However, recently, I'm kind of getting a new perspective of things. I only found out a few month ago that "female lead relationships" are a thing, which is more or less where that "wish fulfillment" side really seems to fit into. I think a lot of gripes I have are less "femdom" and actually more about a desire for things like "Female lead relationship", and I think that's becoming the biggest difference between people's understandings of what femdom is.
There is "traditional" femdom and people who really like the hardcore stuff, you do what the domme says and you're lucky if you get an orgasm at all, its all about her. But the part where I (and others) seem to fit, is this whole idea that the female dictates how everything is done but is kinda thrust/forced into this role of balancing it in a way to make everyone happy/do things that brings everyone pleasure. So I'm re-adjusting my thinking of how I view femdom and whether that is something I actually enjoy or if I'm just super kinky, because I'm thinking its the latter.
Its ok, but let me rant a bit myself:
Bottoming from the top is not femdom [since "everything", includes requested maledom; its not femdom if a sub male does
topping from the bottom either by demanding a dominant female to do this or do that, hence
transforming the female into a service provider and its not femdom if a woman uses it to achieve masochistic goals:
bottoming from the top].
I knew about the "female led relationship" theme already, but even there I never saw suggested that it is actually female led if the female "leads" you to dominate her. I always saw all the content under that header to respect the basic premise of femdom: females are not only in charge but also on top [dominating], with the added notion, that everything in the relationship should center around them, including issues of domestic, financial and other aspects <-basically a female defined, entire way of life, where a male can sign up into, but then renounce taking control of the arrangement. But I personally don't mind if this notion is expanded to whatever you wish.
I won't compromise on the meaning of femdom tho. The
female at minimum needs to be in a sexually dominant position, she needs to be in a position in which
she is always respected, worshiped and
the focus needs to be on her pleasure. Femdom of course its on a spectrum from casual to committed, from light to dark, from soft to extreme,
the only unifying principle is that there is at least 1 female present who must be the dominant party.
The male sub's pleasure should come from submitting to her dominance, not just her wishes [whatever they may be], but her dominance. In terms of fetishes femdom is literally endless, since there are many unique ways of expressing and receiving dominance, or how others have conceptualized it: power-exchange. Anything else is trying to miss-use the term, there is only ambiguity here, if artificially generated.
The issue is not with the term's meaning, but with people who came to love/identify with the term while exploring their sexuality led them into other directions, but they can't let go of their previous identity. They expanded/branched out into other sexual domains without perhaps realizing it first, and therefore they try for awhile to include their changing sexuality to still fit into a definition of femdom. Thereby not only lying to themselves,
but also destroying the concept's meaning for others. This leads to unnecessary drama, because
the simplest and most sensible solution is obvious:
there is nothing wrong with not being into femdom exclusively [most people are not], and
its ok to be positioned at an intersection of divergent sexual categories - it shouldn't be so hard to admit that someone likes both femdom and lets say sissification, without confusing or conflating the two.
Very important: this does not mean that someone who is into additional genres outside femdom, is not welcome to participate in a femdom community, after all, one can connect just fine into that community as long as he or she leaves the non-femdom elements outside a forum dedicated to femdom. As long as he or she does not attempt to reformulate femdom to fit everything they are into as femdom,
to the detriment of those who would be severely negatively impacted by a watered-down meaning of it in their own quest to find access to what they love, they are welcome. Femdom is very wide as it is, it only has this one rule: females are the ones dominating, that means not only demanding random things, but expressing domination with the things they ask/demand. There are things which are inherently non-dominant.
A submissive woman can be assertive and demand you do things to her, but
that doesn't make her sexually dominant which is the only minimal requirement for her to be a female dominant.
So, one last time:
the definition of femdom is clear, it doesn't depend on who agrees or does not agree with it. The category is just as clear as the category of maledom is, the latter doesn't have the problem of people trying to bend it out of shape into something which it is not.
It is always in areas where females need to be treated with utter respect where "controversy" rears its head up, be it sex or feminism or anything related to women, even lesbians are nowadays asked to accept cocks as part of female anatomy, which basically is the same old "corrective rape" logic which humiliated lesbians for ages, who must long for a good shagging, no matter how hardly they object - its a man's world, where apparently liking dick is obligatory.
I am not sticking to the well-defined meaning of female domination to exclude others from enjoying it, but to shield those of us who love femdom from being gas-lighted into accepting things as femdom, which are not.
If femdom was a dish, it would be lets say pizza, and all I am saying is lets keep pizza pizza, so that we all know when we are eating a pizza its a pizza and not a lasagna. Its completely ok to also eat lasagna for those who like lasagna too, but they shouldn't therefore call lasagna pizza, they can eat pizza just fine even if they admit that they also like eating not-pizza.
This list will continue to use the traditional, that is correct meaning of the concept of female domination. If there is a concept of "female led" relationship which allows for "led" to mean "anything", that is fine, but I don't want to be led into maledom. I fully support petitioning for a "female-led" tag in addition to the "female domination" tag if that would bring more clarity and distinction.
PS: I will add this rant as spoiler into the OP, because I find it very important and it encapsulates the reason I made this list, which for me is indeed a labor of love.
