i am a sissy

[sissychrissi]

i am a good little sissy
i am a good little sissy cocksucker

i find myself returning to the file everyday

This sissy curse lasts forever

[joabos]

This is just sad.

[0turner0]

If that's what you want, and it works for you - more power to you!

[joabos]

If that's what you want, and it works for you - more power to you!

HOW CAN YOU BE OK WITH THIS HOLY SHIT DON'T ANY OF YOU HAVE ANY SELF-RESPECT?!

[iron_blade]

If this is what he wanted, then this works out just fine.

If he didn't want it, he sure looks like he wants it now anywas.

The whole point of this site is to entertain people's fetishes, I can understand someone being offended by things like crossdressing and bisexuality, but if you are then why are you at this site reading the success forum?

[0turner0]

Getting tortured in pain by an imaginary succubus is alright but self-modification isn't?

Don't be so eager to deal out judgment.

[joabos]

Getting tortured in pain by an imaginary succubus is alright but self-modification isn't?

Don't be so eager to deal out judgment.

First, i'd like to say that I had the good will to not do something i would certainly regret later. And second, there's a limit. You may have a crazy fetish, that's completely understandable, but i'm sure this isn't what the OP had in mind. Who would like to become something like this? You may have a self-prescripted bad life, and want to simply lose contact with it, but that's no reason to simply do things that turn you in a nightmare of a person. I don't care if a fetish is disgusting. I just can't believe a person would want to become what the OP is.

[davelowe1977]

Fetishes aren't disgusting - deviance is normal.

If you have such polarised opinions on standardised behaviour, go somewhere else - a catholic church perhaps.

[zapnosis]

joabos, not only do I respect myself, I try to respect others as well. Your comments on this thread are not only unhelpful and rude, but they represent the kind of response that makes people afraid to talk about this stuff elsewhere. That is why sites like this exist.

If you want to argue about the morality of the decisions we make in a rational and sensible manner then I'm sure many people on here would be interested to hear what you have to say, but I'd recommend that you either avoid jumping to conclusions about other peoples' lives or keep your comments to yourself.

[joabos]

Fetishes aren't disgusting - deviance is normal.

If you have such polarised opinions on standardised behaviour, go somewhere else - a catholic church perhaps.

I just said i didn't find fetishes disgusting.

[davelowe1977]

Fetishes aren't disgusting - deviance is normal.

If you have such polarised opinions on standardised behaviour, go somewhere else - a catholic church perhaps.

I just said i didn't find fetishes disgusting.

Read what you actually wrote!

[FrankJ]

Getting tortured in pain by an imaginary succubus is alright but self-modification isn't?

Don't be so eager to deal out judgment.

First, i'd like to say that I had the good will to not do something i would certainly regret later. And second, there's a limit. You may have a crazy fetish, that's completely understandable, but i'm sure this isn't what the OP had in mind. Who would like to become something like this? You may have a self-prescripted bad life, and want to simply lose contact with it, but that's no reason to simply do things that turn you in a nightmare of a person. I don't care if a fetish is disgusting. I just can't believe a person would want to become what the OP is.

Who in the world are you to judge that op is a nightmare of a person or turning into it?!

And btw, the internet is filled with sissy fetish sites. And by coincidence WMM also has a lot of feminization and sissy files. So yes, there are people who want this and it's neither better nor worse than all the other "strange" fetishes here on the site.

[davelowe1977]

Getting tortured in pain by an imaginary succubus is alright but self-modification isn't?

Don't be so eager to deal out judgment.

First, i'd like to say that I had the good will to not do something i would certainly regret later. And second, there's a limit. You may have a crazy fetish, that's completely understandable, but i'm sure this isn't what the OP had in mind. Who would like to become something like this? You may have a self-prescripted bad life, and want to simply lose contact with it, but that's no reason to simply do things that turn you in a nightmare of a person. I don't care if a fetish is disgusting. I just can't believe a person would want to become what the OP is.

Who in the world are you to judge that op is a nightmare of a person or turning into it?!


And btw, the internet is filled with sissy fetish sites. And by coincidence WMM also has a lot of feminization and sissy files. So yes, there are people who want this and it's neither better nor worse than all the other "strange" fetishes here on the site.

Well said!

[Alien4420]

Amen. If it's something you enjoy doing and it doesn't cause any harm to yourself or to others, I say go for it, because you'll be happier if you do. The only real problem with something like being gay or being a sissy is the reaction of intolerant people, and judging by the demographics, they're a dying breed.

[zapnosis]

Amen. If it's something you enjoy doing and it doesn't cause any harm to yourself or to others, I say go for it, because you'll be happier if you do.

To try and make some positive use of this thread [sorry sissychrissi, if you want it back, I'll delete this post], what if someone does get off on something that can cause them long-term harm? Freedom vs Responsibility and all that. Say, for example, I got turned on by a hypnosis file that makes the listener want to commit suicide or do something similarly bad to themselves. Would anyone have a right to tell me that I was wrong?

[Alien4420]

Amen. If it's something you enjoy doing and it doesn't cause any harm to yourself or to others, I say go for it, because you'll be happier if you do.

To try and make some positive use of this thread [sorry sissychrissi, if you want it back, I'll delete this post], what if someone does get off on something that can cause them long-term harm? Freedom vs Responsibility and all that. Say, for example, I got turned on by a hypnosis file that makes the listener want to commit suicide or do something similarly bad to themselves. Would anyone have a right to tell me that I was wrong?

That's an interesting question. At first take, it seems to me that the same criteria should apply here that apply in everyday life, e.g., if we think someone should be allowed to do something, they should be allowed to do it through hypnosis, and vice-versa. And IMO, there's never any problem difficulty in giving someone advice, as long as it's respectful and appropriate.

In practice, I think that we have a tendency to interfere too much in people's choices on the pretense of protecting them, when all we're really doing is trying to impose our own prejudices on them. Like telling gay people they can't marry, or terminally ill people that they can't end their suffering. I wouldn't hesitate to intervene in the case of a child, or someone who isn't capable of making an informed decision, like someone who's clinically depressed and considering suicide. Or if there was risk of harm to others, or to society. But otherwise, I wouldn't meddle, just express my opinion if I had a strongly held one and then respect the other person's right to choose what's best for him, as I'd hope that they'd respect mine.

[User517]

First off, hypnosis is a choice. You CHOOSE to download the file, and you CHOOSE to listen to it. Although there are some files which try to get around this, ultimately it becomes the choice of the listener, or someone related to the listener what is being tranced to.

Second, for the most part, unless the participant is willing to any extent to do those things which are being asked of them, any suggestions which are forced upon them would have very little effect, and normally only end up breaking the trance as the person rejects those ideas. Even in the case of subliminals and brainwashing, if the person has profound disagreements with what they are being asked to do, they still won't do it.

Third, there is a difference between creating a file which causes a person to adopt a damaging lifestyle, and suggesting that they kill themselves.
Same as directing someone to a cliff verses pushing them off or even telling them to jump. The first case still allows that person to make their own choices about their life, while the later only seeks to end it. Although it may seem distasteful to many, being a sissy whore is still not as bad as being dead, although both may be willingly sought out.

Forth, regardless of what was said above, there would be too many legal implications if anyone ever followed through. And, most of the really damning files come with related warnings about their use, and don't make use of subliminals or brainwashing as a means of action; meaning that anyone using those files usually agrees in some form to accept the consequences.

You may not understand it, you may disagree with it, but it is their choice, their life, and they're stuck with it. You also need to keep in mind that for some, it is just fantasy. Although still real in some respects, it only works because they want it to work, and are aroused (either physically or mentally) by it.

[zapnosis]

I wouldn't hesitate to intervene in the case of a child, or someone who isn't capable of making an informed decision, like someone who's clinically depressed and considering suicide. Or if there was risk of harm to others, or to society.

Well said. What if, again purely for example, I had such a file and I wanted to upload to WMM, correctly described. Ignoring the fact that it would almost certainly be deleted straight away, and any legal issues, would that count as risking harming others? A danger to society? After all, people could decide for themselves whether or not to download it. But after 6 months any member could download it for free without anyone else being involved.

Third, there is a difference between creating a file which causes a person to adopt a damaging lifestyle, and suggesting that they kill themselves.

OK to take another, more practical, example. There are quite a few guys out there who have a smoking fetish. Smoking is habit-forming and can adversely affect health and increase the risk of serious disease. What if I were to try and upload a file that encouraged people to smoke, in order to please those who have a smoking fetish. Should that be allowed? Does anyone have an automatic moral right to object? Is consent mitigated by the fact that the listener has a fetish?

I, for one, always say that consent is not an absolute. Society and the law like to say that consent is either given or it is not, it is comforting to believe that things are that simple, but I disagree. We have instinctive urges that are not rational in the socities we live in, not least regarding arousal. We all have a degree of ignorance and we all have a degree of imagination. When we are born we know only our instincts, and what we grow up with becomes "normal", so every human action is in fact a reaction to our developing instincts and our experiences. An irrational or "surreal" act may be the result of an irrational or "surreal" experience or an instict that has outlived its purpose. I am wandering into my thesis, so I'll stop there, but...

The point I'm making is, does a fetish change the nature of consent? Even the degree of consent? And if so, does that change the morality of the situation?

[Alien4420]

I wouldn't hesitate to intervene in the case of a child, or someone who isn't capable of making an informed decision, like someone who's clinically depressed and considering suicide. Or if there was risk of harm to others, or to society.

Well said. What if, again purely for example, I had such a file and I wanted to upload to WMM, correctly described. Ignoring the fact that it would almost certainly be deleted straight away, and any legal issues, would that count as risking harming others? A danger to society? After all, people could decide for themselves whether or not to download it. But after 6 months any member could download it for free without anyone else being involved.

I think it would, inasmuch as the presence of such a file might encourage someone to take a harmful course of action. It would be like yelling "jump" to a despondent man on a ledge, or handing a book of matches to a child.

Third, there is a difference between creating a file which causes a person to adopt a damaging lifestyle, and suggesting that they kill themselves.

OK to take another, more practical, example. There are quite a few guys out there who have a smoking fetish. Smoking is habit-forming and can adversely affect health and increase the risk of serious disease. What if I were to try and upload a file that encouraged people to smoke, in order to please those who have a smoking fetish. Should that be allowed? Does anyone have an automatic moral right to object? Is consent mitigated by the fact that the listener has a fetish?

Allowed, yes, IMO, although that of course is a subjective decision, and just as some publications refuse tobacco advertising I'd have no problem if EMG or another site owner decided to reject such a file (but not if the government banned it).

I'd also say, whether I personally agree or not, that anyone has a right to object on moral grounds, just as some people object to portrayals of smoking in movies. And as I said in my last post if the objection is reasonably respectful, as so many of these objections are not.

The fetish question is perhaps the most interesting. I believe that fetishes are an aspect of personality -- little more than the consequence of infantile imprinting, generally on an accoutrement, a baby bottle, or something of the sort. Essentially a consequence of our adoption of clothing, tools, and the like. Sometimes bolstered by physical or emotional unavailability on the part of the mother. And I don't believe that personality should be medicalized. From what I've seen, when psychologists decide that aspects of personality represent "disorders" they're usually just imposing their own, usually middle class American values on behavior -- using a diagnosis as the equivalent of what, in an earlier age and still to some, would have been a declaration that something is a sin. So, really, I think we should avoid abusing psychology that way and make a frank decision as to what we're going to allow and what's going to be taboo, based on the criteria of obvious harm to self or others, informed choice, and so forth. Personality doesn't always give us much of a choice, but neither is it something that we should seek to outlaw except in extreme circumstances. Just as I respect the right of someone to put the pleasure of smoking ahead of the health risks, despite having myself made a different choice, I respect the right of someone to judge for themselves whether the pleasure afforded by a fetish outweighs any harm.

I, for one, always say that consent is not an absolute. Society and the law like to say that consent is either given or it is not, it is comforting to believe that things are that simple, but I disagree. We have instinctive urges that are not rational in the socities we live in, not least regarding arousal. We all have a degree of ignorance and we all have a degree of imagination. When we are born we know only our instincts, and what we grow up with becomes "normal", so every human action is in fact a reaction to our developing instincts and our experiences. An irrational or "surreal" act may be the result of an irrational or "surreal" experience or an instict that has outlived its purpose. I am wandering into my thesis, so I'll stop there, but...

I like your analysis, though, and agree. But I'd add that, all other things being equal, we're happiest when we're able to express our deepest instincts: with repression comes anxiety and an overall diminution of pleasure. So there is a reason to allow the fullest possible expression of instinct, to the extent that personal or social harm resulting from the expression of that instinct doesn't outweigh the pleasure. And for society, the dividing line is a moving target, changing from era to era and place to place. It also seems to be less a line than a penumbra, with some personality traits taboo -- bestiality, say, or pedophillia -- others tolerated but discouraged, like smoking or eating to excess, and others embraced or encouraged.

The point I'm making is, does a fetish change the nature of consent? Even the degree of consent? And if so, does that change the morality of the situation?

I'd say no, for the reasons I mentioned above, and taking into account the unusual power of human sexuality, which can lead us to do things that we wouldn't otherwise do. But we live with that as part of who we are. It may seem objectively silly to listen to a file that makes you take up smoking, but then, it's also objectively silly to marry someone for their looks, and guys do that all the time.

And, really, from what I've seen, in real life, we tend to go overboard in judging and attempting to control the behavior of others. For example, I'll be damned if I can see any harm in gay marriage. What exactly is the harm that it's supposed to *do,* other than making some gay people happy? Long observation tells me that in many cases, people and society suffer more harm from the sort of overzealous meddling that produces a Larry Craig than they would from the consequences of loosening some social strictures. I'd much rather concentrate on taming and channeling those instincts that I think really do do serious harm, such as the instincts that lead to teen pregnancy or unsafe sex, or date rape or the exploitation of children.

And, mostly, I'm confident in the ability of most people to make choices that are reasonable, and in the wisdom of instinct. Sure, by nature, and it's part of our nature, we sublimate and repress our instincts; it's what makes human and particularly modern human society possible. But in our desire to impose our understanding, I think we sometimes fail to respect its limits, sometimes meddle with things that we don't understand or confuse our own instincts with rationality. Sort of like the Corps of Engineers replacing natural ecosystems with locks and levees, only to have to rip them out when they make the flooding worse.

[doit]

well people, I have read the comments and followed the lines of thought.

Some people seem to think we are dealing with the higher brain functions of reason and logic here. Fetishes are driven, and created, by things that have effected our lives and created powerful emotional links within a person. we are dealing with base desires and sub-emotional drives, primal emotions that have been linked to things during his/her life. To try and place rational logical thought processes on them would be overlooking the reason they exist and the source/s of their existence.

Some could state that being straight and only having 'normal' turn-on's is in itself a Fetish ! and what defines normal !

I have trained in hypnosis and psycho-analysis, and can only say 'normal' is only an opinion of a given person. But I would also say we all have a right to have that opinion.

I would say that, if you cant understand why, and wish to know, ask and learn.

this is the place to learn so much about what it is to be human.

Of course this is just MY OPINION. :)