Several years ago, I had an online "thing" with a guy, Jason. He was well over a decade older than me and seemed to have his life pretty much together on the other side of the country with a big house, a dog, the works. Jason was a fairly handsome older man--cute face, neat style, hairy body, salt and pepper hair, etc.--but now that I think about it, he wasn't really my type because he was really slim and petite. This isn't to imply that I only like humongous bears, but I do like men to have some meat on them and Jason was a vegetarian dish in that sense. However, the reason why we didn't work out wasn't that shallow because our personalities eventually clashed because I tend to come off as the subservient, worshipful little brother type to some people when I meet them, which is never a sustainable dynamic for me to be in.
Anyways, he and I made it a thing to video chat or talk on the phone every day, which was a nice constant. So, one night, we were video chatting and he was relaxing on his patio, drinking white wine, when he decided to talk dirty to me. Now, I for the life of me don't remember the exact things he was saying, but I know that he really wanted me to dominate him at some point (I guess to subvert the "little brother" dynamic he wanted outside of the bedroom), so he was probably talking about his fantasy of me making him my bitch. Then, all of a sudden, we both heard some other voice from a distance. It turns out that Jason's and his neighbor's yards weren't separated by fences and the elderly woman that lived next door to him heard his voice and decided to ask him something. So, Jason, blushing, excused himself from our kinky discourse and went to see what she wanted.
When Jason came back, he explained that she was just commenting on something he painted, then got back into brass taxes about how he envisioned me dominating him. I really wasn't in the mood for that to begin with and the interruption put a nail in that coffin for me, but Jason was going full force, so I just went with it. Then, sure enough, we both hear the old lady's voice again. Jason's face was priceless. At that point, I would have been over it and livid, wanting to take the conversation inside, but Jason was much more patient. This time, Jason wasn't as surprised by her voice, so he didn't blush as much, but embarrassed, foot-in-the-mouth syndrome filled his eyes as he composed himself a second time to go speak to her. I don't remember exactly, but this must have happened at least one or two more times after that. This is actually what drew me into a conversation that I was only half into. In fact, this little episode is really what made me attracted to Jason.
This probably makes me sound like a sadistic sociopath, but Jason's embarrassment really turned me on. However, it's not that I liked seeing him suffer so much as I liked seeing him deal with his humiliation. Again, if I were in his shoes, I would have gotten flustered, quickly given up, and took the conversation inside where my neighbor wouldn't be able to hear my conversation or bother me anymore. However, if Jason had done that, I probably would have called it a night sooner because I wasn't even that interested in the conversation to begin with. Plus, there wouldn't have been much character or vulnerability in that situation to hold onto. I would have just gotten the impression that Jason is kind of uptight, which says a lot about me since that's what I would have done. Or, say if Jason was extremely uptight and had some sort of panic attack from the situation, I wouldn’t have gotten any joy out of seeing this guy legitimately freak out. In fact, I would have been pretty turned off by that because it would have shown me that he’s incapable of dealing with any sort of embarrassment. On the other hand, imagine if Jason wouldn’t have had any sort of emotional reaction to the possibility that his elderly neighbor heard his sexual fantasies of being dominated. That would have been some scary, Christian Bale in American Psycho shit and a red flag, because who wants to be around someone that is completely incapable of shame or humiliation?
This story reflects my, and probably other people’s, attraction to embarrassment. We might not like complete uptightness in someone we’re sexually or romantically attracted to, but we still probably are attracted to people who could get shaken up over some embarrassing moments. Moreover, I think that witnessing and enjoying that encounter with Jason showed me that I’m not only attracted to humiliation, but confidence and how felt humiliation is dealt with. On one level, I really admired Jason in that moment for having the confidence to face his neighbor with a polite and cheerful, Midwestern attitude regardless of what she might have heard come out of his mouth, then pick up where he left off with our kinky conversation right after. However, on another level, the vulnerability I saw in Jason’s face when he realized that his neighbor could have been eavesdropping on our extremely personal conversation was very attractive to me. He not only looked cute when he was embarrassed, but his comfort with vulnerability was also appealing to me. This showed that even though Jason is fairly confident and sure of himself, he can still be embarrassed and even though certain things can embarrass him, he can quickly recover and get back to business instead of letting his humiliation and shame ruin the time we were spending together.
What I’m getting at here is that a person’s embarrassment can be endearing to a lesser extent and downright amusing to another extent, depending on the situation. Like my video chat with Jason, another person's embarrassment can be endearing in situations when they put themselves on the spot, like when love-stricken protagonists in movies make grand romantic gestures by singing some cheesy love song for their love interest in front of a bunch of strangers. However, humiliation and shame can also be amusing to witness, like when someone gets pantsed in public or clumsily trips on their own feet. As people, we tend to like other people's embarrassment and vulnerability even if we don't have a fetish for it because we can relate to it. If you aren't a sociopath, chances are that you've felt vulnerable and embarrassed at one point or another. So, when you see someone else experience that, it might be a little entertaining in a mildly exploitative way, but it also reminds us of when we were in similar situations, which makes us empathize with that person. If it's somebody we know and have strong feelings for, we might take that as an opportunity to try comforting and bonding with that person, showing them that it's okay to be vulnerable sometimes.
Taking Risks and Putting Yourself Out There
Consider how when people go out to bars and nightclubs for the purpose of hooking up or making friends, they often go in small two to three person groups or if they go in larger groups, they somehow manage to split up at some point during the night. People usually do this because large cliques or groups of friends are far too intimidating and unapproachable to outsiders, which eliminates the possibility that many individual group members would get any action unless they break away from their entourage. When someone is by themself in a public social setting, it's a good way of putting him/herself out there, which makes the person more approachable to strangers. The act of putting yourself out there involves a fair amount of vulnerability because you don't have a friend's company to lean on, which sort of leaves you out and in the open for any stranger to feel confident enough to approach you. With this, you're also setting yourself up for the possibility that you might not be approached, which means that you can spend the night alone if you aren't with a friend or two. The effort to meet someone might not be worth the potential failure of going home by yourself, but it is more likely that at least someone will come up and talk to you if you put yourself out there in some way because vulnerability is something that allows new people in.
When it comes to connecting with new people, the vulnerability of putting yourself out there is kind of like "if you never take a chance, how would you ever know if taking chances would be worth the risk?" Of course, taking too many chances can become a problem because risks often have consequences, but refusing to take chances inhibits progress and the potential for growth. In this sense, we like vulnerability and how people deal with vulnerability because it involves putting yourself out there and a willingness to take a risk, then how good you are at dealing with whatever consequences come your way. In a predatory way, when you put yourself out there at a bar, you run the risk of being roofied and date raped at worst. To a lesser extent, you run the risk of not being approached at all or being approached by people you aren't into. But if you get approached by someone that you are into, which is the best case scenario, putting yourself out there was worth any potential risk and the person who approaches you would appreciate that vulnerability.
Unfortunately, I feel like the willingness to put yourself out there is evaporating or maybe I’m giving older generations too much credit. Whenever I was single, my policy for guys I dated was always that if a man puts himself out there for me by actually asking me out on a date, I would say yes regardless of if I was interested in him. I figured that if someone had the courage to actually approach me, indicate their interest in me, and formally ask me out, I would say yes just to award his courage and see where the date goes to decide if I’d want to continue dating him. However, this has never happened because less people seem willing to take that kind of risk anymore. Most of the times, I’d hear about guys who have crushes on me either through the grapevine or mere observation, but none of those guys ever took the effort to approach me. Whenever guys would approach me at bars, we would both be sloppy drunk and just make out with each other without exchanging phone numbers or making any plans to meet again in the future. For the men I’ve actually dated, there would be a lot of talking through mutual friends and/or texting each other before we would get anywhere, so our actual dates didn’t feel that special since neither of us really assumed any risk. Most of the times, we would even just “hang out,” which eliminated the formal pressure of any actual date. One of the few times a guy actually put himself out there for me, it was a slightly older, semi-creepy Uber driver I had; however, I couldn’t stay true to my policy of saying yes because I happened to already be in a serious relationship. So, I politely declined.
I’m sure that those who came before millennials had their own loopholes to putting themselves out there for dates and sex, but I came of age during the early internet age of pre-hookup apps, which took out the vulnerability of putting yourself out there because being rejected there wasn’t as bad as being rejected in person. Then the culture shifted to hookup apps, and suddenly people can’t handle any risk of being embarrassed. Looking back to my story about Jason, he was of an older generation and seemed to take embarrassment like a champ, which is something that I as a younger person wouldn’t have tolerated. I mean, I think I’m secure enough to believe that I eventually would have found some way to laugh it off, but I know that I definitely would have taken certain measures to ensure that nobody else would be able to hear my conversation and if someone still managed to hear me, I wouldn’t have been able to compose myself and recover as quickly as Jason. He literally put himself out there and continued taking the risk of openly discussing his sexual fantasies even when he knew that we might have company. In the end, I don't know if his risk was that worth it, but the stakes weren't that high and that wound up being the thing I found most attractive about Jason.
How Clothes and Presenting Yourself Puts You Out There
In different ways, your outfit is a conversation starter. The reason why so many places of business have uniforms and dress codes is not only to distinguish employees from customers, but to make employees look professional and approachable because looking nice seems more inviting than looking like anyone off the street. Businesses want customers to feel comfortable with approaching employees for help because it increases the likelihood that they would buy something. Businesses also want their employees to look good and put together because it reflects their company. I kind of touched on this in another post that gets into why some people are drawn to the image of well-dressed men being abducted and tied up, but we seem to be attracted to the idea of confident and accomplished men being objectified and brought down. I mentioned that dapper gentlemen kind of have a feminine quality that seems to attract more masculine, dominant energy that will over power them, but I don’t think I necessarily got into the vulnerability that relates to men dressing up. Perhaps, perceived femininity and vulnerability are pretty close to one another, but they don’t really mean the same thing. My point is the fact that dressing up is a way of calling attention to yourself, and calling attention to yourself is yet another way of putting yourself out there and being vulnerable. So, going out in a particular outfit that would turn some heads, whether it is a silly banana suit or an Armani tuxedo, is a way of putting yourself into a vulnerable position because eyes will be on you for one reason or the other. If you wear something tight, it will draw attention to the shape of your body. If you wear a lowcut shirt, it will show your cleavage or chest hair. If you wear something stupid, you’re setting yourself up for ridicule. If you wear something flattering, you might be complimented.
Looking back to when I was growing up, I seemed to hate wearing any kind of collared shirt for that specific reason. I had the impression that all eyes will somehow be on me if I wore particular outfits and I didn’t think I could handle that kind of attention. I figured that if more people were watching me, I had less room for error and everyone would know when I said something stupid, tripped, had toilet paper stuck to my shoe, etc. Therefore, if I dressed in a way that faded into the background, I’d have a shield of anonymity, which would allow me to screw up and go unnoticed.
Because of the exhibitionism that's part of looking a certain way, various humiliation-based fetishes involve certain things happening to people in certain kinds of outfits. I'm only going to briefly touch on this because I already went over humiliation and fetishism, but certain outfits convey certain meanings (whether they connote higher status or status as a fool), and particular situations could add humiliation to that meaning. For example, a man in a suit or some other uniform that conveys authority being overpowered and objectified is a good way of adding humiliation to an already vulnerable situation. Or, a hairy muscle man might get pantsed when he happens to be wearing his girlfriend's panties as part of their way of spicing things up, so not only does he get pantsed, but his kinky and feminine arrangement gets exposed. My point is that your outward appearance always tends to convey something about you and this can either be intentional (like wearing a t-shirt of a band you like, showing off tattoos, dressing for a particular occasion or context, etc.) or unintentional (being of a certain race or gender, having a certain body type, only being able to afford certain clothes, etc.). Therefore, part of what makes you vulnerable based on the way you present yourself are the assumptions you allow people to make about you.
This isn't to say that you're "asking for it" when you leave the house in a skirt and get harassed, but it means that showing skin, looking expensive, or being an utter hot mess all draw attention to you and set particular expectations (that you might be sexually available, that you're rich and powerful, or that you don't own a mirror). This allows people to take a peek into you and your life whether or not you're actively trying to express yourself through your wardrobe. Granted, the assumptions people make about you might be wrong, but you're still somehow contributing to the impression you make on others. Thus, looking a certain way makes you vulnerable to other people's judgement and the more attention you attract, the more potential for judgement and embarrassment there is going to be. Therefore, even though dapper gentlemen might be attractive to some people because they seem powerful or wealthy, they are also attractive because they are showing some kind of vulnerability.
Consider how it's often thought of as cute when a man dresses up for a date. Part of that "cuteness" might simply come from how nice the guy looks, but the perceived cuteness mostly seems to come from the amount of effort he's putting into the date and the person he's dating because he's trying to make an impression. This seems to be more of the case with men than with women because women are pretty much always expected to put in that kind of effort while most men can usually put in however much effort they want into their day-to-day appearance, and most men usually don't put a lot of effort into how they look because they don't have to. The norm doesn't really pressure men into trying to look appealing. In the past, pre-1970, it just seemed customary that men dressed business casual, but the growing influence of popular culture changed how people started dressing, making everyone more casual and hip. Therefore, men went from not putting a lot of thought into always wearing collared shirts and slacks into making those kinds of outfits something you wear on occasion or for middle class jobs, thus turning them into outfits that started meaning something and taking effort to wear. For a man to put himself out there with an outfit, he has to show some kind of effort. Since that effort is already expected of women, they basically have to display their goods to put themselves out there, even though people interpret pretty much anything a woman does as putting herself out there.
Getting back to vulnerability's relation to perceived femininity, being a man in a world of rigid concepts of masculinity makes it risky to be a guy who cares about his physical appearance. It's considered feminine to be stylish, well-groomed, conscious of your skin's health and appearance, or to do anything for the mere purpose of looking nice or attractive, so men who do these things need their efforts to seem effortless and be undetectable. If the amount of thought and work went into your appearance as a man is exposed, you lose masculinity points and gold stars. To go even further, women are typically open about how much they appreciate men's cleanliness and attention to detail, as well as other feminine qualities like being caring and sensitive, which makes these more feminine traits seem like ways of complying with women or even gay men. So, I find it extremely attractive when men put themselves out there by going against these masculine concepts because it involves a risk. It shows a level of confidence when a man doesn't mind drawing attention to himself, his body, or his style. This confidence in putting yourself out there becomes even more apparent when heavyset men draw attention to themselves by dressing up. Most of the time, people with ample physiques, especially men, try to detract as much attention from themselves and their larger figures by dressing down and staying out of the spotlight, which makes it all the more vulnerable when they wear something that calls attention to them. It's even more attractive to consider the fact that most menswear isn't meant to highlight assets as obviously as women's wear, which adds an underlying innocent and naive assumption that men aren't aware of their own or other men's bodies. Only women can be objectified and have bodies that they need to be conscious of and insecure about, making male bodies and their attributes chopped liver when it comes to desire and attention. Therefore, it's taboo for anyone to sexualize men or for men to cater to other people's desire because only women should do that, then get shamed for it. Thus, it sets a man up for humiliation when he shows vanity or any kind of effort to attract other people's approval and attention. Afterall, being called something like a pretty boy becomes an insult because it indicates a failure in masculinity that deserves ridicule.
The Undesirability of Shamelessness: What's Wrong With Those Who Can't Feel Shame or Humiliation?
Before concluding this extensive piece, I believe that I should get into what is unappealing about people who don't get embarrassed. I mean, if fetishists and non-fetishists can see the appeal in humiliation, there must be a shared understanding that it isn't very interesting or charismatic for a person to not be embarrassed by anything. If people like vulnerability and a person's embarrassment is a sign of their vulnerability, then a person who doesn't get embarrassed isn't vulnerable. If being vulnerable is a way of letting people in, then refusing to open up and be vulnerable shuts people out. I can go on, but you probably get the point.
I mentioned potential sociopathy when discussing the possibility of Jason not being embarrassed by his neighbor's intrusion when we were discussing something intimate. On one hand, that could have been attractive to some people because it would have shown unshakable confidence, even more confidence than what I witnessed with Jason being embarrassed. On the other hand, to a lesser extent, that wouldn't have been as memorable to me because I wouldn't have witnessed Jason's cute and inviting vulnerability in that moment. To a more extreme extent, Jason's lack of embarrassment would have been kind of alarming because it not only would have made him more intimidating to me, but it would have made me wonder what kinds of things actually make him ashamed and embarrassed if an old lady hearing him tell another man to make him his bitch doesn't. I'm not saying that he or anyone should be embarrassed or ashamed for wanting that, I'm definitely not a slut or kink shamer, but there needs to be a floor and certain standards for those kinds of things. Everyone should have at least one topic or thing that makes them blush in a given context. If they don't, I don't mean to instantly refer to them as sociopaths, but it usually takes a sociopathic mind to not feel any shame or embarrassment for questionable things they do.
In my stories about Mr. Wyley and Jason, I brought up how being able to see their humiliation showed their humanity because embarrassment and vulnerability appear to be innate human qualities that bring people down a notch. Shame and embarrassment are relatable qualities, which is how we're capable of feeling embarrassed for other people even if we don't necessarily know them very well or like them very much. As people who experience these things, we know that they aren't easy to endure, so we empathize with people in those situations and admire those who can feel shame, but get passed it. Therefore, there isn't a lot to admire about people who can get through shameful situations when they don't feel ashamed.
When a person is incapable of being embarrassed, there isn't any vulnerability for the rest of us to empathize with. Because of this, it's difficult to relate to people who don't feel shame. I don't mean to imply that shameless people are less human or are actual sociopaths, but they lack an extremely relatable quality that most humans latch onto that opens them up to bond with others. Getting back to how shame is often used to establish order, I think shamelessness is threatening and intimidating because it could indicate a lack of order in a sense. For example, if humiliating criminals is a way of breaking them down and setting examples for others to reduce transgression and crime, how would that strategy work for people who can't be embarrassed? Humiliation is probably the most effective, nonviolent form of punishment because it doesn't involve physical, but psychological pain. However, the strategy is useless if a subject isn't capable of feeling shame. Therefore, it must be more challenging to punish these people, which kind of makes them a threat to most authorities.
Something I haven't gotten to that relates to humiliation, shame, and embarrassment, is dignity. Dignity is basically any kind of demonstration of self respect or respect for others. So, if you have a shred of dignity/self respect, you are more likely to not do things that are degrading because the cost of humiliation is too high. If you respect others enough to treat them in a dignified manner, you won't do anything to degrade them because you don't want the level of respect you have for them to change. This isn't to imply that people who are into degradation don't have respect for themselves or other people, but the broader scope of degradation challenges understandings of respect and dignity. Perhaps, you might develop respect for people after seeing how they deal with degradation, which might be the case for pledges in a fraternity who advance and get initiated. Or, maybe you like degrading people so you can see them as lesser and not feel obligated to respect them. Either way, dignity relates to humiliation because people need some self respect in order to get embarrassed. Without self respect, people can do things that would be humiliating to most people without feeling embarrassed or humiliated. When dignity goes too far by prioritizing your own self respect and esteem over other people's, it starts bordering on pride and arrogance. And the more prideful someone is, the less likely they are to do things that will embarrass them, unless they're also incapable of shame. I think this is where a lot of scenarios of bondage revenge porn come from where arrogant straight men are overpowered and taken advantage of, which not only renders them physically powerless, but also breaks down their prideful egos by humiliating and objectifying them. As far as humiliation and vulnerability is concerned, dignity and pride give subjects in bondage more to lose. And when a subject doesn't have any dignity or can't experience humiliation, they have less to lose and the stakes are lower.
Therefore, common understandings of dignity and pride add higher stakes to sex, fetishism, and romance because our human concern about making certain impressions on other people factor into how approachable and relatable we are. If our impressions on other people are somehow compromised, we are subject for humiliation, which makes the attempt at making an impression a vulnerable situation. I feel like the informality of our generation (the refusal to call dates dates or the refusal to show effort or that you care by dressing up) is an attempt to avoid that vulnerability because if you're not noticed, no one would see your embarrassment, and if you had no expectations or never showed that you cared about something, no one would see your disappointment. Without vulnerability or any threat to someone's dignity, the stakes wouldn't be very high. This is what makes most humiliation-based fetishes tantalizing because the appeal of most fantasies is the perceived higher stakes and the more there is to gain or lose. Fetishism as a whole seems to be about taking the ordinary and unremarkable and making a bigger deal out of them, as a subversive element of play that reflects the make believe we had as children. Without this and without relying on our own children and grandchildren to keep this imagination alive, since a lot of us might never have kids, I don't know how people would be able to see life as anything but completely drab. The crazy thing about this is that you don't really have to be a fetishist to see little things like a cute guy's embarrassment as valuable, but I think it takes being a fetishist to understand why moments like this have value because we're the ones who are weird enough to obsess over it. Being able to understand why things like this are valuable is important because most people just take these things for granted without acknowledging the need for openness and vulnerability in human connections. As I've mentioned, technology and culture today seem to have stripped many vulnerable parts of socializing away from us to create more convenience, which might be why a lot of long-term, internet-based relationships often end after the couple tries making the relationship work in person. I think that we try applying algorithms of our interests and what we think we want out of a romantic partner when we look for one online, but we fail to consider the little nuances of genuinely putting yourself out there and making yourself vulnerable that create more legitimate bonds between people. So, people should pay closer attention to why they feel charmed when they see a loved one turn red and uncomfortably fumble after they've been embarrassed. Furthermore, perhaps more people should put themselves into situations that might lead to embarrassment just to find out that they don't embarrass as easily as they assumed or that it's possible to survive humiliation.
Comments