Teufelszwirn

Same with : “Se faire baiser”* = “To get fucked” the exact same also means “To be WRONGED”.

* NOTE : it’s rarely or never commonly used for men because it is PASSIVE (meaning a man cannot be/get fucked by a woman).

Maybe don’t let your 5 year old play M rated games

It's not literally about jars and tires. It's simply a code for "I am stronger than you". Men think they are better because they are physically stronger, and see women as inept, clumsy, childlike and unable to do anything by themselves.

Women love it. I have a female student right now who is obsessed with my farm and asks me questions about what I've done that day every class 😂 Women like the reassurance of seeing an average looking woman (I'm not entering any bodybuilder competitions for sure) who is able to succeed at something historically done by men.

And the only post:

So no communities of only cis women...right?

Oh? r/DegradingHoles?

Fascinating subreddit rule, right in the sidebar! Must be a small, underground community evading banning, right? Reddit would never allow a community with a rule for only cis women...

...unless it’s to jerk off to, because woke lefty men who scream “sex is a spectrum” and “transwomen are women” suddenly know exactly what a woman is and that they only want to jerk off to a natal woman. Hm, sounds kind of cissexist bioessentialist genital fetishist of them :(

Knife play, choking and rough sex have found a home on FreakTok, but the line between sex positivity and sexual violence is becoming blurred.

“When he claims he’s freaky but won’t drag a knife across your skin… it’s funny how people have become pussies all of a sudden”.

Welcome to #freaktok, one of the darker corners in TikTok’s labyrinth maze of subcultures and alternative communities. Where #thriftflipping clothes or #astralprojecting into an alternative dimension doesn’t cut it, users instead like to brag about rejecting ‘normal’ sex.

And it doesn’t seem to be niche. At the time of writing, #Freak has over 1.2 billion views. #ChokeMe has 45.3 million. While a lot of this content is innocent, it is easy to find far more sinister videos. One, of a girl encouraging her reluctant boyfriend to choke her, has 1.1 million views. Another, of a user mocking viewers for being quote-unquote vanilla has 78,000 likes.

“Vanilla is the new frigid,” says 19-year-old Lily from Buckinghamshire. After leaving a comment on a video of a boy mocking his girlfriend for not being into choking, Lily came under fire. “I wrote something like ‘not wanting to be choked doesn’t mean you’re boring’ and I ended up being called out for it,” she says. “People kept saying that I didn’t know how to have a good time and that I obviously wasn’t comfortable with my sexuality.”

As a result, Lily began to question her own preferences. “I started wondering whether this was what sex-positive people did and that maybe I just didn’t understand what ‘good’ sex looked like,” she says. “I found myself defending my own preferences because people weren’t open to the idea that I actually liked ‘normal’ sex.” In the end, Lily deleted her comment because the replies were becoming increasingly personal.

17-year-old Mina from Arkansas had a similar experience. After sharing another user’s TikTok referring to the problem of glamorising rough sex, Mina was met with accusations of kink-shaming; calling her a prude and a snowflake. “There were a lot of negative responses,” she says, but none of them were a huge surprise, with her peers now deeming choking and strangulation as being more acceptable than vanilla sex. “I’ve seen people I know push themselves to seem like they enjoy really extreme things just to be part of the in-crowd. The type of sex you have has become this huge competition,” she says.

For Fiona MacKenzie, founder of campaign group We Can’t Consent To This — a group formed in response to the increasing violence exhibited against women during sex — the trend is worrying. “Young people are being told that everyone is doing this,” she says. The social pressure means that women in their teens and twenties now are being told that not enjoying being slapped or choked is abnormal. “It’s a default expectation now.”

In the process of shaming people, the boundaries between consensual sex and sexual violence risk being blurred. “People’s negative experiences are being diminished because people dismiss them as simply having vanilla preferences,” Fiona says. Lily agrees, arguing that the difference between being empowered to have the sex you want and being the victim of violence is ignored. “Somebody even messaged me saying that ‘women deserve to be hurt’.”

Alarmingly, videos that glorify sexual violence are also extremely popular on TikTok. There’s videos romanticising domestic abuse, the ‘psychotic boyfriend’ trope and even the ‘things girls want but won’t ask for’. Last summer TikTok was forced to remove some content under the #365days hashtag after users used it to display bruises obtained during sex or footage of grabbing their partners by the throat.

Given that a recent survey of UK women between 18-39 found that 38% have experienced unwanted spitting, choking or slapping during consensual sex, it is concerning that the normalisation of these behaviours is being confused with consent. With uses of the “rough sex defence” in homicide cases increasing 90% in a decade, it is clear that we need to address how sexual violence is increasingly being mistaken with sexual liberation.

[…]

Why does he get off on you saying "no" and "stop"?

Why doesn't he get turned off when someone begs him to stop during sex?

Why does he get hard to see you bruised and hit?

Why isn't he turned off at the thought of you being hurt?

Why is he turned on by thinking about you beingc hurt?

If her friend said her father used to punch her in the face and she'd like to be punched again to work through the trauma.

If her friend said she'd been watching people punch each other and that it seemed cool and fun.

If her friend boasted about how she wasn't scared of a broken nose. If her friend said she would enjoy watching her cry.

Would she deck her friend? Or would she feel uncomfortable about being asked, and incredulous at the notion someone would do that to somebody they supposedly cared about?

Also, you can super tell that this person has no idea what the goddamn they’re talking about, because while any of those could be part of someone’s aftercare routine they’re not…. Like…. What most people mean by aftercare

Aftercare is (usually)

Taking care of any immediate physical needs, especially if they’re related to the session

Reassurance (usually but not always physical affection or verbal affirmation)

Asking how they feel/if they need anything else/talking about the scene

“staged violence” that results in frayed nerves and raw flesh…okay…

It’s this kind of orgasm self brainwashing that makes me so concerned not just about BDSM but the consequences of sex dolls and especially child sex dolls. While some say they are a way to satisfy the urge to harm children what I’ve seen is that it will likely make them more comfortable assaulting children and women. They can provide the practice and experience to be comfortable using the body of someone rendered unconscious to gratify oneself.

Here are just a few examples:

“I said our safe word but he ignored it, I said it again and he ignored it once more.” (1/6)

“Not to mention [he] didn’t actually stop until I said [the safe word] like 3 times as well as “no” and other things.”(2/6)

“I said the safe word… He didn’t stop. I said it again. Then I said it a few more times…I lost count. He didn’t stop until he was done”(3/6)

“…it hurt so I told him to stop and he said he was really close so I said our safe word… he said ‘just hold on’ and finished”(4/6)

“I said my safeword and pushed away. He just… continued.”(5/6)

“I couldn’t think of our safe word to save my life. I was screaming, telling him to stop and tried pushing him away… he just pinned me down even harder… I just feel… worthless and abused?”(6/6)

After this whole public efford to normalize porn consume for woman and desistigmatization of BDSM is that things turn upsidedown like this. Now you cant find erotic fanfiction of any fandom that doesnt contain sadomasoquism.

On AO3 I see so many E rated fixes tagged with rape, BDSM, chocking, anal (het), bukkake, “cock slut”, etc. And these aren’t necessarily pwp fics. It’s romance fics.

I almost feel like it has to be something parents watch out for and monitor. They just really have to limit internet time and monitor what kids do.

And @ all the notes saying all this stuff existed back in the day: yeah but it was way harder to find the really extreme stuff than it is now. It was kept on closed LJ communities and small websites. I didn’t find it mixed in with the sfw fics or the vanilla nsfw stuff. I might have come across one every now and then, but it was mostly was something you had to go looking for. Now like 50% of fanfics on a page contain it.

Billie Eilish began watching porn aged 11 to be cool, “one of the guys”. But the brutal, abusive scenes she encountered gave her nightmares and in her first sexual relationships she complied with acts she hated “because I thought that’s what I was supposed to be attracted to”. Porn, she said this week, “destroyed my brain”.

Yet already Eilish, who only turns 20 this weekend, is being censured for her “anti-porn tirade”. Her lush voice, dark lyrics and seven Grammys can’t save her from being branded a Swerf (Sex Worker-Excluding Radical Feminist), a slur applied to any woman who dares challenge the global sex trade.

For a decade the supposed progressive position on pornography has been that it is liberating and “sex positive”. Those alarmed by its ubiquity and ever more savage content are right-wing, “pearl-clutching” old prudes. Cancel culture has given porn a free pass. A 1990s sitcom episode must be erased for showing blackface and an unwanted pass is classified as abuse. Yet porn, awash with grotesque racial tropes and extreme sexual violence including choking and slapping, often of apparently non-consenting, underage girls, is mere “fantasy”.

When you point out this paradox, many in their mid-twenties and thirties insert fingers in ears. So Eilish’s opinions raise a fascinating question: have the youngest adults, internet natives, scrolling smartphones from 12, watching anal sex years before their first kiss, formed a different view of porn?

In her recent book The Right to Sex, the Oxford professor Amia Srinivasan describes teaching her students the work of “second wave” feminists Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon, who argued that porn writes the script for male oppression. Srinivasan assumed undergraduates would find their position as outdated and repressive as she did. Instead they were electrified, agreeing with 1970s feminists that porn objectifies women, ignores female pleasure and, like Eilish, that it groomed them into sex acts they didn’t enjoy. Srinivasan reflects that at 36 she only encountered porn as an adult, while “sex to my students is what porn says it is”.

Srinivasan concludes with the old liberal fudge, that violent porn is best defeated by feminists creating “ethical” porn. (As if a few arty shags can displace Pornhub’s millions, or that men would watch them.) Yet I’d bet her students, boys and girls suffused in traumatising images from childhood, now angry their most tender, intimate selves have been shaped by rapacious companies, would consider stronger solutions.

This week a joint committee report was published on the draft Online Safety Bill, putting age-verification controls back on the agenda to keep children safe from accessing pornography. Although a government commitment since 2015, this was kicked around for years until finally killed by Nicky Morgan three months after Boris Johnson became Tory leader. With an election looming, the prime minister was reportedly unwilling to get between Red Wall man and his right hand.

Five years ago this policy was loudly disdained: surely canny, horny teenagers can breach age blocks with virtual private networks (VPNs) which conceal your country location. When porn companies proposed launching their own verification companies, users feared their identity and sexual proclivities would be exposed in any data breach. The proposal that porn access tokens could be sold at newsagents was viewed with hilarity and horror.

Yet since 2015 political pressure to bring online platforms under the same ethical and legal constraints as terrestrial publishers has grown. There is disgust at Instagram and Facebook for allowing, say, self-harm images to be viewed by vulnerable teenagers. Moreover, the moral exceptionalism once afforded to porn is dead. Last year campaigners revealed that Pornhub allowed child rape and other non-consensual acts to be uploaded on to its platform. When MasterCard threatened to block use of its cards on the site, Pornhub took down ten million videos overnight. Thus the world’s heedless governments were schooled in ethics by a credit card company.

It is now impossible to ignore the alarming sexualisation of children exposed to porn. An Ofsted report in June revealed that nine out of ten secondary school girls and half of boys had been sent unsolicited “dick pics”. In the two primary schools it studied, children were already accessing porn. Only the wilfully blind could dismiss a link between girls being pestered for nudes, TikTok videos where 14-year-olds proclaim they enjoy being strangled and spat on, what Ofsted calls a “normalisation” of sexual harassment and porn being woven into children’s lives.

Children’s charities have implored the government to bring in age verification. True, a 16-year-old may circumvent any barrier. But 60 per cent of 11 to 13-year-olds are first exposed to porn unintentionally, so it might at least stop a small child blundering across gang rape. (And if Netflix can defeat VPNs, why not governments?) The online gambling industry has used age verification successfully for years.

Dame Rachel de Souza, the children’s commissioner for England, reports that porn companies are happy to introduce age verification via third-party sites. But they want government to compel them so everyone must fall in line. De Souza says her office is having under-21s draw up online guidance aimed at protecting younger siblings. She says: “They are seriously concerned. I doubt they’ll be letting their children do it.”

A moment of silence for this person I just blocked.

But if anybody else is wondering:

Immersion therapy is a phobia treatment, i.e. it’s used to control irrational, disproportionate anxieties whose objects are in fact harmless. Variations on it may sometimes be used to manage triggers or avoidance issues descending from trauma—if certain loud noises cause panic attacks in a bombing survivor, or if a car crash survivor develops a fear of car travel, for example. To treat PTSD closer to its core, patients are encouraged to talk about or retell their trauma; “immersion” in this sense is immersion in one’s memory. The goal is to help curb distress during future instances of involuntary recall. The patient isn’t subjected to more bombings or car crashes.

This is from Bessel van der Kolk’s The Body Keeps the Score. Bessel is a psychiatrist focused on PTSD and trauma, and has done this since the 90s. Emphasis mine. Note that, shockingly, there’s not one positive implication of directly re-experiencing traumatic stimulus:

CBT was first developed to treat phobias such as fear of spiders, airplanes, or heights, to help patients compare their irrational fears with harmless realities. Patients are gradually desensitized from their irrational fears by bringing to mind what they are most afraid of, using their narratives and images (“imaginal exposure”), or they are placed in actual (but actually safe) anxiety-provoking situations (“in vivo exposure”), or they are exposed to virtual-reality, computer-simulated scenes, for example, in the case of combat-related PTSD, fighting in the streets of Fallujah.

The idea behind cognitive behavioral treatment is that when patients are repeatedly exposed to the stimulus without bad things actually happening, they gradually will become less upset; the bad memories will have become associated with “corrective” information of being safe. (33) … It sounds simple, but, as we have seen, reliving trauma reactivates the brain’s alarm system and knocks out critical brain areas necessary for integrating the past, making it likely that patients will relive rather than resolve the trauma.

Prolonged exposure or “flooding” has been studied more thoroughly than any other PTSD treatment. Patients are asked to “focus their attention on the traumatic material and … not distract themselves with other thoughts or activities.” (35) … Exposure sometimes helps to deal with fear and anxiety, but it has not been proven to help with guilt or other complex emotions. (37)

In contrast to its effectiveness for irrational fears such as spiders, CBT has not done so well for traumatized individuals, particularly those with histories of childhood abuse. Only about one in three participants with PTSD who finish research studies show some improvement. (38) Those who complete CBT treatment usually have fewer PTSD symptoms, but they rarely recover completely: Most continue to have substantial problems with their health, work, or mental well-being. (39)

…

Patients can benefit from reliving their trauma only if they are not overwhelmed by it. A good example is a study of Vietnam veterans conducted in the early 1990s by my colleague Roger Pitman. (44) … Roger would show me the videotapes of his treatment sessions and we would discuss what we observed. He and his colleagues pushed the veterans to talk repeatedly about every detail of their experiences in Vietnam, but the investigators had to stop the study because many patients became panicked by their flashbacks, and the dread often persisted after the sessions. Some never returned, while many of those who stayed with the study became more depressed, violent, and fearful; some coped with their increased symptoms by increasing their alcohol consumption, which led to further violence and humiliation, as some of their families called the police to take them to a hospital.

I really, sincerely hope anyone capable of firing about ten neurons of critical thought can piece together, from that last paragraph, the implications of trying to reenact a rape or other sexual trauma through kink when even talking about experiences makes people shut down jesus fucking christ.

Here are Bessel’s citations:

33. E. Santini, R. U. Muller, and G. J. Quirk, “Consolidation of Extinction Learning Involves Transfer from NMDA-Independent to NMDA-Dependent Memory,” Journal of Neuroscience 21 (2001): 9009–17.

35. C. R. Brewin, “Implications for Psychological Intervention,” in Neuropsychology of PTSD: Biological, Cognitive, and Clinical Perspectives, ed. J. J. Vasterling and C. R. Brewin (New York: Guilford, 2005), 272.

37. E. B. Foa and R. J. McNally, “Mechanisms of Change in Exposure Therapy,” in Current Controversies in the Anxiety Disorders, ed. R. M. Rapee (New York: Guilford, 1996), 329–43.

38. J. D. Ford and P. Kidd, “Early Childhood Trauma and Disorders of Extreme Stress as Predictors of Treatment Outcome with Chronic PTSD,” Journal of Traumatic Stress 18 (1998): 743–61. (There are 3 other articles lumped into this one.)

We have every reason to feel fear, it’s a natural response to dangerous environments. It’s designed to protect us.

The rest of society echoes this idea that women’s fear is unjustified constantly, normalising predominantly male violence and making women more vulnerable to abuse by teaching us to ignore our gut instincts and red flags.