So, this is a complete and utter rant, because that’s just the mood I’m in. Also, it’s my blog. In case you didn’t know, I rant hard (and fast).
My first half-week in New York City has been an utter roller coaster. In these few short days after I (mostly) finished regrouping with friends, I remember exactly what I love about New York City, and exactly why I can’t stand it anymore. On Thursday, my first day back, I literally got off a bus, called Sinclair, and spent the evening first at Alphabet Soup (organized by the extremely perky and energetic Mina), and then later at a smaller, somewhat more private gathering of a few particular sex bloggers.
Let me say that again. I literally got off a bus, and went to a kinky social gathering with friends. I spent the majority of my time at Alphabet Soup talking to Sinclair about femme identity as it relates to cisgendered men. Others joined the conversation and things branched from there, but never did the conversation stop, and rarely did I say something that people couldn’t offer their own opinions on. I think I got the “you’re kind of an alien” face twice, maybe.
Do you know how long it’s been since I’ve felt like any gathering—regardless of whether it was filled with kinky people or not—was even remotely interesting on a sociosexual conversational level? That’s right, a year, because I was in fucking Sydney, where despite not being in a body-phobic culture like America is sadly entrenched in, people are still so massively ignorant about gender and sexuality issues (including people in the BDSM community), that it felt like I had actually travelled back in time. So, that was awesome.
But Alphabet Soup had its less-than-awesome moments, too. One dominant woman (plus one point) started talking to me, but her tone and demeanor was so overly presumptuous that I lost interest pretty quickly. One of the first things she said was, “I can get any man I want.” (Minus ten billion points.) ‘Really?’ I thought, ‘Well, you must not want me, then, because you’ve just ensured you’re not going to get me.’
Since I’m a submissive man, I get similar reactions when I turn down would-be advances from dominant women as I do for being a self-sufficient professional from bosses when I quit jobs: shock and a certain degree of indignation. It’s like they simply can’t parse what just happened, and the conversations would almost be funny if those conversations didn’t betray how totally fucked up these people probably treat the rest of their professional or sexual lives.
On the sexual advances front, I blame a massive swath of other submissive men for this, the ones whom I sometimes feel compelled to apologize to my friends over because they are so stereotypically stupid. No, really, on behalf of my gender, I’m sorry. (On the job front, I blame the education system for lying about life so horribly and for not giving students the actual skills they need to make it on their own.)
I was having a good time at Alphabet Soup, but was glad when Sinclair pulled me out of the bar to grab a slice of pizza and continue our conversation. Afterwards, we met up with Axe and Bad Man, among others at yet-another-bar. I had a blast getting to see Axe again, who also introduced me to Mia, and then had another awesome conversation about pornography and the impetus behind MaleSubmissionArt.com, my photo-blog-ish thing where I try my best to make poignant remarks about “bad” porn by showcasing “good” porn.
My favorite exchange from that conversation had to do with horse sex—which isn’t and probably never will be my thing—where somewhere in there I said that I’d be happy to see pornography depicting men having sex with horses because so much of that same stuff exists depicting women. Seriously, doesn’t it strike anyone else as being somewhat fucked up that it’s 2009 and I had to make a web site so that when you Google “submissive men art” or similar, you actually have a shot in hell of getting what you’ve been searching for? And no, damnit, pictures of women dominating men are not the same as pictures of men being submissive to women.
Also frustrating? The fact that “Femdom Sissy Art” is still ranked higher. Fuck’s sake. This was supposed to be the future. Where’s my goddamn equal sexual opportunity? And while you’re at it, where’s my goddamn flying car?!
Anyway, I left when the gathering whittled down to few enough people that the conversation, thanks to the skew of hegemonically masculine men, I suppose, began to go places I was no longer interested in going. Like, uhm, why girls don’t call you back when you send them text messages that read “come over.” (Should I apologize for this one on behalf of my gender? No, probably not.)
I spent the night in Brooklyn and the next day, mostly, with my family. That was good. The weekend was as relaxing as I could hope for, but I’m still stressed and need a vacation. Badly.
Then on Monday I hopped down to Conversio Virium for some pre-meeting sociability, promptly ditched the meeting itself in favor of food and conversation with Reki, and then returned for some additional post-meeting sociability.
It’s absolutely inspiring to see some of the Conversio kids be as outgoing and proud and happy as they seem to be. Their vice-president in particular is a young man who I remember as someone who was barely able to whisper when he spoke. Now, he hugs me warmly and openly.
I’m at once incredibly satisfied knowing I had a hand in making a space where he could blossom in that way, and also incredibly envious that his experiences were so quickly so positive while mine at that age were so utterly bitter. I sincerely hope he takes all of those positive experiences and works to make sure that others can also benefit so profoundly from CV.
I keep my iPod with me at all times because I’m constantly writing notes in it, ideas for blog posts or other rants, things I can do better for my community-related projects, and so forth. It’s simultaneously inspiring and depressing being back here. I’m thrilled that I’m surrounded by such wonderful stimuli again, but I’m more than a little overwhelmed at the challenge that lies ahead. Cuz, fuck, I’ve still so much work to do to make the kinds of spaces I’ve always wanted to have ahead of me.
by Wendy Blackheart
01 Apr 2009 at 03:58
You’ve never seen a video of a guy getting fucked by a horse? And you’ve been on the internet *how* long? I’ve seen a guy get fucked by a horse AND a pig.
But then, I’m kind of twisted.
by maymay
01 Apr 2009 at 04:09
@Wendy Blackheart: Admittedly, I haven’t spent a great deal of time searching specifically for porn of men getting fucked by horses or pigs. Maybe that’s why I haven’t run into it. But then again, and here’s my point, I also haven’t spent any significant time searching for pornography of women getting fucked by horses or pigs, and I have seen that quite a number of times. What does that tell you?
by Wendy Blackheart
01 Apr 2009 at 04:17
Point taken.
And in my defense, I wasn’t actually *looking* for it. Beastiality porn is sort of like a car accident. You don’t seek them out, but sometimes you find one, and its so fucked up you can’t stop watching and waiting to see if the car is gonna blow up.
Also, I went and took a look at ‘Femdom Sissy Art’, and it doesn’t appear to actually *have* any of that.
by maymay
01 Apr 2009 at 04:36
So I’ll admit, I’m not likely to be interested in anything called “femdom sissy art” so I didn’t even click. But I’m not surprised it seemed to turn out to be an illegal music download site. Which, by the way, is kind of my other point about not even having a chance in hell of finding this “good” kind of porn.
by Ranai
01 Apr 2009 at 06:47
O most cruel April Fools day pic. :)
her tone and demeanor was so overly presumptuous that I lost interest pretty quickly. One of the first things she said was, “I can get any man I want.”
Huh.
You know those recurring laments from dom women about “I wish submissive men would relate to me as a human being”? The dehumanisation phenomenon not only exists thanks to some submissive men who do it; it also exists thanks to some women who act as if they weren’t human beings.
by Ranai
01 Apr 2009 at 07:06
P.S. “femme” and “butch”. I wouldn’t give this too much attention. Aren’t those concepts just another culturally constructed artificial dichotomy for pigeonholing people? How about being sexy as Maymay.
by Switch
01 Apr 2009 at 08:23
To me, the hopeful, “love-NY” part of this post came through much more strongly. Yes, the battle’s not yet lost or won, but what I hear is that you had most of a week in which you basically attended great events that happened to also be attended by some not-great people who need to get with the times. In fact, because I don’t have the experiences to make me envious, what you say about CV’s Vice Pres seems to be an unweighted positive! That said, I know that in the years you’ve been active in that scene, you’ve become very good at sorting the wheat from the chaff kinky-events wise, so perhaps it should read as unfortunate that even in those events most enjoyable and interesting, there are still Dommes or that sort. (Any dominant woman who claims she can get any man she wants deserves that hideous kink-linguistic title. It should read as a warning to submissive individuals everywhere.)
by maymay
01 Apr 2009 at 14:55
@Ranai:
Well, frankly, no. Just as “man” and “woman” aren’t intended for pigeonholing people, and just as a hammer isn’t intended for use with a screw, but rather a nail. I spent a great deal of time and effort exploring the distinctions between man and woman and what that meant when applied to myself, and I’ve gotten a great deal of good out of that exploration. Why shouldn’t I do the same for femme and butch?
I think more men—and possibly more women—should absolutely be exploring these things. Ignoring differences is silly, and dichotomies are useful for understanding distinctions. That doesn’t mean I’m going to appropriate them destructively or restrictively, and while many people do that, I find that to be the fault of the person, not the conceptual construction of the thing they’re exploring.
@Switch:
I don’t know if I said I “attended great events,” since, well—let’s face it—I ditched the presentation part of CV’s meeting for a reason and the only reason I had as good a time as I did at Alphabet Soup was because I got to talk to people I missed talking to. But yeah, I’m glad the “love NY” part came through more strongly because I am glad to be back.
And yes, CV’s Vice President’s blossoming is an unweighted positive overall, if also a personally painful pang of envy. I wish I didn’t have to pour out so much of the bad things to make way for so much good—because, seriously, I can’t do this alone and I really need more people’s help. I’m thrilled that I did something that led to amazing Good Things for CV’s now-Vice President, but goddamnit, I don’t want that task, I want to reap the benefits, too.
I’d go so far as to say anyone who claims they can get anyone they want is a waste of everyone’s time. Pompousness like that is very unattractive, and if I could share with the rest of the world how viscerally painful it is for me to see reminders that exactly this sort of behavior is encouraged time and time again, I would do that in a heartbeat. Maybe then more people would get it.
Also, does anyone else ever read “Domme” as “Dom me” and what does that tell you about things?
by Zephyr
02 Apr 2009 at 00:37
1) So what were your conclusions with Sinclair about femme and cismen? Inquiring transthings want to know.
2) Ranai: do you mean that those women dehumanize men, or themselves?
3) I was just thinking about said Domme (I was the unmentioned third person in that conversation), and about the reactions here. I think that in addition to the aspects mentioned here, or maybe as a definition of them, there’s a certain flavor of ‘you should think/believe what I tell you to, because clearly I know all about it’. I suppose it’s a form of arrogance.
I should perhaps also say, however, that the conversation was in fact about flirting. She didn’t make that remark in a vacuum. Still, though, back to the first hand, she was talking about it as a game (the sort of game found in the book of that name, for example). And I think dehumanization is an interesting word to help explain why I’ve always hated this sort of thing, although I’m not sure I’ve ever encountered it that way from a woman before. In this view, it’s not actually about the person you’re pursuing. And there’s no assumption that if you just be yourself, and you like someone, you can connect with them. It’s all about social mechanics divorced from the actual people involved, which shows the same lack of personal care or interest that turns me off in my (stereotypical and warped-for-personal-reasons) views of men. Upon reflecting, I suppose the word is manipulation.
by maymay
02 Apr 2009 at 05:25
@Zephyr: There were no conclusions about femme and cismen, just many avenues to begin to explore. However, something that did come up was that while I strongly support the transsexuality community, I also feel as though many men—such as myself—are falsely looking to transsexuality to solve issues regarding a mix of their hegemonically socially unacceptable masculinity and femininity. This strikes me as being just as inappropriate as overmedicating a passionate child by diagnosing them as ADHD when what they really need is an adult who will nurture and support their natural development, despite our culture’s negative messages to them.
This is why I am a man today. And there was a long time when I thought I may not be one. But you know what, it turns out I am—I’m just not a traditionally masculine one. And that’s okay.
This is true, and I think proves the point even further. When you’re talking about flirting, and you say “I can get anyone I want,” you’re being presumptuous and I will politely dismiss you, end of story.
by Ranai
02 Apr 2009 at 08:35
@ maymay It was probably the wording “femme identity” in the post that made me think of pigeonholing and restriction. I see a difference between examining and exploring various attributes as they apply or not to one’s individuality, and constructing identities out of one attribute or trying to fit into identities constructed by others. If you weren’t referring to the latter processes, the word “identity” misled me.
@Zephyr I meant: dehumanise themselves. Though in the context you’ve described, yes I’d also see a “dehumanising others” trait in collecting anonymous conquests.
Being dominant & not dehumanised means that I can still be together with the same person who likes to submit to me when I’m having a bad cold, or am lusting after some unattainable character in a film, or take a long time trying to figure out a solution to something. In short, dominance as one of various human attributes, not something that negates my other human attributes.
I could make up a fictional story about a woman who could get absolutely any man she wants to submit to her, but I couldn’t make her just a human – I’d need to give her supernatural abilities.
by Ranai
02 Apr 2009 at 08:48
@ maymay Though I still suspect that what you call hegemonical culture would apply the constructed dichotomies “feminine” or “masculine”, “femme” or “butch” to human attributes which I wouldn’t call any of these terms at all.
by maymay
02 Apr 2009 at 20:28
Ranai:
Ah, that makes sense to me if you read the meaning of the word as “the fact of being who or what a person is,” rather than my intended use, “a close similarity of affinity.” The English language’s words can be so duplicitous sometimes. :)
by blaise bonfire
08 Apr 2009 at 15:34
Hey dears, this is a little departure from my usual ludditeness, but i wanted to chime in…
I was listening to a rebroadcast of Harry Hay last night(an early founder/philosopher of the radical faeries)at one of the original gatherings. He was speaking about one of his foundational theories, subject-SUBJECT consciousness& it’s been doing battle with my thoughts about bdsm/fetish activities& communities since then:
[summery from wikipedia]:
Subject-SUBJECT consciousness
Subject-SUBJECT consciousness, a concept proposed by Harry Hay believed by Hay to be queer people’s unique perspective on the world. Hay saw heterosexual society existing in a subject-object dynamic; where men, who had the culturally acceptable power, saw only themselves as subject and therefore higher than women, who were treated as objects and property. Hay extrapolated this interpersonal-sexual dynamic (male-power:female-subordinate) into a broader social context, believing that the subject-object relationship was the driving force behind most all of societies’ ills. Objectification served as a barrier, emotionally separating an individual (subject) from another individual by dehumanizing them, making them object.
When Hay looked at homosexual relationships, however, he saw a different dynamic at work. He believed that homosexual relationships were based on mutual respect and empathy for the other, a longing for a companion who was as equally valuable as the self. Hay termed this interpersonal-sexual dynamic subject-SUBJECT (which Hay capitalized for emphasis in all of his writings). He believed that this subject-SUBJECT way of viewing the world was queer people’s most valuable contribution to the greater society. By empathizing with all people, relating to each other as equal to equal, society would change drastically and social injustices would be eradicated.
thoughts?
by maymay
08 Apr 2009 at 15:58
Blaise! It’s so nice to see you drop by my little corner of the Internet. :)
It’s plain to see Hay’s influence as well as his agenda in that description of his “subject-SUBJECT” viewpoint. I must say that, on face value, I find the hypothetical causation that he proposes is heterosexuality to be greatly flawed. I do, however, agree quite strongly with many of the points raised by the subject-object dichotomy.
Insofar as relating Hay’s views to BDSM and fetish, I think that much of the work that still needs to be done (and that I’m trying to do quite explicitly over at MaleSubmissionArt.com as well as here on my own blog), is to decouple notions of power dynamics from gender and, more to Hay’s point, refute the notions of gender inequality in relation to who takes ownership of said power dynamics.
More specifically, hegemonic cultural views of submissive men are ones in which the submissiveness is imbued by feminine traits, but I think this is flawed. Not only does it reinforce the subject-object stereotype as it relates to gender that I think Hay is speaking about, it also fails to recognize the strength of being the object. I dislike the idea that subject-subject relationships are inherently better than subject-object relationship dynamics. Then again…maybe I’m misinterpreting Hay’s words and losing some of his intent in the process.
Regardless, homogeneity is actually my enemy, since a lack of exposure to sufficient diversity is the root of ignorance, itself the root of persecution.
by Jani
14 Apr 2009 at 09:21
*drops in from lurkerdom*
Maymay, I just found your site this week, and I wanted to say THANK YOU SO MUCH. Thank you for your collection of gorgeous pictures of men, and even more THANK YOU for your attitude about sex and gender and sex play. It is incredibly refreshing to find someone who seems to be in it for the…I guess I’d say for the fun. Someone who doesn’t take themselves soooo seriously that they lose sight of how awesome sex can be.
Anyway–from a bi girl who doesn’t know if she’s into BDSM but flits around the edges, thank you so much. :)))
by nakeysub's Mistress
20 Apr 2009 at 16:12
OMG! I think I’m in love with you! *LOL*
I wish I’d found your blog when my husband and I were starting our journey through this. (I found your Male Submission Art blog today.)
I was SO sick of seeing all the pro-Domme stereotypical crap when I was trying to explore our options and learn things when he confessed to me he wanted me to take things more formal in our marriage. I mean, we felt like we were totally marginalized because at first I could find NOTHING about subs like my husband who aren’t into humiliation or sissification or being treated like a doormat. We’re coming at it from love, not sadism.
It’s this reason we’re EXTREMELY careful with what we do. If people knew my husband was submissive to me, it would totally f*** his job. I’m not doing this because I’m a sadist, I’m doing this because I am dominant and he wants to be submissive to me.
THANK YOU for your blog! (I’m off to read the back posts.)
nakeysub’s Mistress.
by maymay
24 Apr 2009 at 07:10
Thanks for the kind words, Jani. :)
Certainly, there are lots of people—kinky, vanilla, religious, or otherwise—who for some reason think “fun” isn’t a valid reason to enjoy sex. I hope those people eventually change their mind about that, since I think they’d have a lot more fun if they did. ;)
Glad to hear you’ve been enjoying MaleSubmissionArt.com, nakeysub’s Mistress. Even more happy to hear that you’ve found and enjoyed my blog from there and that you’re encouraged by seeing the different representations I try to give submissive men than what exists on the rest of the Internet. I’m pretty convinced that such monotonous representations are damaging in more ways than one, and that the solution to this problem is to showcase positive aspects of masculinity in sexually submissive contexts. If you’re interested to hear me talk about exactly that, I’d encourage you to keep a look out about these parts, since I’ve got an audio recording about that I’m hoping to share soon.
by Dead Squirrels
01 May 2009 at 09:49
I just came across your blog because I am following you on tumblr. It is great to see someone talking about this.
As a bi-sexual female (and a bit of a feminist) I find it frustrating that on places like tumblr there are TONS of “sexy” nudes of women but not a lot of men at all, needless to say men being submissive and dominated by a female. I am looking forward to reading your blog in more detail and checking out more of your tumblr site.
THANK YOU FOR SHARING !!!
more later!
by maymay
01 May 2009 at 17:45
This may be too meta, but thanks for the complimentary thanks, Dead Squirrels. :)
Yes, I couldn’t agree more. This comes back to the chicken-and-egg problem, though: if the media depicting submissive masculinity just doesn’t exist in the way MaleSubmissionArt.com tries to showcase that it can, then it’s not going to appear on blog platforms like Tumblr or anywhere else for that matter. But if it doesn’t appear on such sites, then it’s not possible for uninformed and unaware people to understand that such positive depictions of men and male sexuality are even a possibility in the first place.
We have to start somewhere, though. This is why I am trying my hardest to make it easy for people to spread the word, to copy what I’m doing and do it themselves. It’s why I don’t want to own the copyright on submissive male sexuality: MaleSubmissionArt.com is a mirror on the Internet, and I explicitly don’t want it to be a source for imagery of masculine submission but rather a showcase of what exists. This, I hope, will help make it appear elsewhere—maybe even everywhere!
Again, I hope that a submissive man’s voice is not going to be the only one talking about this. Some dominant women are speaking about it, too. Interestingly, I often feel like they have more of an audience than I do, merely because they are dominant women. Sigh….