Thanks again, maymay, for being a voice of reason in the darkness.

I do like to think of myself as being good at listening, from what people tell me. But so are you. That’s whats making this conversation very enjoyable.

[BDSM] seems to be all about rules. Now after reading more on the subject (mostly in your space) the last couple of days I understand, more concrete than formerly, that rules are one of the things whats played with, they are toys so to speak.

No, you’re correct. Rules can be the toys in BDSM. I strongly dislike the rigid protocol-driven approach to BDSM because I think it misses the point.

I actually came here via MaleSubmissionArt.com because aag linked it in one of her posts. I really liked browsing through it.

Oh! I’m sorry, I must have missed that. Where did AAG link to me? I didn’t see that either; I’d like to know.

Hey anyway thanks for taking the time to explain and talk to me, I know how tedious it is to explain your (in my case feminist) position again and again to people who just haven’t done enough reading.

Some people learn through conversation, not reading. That’s why I think it’s important to talk, and write, and listen, for instance. :)

It’s import is in what you say: “The idea of finding solutions instead of setting up rules presupposes that rules are not always solutions, which is a good thing to keep in mind.” See and I think this is where a lot of confusion for non-kinky BDSM-critics comes from. It seems to be all about rules. Now after reading more on the subject (mostly in your space) the last couple of days I understand, more concrete than formerly, that rules are one of the things whats played with, they are toys so to speak. Unless of course I misunderstood in which case I will continue my education.

I actually came here via MaleSubmissionArt.com because aag linked it in one of her posts. I really liked browsing through it.

Hey anyway thanks for taking the time to explain and talk to me, I know how tedious it is to explain your (in my case feminist) position again and again to people who just haven’t done enough reading.

Sorry for assuming you would return a heated reply. My experience, as yours has been that BDSM is a highly contentious subject in feminist circles and I assumed that you would be defensive here :D Shows you what I know.

Meh, as we all know, it happens. I try hard to approach every new situation without bringing the past into it, but that’s hard.

I would really like to learn more about experiences of power in BDSM.

You might find MaleSubmissionArt.com, which is another blog I keep dedicated entirely to exploring power dynamics and masculinity from a feminist angle, interesting.

by the way I do think we would be better of abolishing individual cars, at least in metropolitan areas. I’m all for public transport car sharing and taxis. ;)

So do I. My point is that neither myself or (I hope) others who think reducing dependance on cars is a good thing would be so foolish as to call for the abolishment of cars. People in our society have a tendency to construct rules to avoid problems rather try to find solutions for making improvements to existing circumstances. I think that’s a misguided effort at best, prejudiced and evil at worst.

The idea of finding solutions instead of setting up rules presupposes that rules are not always solutions, which is a good thing to keep in mind. For instance, I recently learned of a design for reducing traffic accidents and pedestrian deaths that—surprisingly—radically reduces the number of warning signs and other traffic signals (like traffic lights!) used at intersections. Turns out, this actually works wonders. (Skip to about 12:12 in the video linked above and watch for about 30 seconds for the relevant bit. I think it’s neat.)

The argument by anti-BDSM-feminists is the following: 1) the goal of (radical) feminism isn’t to solely abolish inequality but to abolish power, hirarchy etc. 2) BDSM is based on power (exchange) thus reifying power structures 3) ergo BDSM is in opposition to feminism ergo bad.

That’s interesting. Although it betrays a deep misunderstanding of power. To say something, like power structures, that can be misused should therefore be abolished is as silly as saying we should get rid of cars, or electricity, or anything else that is useful but could be misused. This ease of substitutability of one thing for another in the anti-BDSM feminist argument thus bears all the marks of a bad explanation. This is why I think it’s so important to start sharing what we know about the way power works, for the BDSM community in particular. Because frankly, we know a lot more than most other people do since we use it as a part of sex all the time.

And before you rip into me remember I am just reporting on anti-BDSM feminist opinion. These are not (necessarily) mine.

I wouldn’t rip into you. Thanks for sharing a bit about what’s happening in German-language blogs with me. :) I can’t usually access that.

The argument by anti-BDSM-feminists is the following: 1) the goal of (radical) feminism isn’t to solely abolish inequality but to abolish power, hirarchy etc. 2) BDSM is based on power (exchange) thus reifying power structures 3) ergo BDSM is in opposition to feminism ergo bad.

I thought I’d add that here because nobody quite put it that way. It isn’t about sexism, nor does the argument go that BDSM is inherently misogynistic, nor that women only want to participate because they are brainwashed patriarchical minions. On the other hand those feminists do believe that desire as gender is socially constructed.

And before you rip into me remember I am just reporting on anti-BDSM feminist opinion. These are not (necessarily) mine.