I have a theory on this. It’s long so if you don’t like it reblog from the OP who is spot on.
Men’s sexual response is different from women. I’m not a man but let’s face it they like to talk about it so we have a good idea. It’s been proved they have fewer nerve endings on their cock than we do on our clitoris. Men who are circumcised have fewer still.
Men who masturbate excessively and/or who use porn compulsively (which is a great number of men now) lose feeling in their penis and have to stimulate it much more forcefully than a woman’s vagina ever could (this is known as death grip).
Additionally, ever since the sexual revolution and the Masters and Johnson nonsense, men have been told that women both are sexual beings like them who have superior orgasms and who also fake orgasms and don’t enjoy sex. In previous decades there was an obsessive search for how to get women to have multiple orgasms, or at least to orgasm on demand. The current equivalent is the obsession with getting women to squirt (it’s visual proof of something, and men like that, plus it reminds them of themselves).
Anecdotal evidence from older straight women suggests before the porn explosion men in general tried to be competent in bed in order to secure sex in the future and as a source of pride. Now there are issues with this too, as any anorgasmic woman with an ego-bruised male partner will attest. But in general there was a sense that although men were suspicious of orgasms being fake, they still considered being a good lover as a sign of manhood.
The porn explosion changed that, in several ways. Being able to examine women at an almost gynaecological level to see what happens when an orgasm is real or faked meant the nagging doubts about women’s orgasms were amplified. Women could be observed being penetrated by the most enormous penises, in the roughest ways, and still no orgasm. Worse, in many cases the woman seemed entirely unaffected. Now we know that’s because of numbing creams and drugs, but to the male viewers it hints at an insatiability of the vagina. No matter what you throw at it she looks bored! Therefore all the orgasms are either fake or brought on by something else. You see where I’m going with this?
Men with normal sexual response and feeling in their penis can orgasm really well during vaginal intercourse. There’s nothing intrinsically inferior or unsuitable, even post partum. We know vaginas stretch and return and balloon when aroused etc etc. A straight man doesn’t “need” an anus to stimulate his penis because the anus is somehow superior. So where did all the anal come from?
Pain. Women find it much more difficult to look bored when something is penetrating their anus. It is uncomfortable, or painful in many cases. Unlike with vaginas, there can be actual physical damage caused by penetration so all the tropes about tightness, first time, virginity - and conversely overuse, slackness, etc play out much more with anal sex particularly in porn.
Who masturbates to rosebudding if not men with deep seated fear and hatred of women’s sexuality? If she’s screaming she feels it. If she’s crying she’s not bored. He can be satisfied there’s no fakery and he isn’t being laughed at.
So, strangulation. It’s proponents talk of intensity, trust, intimacy and the physical sensation of oxygen deprivation especially at point of orgasm. Great, except for two things: it really can cause death or brain damage quite easily, and as mentioned above, it’s a one way street.
So how come men, who have given up on the quest to be the perfect lover and now focus on their own sexual response, the aesthetics and the depravity (again driven by the porn explosion whereby overuse of “normal” porn leads men to seek out more violent porn for the novelty factor) now want to intensify women’s orgasms by strangling them?
Well again there’s nothing to suggest that despite what they might say, men are suddenly interested in getting women to come. However there is another physical response involved in strangulation, and it’s something women who get strangled all the time can’t fake or stop happening, and that’s the flash of fear and panic that happens when a human realises she can’t breathe.
Going back to the painal phenomenon the look of terror, no matter how fleeting, is also real and can also be relied upon. The man once again knows her responses are real and he is creating them. He might well have also fetishised women’s pain and fear from porn use too.
There have always been perverts, but in the past when pornography was not available men were much much less likely to try to have anal sex or to strangle their wives (while having sex - they still beat them when they were angry of course).
But rather than it being a copycat behaviour, it’s more driven by performance anxiety and a need to compete with other men. Think about how many erect cocks and naked men fucking the average straight 25 year old man has seen now versus how many he would have seen pre porn explosion. Also, humans are much more savvy in terms of advertising. It’s no longer enough to advertise the existence of a product, its price and its benefits, there is now often a psychological appeal - this will make you sexy, this will make you morally pure, this proves your superior intelligence, this is rare and shows your discernment.
There’s an interesting article on the porn explosion (that I can’t find, sorry) that refers to jailed pornographer Max Hardcore’s use of medical speculums as a sign of him searching deep within the female body for something that cannot be found. It’s disgusting but accurate. As long as men continue to see the women they have sex with as experimental test subjects and reflectors of their own sexual glory rather than as human beings with a completely different sexual response to men, we will see fads for dangerous sexual activities. Those fads will be reflected in porn as much as caused by them, because as evil as porn is, the cause is this curiosity/anxiety coupled with a total lack of empathy. Mengele would be proud.
