To recap some aspects of my lengthy and rambly context section, visuals and aesthetics can convey a lot about a character and a situation that’s unfolding. For example, gay male bondage is prettier, while male bondage for straight women seems more basic and geared towards a more realistic aesthetic. Guys in porn who resemble us or men we’re attracted to by dress, physical appearance, and/or profession, make the situations in our fantasies seem more real. What all of this amounts to is the fact that a man’s clothing says a lot about him, which creates a certain image of the types of guys we like seeing kidnapped.
Again, unlike subjects in more hardcore bondage who are either kept naked or suited up in some kind of gear, subjects of scenario-driven softcore bondage are subdued with some of their personalities/identities shining through their restraints. Even though a third of this subject’s face might be covered with layers of a duct tape gag, the dominant can still see his sub’s facial expression, look into his eyes, observe his neat hairstyle, and listen to his muffled whimpers. Even if significant portions of the sub’s body is wrapped up in rope or duct tape, the dom can still see the outfit his sub had put on before ever dreaming that he was going to get bound and gagged that day. I apologize for the broad strokes once again, but I now think that beyond the mere dehumanizing control and fantasy in hardcore bondage, the appeal of gear seems to come from how democratized the subs become. While softcore bondage is a bit more superficial because it allows us to obsess over particular kinds of personalities and styles of dress, bondage that’s hardcore seems to turn subs into objects in a way that makes all of them the same. Thus, the leather and rubber gear that is worn becomes a uniform that directly links these subs to other subs in the broader kink community. Things like harnesses, hoods, and ball gags have become widely recognized as aspects of kink culture, which makes people who practice kink in this way a part of something that is larger than they are, while actual softcore bondage isn’t as easy to spot because images we get off to in our porn can be confused with the bondage we see in mainstream media.
When we watch mainstream TV shows and movies, we follow and identify with particular characters we like and are attracted to, and develop a distaste for characters that we don’t like. In a similar way, softcore male bondage fetishists are drawn to depictions of tied up men we find attractive for various reasons. The tied up man can either just have a nice body or handsome face, he can be dressed up like a ruthless bad boy or an orderly authority figure, and he could appear angry about his restraints while barking muffled threats about what he’ll do when he gets out of being bound or appear genuinely scared about being helpless in a potentially dangerous situation. So, maybe we like seeing tough, bad boys having the rug swept from under them and observing whether or not his tough guy act can be shaken. We could also be into seeing male authority figures (law enforcement, bosses, etc.) having their power and prestige compromised with the humiliating vulnerability that comes with being bound and gagged. Either way, these types of men can’t be recognized in their bondage scenarios without some context and that context can’t be as easily conveyed in images and video clips without particular outfits and clothing. Therefore, the authority figures would likely be clean-cut and either in a fresh-pressed suit or uniform and the bad boys would likely be more rugged and surly looking.
Although I enjoy the look of a tough-and-surly guy getting bound and gagged, as the title of this section suggests, I believe that dapper gentlemen make for better captives. In general, I tend to be more attracted to men who seem to make an effort for their appearance than those who look like they just rolled out of bed and never wore a collared shirt without being obligated to either for work or formal occasions. My preference for well-dressed men might have came from how much my mother pressured me to dress up for church and special occasions by stressing how “this is what people have to do” and then gloating about how nice I looked whenever I did dress up, but never made a big deal about how I normally dressed. Psychologically, maybe thinking of men who are well-groomed with tucked in button downs as praiseworthy really sunk into my brain and stayed there, making me think that men who appeared that way were preferable to those who didn’t. It is also possible that a man being well-dressed indicates a “beta” status because most men in the social class I grew up in don’t put effort into their looks and assume that any guy who does is gay. In that sense, wearing a uniform or dressing nice indicated some sort of subservience because it’s looking a certain way out of obligation. However, as I got older and grew into my fetish, as well as the general adult world, I eventually learned that although dressing nice for certain occasions might just mark a celebratory event or show respect, being well dressed also indicates status, power, and even confidence. Even though worrying about how you look is seen as rather feminine, status, power, and confidence represent most of what people find appealing about men.
Grappling with the Idea of “Cisvestism”
I’ve been throwing the term ‘cisvestism’ around in my head a lot because I and a lot of other bondage fetishists are particularly drawn to how the subs in our fantasies are dressed. In the porn we consume, I’ve noticed that quite a bit of us are into guys being tied up in suits; superhero costumes; athletic, cop, firefighter, and/or soldier uniforms; and/or many other kinds of gender specific outfits. Since part of our bondage fetish includes particular kinds of costumes/clothing that are gendered male, I figured that unlike transvestism (which is a fetishization of you or other people wearing clothes of another sex), we seem to be ‘cisvestites’ because ‘cis,’ as opposed to ‘trans,’ implies that this fetish includes things that are considered “appropriate” for the gender we were born as. Even though the term seems odd, I have found that cisvestism is apt for this phenomenon and even that acts of cisvestism usually include fantasies of taking on some other “gender appropriate” persona. For example, some guy’s cisvestistic fantasy might include him being a captured cop when he has a completely different profession and no interest in actually becoming a cop. With this in mind, I started to think a little more about the kinds of same-gendered captives we either want to be or have for ourselves. Like if we stick with the cop example, it must mean that we like the idea of subduing a man with authority who is orderly, even though cops aren’t all the time; who wears a neat and masculine uniform that includes weapons, restraints, a clean shave, and a cropped hairstyle; and who probably won’t take it lightly when he has that power and authority stripped away from him.
Beyond just liking subs who wear certain things, some of us even get off to wearing certain articles of clothing like ties, dress shirts, jock straps, dress socks, etc. Like how male transvestites might get off to wearing a pair of women’s lacy panties, a cisvestite man might get off to wearing typically masculine articles of clothing. Therefore, even though cisvestism might seem strange to people without the fetish because it, again, involves sexualizing something that isn’t typically seen as sexual, it wouldn’t ever have the stigma that transvestism has because it isn’t as recognizably taboo. Whereas transvestism, particularly male transvestism, is stigmatized because it involves a man “taking on” a symbolically female role with feminine artifacts, cisvestism isn’t really recognized and can be better hidden because it involves a man getting pleasure out of masculine artifacts. Therefore, it appears to be an underlying sexism and homophobia that influences transvestism’s stigma because it is taboo for a man to feminize himself, but not to masculinize himself. Another double standard that seems to be in place with transvestism is that there doesn’t really seem to be a focus on female transvestism, when a woman gets off to masculine artifacts or assuming male roles. I think that this lack of focus might have something to do with the stigma against male femininity. Even though it is taboo to an extent for a woman to be masculine, female masculinity is a little more palatable to mainstream society than male femininity. Since masculinity and men always seem to be on top of to totem pole, maybe it is inherently assumed that everybody wants to be male and masculine, which makes it strange when men want to be feminine and somewhat understandable when women want to be masculine. If a woman wants some masculinity, she can claim it and become more powerful in spite of her transgressions, but when a man wants some femininity, that would compromise his masculine privilege without giving him much power in return. Thus, society fears and ridicules male transvestism, while ignoring or being unaware of other kinds of -vestisms. This stigma and level of taboo, however, might even be part of what fuels male transvestism because it is more forbidden than any of its counterparts and the “forbidden fruit” aspect is where the appeal comes from.
As opposed to how transvestism’s appeal seems to be rooted in taboo, cisvestism’s appeal seems to come from the fact that it’s a taboo that can be disguised as normal. For example, a guy who gets off to wearing dress shirts might not have to wear them to work or might not like wearing them out, but his fetish item can be left in plain sight because there is nothing strange about finding a men’s dress shirt in a man’s closet. Likewise, we also tend to be turned on by the idea of tying up and pleasuring/torturing men who we think of as normal and men’s business casual wear is possibly the most normal thing for a middle-class, adult man to wear. So when we imagine capturing this ‘normal’ man, it is safe to assume that he has never fathomed the thought of someone getting off from him being tied up in his work clothes, enjoying the helpless expression on his face and muffled cries when his mouth is stuffed, and getting pleasure out of the puzzled look in his eyes when his feet are being worshiped. There is something especially alluring about flipping a normal, vanilla guy’s world upside down with our alternative kinds of desires because his confusion about our intentions adds to his helplessness. He might not think that we’re sexually attracted to him because we haven’t stripped his clothes off when we very easily could have, and we might find that naivety cute because he hasn’t even started to imagine what we find attractive about him.
Here, the naivety I mention is two-tiered. On one level, there’s a recognition of the general cluelessness that sex appeal doesn’t have to come from obvious things like nudity. On the other level, I’m linking the presumed normalcy from a man’s appearance to having a ‘normal,’ vanilla understanding of sex and sexuality. So, the first level of naivety just acknowledges the fact that cisvestic clothing fetishes aren’t that popular or widely recognized, while the second level projects that kind of naivety onto men we think of as normal. I bring these things up because a lot of fetish porn seems to relish in the fact that most submissive men in these scenarios are unsuspecting of what will happen to them, don’t immediately comprehend that they’re being subdued for sexual reasons, and often might not think of themselves or what they’re wearing as sexually appealing. I think since most fetishists are oppressed by the world of the normal, we find ourselves attracted to men who are presumably normal and like imagining their normal reactions to being made vulnerable and humiliated. We have fun with the thought of corrupting a normal guy with our own dirty fantasies, getting to push his limits, and maybe learning a few things about him in the process. Chances are, if the subdued man has any kinky bones in his body, he might be able to deal with humiliation and vulnerability better than if he is completely vanilla and has never considered being tied up and objectified as something that might be pleasurable. Under regular circumstances, we might never find these things out about the men in our lives that we lust after. On the other hand, when we are the subs of our own fantasies, we might make ourselves the innocent, unsuspecting business-casual victims of bondage and objectification.
Getting Punished for Being Handsome/Desirable
Although I love the symbolism and resourcefulness of it, I’m not very fond of gags that only consist of ties and nothing to fill the mouth or seal the lips. However, I am very fond of guys being tied up with a bunch of ties whenever I’ve seen it in male bondage porn. There is a general connection to dress clothes that I like in these sets, but I also love the makeshift element to it. It also makes me wonder if a man who owns a bunch of ties, who is either a typically dapper dresser or has to wear ties for work, was home invaded by someone who knew that there would be a plethora of ties available in this guy’s closet that can be used to restrain the sub. This would mean that our captive was followed and must have worn enough ties out for the home invader to know that there would be enough resources for properly subduing the sub, so he wouldn’t have to spring for duct tape or rope. This is also a kind of way of making the sub’s captive position partly “his fault” for having so many ties because maybe if he wasn’t so focused on his appearance, he could have noticed that he was being followed and he wouldn’t have made himself as easy to subdue because the home invader would have been bothered to use his own resources or been more creative with how to tie him up.
The thought of being a heterosexual, God-fearing, hard-working, dressed to impressed guy who is captured and sexualized in ways we didn’t think possible by people we didn’t know existed is also very appealing. On the surface, it might seem as if our fantasies about being “normal” submissives indicates a desire to actually be normal in some way,–as if living in a world where people like us are unheard-of is more appealing than the fetish world we live in–but I would like to believe that the “normal” personas that we like to trouble with bondage are just indicative of our appeal for a struggle. Specifically, when we imagine ourselves having a bondage play session with a buddy, the struggling that is likely to happen is mostly premeditated and artificial because we like a struggle. However, when we imagine ourselves as regular guys getting trussed up for who-knows-what, the imagined struggling would be more out of genuine unease and a need to get loose because the captor’s motives will be predatory and unknown.
Since putting on a costume or a certain outfit could involve essentially becoming a different person in a performative way, it can inform us how that person might respond to being tied up and gagged in our roleplays. For example, a man who only keeps the very top button of his shirt undone might be more conservative about showing skin or like feeling the pressure of the plackets of his shirt tugging at each other by his throat, which would add to his discomfort if his captor decides to loosen his shirt and tie. Although a man who buttons his shirt lower might feel less stingy about showing a little skin and chest hair, he might button his shirt as such because he feels choked when he is more buttoned up or in a tie, which might indicate that he is more uncomfortable with being restrained than being exposed. Similarly, a pair of neatly pressed khakis might indicate an uptightness that would make a submissive hate not having control, but be too insecure to put up any sort of a fight. A pair of ripped and faded, loose-fitting jeans could indicate that a submissive is laid back, but he might hate others getting to see him look vulnerable, which might make him overcompensate by appearing calm and confident that he’ll eventually get loose and crack some skulls. The point here is that clothing indicates something about the men who wear them, which adds to our fantasies about them. We all essentially wear costumes to an extent to convince people that we are clean, fit, stylish, professional, approachable, etc. in our everyday lives, which influences how we act and how we carry ourselves even if we don’t take a particular interest in fashion. However, men are only allowed to go so far with this.
Even though it is possible for men and women alike to be objectified, lusted after, sexually assaulted, and subdued, women are thought to be especially vulnerable to sexual predators. Consider why scream queens in horror movies are queens and hardly ever kings. As a culture, we are accustomed to the male/predatory gazes that are focused on women. Part of the reason for this is that women are thought to just be more aesthetically pleasing than men since our culture has conditioned all of us to place a lot of value into looks and attractiveness, so we’d rather watch someone beautiful on the screen for 90+ minutes than someone who isn’t beautiful, which is usually a woman. Therefore, we’re more conditioned to objectify female bodies. Another reason for centering horror movies around female characters is the fact that we’re more comfortable with seeing women being vulnerable and terrified because: we typically think of women and girls as weaker and more vulnerable to the world’s harms, which makes us feel more tense as an audience when we see women in peril; and as a culture, we are uncomfortable with seeing a man’s terror and vulnerability, which makes us less likely to identify with a male character who shows weakness and maybe even find his terror funny. So, in a visual culture where it’s more acceptable for men to be dangerous predators or shallow archetypes that are meant to be instantly killed off than realistic people who are capable of showing and experiencing all kinds of emotions, it isn’t considered common for men to experience vulnerability.
Thus, the mainstream discomfort that comes from seeing male vulnerability might contribute to male bondage’s appeal because it isn’t something that a lot of us are exposed to, which makes the idea of seeing a vulnerable man or making him vulnerable taboo. Media definitely isn’t as saturated with displaying fully rounded men in vulnerable positions as it is with displaying women in those positions, which makes these kinds of depictions of men a jem to male bondage enthusiasts, something that’s exotic and unfamiliar. Moreover, men usually aren’t as confronted with vulnerability in real life the way that women are. Even though both can be lusted after and objectified, women are the ones who get confronted with actual danger because of lust and objectification while men just get ironically cat-called or aggressively pursued in gay bars or in prison. Therefore, the male bondage world kind of extends the danger that attractive women face to attractive men. In the male bondage world, a man becomes fair game when he has a handsome face, when he wears clothes that reveal hard nipples, firm muscles, chest hair, a round butt, and a big bulge. Just like how a woman’s curves and the way she dresses them are unintentional, but can be taken as having a sexual intent to predators, we seemingly reverse this logic and responsibility onto the men we’d like to capture. Coincidentally, the sex appeal that comes from male bodies and their attire is rarely ever addressed as such pretty much because men don’t wear skirts, which kind of makes men oblivious to how desirable menswear can make them. So, this obliviousness about menswear’s sex appeal adds to the unwanted and unexpected desire we direct towards them because he just might want to “look nice” without expecting sexual advances,which makes our kinds of advances towards him a kind of punishment for not knowing what he was doing by looking the way he does.
To be continued…
Comments