Recommending Female domination Games

[TessSadist]

I don't wish to start a debate. But I KNOW intimately well, that in reality most femdom is devoid of vaginal penetration, no stories, videos, life-style stories I know - and I know an embarrassingly huge amount - ever relegate femdom to foreplay, its the main course, not an appetizer. Real femdom that is. Maybe what you are looking for is softcore erotica with some naughty foreplay, but that's not what femdom is or supposed to be. But I am absolutely positive, that most games with the female domination tag on this site (especially if they also mention vaginal sex) will be right up your alley. The few games which actually feature real femdom, are rare and not for everyone.

Speaking for myself, I don't mind a tongue penetrating my vagina sometimes! But adding to that, (for me personally anyway) if I am into dominating you, that penis is not getting any real action err inside me. No way. That's a lot of the fun right there. Sample size of 1 anyway!

 

[ChaosOpen]

Speaking for myself, I don't mind a tongue penetrating my vagina sometimes! But adding to that, (for me personally anyway) if I am into dominating you, that penis is not getting any real action err inside me. No way. That's a lot of the fun right there. Sample size of 1 anyway!

That's kind of disturbing. You'd have to put a lot of trust in someone who is tying you up and whipping you to not go too far and cause a medical emergency then subsequently ignore it. If that someone is disgusted by the thought of any intimacy and they are simply in it to cause pain... Well, I'm not sure I could place any amount of faith in that person.

Though, I enjoy sadism myself, I had a real fun time with Slave Lords of the Galaxy,

You must be registered to see the links

and

You must be registered to see the links

. So, maybe I'm just a bit confused because whenever male-on-female it is generally a whip-and-carrot method unless it is simply depicting torture(Euphoria), but femdom seems to have a whip and bigger whip obsession.

 

[Aseratrix]

Speaking for myself, I don't mind a tongue penetrating my vagina sometimes! But adding to that, (for me personally anyway) if I am into dominating you, that penis is not getting any real action err inside me. No way. That's a lot of the fun right there. Sample size of 1 anyway!

Oh, I definitely would wish for having a useful tongue in a multitude of ways. I just didn't consider tongue-action to be "penetration". But yeah I entirely agree with you TessSadist

 

[Aseratrix]

I played this game too. I didn't like the emphasis on the huge amounts of cum at times (felt like overkill sometimes) and the uh grosser stuff (you know what I mean) but some of the scenes were incredible femdom to me. I really also enjoy narrative worlds where the females are quite rich and powerful and have the freedom to basically do what they wish, etc. Starless is probably a bit too cum centric for my taste but some of the scenes were still really good! I especially liked that there were varied endings for the main character ranging from pretty good to downright brutal, and that style of variety of choice greatly influenced me in designing a long-term set of tree branch endings for the game I am working on right now. And Euphoria is for me something beyond femdom if you can get a certain ending path or two, so many harsh scenes but such moving emotion and impact near the end too if played a certain way. I think it's a great game even though for some it's definitely too rough I would say.

Based on your evaluation, I will definitely give the game one more try

 

[TessSadist]

That's kind of disturbing. You'd have to put a lot of trust in someone who is tying you up and whipping you to not go too far and cause a medical emergency then subsequently ignore it. If that someone is disgusted by the thought of any intimacy and they are simply in it to cause pain... Well, I'm not sure I could place any amount of faith in that person.

Though, I enjoy sadism myself, I had a real fun time with Slave Lords of the Galaxy,

You must be registered to see the links

and

You must be registered to see the links

. So, maybe I'm just a bit confused because whenever male-on-female it is generally a whip-and-carrot method unless it is simply depicting torture(Euphoria), but femdom seems to have a whip and bigger whip obsession.

That's a pretty big leap of context you made based on the comment, both on the issue of "being disgusted by intimacy" and also concluding "this means just to cause pain", particularly since I never mentioned whipping or tying up at all. Some men actually adore being in chastity and denied orgasms and is for them quite intimate. Intimacy being defined by vaginal sex that way is to me a fairly limited and simplistic worldview as the emotional and psychological dynamics in a relationship and that connection are far far more powerful to me. But I'm a woman, and I think perhaps some men might disagree with me.

 

[ChaosOpen]

That's a pretty big leap of context you made based on the comment, both on the issue of "being disgusted by intimacy" and also concluding "this means just to cause pain", particularly since I never mentioned whipping or tying up at all. Some men actually adore being in chastity and denied orgasms and is for them quite intimate. Intimacy being defined by vaginal sex that way is to me a fairly limited and simplistic worldview as the emotional and psychological dynamics in a relationship and that connection are far far more powerful to me. But I'm a woman, and I think perhaps some men might disagree with me.

Fact of the matter is we are rather short lived existences in the scope of the human race, really our goal is propagation. Mature, select a mate, reproduce, then raise your young before you die; that's what your purpose in life really boils down to. Pair bonding is a means to that ends, so if you're effectively saying "a relationship isn't just about sex," then what the hell is the point of it? If not reproduction then why be in a relationship with a male? Looks like you selected a mate but you seem to be struggling with step 3...

 

[Aseratrix]

Fact of the matter is we are rather short lived existences in the scope of the human race, really our goal is propagation. Mature, select a mate, reproduce, then raise your young before you die; that's what your purpose in life really boils down to. Pair bonding is a means to that ends, so if you're effectively saying "a relationship isn't just about sex," then what the hell is the point of it? If not reproduction then why be in a relationship with a male? Looks like you selected a mate but you seem to be struggling with step 3...

Wow! First of all, we have NO drive to reproduce, not directly anyways. We have a sexual drive, which does not contain a desire for babies directly. Babies were historically and sometimes the RESULT of vanilla sex (you know, the "miracle" because of the shock-effect lol), but the internal desire of sex itself, the subjective appetite for it, is totally devoid of a direct desire to reproduce, even in the most boring of "shaggings". Nobody is crying out in the heat of even vanilla copulation, that "oooh ima gonna have a baby"...well except in horror...

Plus in this day and age not even penis to vagina sex needs to result in procreation. You heard about condoms and pills I assume. That nature - mind you an unintelligent and blind force - has living organisms copying themselves via stealthily enticing them either through sheer instinct or unrelated subjective desire, does not and should not translate into a moral obligation of any sort - that's a logical fallacy called: appeal to nature. Even if sexual desire and all its varieties would inherently contain a desire to pop out babies - which they absolutely do not, ask homosexuals while you're at it too - we humans in particular derive our ethics from entirely separate sources, not the blind mechanisms of evolution and thus we are not beholden to do what nature wants us to do. The majority of our moral standards are based on understanding and reasoning. Finally, there have been a lot of studies showing that the benefit of sex, (such as they also found among Bonobos) is more about social and personal connections, building relationships, above and beyond reproduction. If you truly believe what you just said, the only sex your desire should exhaust itself in is the missionary position.

Don't get me wrong, its nothing bad for being vanilla (and everything wrong with being the asshole you currently present yourself as), but what the hell are you doing on a specifically femdom thread? You even cite explicitly maledom games you enjoyed as an example of what you liked. Something tells me you are either a troll or on a crusade against people who are not into your Victorian PIV pov.

 

[TessSadist]

Fact of the matter is we are rather short lived existences in the scope of the human race, really our goal is propagation. Mature, select a mate, reproduce, then raise your young before you die; that's what your purpose in life really boils down to. Pair bonding is a means to that ends, so if you're effectively saying "a relationship isn't just about sex," then what the hell is the point of it? If not reproduction then why be in a relationship with a male? Looks like you selected a mate but you seem to be struggling with step 3...

The difference is for humans sex alone is not enough in defining a relationship, for animals they often are at first glance (although some animals are more than meets the eye certainly in ways we do not fully understand). The biological imperative of propagation is always present, but consciousness and emotional bonding for human beings allow for much higher states of intimacy in a relationship. Intimacy is what we were talking about too, not the context of an overall relationship. That is a different framework and context entirely beyond what I was discussing. You are applying two dimensional thinking to a three dimensional paradigm by assuming that me saying sexual encounters can be intimate without sex = the relationship never has sex at all.

I'd also add you are kind of demeaning the millions of couples around the world that do have sex but don't have or want children for whatever reason, and also the likely millions of say older couples that started new relationships of deep intimacy and bonding without any sex at all from the start or ever. (one example I actually know is a 75ish year old couple)

 

[Aseratrix]

That's kind of disturbing. You'd have to put a lot of trust in someone who is tying you up and whipping you to not go too far and cause a medical emergency then subsequently ignore it. If that someone is disgusted by the thought of any intimacy and they are simply in it to cause pain... Well, I'm not sure I could place any amount of faith in that person.

Though, I enjoy sadism myself, I had a real fun time with Slave Lords of the Galaxy,

You must be registered to see the links

and

You must be registered to see the links

. So, maybe I'm just a bit confused because whenever male-on-female it is generally a whip-and-carrot method unless it is simply depicting torture(Euphoria), but femdom seems to have a whip and bigger whip obsession.

For me whats disturbing is your attempt to reduce the notion of intimacy to copulation. Now that's disturbing, and self serving too. The sad thing is you have no idea about the depth and complexity of a dom-sub relationship and the incredible bonds that such arrangements can spawn. The latter type of relationships are usually more cerebral, more psychologically meaningful, where erotic tension rather than sheer sex is the focus. Its like an elaborate dinner with candles and 50 years old wine, and a long philosophical discussion about the meaning of life, while vanilla sex is like eating a burger in a run-down motel, while watching TV. The difference is heaven and earth, but you'd never understand it.

 

[ChaosOpen]

The difference is for humans sex alone is not enough in defining a relationship, for animals they often are at first glance (although some animals are more than meets the eye certainly in ways we do not fully understand). The biological imperative of propagation is always present, but consciousness and emotional bonding for human beings allow for much higher states of intimacy in a relationship. Intimacy is what we were talking about too, not the context of an overall relationship. That is a different framework and context entirely beyond what I was discussing. You are applying two dimensional thinking to a three dimensional paradigm by assuming that me saying sexual encounters can be intimate without sex = the relationship never has sex at all.

I'd also add you are kind of demeaning the millions of couples around the world that do have sex but don't have or want children for whatever reason, and also the likely millions of say older couples that started new relationships of deep intimacy and bonding without any sex at all from the start or ever. (one example I actually know is a 75ish year old couple)

Point was was that we can't escape nature, human pair bonding is based on a fundamental desire to reproduce, so the strongest indication of trust and intimacy is the willingness to at least perform the act of procreation. As it is an indication that the female sees the male as a sexual partner. Even if our higher reasoning seeks to avoid having children through contraception, the fact that a woman is willing to have sex with a man at least shows that she approves of him as a mate.

Saying "I'm not going to have sex with you" is the same as saying you don't approve of him as a mate, a "friend" would probably be a more accurate definition of your relationship. You want to spend time with them and do things together, but you don't want to pursue the relationship further.

Lastly, how does one have a "sexual encounter" without sex? It's just an "encounter" at that point isn't it?

For me whats disturbing is your attempt to reduce the notion of intimacy to copulation. Now that's disturbing, and self serving too. The sad thing is you have no idea about the depth and complexity of a dom-sub relationship and the incredible bonds that such arrangements can spawn. The latter type of relationships are usually more cerebral, more psychologically meaningful, where erotic tension rather than sheer sex is the focus. Its like an elaborate dinner with candles and 50 years old wine, and a long philosophical discussion about the meaning of life, while vanilla sex is like eating a burger in a run-down motel, while watching TV. The difference is heaven and earth, but you'd never understand it.

So, because I don't want to be denied sex I'm uncultured? Am I understanding that correctly? Wanting to have sex with the woman I love makes me boorish and incapable of grasping the nature of one as cultured as yourself?

 

[Aseratrix]

Point was was that we can't escape nature, human pair bonding is based on a fundamental desire to reproduce, so the strongest indication of trust and intimacy is the willingness to at least perform the act of procreation. As it is an indication that the female sees the male as a sexual partner. Even if our higher reasoning seeks to avoid having children through contraception, the fact that a woman is willing to have sex with a man at least shows that she approves of him as a mate.

Saying "I'm not going to have sex with you" is the same as saying you don't approve of him as a mate, a "friend" would probably be a more accurate definition of your relationship. You want to spend time with them and do things together, but you don't want to pursue the relationship further.

Lastly, how does one have a "sexual encounter" without sex? It's just an "encounter" at that point isn't it?

So, because I don't want to be denied sex I'm uncultured? Am I understanding that correctly? Wanting to have sex with the woman I love makes me boorish and incapable of grasping the nature of one as cultured as yourself?

To your first response: I disagree that we can't escape nature. We already did so on a huge scale, human civilization itself is in its essence a distancing from nature, since we began caring for the ill and elderly, use technology and medicine, we already excised ourselves out of the rules of natural selection.

I totally disagree that human pair bonding is based on a desire to reproduce. We have a desire to have sex, not to reproduce - and it does not even need to be pair-bonding, it can be a group-bonding too. Biologically even, reproduction is hidden from the desire to have sex, sure nature "invented" sex as a way to basically trick us into reproducing, but we are no longer mere animals, and even in case of animals sexual desire can have non-reproductive forms.

The desire to reproduce in humans is entirely a matter of choice, of cultural expectation, and not an inherent part of sexual desire. Since we can use a wide assortment of defenses against pregnancy to occur, not even vanilla heterosexual copulation needs to result in pregnancy - plenty of couples decide to stay child-free yet enjoy having sex, regardless. This already means that we outsmarted nature's smarts in its aim to make us a slave to the DNA.

An important point also: homosexuals also have pair bonding and they enjoy sex and want to have sex, their case is a prime example how sex is not inherently about reproduction. Similarly, different fetishes we have are also not about reproduction. Unless you want to kink-shame us, or unless you are a homophobe, you would cease this ridiculous claim that sex is primarily about reproduction it is not. Conversely, since artificial insemination exists, sex is not even needed for reproduction. We can entirely circumvent the stupid program of evolution. Since we have a lot of sexual preferences, a woman or a man "having sex" with the other or the same sex can mean a lot of different things for different people, it does in no way represent any desire to reproduce.

"Lastly, how does one have a "sexual encounter" without sex? It's just an "encounter" at that point isn't it?"

Nope, since oral sex can be part of it, and oral sex is having a form of sex, is more than just an encounter. I would also say that the encounter would be entirely sexual without even oral sex, for erotic satisfaction can happen without any sexual contact whatsoever. You can "get off" on purely femdom stuff, without even touching yourself/or by touching yourself. Sexuality is something varied beyond your wildest imagination. It definitely does not mean merely "fucking".

The last quote, where you worry that I find you being uncultured...that's ridiculous, you completely misunderstood my point. There I simply tried to describe how two sexual experiences (femdom vs vanilla) feel to me, it was an attempt to convey to you the message that while YOU can't find intimacy in femdom, for me there is incomparably more intimacy in it than in vanilla sex. Its a difference of sexuality and sexual preferences. In fact, casual vanilla sex for me is way less intimate than a femdom experience.

I really think, we should leave it at that. Find your own sexuality, be who you are, find what you enjoy. You don't need to force your preference on us. I don't go on vanilla threads and bitch about the lack of femdom, nor do I go to maledom threads to bitch about the same. All I ask of you is do the same, respect our differences, realize that femdom is not for you, and lets all move on, this thread was not about debating sexuality in the first place.

 

[TessSadist]

Point was was that we can't escape nature, human pair bonding is based on a fundamental desire to reproduce, so the strongest indication of trust and intimacy is the willingness to at least perform the act of procreation. As it is an indication that the female sees the male as a sexual partner. Even if our higher reasoning seeks to avoid having children through contraception, the fact that a woman is willing to have sex with a man at least shows that she approves of him as a mate.

Saying "I'm not going to have sex with you" is the same as saying you don't approve of him as a mate, a "friend" would probably be a more accurate definition of your relationship. You want to spend time with them and do things together, but you don't want to pursue the relationship further.

Lastly, how does one have a "sexual encounter" without sex? It's just an "encounter" at that point isn't it?



So, because I don't want to be denied sex I'm uncultured? Am I understanding that correctly? Wanting to have sex with the woman I love makes me boorish and incapable of grasping the nature of one as cultured as yourself?

I won't respond again, as your reading comprehension is badly lacking. I suggest you actually read what I wrote as what you are saying here is not representative of anything I asserted. You are still equating one session of domination as equivalent somehow to no sex in an entire relationship by extension and even more dire conclusions that are just not the reality in the dynamics of human relationships. How you arrived at those conclusions based on anything I actually wrote is incredibly surprising and it begs other questions about how you think that are not germane to this discussion but I do wonder. And again, willing to have sex in a broad context is not the same thing (even for an 85 old that can't have sex but would) as a single intimate session with your partner. I can't really in good faith debate with that kind of logic formulation, so good luck.

 

[Aseratrix]

I'm asking leading questions to ruffle feathers because I want to delve into the psyche of what makes a person tick, and that is normally how they respond to pressure. If you're worried about me kink-shaming then may I ask why? You don't know me, but for some reason you seem to care.

Despite having an avatar that says "I ♡ Femdom" you seem to give a lot of care to making sure I view masochism as something far greater than simply enjoying the feeling of emasculation and sense of humiliation and helplessness.

I'm asking you why that would be the main course, BDSM is in the end simply a play put on by the participants in which they play their part for sexual excitement, but it seems like a more fulfilling way to wrap things up to break character then come together as equals to reinforce the relationship.

Maybe that is why you seem to be trying to beat me down verbally. I heard that cuckold boyfriends who don't ever "join in" after being cuckolded tend to make for very jealous boyfriends because they are insecure in their relationship, even though having their woman taken away turns them on, it also makes them feel very insecure in their relationship outside of the bedroom. I wonder if a similar phenomena albeit in a different form takes play among male masochist, in which they are emasculated in the bedroom but without that rebound they end up feeling it outside as well and overcompensate as a result.

Good job pal, but it ends here, I am not feeding a troll any further. Also femdom does not entail cuckolding, nor "emasculation", I want 0% male presence in my femdom, and my experience of it has nothing to do with the social construct of masculinity - luckily I have no complexes of having to compensate for it, since I am completely gender-nonconforming thank you very much. You sound like a right-wing fanatic male misogynist with serious ego problems. Since you avoided responding to any of the points I made, this is truly pointless to continue.

"If you're worried about me kink-shaming then may I ask why? You don't know me, but for some reason you seem to care."

Well kink-shaming is indicative of serious repressed sexuality in general, it is an unhealthy preoccupation with what other people enjoy. Its not only not civil, its outright offensive to those who enjoy a particular fetish. I don't care at all what YOU think, especially after the lack of any sign of actual understanding of the issues raised. I care about what I like? Sure. Why should I or anyone tolerate to be berated for what we like? Go and suck off a sledgehammer, and stop bothering this thread. I will also try to report you to the mods, hopefully they will do something.

 

[ChaosOpen]

Good job pal, but it ends here, I am not feeding a troll any further. Also femdom does not entail cuckolding, nor "emasculation", I want 0% male presence in my femdom, and my experience of it has nothing to do with the social construct of masculinity - luckily I have no complexes of having to compensate for it, since I am completely gender-nonconforming thank you very much. You sound like a right-wing fanatic male misogynist with serious ego problems. Since you avoided responding to any of the points I made, this is truly pointless to continue.

"If you're worried about me kink-shaming then may I ask why? You don't know me, but for some reason you seem to care."

Well kink-shaming is indicative of serious repressed sexuality in general, it is an unhealthy preoccupation with what other people enjoy. Its not only not civil, its outright offensive to those who enjoy a particular fetish. I don't care at all what YOU think, especially after the lack of any sign of actual understanding of the issues raised. I care about what I like? Sure. Why should I or anyone tolerate to be berated for what we like? Go and suck off a sledgehammer, and stop bothering this thread. I will also try to report you to the mods, hopefully they will do something.

If I was kink shaming it wouldn't take 5 posts to figure that out, if I was trolling you wouldn't know in only 5 posts.

TessSadist said that she purposefully refuses to have sex in a relationship because she wants to torment her partner and you agreed that it was a good idea. I asked how never having sex in an active adult relationship was a sustainable and you have proceeded to dance around the question since. With you avoiding the issue instead trying to paint me as a plebeian and Tess claiming that she didn't really say what she said, she meant the complete opposite and I was simply too dumb to know that.

So, I am asking you again: why do you seek a relationship which is predicated on the girl withholding sexual satisfaction for the purpose of torment?

 

[Arthas12]

TessSadist said that she purposefully refuses to have sex in a relationship because she wants to torment her partner and you agreed that it was a good idea. I asked how never having sex in an active adult relationship was a sustainable and you have proceeded to dance around the question since. With you avoiding the issue instead trying to paint me as a plebeian and Tess claiming that she didn't really say what she said, she meant the complete opposite and I was simply too dumb to know that.

So, I am asking you again: why do you seek a relationship which is predicated on the girl withholding sexual satisfaction for the purpose of torment?

Jesus Christ, talk about going from 0 to 100 real fucking quick. In all honesty why does it matter? Isn't the most important thing that both participants enjoy what they are doing? If the guy, or girl for that matter, enjoy being "tormented" where is the problem? The key is concent and mutual agreement. I for one am a submissive. I literally get off on being dominated and sex does next to nothing for me. It really is that simple.

So here is my question to you; Why do you care, and why is it a problem as long as it is done on agreeable terms for both participants?

I strongly suggest that you do some reading on fetishes to get some insight in what you are talking about.

 

[Greycrimson]

If I was kink shaming it wouldn't take 5 posts to figure that out, if I was trolling you wouldn't know in only 5 posts.

People think you are trolling because you refuse to understand a very basic concept like people being into different kinks. It's something even a 5 year old could figure out after explained so many times and in so much detail so what you are doing seems to be on purpose.

I asked how never having sex in an active adult relationship was a sustainable

1.Partners find sexual gratification in things other than sex
2.Partners engage in sexual activities other than sex
3.Partners continue on this relationship

But I assume you don't accept anything other than penetration as sexual activity which is why you keep coming back to this.

 

[Frosty2000]

Well I am married to a dominant woman. Main reason she restricts my orgasms, is that I am just more attentive in daily life when kept on the edge. And yeah intercourse was not a thing early on. Sex was just a one way cunnilingus street to her orgasm, and yeah I like and prefer it that way. At one point we wanted to have children though, so intercourse started to happen. Outside of trying to get pregnant it simply depends on her mood now. Ideally she would want to not have intercourse with me, but I guess I am the kind of sub where Dommes are not always able to follow their ideals, since that was a common theme in all my relationships before... or well maybe that's just a thing which always happens in those relationships?

So yeah starting a relationship with a Domme who doesn't allow intercourse isn't the same as castration. In real life, even in femdom relationship, desires change or evolve of course. If you have a good connection they most likely change in complementing ways. If not, at least in most western countries, you are free to seperate. Therefore I was always quite relaxed about the no intercourse thing and didn't see greater implications in it for any future family wishes.

Having said that, in fantasy scenarios I quite enjoy the threat of forever being put in chastity and serving a Domme without ever being allowed any intercourse with her or even any own orgasm. Would wish more femdom games would incorporate paths like that.

 

[Aseratrix]

So, I am asking you again: why do you seek a relationship which is predicated on the girl withholding sexual satisfaction for the purpose of torment?

Because I like it better that way? And because sexual satisfaction for me is something else than it is for you? Because being allowed to worship female beauty, serve it and cater to her whims is satisfaction in and of itself to me. Because giving her head is more fulfilling to me psycho-sexually than coitus, not the least because it feels like still worshiping her, without transforming her into a passive recipient of my need. There are many reasons, and all of them are good enough for me, and that's why I love femdom. Have a nice day!

 

[ChaosOpen]

Because I like it better that way? And because sexual satisfaction for me is something else than it is for you? Because being allowed to worship female beauty, serve it and cater to her whims is satisfaction in and of itself to me. Because giving her head is more fulfilling to me psycho-sexually than coitus, not the least because it feels like still worshiping her, without transforming her into a passive recipient of my need. There are many reasons, and all of them are good enough for me, and that's why I love femdom. Have a nice day!

Thank you, that was very enlightening and I believe I at least understand where you're coming from and agree that with such a mindset having sex afterword would break immersion. In such a relationship you'd either have sex OR femdom, trying to combine the two into one night would ruin it.

 

[Choo-choo]

there is also https://f95zone.to/threads/piece-soft-19-may-19-piece-soft.30489/ "reverse ryona"
piece soft/erocabin games
and ZGreatMagician have some good games too