I just find what I've read of the books to be: A. Poorly written and B. Disgustingly misogynistic.

The philosophies set forth are IMO misogynistic. (I could start copy and pasting parts of the text) From an evolutionary perspective it is true that a large portion of women are somewhat submissive to men in romantic exchanges, but that's a far cry from women being submissive and willing slaves to men period as a general gender basis.

In addition misogynistic texts with ideas such as these have always been used as excuses to dominate women in the general public sphere. While I agree that dominance and submission even on "traditional gender roles" between a man and a woman can be a beautiful thing, it should not be assumed to be a thing that most women deeply secretly want, which is what the books suggest.

And yes, it's a fictional planet called Gor, but...it's repeatedly suggested in the novels that Earth should be this way too but the men are too weak on Earth to force the issue, so it seems very much like Norman's actual philosophy put to fiction, rather than just fantasy.

And yes the books are fantasy, but...the part where it becomes bizarre for me is when fiction is used as a basis for a real life lifestyle. Again, not trying to judge you. You have been completely mature and kind in our exchanges and I don't want to disrespect and judge you but it's very difficult for me to separate the lifestyle completely from books I find so personally distasteful.

Then my second problem with it is that I think when people base their personal relationships upon a series of books, they take away so much of what could be "just theirs" by adhering to a preset list of rules. And this can happen in the overall larger kink community as well, even outside of Gorean Lifestyles, like the tendency towards people in the Scene to expect that all subs/slaves/pets are going to deferentially address all dominants.

That might seem "polite" to some people, but it's invasive to others. And seeks to overly "codify" something that really should be more personal and private.

I think the largest mistake Feminism ever made was trying to come into people's bedrooms. And I think the Kink community in a sense sometimes does the same. While it's nice to interact with others who "get it" it can be invasive when others who "get it" are possessed with the drive to educate others on how to "do it right."

And no, I am not saying you are doing this or have done this. But I think we can agree there are many self styled submissive and dominant mentors who would like nothing more than to train others to be as uber wonderful as they are.

It's one thing for someone to say: "Here is the safest way to wield a cane" It's another, IMO for someone to say: "Here's the best way to train a submissive" An individual master determines that. And while one may ask for advice on such a topic, often that advice comes unsolicited.

To think that there is some uniform way to train submissives is something I've always found insane, and that is why when I found the writings of Jon and Polly I did connect very much with what they were saying.

And also because J and P live a lifestyle in many regards similar to my own. There is a bit of an issue with the whole, "I'm a female with a need to be owned/controlled by a male" Because I wouldn't submit to a female. I would kick a woman's ass before I'd ever let her dom me. And if she was a lot bigger than me, I'd just have to fight dirtier.

But...I think the problem with the Norman books is this wild speculation, taking a few evolutionary/sociological concepts and superimposing them to this degree. I just find the books crass.

Examples of ewwwww to me:

” … when she has been irritable or otherwise troublesome, even a Free Companion may find herself looking forward to a pleasant night on the stones, stripped, with neither a mat nor a blanket, chained to a slave ring precisely as though she were a lowly slave girl. … A taste of the slave ring is thought to be occasionally beneficial to all women.” Why do the men do this? “It is the Gorean way of reminding her … that she, too, is a woman, and thus to be dominated, to be subject to men.”

"It is the nature of the female to submit; accordingly, it is natural that, when she is forced to acknowledge, accept, express and reveal this nature, that she should be almost deliriously joyful, and thankful, to her master; she has been taught her womanhood." - Marauders of Gor, Pg. 155

To me this is not virtue, it is not love, it is not honor. "taught her womanhood?" Are they freaking kidding me?

That's just two things out of a whole bunch of things. (I wish I could find some of the branding references.)

I have probably said too much here and if I have, you are welcome to tell me where to shove it. Just trying to express my thoughts on the issue.

It's one thing to say: "It seems to me that many women have a desire to be submissive to varying degrees, with a small percentage desiring to be completely owned by a man" (which is my view) It's quite another for someone like John Norman (I know, not his real name) to state what HE states.

I also think such ideas might have been less misogynistic and insane had they been more nuanced from a woman's pen. But that's me.

I am also against all forms of Caste systems. I don't agree with certain "roles" for anybody. While some types of people may as a group tend to gravitate toward one thing or another, any kind of proscribed roles tend to hurt the people who don't fit into those roles. This is felt very sharply in India where a caste system is still in place. This has been felt sharply by many woman for centuries as their options have been severely limited to just what men thought a woman's "place" was.

And while I do agree that we have quite a "pussification of the American male" going on, I think "cruel yet fair" in describing the men of Gor, is about like saying biblegod is "loving, yet if you don't agree with him he'll let you burn in hell for eternity."