However where I disagree is where you argue, male received oral is almost inherently male dominated or female received oral sex is the femdom. To me the domination, is the person with the power and calling the shots regardless of the act undergone. There are male domination games and porn out there where the woman is subject to cunnilingus often unwillingly, in this example do you still consider it femdom? If a woman is unwilling and lacks the power in the situation to control her partner or even stop it, how are they the dominant in this scenario? I definitely would consider this maledom regardless if the woman is receiving the physical pleasure.
Another example, if we take your logic (which I am not trying to fault but trying to understand) if the pleasure is always at the behest of the domme, how do we explain footjobs? A trope and preference well established as part of femdom where does the domme, the female, recieve the pleasure of giving the footjob? I mean, to be fair, you may think this isn't femdom either but many seem to consider this act as predominantly femdom in nature.
Only 2 things I take issue with here:
1. "the domination, is the person with the power and calling the shots regardless of the act undergone.", because I would argue that both this would have to be true, and the domme would have to be pleasured/turned on by the act AND the sexual act itself would have to not be masochistic/humiliating/submissive for the domme. (such as in the extreme example I gave where "dominant women" would "demand" to be spat on, slapped or urinated on - again, by your own logic, where the only thing that matters is who calls the shots, that would be femdom)
I would agree that my original statement, where I said what should matter is who receives the pleasure, is somewhat incomplete, as I can think of various established femdom kinks where the domme does not technically receive pleasure, but for all of those neither does the sub. (like whipping, pegging, pony-play, boot/foot licking etc) In those cases, I'd argue that the femdom nature of the scene is conferred by the fact that the domme is both calling the shots, derives pleasure from the sexual acts (as in, she is turned on by it regardless of the fact that nobody/nothing is necessarily touching any part of her vulva) AND is not put in a degrading/submissive position by the acts themselves.
You take the last of these 3 conditions away, you'll have women getting turned on by submissive kinks. You take only the 2nd one away, you get to what I regard as non-femdom footjobs (eg footjobs where the woman does not draw any enjoyment from it and is doing it only to please the male sub - if she does get turned on by it herself as well, then the scene does fufill all conditions and is 100% femdom) or basically a service-domme if we're talking about other kinks (a woman who just engages in femdom sex/kinks to please a male sub/get paid, but is dispassionate/not also enjoying the act herself), and you take only the first condition away and we get a male calling the shots. (even if the other condition are fulfilled, and the male wants a female to humiliate him or receive pleasure from him, she's obviously not the dominant party if he is in controll...)
2. I briefly touched on this already, but I also disagree that all footjobs are "established femdom" - I heard of maledom VNs and/or fanfiction where dominant male characters request footjobs from a submissive female, so I wouldn't consider those femdom on account of who calls the shots, and I also think footjobs in a self-proclaimed femdom narrative that focus entirely on the male sub's pleasure/orgasm and there is not even one indication that the woman is at least getting turned on by either the act or the fact that she is humiliating him, are not femdom, on account of them breaking my second condition.
So, I think now that I clarified my position, you probably see where I'm coming from. I never said that any sex scenes that break only one of these three conditions are "maledom" at any point (most of them are somewhere in-between), and I very much think reverse-rape games can be femdom - this is why I asked questions about this one. (I also agree with you that's it's a silly terminology, but I'm going with it becase it's conventionally accepted)
The way I see it, "reverse-rape" is esentially just vanilla sex initiated by a female, on her terms and often against the protests (although often mild) of the male party so, given that vanilla sex is very much a neutral act which both parties can receive pleasure from and is not in general submissive or degrading to either, the only thing that matters for it being maledom/femdom is who calls the shots. So, in spite of your wider and my narrower definition of femdom, for this one kink more by virtue of chance than similar mentality, I think we regard exactly the same things as femdom!
My only issue with games like this is if, except for the "reverse rape", there is no other type of femdom and there are only either maledom ("harem" for example and some blowjobs) or vanilla kinks.
I also think that kinks and fetishes obviously stem from emotional desires and instincts and making an objective science out of them/defining them in a universally-acceptable way is probably impossible, (so I'm ok with us having different opinions) but what irks me a bit about femdom being used as loosely/widely as it is on f95, is that I don't see the same thing done with maledom and I find it a frustrating double standard! I for one have never seen a maledom game where the only maledom tag was "rape" (that the female sub will eventually find enjoyable) and everything else was stuff like "pussy worship", "footlicking", and various other femdom fetishes, whereas for femdom games it is somewhat common to see exactly that happen with maledom/vanilla kinks...
Phew! Anyway, sorry for taking so much of your time with this rant! I intended it much briefer than it wound up...
