Talk:Sissy hypno

Requested move 8 May 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Lightoil (talk) 04:47, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

---

Autogynephilic persuasive pornography → Sissy hypno – Contested technical move. I believe "sissy hypno" is the WP:COMMONNAME by far. The sources in "further reading" all use "sissy hypno", and "autogynephilic" is something from Blanchard's transsexualism typology that has been appropriated by transphobes. Pinging Ahecht and Chaotic Enby as both were on WP:RM/TM. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 02:40, 8 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Lightoil (talk) 16:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

• Support per my request at WP:RM/TR, common name used by all three sources while the "autogynephilic" label is only used by one of them, and refers to a controversial typology. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 10:43, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
• Support Common name. Skyshiftertalk 11:01, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
• Support This is a rare case where the common name is actually less offensive than the impressive-sounding academic name, not to mention being infinitely more likely to be searched for in the first place.Vizjim (talk) 14:24, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
• Comment – While I'm not sufficiently familiar with the term to take a strong position, should we not consider the title Sissy hypnosis? Looking at the abstract for Mackay & Mackay (2021), they consistently use the term hypnosis outside of scare quotes. This would be in line with the article Erotic hypnosis. Graham (talk) 06:05, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

  I would probably gravitate towards sissy hypnosis myself. (Don't take that out of context.) LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 11:18, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

  @Chaotic Enby, Skyshifter, and Vizjim: Would any of you object to the title Sissy hypnosis? Graham (talk) 19:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

  It's fine with me! Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 19:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

  Disagree, mildly. Looking at the full article by Mackay & Mackay, they distinguish between hypnosis more generally, and "sissy hypno" as a specific phenomenon. I think "sissy hypno" distinguishes this specific art form from actual hypnosis. Vizjim (talk) 08:20, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

  @Vizjim: I don't believe I have access to that article. Would you be able to email me a copy, or provide a link at which the full text is accessible? (If not, I can post at WP:RX.) Graham (talk) 01:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

  I have put in a request just in case at WP:RX § Mackay and Mackay, "Hypnosis and Pornography", Porn Studies (2023). Graham (talk) 05:13, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

  Having taken a cursory look at Mackay and Mackay, I have a better idea as to where Vizjim is coming from. What do you make of it, LilianaUwU? (The article is available through the Wikipedia Library here.) Graham (talk) 03:29, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

  It does seem to be using the term "hypno", not "hypnosis", to refer to the phenomenon, yes. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 04:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

  @LilianaUwU: That being the case, I'm tempted to go with "hypno" after all. Do you have any thoughts? Graham (talk) 04:23, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

  Sounds reasonable. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 04:32, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

• Barring any significant objections, I'll go ahead and support moving to Sissy hypnosis. Graham (talk) 19:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Support moving to Sissy hypno per above discussion.

Lightoil, it looks like we've all come to a consensus if you would like to close the discussion now. (Per WP:RMRELIST, a relist needn't prevent a closure when a consensus has been reached.) Graham (talk) 04:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

• Note to the closer – Given that the discussion has moved towards considering two titles (Sissy hypno and Sissy hypnosis), I might suggest that a relisting is in order as we work towards a consensus. Graham (talk) 01:03, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

  I am personally okay with both proposed titles, I believe replacing the current title is more important than the specifics of the wording. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 15:52, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Relisting as suggested to generate clearer consensus. Lightoil (talk) 16:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

• Comment prefer "hypno" over "hypnosis", per others. Skyshiftertalk 04:06, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Controversy section

Vizjim, I've removed your addition because I felt it gave undue weight to the viewpoint that gravitates towards "being trans is a fetish". It could belong in the article, but I'm not sure if giving it half of the article is appropriate. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 11:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

• I think the exact opposite - the point of the section is that transphobes are weaponising their poor understanding of the phenomenon. The use of sissy hypno in "gender critical" activist circles is one of the reasons it's an important phenomenon. Vizjim (talk) 08:17, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Being trans can be due to autogynephilia, wbich is a fetish. I don't see how this fact is an issue to anyone. Bespeak (talk) 23:36, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Because it's not true? It can be, as can everything, but it's extremely rare. "Undue" doesn't begin to address this, as does your other edits. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 19:53, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Re-read what I wrote. In order for what I wrote to be "not true" there would have to be no auto gynephiles in existence. Given that I am one, and I know many others, this clearly is not "not true". Bespeak (talk) 20:11, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

There is definitely an issue of undue weight when multiple fully unsourced paragraphs are added about the benefits of "recovery therapy" from sissy hypno. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:28, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

You're not an autogynephile. You've been told you are one by people who are pushing an agenda. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 21:29, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Are you not pushing an agenda? Seem pretty clear.

I love Sissy Hypno and for me is a fetish, i'm not transitioning from any gender to another nor i will any soon. Not all sissy are trans and not all trans are Sissy, that's just about sexual role.

The only fact you said "is not true" and a couple of words after you state it could be possible show how much biased your position is.

When people like you try to impose your ideas on sexuality and social gender figures for anybody else is scarry as much as when homo/trans-phobes does.

We did not fought to demolish social gender impositions for another imposition to thrive.

Be what you wish and let other be what they feel! 93.44.188.66 (talk) 04:11, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

edit: Bespeak has been banned by this "kind and open minded" people not to conform with their ideology. I love when fascism try to disguise as the opposite just to play with the same rules as ever. (A) 93.44.188.66 (talk) 17:29, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

To clarify, Bespeak wasn't blocked because of their opinions about autogynephilia, but for clear and obvious trolling (after a partial block from the article for writing a "gobsmackingly awful" advert for a sissy hypno file). Fascism is when obvious trolls get blocked, apparently. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:48, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Thank you creating this article on a form of pornography that has seen an increase in academic focus in the gender studies field in recent years. It's concise, appropriately referenced and expandable (reasonably tagged as a stub by another editor). A solid base from which to build.

Klbrain (talk) 10:24, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Recent additions

I'm reverting the recent, mostly unsourced additions to the article without consensus. The "controversy" sections are being discussed above, but some of the other additions are just as plainly absurd.

A notable example of sissy hypno content is the "Curse Sissy Addict" file available on Warpmymind.com. This file is designed to create a profound transformation in its listeners. It employs techniques intended to create a strong craving for cock and cum, akin to a drug addiction. Through repeated exposure, the file aims to embed the addiction deep within the unconscious, transforming listeners from mild curiosity to full-blown compulsion.

How is this, without any citations demonstrating notability, a useful addition to the article? Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:31, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Do it. I know Bespeak's gonna revert almost immediately, because of course, but do it. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 21:33, 27 July 2024 (UTC)