squireutations

[squireutations]

happy pride month

[squireutations]

i've had this dumb idea for like a month, there it is

[squireutations]

TL;DR being like, YES the royalty is there but they're in the background. They're in charge of everything but the being in charge of everything part is unsexy. Meanwhile a knight (who doesn't always swear direct service or fealty to the crown, mind) is both subject to that rule with extreme consequences for disobeying and also an enforcer of that rule on the even more vulnerable. Like, we're BOTH way down on the feudal food chain, but a knight is slightly above a squire, and a squire is their dominion. It's service sub/ dom power play if both of you have an even more dom dom in the background who isn't even in the room. Can anybody hear me.

Knight kink chat; why knights but not royalty?

SO, just gonna braindump about my thoughts on knight kink, particularly my specific flavour, including historical context and how my own modern context and beliefs intersect with it, and also touching on how kink doesn't necessarily reflect on a person's values. Prefacing with the note that of course royalty kink is valid, etc, etc, just chatting about why I personally am not a fan. The historical context, albeit a MODIFIED one (I prefer to write it without the gender being particularly important and that squires can be adults), is a primary reason as to why I am into knight/knight and knight/squire with little to no interest at all in royalty/knight or royalty/squire or anything really involving the nobility (though, in specific circumstances, might be fonder of royalty/royalty, royalty/nobility, etc) The core reason I think I enjoy it is what I have previously tagged in my kink writing as "institutional power dynamics".

(Image ID: A simplified diagram of power structures under feudalism. The forthcoming paragraph acts as a written version of the diagram. Illustrated by myself.) Knights and their squires are fundamentally keystones in the function of a feudal power system. Feudal hierarchies revolve around the idea of the royal figurehead owning literally all of the land, and keeping ownership, but "loaning" that land out to their nobles for those nobles to then use the smallfolk (serfs) to work the land and produce wealth and resources for the noble ruling them. Knights could be both an enforcer for the noble and a fiefholder in their own right-- they could be vassals (given land by the nobles) or petty nobles (unblooded, new nobility, borne from "common" blood and usually raised to nobility by virtue of military or martial achievement, therefore given land by the crown).

Squires were more often than not noble children by blood, sons of nobility raised by "lesser" women of the lord's household before they were old enough to become pages, later becoming squires. As with all things in Medieval Europe this entire process was also deeply religious, with squires and knights swearing their oaths in churches and being confirmed as knights most often at religious ceremonies or times of year (Easter, Christmas, apparently sometimes weddings). It was also incredibly patriarchal.

Meanwhile in real life, with all my modern sensibilities, I am "common" blooded lower class anti-royalist, anti-capitalist, probably anarchist of some form who believes strongly in gender equality and social equity. Would I ACTUALLY want to live in a feudal state? FUCK no! Feudal state systems are inherently theft of the land by a ruling class from the people who work it. Would I ACTUALLY want to be a squire or a knight? FUCK no! They were the enforcers of the ruling class AND were as beholden to the nobles as the serfs were to them. HOWEVER. The beautiful thing about kink is it's only real if you want it to be. You create a bubble of fantasy where it is an extended form of play, of make-believe, where nothing is permanent and everything is permitted for as long as everyone involved wants it to be. I find the social and sexual power dynamics between knights, their squires, and each other deeply fascinating. The armour and aesthetics are hot obviously, because of course they are, but the power dynamic of a knight that carries all of that baggage is very fun to me. A knight is in a position of power AND fealty. A knight is someone who relies upon their liege lord, their suzerain, for their position and must literally fight to maintain it by obligation. They are armed servants of the ruling class and are treated as such. A knight is also in power. They have direct control and exert power and influence, often martial, over the people beneath them. They are paid dues and respect. They give orders and they are followed. A squire is a knight in a hauberk chrysalis. They are not yet equal but are becoming, but until they are they are at the mercy of the whims of their knight and that knight's household. Both of them are resources with blood and breath, both equally with power and without it, not quite ruling and not quite ruled. I have no interest in royalty kink or nobility kink outside of specific circumstances because the power dynamic just has way, way too much baggage for me. The aesthetics are fun but I can't squire in my head the idea of that kind of explicitly exploitative power dynamic being something I would personally enjoy. A crown has absolute power by ontological nature and I can absolutely see the appeal of that being the point. Disrespect to a crown, refusal to a crown, leads to distinctly unfun consequences-- to a knight? A little more wibbly and elastic. I enjoy knights and their squires because of the blend of power dynamics, aesthetics, and potential interconnected dynamics ALONG with the ever-present baggage of there always being a bigger fish in the food chain. There is martial discipline and obligatory duty, there is tournament and ceremony and religious repression, there is the performance of masculinity, there is the training so hard your muscles shake and then going just that bit further, there is giving one another scars and bruises in one context and squeezing them in another, there is the bond between a living weapon and the person that arms them and the knowing one another inside and out, their every habit, because you have to. Squire kink is service sub play with institutional power dynamics adding context; so much more socially complex than one person having power in a scene and one person not. ( "Neither of us are in charge but both of us have power," says the knight, "but I have more, and right now I'm in charge of you." )

Plus, yknow. Metal smells better with sweat and blood than it does with silk.

[squireutations]

Knight kink chat; why knights but not royalty?

SO, just gonna braindump about my thoughts on knight kink, particularly my specific flavour, including historical context and how my own modern context and beliefs intersect with it, and also touching on how kink doesn't necessarily reflect on a person's values. Prefacing with the note that of course royalty kink is valid, etc, etc, just chatting about why I personally am not a fan. The historical context, albeit a MODIFIED one (I prefer to write it without the gender being particularly important and that squires can be adults), is a primary reason as to why I am into knight/knight and knight/squire with little to no interest at all in royalty/knight or royalty/squire or anything really involving the nobility (though, in specific circumstances, might be fonder of royalty/royalty, royalty/nobility, etc) The core reason I think I enjoy it is what I have previously tagged in my kink writing as "institutional power dynamics".

(Image ID: A simplified diagram of power structures under feudalism. The forthcoming paragraph acts as a written version of the diagram. Illustrated by myself.) Knights and their squires are fundamentally keystones in the function of a feudal power system. Feudal hierarchies revolve around the idea of the royal figurehead owning literally all of the land, and keeping ownership, but "loaning" that land out to their nobles for those nobles to then use the smallfolk (serfs) to work the land and produce wealth and resources for the noble ruling them. Knights could be both an enforcer for the noble and a fiefholder in their own right-- they could be vassals (given land by the nobles) or petty nobles (unblooded, new nobility, borne from "common" blood and usually raised to nobility by virtue of military or martial achievement, therefore given land by the crown).

Squires were more often than not noble children by blood, sons of nobility raised by "lesser" women of the lord's household before they were old enough to become pages, later becoming squires. As with all things in Medieval Europe this entire process was also deeply religious, with squires and knights swearing their oaths in churches and being confirmed as knights most often at religious ceremonies or times of year (Easter, Christmas, apparently sometimes weddings). It was also incredibly patriarchal.

Meanwhile in real life, with all my modern sensibilities, I am "common" blooded lower class anti-royalist, anti-capitalist, probably anarchist of some form who believes strongly in gender equality and social equity. Would I ACTUALLY want to live in a feudal state? FUCK no! Feudal state systems are inherently theft of the land by a ruling class from the people who work it. Would I ACTUALLY want to be a squire or a knight? FUCK no! They were the enforcers of the ruling class AND were as beholden to the nobles as the serfs were to them. HOWEVER. The beautiful thing about kink is it's only real if you want it to be. You create a bubble of fantasy where it is an extended form of play, of make-believe, where nothing is permanent and everything is permitted for as long as everyone involved wants it to be. I find the social and sexual power dynamics between knights, their squires, and each other deeply fascinating. The armour and aesthetics are hot obviously, because of course they are, but the power dynamic of a knight that carries all of that baggage is very fun to me. A knight is in a position of power AND fealty. A knight is someone who relies upon their liege lord, their suzerain, for their position and must literally fight to maintain it by obligation. They are armed servants of the ruling class and are treated as such. A knight is also in power. They have direct control and exert power and influence, often martial, over the people beneath them. They are paid dues and respect. They give orders and they are followed. A squire is a knight in a hauberk chrysalis. They are not yet equal but are becoming, but until they are they are at the mercy of the whims of their knight and that knight's household. Both of them are resources with blood and breath, both equally with power and without it, not quite ruling and not quite ruled. I have no interest in royalty kink or nobility kink outside of specific circumstances because the power dynamic just has way, way too much baggage for me. The aesthetics are fun but I can't squire in my head the idea of that kind of explicitly exploitative power dynamic being something I would personally enjoy. A crown has absolute power by ontological nature and I can absolutely see the appeal of that being the point. Disrespect to a crown, refusal to a crown, leads to distinctly unfun consequences-- to a knight? A little more wibbly and elastic. I enjoy knights and their squires because of the blend of power dynamics, aesthetics, and potential interconnected dynamics ALONG with the ever-present baggage of there always being a bigger fish in the food chain. There is martial discipline and obligatory duty, there is tournament and ceremony and religious repression, there is the performance of masculinity, there is the training so hard your muscles shake and then going just that bit further, there is giving one another scars and bruises in one context and squeezing them in another, there is the bond between a living weapon and the person that arms them and the knowing one another inside and out, their every habit, because you have to. Squire kink is service sub play with institutional power dynamics adding context; so much more socially complex than one person having power in a scene and one person not. ( "Neither of us are in charge but both of us have power," says the knight, "but I have more, and right now I'm in charge of you." )

Plus, yknow. Metal smells better with sweat and blood than it does with silk.

[squireutations]

theres people on here fighting battles i cant even imagine

[squireutations]

Roachification and Eroticizing Transmasculinity

You can read this on my Neocities site, along with more of my writings both fiction and non-fiction.

Hi. I’m of the opinion that people don’t eroticize transmasculinity enough.

People sexualize trans men and mascs, but not our transitions. So long as we fit a very narrow threshold of androgynous twinkiness, it’s totally fine to be sexualized and objectified. But any transmasc who isn’t a twink? A transmasc who doesn’t meet the appropriate standards of thinness, whiteness, and ambiguous tomboy-ish masculinity? Or who, God forbid, isn’t exclusively a bottom and submissive? It’s as if we don’t exist.

Trans men and mascs are sexualized for the ways we refrain from transition. A transmasc can bind, wear men’s jeans, and have short hair, and still be acceptably fuckable. But I know too many guys who were shamed by their “supportive” partners for wanting to go on testosterone, because it would make them too masculine, ruin their attractiveness. Countless transmascs are told their goals for transition are disgusting, especially when it comes to phalloplasties and other types of bottom surgery. Too many of us have been shamed out of HRT, top surgery, bottom surgery, or even exploring ourselves in diverse sexual ways, because wider society tells us that transmasculinity taken “too far” is destined to make us ugly and unfuckable.

Considering there are a lot of places today that continue to treat women and people assumed to be women as though their physical appearance and fuckability is the most important thing about them, it’s no wonder that so many transmascs are susceptible to this fearmongering. Being an unattractive woman gets you criticized by your family, your friends, your partners and potential partners, your co-workers, and confidently rude strangers. Especially if the transmasc in question was considered a “beautiful young lady” before coming out, why would they want to transition? Even if it would make them feel happier internally, their external life would get materially worse. Shouldering dysphoria against this burden sounds like a good option—a better option, even, than becoming unworthy of affection for being who you are.

There are plenty of ways to combat this regressive, transphobic attitude. Overthrowing patriarchal and white supremacist standards of gender and sexuality, of course, but that’s not something we can do overnight. For the purposes of this post, I’m going to advocate for roachification as a way to reclaim transmasculinity and eroticize our transitions like we deserve.

Now, like a lot of terms trans people have reclaimed for our sexualities, the idea of roachification started as a transphobic term to describe “what happens” to someone going through a transmasculine transition. If you feel like being upset, you can go on Urban Dictionary and find a definition neatly sketched out that reiterates all of the above-described fearmongering in a single sentence:

“the process of a ftm or trans masculine person metamorphisizing from a beautiful girl to the most disgusting, vile, greasy, horrific boy there ever has been, in extreme cases; an incel.... or sid from skins.”

Even disregarding the transphobia inherent in the idea that an unhappy but “beautiful” cis girl, is more valuable than a happy but “disgusting” transmasc, I think this person is just making up a strawtrans to get mad at. The incel accusation makes me laugh—the famously open, accepting, gender expansive incel community. The community of cishet men who are so misogynistic they disparage the idea of being kind to anyone they think is a woman. Just overflowing with trans people, I’m sure.

Getting away from the transphobia, how does one reclaim the idea of roachification? I believe it lies in accepting every part of transmasculine transition, including the parts that may, actually, be perceived as ugly, gross, and/or a downgrade from a previously-attained cis womanhood. Allow me to explain.

Fundamentally, anyone going on any sort of HRT is going through puberty a second time. It’s being a teenager again, which is why so many trans people go through a sort of “second adolescence” if they transition later in life. You get to discover yourself all over again, and that’s a beautiful thing! But, just like being a teenager, there are things that make you feel weird, uncomfortable, or insecure.

Considering testosterone here: your skin breaks out, you gain weight, you grow hair in places you’re not used to, you get hungry, and you get horny. Speaking only for myself, I had to up my snack budget because I was destroying family-sized bags of chips by myself. I would wake up in the morning, masturbate, go to work, masturbate as soon as I clocked out, and then one more time right before bed (okay sometimes I still do that). My skin was already oily, but it’s greasy now. There’s the inside joke in that the hair on your ass grows in before T even touches your facial hair—and when it does grow in, it can be patchy, uneven, and weird looking. Your voice cracks make you sound like you’re 13 and your body odor smells way stronger. Transition can be awkward and uncomfortable, and, yes, you might even feel a little gross.

But why is that bad? The journey to becoming more of who you are might be a little messy, but I think that’s a perfect excuse to play in the mud.

Consider roachification as the gendered opposite of bimbofication. For a transmasc who is moving from a status of “beautiful young lady” to “gross, sweaty man” it can be hard to release the fear of losing that conditional acceptance, but a great way to combat that fear is to indulge in it. Lean in and explore the “ugly” parts of transition. It might turn out that you like slouching around with a hand in your pants, gorging yourself on snacks and your brain-melting media of choice, throwing on whatever you picked out of the laundry pile this morning, and forgetting to shower for a few days. You’ll realize you kinda stink. Maybe you like that, too.

Roachification is about playing in the mud. It’s about reveling in the behaviors that are supposed to disgust you. It’s about the hedonism of the base instinct, doing what your body desires with absolutely no higher functioning involved. It’s the idea of moving from an uptight, controlled appearance that you can’t relax into, even when you’re alone, into the kind of vulgar bliss that comes from sitting in the same spot all day and rubbing one out without washing your hands. Your dick is calling and that’s the only thing that matters, after all. And when you’re done, you sit in your dry cum for a few more hours before getting up to clean off—and, hell, might as well jerk off in the shower while you’re at it.

If transition turns you back into a teenager, roachification is about embracing your inner teenage boy who has full run of his parents’ basement. It’s about being sloppy, gross, horny, and not caring that you’re acting that way. The greatest balm to any insult is being able to say “lol, so what?” and roachification puts the power back in your hands. To enjoy being disgusting, vile, greasy, and horrific. To become what you always feared, and realize you like it better.

Obviously, I didn’t come up with the idea of roachification myself. I am not the first person to make any of these observations, and I will certainly not be the last, but the longer I’ve sat with these thoughts, the truer they feel to me. The more I think about this kink, the more important it is to me.

I love roachification as a way to show a transmasculine person finally being able to relax out of femininity. Not just leaving it behind, but being too lazy to pick it back up once the masculinity “takes over.” Now that you’re comfortable enough to be lazy, dirty, and self-indulgent, why would you ever go back? I love a transmasc leaning into who they are—including, perhaps especially, if who they are is smelly and sweaty and hedonistic.

As for myself? I love my transmasculine transition and everything it does to my body. I even love the things I thought I’d hate, because the fearmongering got to me too. It was only by transitioning did I realize just how wrong that transphobic “advice” was, so now I’m more than happy to indulge in my “ugliness.” Being smelly, greasy, hairy, and horny has never felt more liberating, and it’s only going to “get worse” by these people’s standards. Frankly, I welcome it.

Transmasculine sexuality shouldn’t be confined to the narrow box mainstream sexuality has decided it needs to fit in. Trans men and mascs deserve to become who we are, unapologetically, and every aspect of transmasculinity deserves to be captured in perverted amber. We deserve to make our transitions as erotic as we damn well please, regardless of who jumps out of the woodwork to complain that we were prettier when we shaved. We deserve to be human beings, with the full range of beauty and ugliness that can be attributed to any person.

At time of writing, I’m still early on in my transition, just over a year on testosterone. I’m growing hair and a bigger clit and a bottomless stomach. I hope I get even more disgusting by next year.

[squireutations]

Squires in my area

Lovelorn squires in my area

How to make a squire feel loved

[squireutations]

How do I politely tell a mutual that I’d let them rail me

[squireutations]

Squires in my area

Lovelorn squires in my area

How to make a squire feel loved

[squireutations]

being knightcore doesn't mean you have to be pro-monarchy. you can just swear your undying fealty to your best friend or your crush or something

[squireutations]

Anon me w/ kinks and I’ll rate them from 1-10 🔗

[squireutations]

the real sexual fantasy isnt all the knight/squire shit or the dragons or the monsters. its that the cock goes in first try without pain and you can do more than one position

very unfair to give me a size kink and a pelvic floor made of fucking titanium. hope whoever thought that one up is having the day they deserve

[squireutations]

Careful what you wish for, big buddy.

[squireutations]

this is how tag searches feel

[squireutations]

[squireutations]

speedran thru this a little bit cause i started to not like it . anyways there u go

[squireutations]

overstretched a muscle carrying chainmail wrong this weekend. loving life