Super super short post.
I noticed something a few weeks ago actually that I ended up writing down because I wanted to mention it on here. I’m pretty sure everyone is familiar with the term “whipped,” used to refer to a subservient male in a heterosexual relationship with a woman.
Anyway, I overheard someone use it in a conversation while in the cafeteria and I thought to myself, “funny how it doesn’t apply to women, and there is no female equivalent.”
Clearly written by a “whipped” male. Psh, so beta. Either that, or pretty much true. Probably true.
Before I could even begin to ask myself why it would be that there wasn’t a female equivalent, the answer was pretty obvious.
Society advocates subservient women, and has done so for a pretty long time, so of course subservient women won’t be mocked for being subservient.
On the other hand, it doesn’t really fit in with the patriarchal world model if men are subservient for women, so some patriarchal genius (read: “Asshole”) came up with the modern colloquial understanding of the word “whipped”. The idea of course was to steer men towards being dominant over women.
My advice for fixing this? (Because of course you want to hear it)
Make fun of subserivent women too. You can even just start using “whipped” to refer to deliberately (it wouldn’t be funny/appropriate to call abused/battered/subjugated women whipped) subservient women. Or, we could keep whipped as an exclusively male term, and use something else instead. How about “flogged”? Yeah, that’s good.
From now on, deliberately subservient women should be made fun of by referring to them as “flogged”.
I have spoken.
For The Sake of Debate 