I actually disagree with it being different for men. I think the aegosexuality dynamic is identical to what men get from porn. No dealing with emotional intimacy, which is difficult and messy, no dealing with your own physical inadequacy or anxieties about performing sexually. These things are "safe" in a certain sense. "Cuckold" porn is the most extreme version, literally getting off on not participating at all.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that while the fantasies might be different, the underlying mechanism isn't...at all.
Aegosexuality isn't gender specific, and it's more than just getting off from being a voyeur but rather turning it into your entire sexuality, not just a kink. It's about complete absence, not being cuckolded (though maybe I've misunderstood this term).
I'm making a point about the majority vs the majority, btw, not making universal claims. I've no doubt there are men that engage with lesbian content the same way that I'm describing women do with gay content--but they are not the majority. I've certainly never encountered them. I even say there are fetishistic women out there, and I actually quite empathize with the gay men who feel like they're being objectified and dehumanized. In a way it's about consuming them whole rather than reducing them to a sexual fantasy, if that makes sense.
I think we do disagree. I don't think women fantasizing about gay men are "consuming them whole" it's just they their fantasies include more than just the act itself. I'll just do some shameless self promotion and say I wrote about all this a year or so ago.
I used to have this friend I worked with. Very nice and smart girl, but extremely sheltered and as long as I worked with her (which was many years) never heard her mention dating anyone. She still lived with her parents.
She was obsessed, and I mean obsessed with Robert Pattinson. After a while I just started to see the whole fantasy as a substitute for actually dating which was too difficult and scary. It was sad. I wish things could have been different for her. I think she was definitely afraid of real relationships.
I've written about this perspective before, it happens pretty often that people will say they care more about a ship (oftentimes more with regards to real people's relationships) than their own. The proxy experience is one that I find incredibly psychologically interesting.
I had a friend whose wife was a Twilight wife. Like she had the same Jeep that was in the movie. They took at least one vacation to the PNW where it was filmed. I have no idea if it factored into their divorce but it wouldn’t surprise me.
Really interesting stuff. I definitely agree that women are attracted to gay men because it's safe, but I wonder if there are other reasons too. When something like 18/20 of the top ships on AO3 are M/M, can all the women writing and reading these stories not want to put themselves in the possibility of a real relationship? Even an imaginary one? I kinda hope not, because that's pretty depressing.
I think these communities feed off each other and encourage going deeper into the rabbit hole of obsession and disembodiment. And a lot of people have no idea these communities/obsessions exist despite being a big part of many women's lives when they're young. (I mentioned to my husband how straight women love Heated Rivalry, mostly for the smut, and he was completely perplexed.)
It definitely doesn't apply to everyone, it's just an observable artefact that I don't see mentioned. And it really applies to people who are obsessed about straight ships, too, I've written about the psychology of that a couple of times.
But in the past I did see a lot of internalised misogyny in those corners, women who didn't want to read about men with women because "girl parts are gross." So there's a lot at play.
I love slash ships and have written and read plenty and I know plenty of fellow fans who participate who are in happy relationships.
Great article, I did not know there were people abandoning relationships on this basis! I’d wager there *are* guys out there who are stuck obsessing over idealized sapphic relationships, but they don’t fit any fun narratives (yet!) so it’s just not as visible.
I remember the Twilight coverage of this phenomenon vividly! I feel like I've also read articles on women who abandon relationships (or never get in to a relationship) because of romance novels--like good old fashioned Harlequin bodice rippers. But it was always presented as a weird thing. With Heated Rivalry, this all feels much more mainstream now. I'll have to see if I can find that romance novel article.
Would love to read that! I believe it, I was immersed in fantasy novels in my teens so I was so out of the loop of relationships. That bodice rippers might have this impact sounds entirely likely.
While this term has a use here through your personal lens, it’s important to stress that this is not a term that exists in romance fandom or academia. The way it is used here problematically is not how tropes function in romance. Not to mention that it’s impossible to proclaim what is or is not kinky monolithically. I just wanted to drop that in because romance readers have been infantilized and othered since the birth of the genre. The reasons why women love romance are not pathological.
While I think sex is the number-one reason for divorce, I would bet money that, most of the time, it is not due to unrealistic expectations. Women love M/M romance—and erotica—because it’s hot. Not out of a need for safety; but the lure of fascination. The essence of genre romance is actually about active participation with erotic and romantic fantasies.
And the best comment on that Instagram post is from @dickinsonwoolf:
“How are these comments not realizing that the divorces had nothing to do with the actual show and everything to do with the fact that they realize they hated their husbands?”
I'm not sure which term you're referring to--perhaps erotical illusions? I don't think it's a problematic term, it's just a good way of categorizing the way we react to different stimuli. I also explicitly say that the way fandom refers to having kinks for a specific trope is not the way "kinks" are seen or discussed in general, it's an adopted term for something that hits a psychological spot.
"They like it because it's hot" is a simplistic and dismissive. I'm not interested in pathologizing anyone, but as someone who had a cultic fandom experience (and lost friends from it when I was in that high) I want to explore the why's of people's attachment and investment beyond the surface. I exist in these spaces and I want to make sense of them beyond the shallow reductionist “it’s hot” excuse. "It's hot" doesn't explain why people cling to specific dynamics and can't even accept that reality is more complicated than that, nor does it provide any more insight into the human condition, which is what I find interesting.
Yes, I was referring to “erotical illusion.” I didn’t want to write an essay in your comments, so “hot” was clearly a summary term, reductive for brevity and not a shallow or dismissive explanation. I wrote a thesis on this; there is a great deal to say about why women love romance and what romance is.
As I said, the term may fit your specific context of obsessive fandom—which is an interesting focus (I can think of a few movies about it).
I don’t know why “kink” is in quotation marks. But you didn’t frame “erotical illusion” merely as a private lens for obsessive fandom; you called it the underlying mechanism behind romance tropes. You didn’t just note that fandom uses “kink” differently; you said those tropes “are not actually kinky.” And you didn’t restrict the psychological claims to cultic or obsessive fandom; you extended them to women’s attraction to M/M and romance more broadly. That is what I was responding to. The statements you make to the contrary contradict, rather than support, what you say in the main essay.
It’s important to be clear on this because romance is such a target. But your topic is also very interesting, and I look forward to reading more about it.
I think this is the first time I've seen the lesbian influence on m/m slash identified with excess romanticism. Normally the tell-tale sign is projecting butch/fem stereotypes onto tops and bottoms (particularly glaring in stories about a rich older man seducing an ingénue of uncertain sexuality, where it gets the stereotype precisely backwards)
"The dynamics that are perceived in this fiction are simply not realistic, not just for gay relationships but straight relationships, and dare I say, even when it’s lesbian dynamics being injected, not all lesbian relationships are romantic fairytales either."
illustrated with a quote mentioning
"Lesbian relationship dynamics are often written in m/m slash fics by lesbian authors"
Read to me as saying that the "lesbian dynamics" in question were being identified as part of, or a version of, the romantic fairytale "fantasy dynamics" that make m/m slash inspiring to women stuck in mediocre relationships with straight men. Rather than the tropes that serve to make m/m relationships more palatable to women, and which are implausible but not fantastic, uncommon in reality without exceeding it.
I actually disagree with it being different for men. I think the aegosexuality dynamic is identical to what men get from porn. No dealing with emotional intimacy, which is difficult and messy, no dealing with your own physical inadequacy or anxieties about performing sexually. These things are "safe" in a certain sense. "Cuckold" porn is the most extreme version, literally getting off on not participating at all.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that while the fantasies might be different, the underlying mechanism isn't...at all.
Aegosexuality isn't gender specific, and it's more than just getting off from being a voyeur but rather turning it into your entire sexuality, not just a kink. It's about complete absence, not being cuckolded (though maybe I've misunderstood this term).
I'm making a point about the majority vs the majority, btw, not making universal claims. I've no doubt there are men that engage with lesbian content the same way that I'm describing women do with gay content--but they are not the majority. I've certainly never encountered them. I even say there are fetishistic women out there, and I actually quite empathize with the gay men who feel like they're being objectified and dehumanized. In a way it's about consuming them whole rather than reducing them to a sexual fantasy, if that makes sense.
But it's also possible we simply disagree.
I think we do disagree. I don't think women fantasizing about gay men are "consuming them whole" it's just they their fantasies include more than just the act itself. I'll just do some shameless self promotion and say I wrote about all this a year or so ago.
https://nextstophyperreality.substack.com/p/the-society-of-the-pornographic-spectacle?r=2go3n
To misquote Powerup Comics: as far as I'm concerned, all porn is "cuckold" porn.
The question is how many make it their entire sexuality/approach to relationships in general?
I used to have this friend I worked with. Very nice and smart girl, but extremely sheltered and as long as I worked with her (which was many years) never heard her mention dating anyone. She still lived with her parents.
She was obsessed, and I mean obsessed with Robert Pattinson. After a while I just started to see the whole fantasy as a substitute for actually dating which was too difficult and scary. It was sad. I wish things could have been different for her. I think she was definitely afraid of real relationships.
I've written about this perspective before, it happens pretty often that people will say they care more about a ship (oftentimes more with regards to real people's relationships) than their own. The proxy experience is one that I find incredibly psychologically interesting.
I had a friend whose wife was a Twilight wife. Like she had the same Jeep that was in the movie. They took at least one vacation to the PNW where it was filmed. I have no idea if it factored into their divorce but it wouldn’t surprise me.
Really interesting stuff. I definitely agree that women are attracted to gay men because it's safe, but I wonder if there are other reasons too. When something like 18/20 of the top ships on AO3 are M/M, can all the women writing and reading these stories not want to put themselves in the possibility of a real relationship? Even an imaginary one? I kinda hope not, because that's pretty depressing.
I think these communities feed off each other and encourage going deeper into the rabbit hole of obsession and disembodiment. And a lot of people have no idea these communities/obsessions exist despite being a big part of many women's lives when they're young. (I mentioned to my husband how straight women love Heated Rivalry, mostly for the smut, and he was completely perplexed.)
Anyway, great piece - thanks for writing it!
It definitely doesn't apply to everyone, it's just an observable artefact that I don't see mentioned. And it really applies to people who are obsessed about straight ships, too, I've written about the psychology of that a couple of times.
But in the past I did see a lot of internalised misogyny in those corners, women who didn't want to read about men with women because "girl parts are gross." So there's a lot at play.
I love slash ships and have written and read plenty and I know plenty of fellow fans who participate who are in happy relationships.
Great article, I did not know there were people abandoning relationships on this basis! I’d wager there *are* guys out there who are stuck obsessing over idealized sapphic relationships, but they don’t fit any fun narratives (yet!) so it’s just not as visible.
I remember the Twilight coverage of this phenomenon vividly! I feel like I've also read articles on women who abandon relationships (or never get in to a relationship) because of romance novels--like good old fashioned Harlequin bodice rippers. But it was always presented as a weird thing. With Heated Rivalry, this all feels much more mainstream now. I'll have to see if I can find that romance novel article.
Would love to read that! I believe it, I was immersed in fantasy novels in my teens so I was so out of the loop of relationships. That bodice rippers might have this impact sounds entirely likely.
While this term has a use here through your personal lens, it’s important to stress that this is not a term that exists in romance fandom or academia. The way it is used here problematically is not how tropes function in romance. Not to mention that it’s impossible to proclaim what is or is not kinky monolithically. I just wanted to drop that in because romance readers have been infantilized and othered since the birth of the genre. The reasons why women love romance are not pathological.
While I think sex is the number-one reason for divorce, I would bet money that, most of the time, it is not due to unrealistic expectations. Women love M/M romance—and erotica—because it’s hot. Not out of a need for safety; but the lure of fascination. The essence of genre romance is actually about active participation with erotic and romantic fantasies.
And the best comment on that Instagram post is from @dickinsonwoolf:
“How are these comments not realizing that the divorces had nothing to do with the actual show and everything to do with the fact that they realize they hated their husbands?”
I'm not sure which term you're referring to--perhaps erotical illusions? I don't think it's a problematic term, it's just a good way of categorizing the way we react to different stimuli. I also explicitly say that the way fandom refers to having kinks for a specific trope is not the way "kinks" are seen or discussed in general, it's an adopted term for something that hits a psychological spot.
"They like it because it's hot" is a simplistic and dismissive. I'm not interested in pathologizing anyone, but as someone who had a cultic fandom experience (and lost friends from it when I was in that high) I want to explore the why's of people's attachment and investment beyond the surface. I exist in these spaces and I want to make sense of them beyond the shallow reductionist “it’s hot” excuse. "It's hot" doesn't explain why people cling to specific dynamics and can't even accept that reality is more complicated than that, nor does it provide any more insight into the human condition, which is what I find interesting.
Yes, I was referring to “erotical illusion.” I didn’t want to write an essay in your comments, so “hot” was clearly a summary term, reductive for brevity and not a shallow or dismissive explanation. I wrote a thesis on this; there is a great deal to say about why women love romance and what romance is.
As I said, the term may fit your specific context of obsessive fandom—which is an interesting focus (I can think of a few movies about it).
I don’t know why “kink” is in quotation marks. But you didn’t frame “erotical illusion” merely as a private lens for obsessive fandom; you called it the underlying mechanism behind romance tropes. You didn’t just note that fandom uses “kink” differently; you said those tropes “are not actually kinky.” And you didn’t restrict the psychological claims to cultic or obsessive fandom; you extended them to women’s attraction to M/M and romance more broadly. That is what I was responding to. The statements you make to the contrary contradict, rather than support, what you say in the main essay.
It’s important to be clear on this because romance is such a target. But your topic is also very interesting, and I look forward to reading more about it.
I think this is the first time I've seen the lesbian influence on m/m slash identified with excess romanticism. Normally the tell-tale sign is projecting butch/fem stereotypes onto tops and bottoms (particularly glaring in stories about a rich older man seducing an ingénue of uncertain sexuality, where it gets the stereotype precisely backwards)
“Excess romanticism” where exactly? This comment reeks of projection tbh.
"The dynamics that are perceived in this fiction are simply not realistic, not just for gay relationships but straight relationships, and dare I say, even when it’s lesbian dynamics being injected, not all lesbian relationships are romantic fairytales either."
illustrated with a quote mentioning
"Lesbian relationship dynamics are often written in m/m slash fics by lesbian authors"
Read to me as saying that the "lesbian dynamics" in question were being identified as part of, or a version of, the romantic fairytale "fantasy dynamics" that make m/m slash inspiring to women stuck in mediocre relationships with straight men. Rather than the tropes that serve to make m/m relationships more palatable to women, and which are implausible but not fantastic, uncommon in reality without exceeding it.