One of the most frustratingly ignorant arguments for why BDSM is a Bad Thing comes from self-proclaimed feminists who view women who enjoy a submissive sexuality as traitors. My understanding is that such feminists believe that an imbalance of sexual power, most of which they see as being in the hands of men (while annoyingly refusing to describe which men), is the root of all activity that oppresses women. Their solution, then, seems to be to disentangle power from sex, making expressions of sexuality socially acceptable only when their physical manifestations are wholly egalitarian.
Unfortunately, although this sounds good to many people, by focusing on the physical acts of sex, what these people are actually advocating is discrimination based on one’s choice of sexual activities. That doesn’t strike me as a very noble goal at all. A great example is the endless blowjob debate: Is the act of orally pleasuring a partner inherently submissive?
If you answered yes, can you please explain to me why women are being submissive when they give a man a blowjob but not necessarily being submissive when they give him a kiss? Both activities are manifestations of potentially (but not necessarily) sexual desire that use a woman’s mouth and lips. I recall reading a study (and now fail to locate the source; damnit; can anyone with Google-fu out there find this?) showing that 30% of a typical person’s ability to sense arousing sexual stimuli is clustered around their mouth and lips. Regardless of whether that’s true or not, would you agree that kissing can be physically stimulating for the person actively doing the kissing? If so, why would this not be true for fellatio? Do you really think kissing the skin of a person’s penis makes that much of a neurochemical difference than kissing the skin of their lips? It’s no wonder so many people enjoy making out and giving their lovers head.
Everyone—including feminists—who incorrectly couples physical activity with emotional intent like this is doing exceptional amounts of damage to the realization of sexual equality. They are forgetting a fundamental truth of Ethics: equality is not interchangeable with sameness. If you treat two different people in an identical fashion, without regard to the context each individual is in and without consideration of their personal motivations, are you really treating them fairly?
Riddle me this, anti-BDSM feminists: Is your goal to establish an allowable set of sexual activity or is it to empower everyone to choose what activities—not necessarily sexually motivated activities, mind you—they would like to partake in, free of social, political, gendered, racial, and other barriers to the pursuit of their own happiness?
Now, while you’re chewing on that, despite the fact that I think feminists, if not feminism, who are rife with extreme opposition to consensual power exchange and BDSM activities is unfortunate, I’m actually pretty empathetic to them. Sadly, such fierce opposition to What It Is That We (in the BDSM communities) Do is not hard to understand if you’ve seen even one glimpse of the sexist assholery I’ve witnessed coming from significant segments of the BDSM community.
Oh yes, don’t you fret, radical feminists, I agree that sexism is alive and well in many people’s understanding of BDSM, if not also their practice of it. ::shudder:: That said, I don’t think inheriting indefensible ideals of sexism by lazily flipping the genders around is anything other than bad logic.
Without a doubt, the most blatant recent example of what I see as indefensible sexist beliefs coming from someone involved in the BDSM community was expressed by a man named Rob, who co-hosts a podcast called The Oh Team (…ew…really? Reminds me of that guy in Office Space making his “oh face”), when he appeared as a guest on episode 2 of the This Week in Kink podcast. I raised a stink about it over on MaleSubmissionArt.com, which I’ll quote:
Our species is fantastically diverse, so collectively we embody myriad dichotomies: tall and short, women and men, dark-skinned and light-skinned, hairless and hairy, and dominant and submissive, are just a few. Human diversity is so vast, in fact, that it’s impossible to infer any given person’s makeup in one sphere (say, D/s) from their makeup in another (say, gender) with 100% accuracy.
Nevertheless, many people often attempt to do just that and end up acting in extremely discriminatory ways, such as the example of Rob in Episode 2 of the This Week In Kink podcast (produced by, surprisingly, the same people who run FetLife.com), with this astonishingly sexist remark:
“I firmly and strongly believe that it is a woman’s role to be submissive to a man. I believe that submission in men is taught at conception because as soon as women realize that they’re pregnant, they start planning that child’s fucking future and quite often that the mother is definitely the beginning of the emasculation. That said, I think that women in the past couple of hundred years have gotten entirely too high on their own power and eventually need to be slapped in the fucking head and put in their place.â€
(Skip to 34 minutes and 32 seconds for the quote.)
This is the kind of thing many dominant men say that makes me want to puke and—I might add—to which I would quite reasonably respond with an anti-BDSM mindset if I were not a submissive man myself. Since I am, the idea that “women in the past couple of hundred years have gotten entirely too high on their own power” seems ridiculous to me, because I’m constantly facing a world in which I get handed the bill in restaurants if I’m eating out with a woman, in which I’m unfairly expected to be the pursuing partner in a flirtatious conversation, in which I’m rarely encouraged to feel beautiful, in which I’m granted unbelievable privilege in my professional work. (I’m a male programmer. Here’s what I don’t have to deal with.) Beyond that, the fact that I’m submissive and a man seems to signal implicit permission for others to ridicule or sissify me, and ignore my desires.
What reality do some dominant men inhabit that they think women-at-large “need to be…put in their place”? Sounds to me like they are pretty well entrenched where these men want them to be already. What ruffles my feathers, however, is this: by pigeonholing women into submissive positions (in any sphere, not just sexual ones), these men not only obstruct the equal opportunity that should be afforded to women, but they also obstruct the very same right to equal opportunity for other men.
In other words, there will never be the opportunity for anyone, regardless of D/s inclination, to freely choose how they would like to experience consensual power exchange without gender equality. Many people in both the feminist and the BDSM communities consistently fail to correctly recognize the interactions that power has with sex. In the case of the former, specific activities are assumed to relate to a power exchange, perhaps thanks to cultural scripts that are played ad-nauseum such as those in mainstream pornography. In the case of the latter, gender insensitivity contributes to a belief system that actualizes sexist behavior without regard for personal choice (and that’s why outspoken women like Bitchy Jones are so spot-on so often).
In one of the followup posts over Rob‘s sexist remarks, Delilah expressed my sentiments very well, if strongly worded:
I’m disgusted by the tendency in a certain type of male dom to believe that they are simply bringing back the good old days by making women subservient the way God intended. Aren’t we supposed to be progressive? Isn’t the point of alternative sexuality to explore, well, alternatives??
And get a load of the comments over there. Don’t get me started on the whole “I have a right to my opinion and you have the right to yours” crap. Free speech is free speech, and this fuckwad has the right to say whatever he likes, just as I do. But to hide behind free speech, to say that you will “fight to the death” next to me to defend my right to have an opinion, too, when in the same breath you’re saying that I’m a second-class human being, is completely disingenuous. It wasn’t so long ago that women didn’t have the right to an opinion—whether in matters of state or in the home. You can’t have it both ways, asshole.
[…]
Much more of this, and I’ll be as bitter and angry as people seem to think darling Maymay is. Nice job, kink community.
What’s worse, such ignorance is not restricted to anti-BDSM radical feminists and parts of the BDSM community. Professionals like lawyers and politicians come to similarly ignorant conclusions, I think, because they haven’t the necessary understanding either of gender or consensual power exchange.
Well, fuck! Wouldn’t you say coming to ill-conceived conclusions about things like how our bodies work, how our legal system should work, and how our governments should be structured, not to mention how technical societal infrastructure should be built, is a problem for our society? I think that’s worth fixing.
I have a great deal of respect for John and Tonja, the hosts of This Week in Kink. Nevertheless, I’m saddened by the ignorance about how issues of power intersect with issues of sexuality some of their asshat mandom guests have displayed. I also feel that anyone with an audience of several hundred thousand, such as that of the FetLife.com membership, has a social obligation to accurately portray the distinctions and details of What It Is That We Do and to combat misconceptions about it, such as deeply-engrained sexist ideals, whenever they arise with at least equal vigor as the misconception was presented with.
Which is what I told them when, to John and Tonja’s immense credit, they actually invited me to come onto the show for episode 8. Since the This Week In Kink show page has since disappeared from the Internet, here is an archived MP3 recording of the show. Skip to 6 minutes and 10 seconds in for that part, although I’d love your feedback about the entire conversation. Also, as an aside, I’m looking forward to This Week In Kink getting more submissive men on the show (and maybe even some gay, lesbian, and transgendered people as well, which TTBOMK, are also missing), as are some others, it seems. Once again I find myself alone, for the time being.
Naturally, John and Tonja have a right not to do what I’d like them to. And, of course, how easy for me to tell them what to do. That’s why, because I don’t like it when people just talk and don’t do, and since I’ve been intending to do this for ages anyway, I (re)started my own podcast, one that specifically addresses these issues and ties them into my agenda to make the intersection of power and sex and the way it impacts everyone, not just “kinky people,†more apparent to the world at large. It’s called Kink On Tap.
Kink On Tap 1 through 7 were made way back in 2007—a lot can happen in two years. Also, I’ve never produced a podcast before so I’m excited to be learning about the craft and eager to hear feedback. What do you think?
Pingback
by Meitar Moscovitz (maymaym) 's status on Saturday, 03-Oct-09 01:57:16 UTC - Identi.ca
02 Oct 2009 at 21:57
[…] http://maybemaimed.com/2009/10/02/dont-you-fret-sexism-is-alive-and-well-in-bdsm/ a few seconds ago from web […]
by Remittance Girl
03 Oct 2009 at 06:25
This is a superb blog post. I cannot agree enough. Emancipation is about the ability to be self-directed, to have independent agency. To choose how to express one’s sexuality instead of having it thrust upon one by society or cultural values. If we go from being defined by a masculinist hegemony to being defined by politically motivated feminists, then what have I gained as a woman? I’ve traded one set of narrow values for another.
by Delilah Wood
03 Oct 2009 at 15:49
What ruffles my feathers, however, is this: by pigeonholing women into submissive positions (in any sphere, not just sexual ones), these men not only obstruct the equal opportunity that should be afforded to women, but they also obstruct the very same right to equal opportunity for other men.
And what really burns my ass is the way that these dominant male asshats are using something that should be varied and radical and choice-based to justify and even erotically codify a Neanderthal way of thinking about women’s rights. As much as I get frustrated by the radfems, as you say here, guys like this are definitely worse, and do those of us who are working to promote a free-expression model of BDSM a terrible disservice. Tonja may be great, but her comment on the discussion around that podcast shows that she’s not thinking enough about the difference between what turns us on and how human beings should be treated in the larger society.
by Janie
03 Oct 2009 at 18:24
Great post! I’ve never seen BDSM as anti-feminist, personally, and have enjoyed it on occasion (giving and recieving). Feminism should be about equality, in my opinion, and that includes sexual equality for both partners. If the couple’s preference is submissive woman / dominant man or vice versa, who are we to judge? Their freedom of choice – the freedom to choose how they engage in sex as a couple – is one facet of equality that the Feminist Movement was trying to accomplish, am I right?
by Naamah
04 Oct 2009 at 06:02
This is just fantastic. Thank you.
I’m a feminist clean through, and the feminists who are anti-BDSM absolutely do not represent the feminism that I have come to know, or the feminism that I help to create. I do not tolerate that sort of talk in the spaces I moderate because it is completely disrespectful to both genders and particularly disrespectful to submissive women and men.
There is a strong current of frustration within the feminist community of people who judge like this. I point that out not to wave the flag of “But I’m not liiiiike thaaaaat!” but to say that this is something we are working on from within, definitely. We’re with you all the way, most of us, and we are trying to bring the others around.
It’s diminishing, infantilizing, insisting that we should be protected from our own desires, aa though they were a thing that would harm us by being realized — instead of being things that will harm us if they are NOT realized, as you pointed out in your essay a while back about how denying you this sort of contact is basically the same as denying you loving touch.
by sharktooth
04 Oct 2009 at 14:06
“Riddle me this, anti-BDSM feminists: Is your goal to establish an allowable set of sexual activity or is it to empower everyone to choose what activities—not necessarily sexually motivated activities, mind you—they would like to partake in, free of social, political, gendered, racial, and other barriers to the pursuit of their own happiness?”
Don’t say this to anti-BDSM feminists, at least unless you don’t mind throwing SAN points down the drain. Anti-BDSM feminists believe that *no-one* would willingly participate in BDSM activities if it wasn’t for our patriarchal culture pressuring them to do so – especially women – and that anyone who claims otherwise is either deluded or lying. (Thankfully, things have improved a bit – prior to the feminist sex wars a few decades ago, *all* feminists believed this, or at least weren’t foolish enough to admit otherwise.)
Their opposition also isn’t related to the sexist asshattery in the BDSM community. They’re the same way towards lesbian BDSMers, perhaps even worse – in fact, this was one of the big things the feminist sex wars were about. (Eventually, said lesbian BDSMers managed to carve out a place within the feminist movement, but it wasn’t easy or pleasant.)
Speaking of… you recall acaptiveman mentioned the UK’s new extreme porn law, under which it’s illegal to possess porn depicting anything that looks like it might cause serious injury, in a recent comment to another post? The anti-BDSM feminists had an important role in that; for example, they provided the rather dubious Government-funded study used to justify it. The reasoning behind the law – that this porn causes male violence against women and must be banned – is also very much a feminist one. What’s more, this form of feminism is the one that has political influential, both in the UK and other countries.
[ It’s quite a nasty law too. The punishment is a prison sentence and being forced to *register as a sex offender*. ]
Also, I’m saddened to see there are sexist assholes like Rob in the BDSM community – and a bit angry. Mostly, though, I’m confused – just what sort of twisted view of the world, and of submission, does it take to think in that way? Will this sexism never die? I *know* the foundations of a better way are out there somewhere: one in which BDSM and feminism aren’t enemies but are necessary parts of a greater whole, and where male submissives and female dominants of all stripes are truly treated as equals. I just can’t see a way there from here.
(Oh dear, that was a bit long and rambly, wasn’t it. Bad habit of mine.)
by Ms. Ava Blue
04 Oct 2009 at 20:29
Idiots like that are not exclusive to any community, sadly. And I’m constantly amazed at how so few people bother to pay attention to men’s feelings and emotions about the roles they are often given to play. It is very easy to be angry at a “privileged” man in power. No one thinks about the burden of responsibility, ethics, morality, that he may carry. There’s little empathy for him.
As for women, many of the third-wave, millennial baby feminists don’t want “equality”. I don’t want to be treated the same as a man in a whole slew of situations. I agree wholeheartedly about equality != sameness. I’m a woman, and I’ll thank you to open the door for me, not ask me to carry heavy objects, and in most cases let me keep the children in a divorce. I still want the same pay though, and voting rights, and all that good stuff. Spoiled bitch that I am, I want everything :).
by Dw3t-Hthr
04 Oct 2009 at 21:57
(I continue to vehemently assert that a kinkless relationship is one which I’m not treated in an egalitarian fashion; it’s one in which my desires are suppressed for someone else.)
Honestly, the sort of bullshit you’re quoting there comes across to me as painfully insecure, if not in one’s self, in one’s kink. It’s not that people are willing to choose to serve or submit, which turns having one’s dom on into a privilege; it’s just The Way Things Are. Or something. I’m not articulating this well.
by maymay
06 Oct 2009 at 05:28
@Delilah:
I agree completely. Nevertheless, I think Tonja’s heart is in the right place. To date, however, I cannot say the same thing for Rob.
@Janie, Remittance Girl:
Thanks for the kind words.
I think you are. I’d love to hear from a feminist who believes that BDSM is fundamentally incompatible with feminism, but I’m afraid no such feminists read this blog, much less would sit through the thrashing I gave them at the start of this particular post. :)
@Naamah:
Very well said. Indeed, since equality is not sameness, it’s important to understand what people want so that what we work towards is equal opportunity, rather than merely defining a new set of restrictions based on inverted sexism.
by maymay
06 Oct 2009 at 05:41
@Sharktooth:
What’s a SAN point?
Yeah, I know. My intent was not to connect the two viewpoints, but rather to take each to task individually for being ignorant.
I didn’t know that, and that’s amazingly frightening.
@Ms. Avah Blue:
Frustratingly, as things stand today in family law, men are extremely discriminated against when it comes to so-called objective custody decisions about what will be best for children. Women are often considered better parents merely because of their gender, which is the definition of sexism. There was a fantastically interesting and very personal story told about this very issue at KinkForAll New York City 2. You might find the audio recording of “No One Cares About Your Blog” worth a listen.
In any event, I strongly, loudly, and without reservation object to the idea that because you are a woman, you should be given unfair advantage in family court settlements over a man.
@Dw3t-Hthr:
Yeah, sorry…what? I didn’t understand you. Want to try again?
by Delilah Wood
06 Oct 2009 at 23:14
What’s a SAN point?
Ha-haaaaa! I just learned this this past week! Apparently, in the old Call of Chthulhu role-playing game, there were various things that cost you Sanity, or SAN, points. This quickly entered standard geek lexicon (e.g., “I hadn’t vacuumed the bedroom in 3 months and the dust bunnies were more like dust Shoggoths – those things cost my Hoover SAN points!”).
by lalouve
09 Oct 2009 at 18:06
I tend to have two major feminist issues with the BDSM world as I have encountered it:
Apart from actual play, much of the scene is still very traditionally gendered. I am expected to dress to please the male gaze, often in clothes that emphasise vulnerability, and often to act with proper deference towards men – despite the fact that I’m not submissive. I do know why this particular regional group is acting that way, but I don’t approve.
Secondly, it would sometimes be nice to see a little less tolerance. I would say that anyone who claims that d/s is gender-determined, like Rob in your example, is a case of ‘your kink is not my kink, and your kink is NOT OK.’ A kink that tells me that my sexual wishes and desires are different from what I think they are is not acceptable to me.
I find much to criticise, from a feminist viewpoint, in the BDSM scene; it is no freer from oppression than the rest of the world. I think much of our kink is shaped and sometimes screwed up by patriarchy. But I also think that one of the best things one can do with one’s own oppression is to subvert it into something joyful and creative and fulfilling, and thus defeat it.
by Dw3t-Hthr
12 Oct 2009 at 00:32
Trying again:
Guys who are all “It is just NATURAL for women to submit to men, it’s the way the world is!” strike me as being fundamentally insecure in their kink (and thus themselves).
They want it to be part of the ground rules for reality, rather than something special that specific people might be interested in offering.
I suspect it’s because if it’s something special, then they wonder if they’re special enough to get it.
by Sai
13 Oct 2009 at 03:53
I think you’d enjoy this poem, a pantoum about giving fellatio as a top (written, as it happens, by an andrgoynous female ex-FWB of mine).
by jellycious
15 Oct 2009 at 01:46
Well, women like me are very submissive when I give a blow job to my partner because that leads us to stimulate our sexual satisfaction. When I gave a blow job to my partner it feels like heaven..lol. it really stimulates me and makes me horny..
Pingback
by Questions I Want to Ask Entitled Cis Het Men, Part 2: Men’s Rights « Clarisse Thorn
20 Oct 2009 at 04:07
[…] There are fragments: some insight might be drawn from the ways in which many BDSM communities create non-oppressive frameworks within which we have our deliciously oppressive sex. With practice, one can get shockingly good at preserving a heavy dominant/submissive dynamic that still allows both partners to talk about their other needs. Surely that understanding of sexual roles vs. other needs could be adapted to the service of gender identity. Yet so many BDSMers still fall prey to the same old gendered preconceptions. […]
by therambler
22 Oct 2009 at 11:02
My ideal, and I don’t think it will be reached in my lifetime, is to get to a point where we never hear about equal rights. Not because one side or the other has “won” but because to not treat a person as a person is unthinkable.
by Karen
23 Oct 2009 at 03:58
Hi.. You have a nice thoughts and opinion about your article. Well, kissing is the first move to stimulate me but it will get me more submissive when it goes orally or oral sex. I hope you will post more good articles and I’m hoping some feed backs from you as well.. ThankS!
by Ms. Ava Blue
24 Oct 2009 at 00:30
On the subject of child custody/rearing, I was talking only about myself. * I * would take any advantage offered in a legal battle, as I expect anyone would. I think there are many, many men who are wonderful – and far better – parents than their ex-wives. It is extremely difficult, and unfair, that a man has to prove that his soon-to-be ex is such a danger to herself and others as to be declared an unfit mother… and even then, he may not get custody.
by Karen
25 Oct 2009 at 21:54
Hi.. is it ok or would you mind if I can put an anchor text in your blogs every time I comment to your blogs linking to our site? Thanks with regards..
by sharktooth
27 Oct 2009 at 12:50
Delilah Wood: yep, that’s the one. I don’t play Call of Cthulu, but it’s a handy idea. Probably quite an apt comparison, too; in a sense you’re dealing with a world where the usual rules of logic don’t apply.
Maymay: Seriously, there’s nothing you can say to convince most of them. This form of feminism is a robust, internally-self consistent ideology with an equally robust community and strong protections against the kind of idea you want to introduce. The perspective from which they view the world is one that rejects any argument you could possibly make.
For example, take the question “Is your goal to establish an allowable set of sexual activity or is it to empower everyone to choose what activities—not necessarily sexually motivated activities, mind you—they would like to partake in, free of social, political, gendered, racial, and other barriers to the pursuit of their own happiness?” That’s easy – their goal is the second, but they believe that (a) women only actually want to participate in a limited set of sexual activities and are pressured into others by the patriarchy, (b) it’s impossible for women to become equal while this is happening, and (c) any women who claims otherwise has failed to self-examine thoroughly enough. Likewise, they fundamentally reject “sameness is not equality” in the form you’re proposing it.
You’d probably run into similar problems convincing a sexist like Rob to change his viewpoint, though not quite the same ones since he’s not part of an ideology in the same way. It seems to be a very human flaw. For further advice, please consult a philosopher.
Maymay: “Yeah, I know. My intent was not to connect the two viewpoints, but rather to take each to task individually for being ignorant.”
Perhaps, but it’s kinda important. In particular, you suggest that this feminist viewpoint is understandable given the sexist attitudes in the BDSM community, but that misses the point. These feminists generally believe that *any* BDSM activity – whether it’s between two men, two women, or a male submissive and a female dominant – is rooted in the patriarchy and fundamentally woman-hating, simply because it involves a power imbalance. (You’ll probably find many of them believe the same thing about all forms of gay male sex and about butch-femme lesbian relationships, especially the older ones.) From what I can tell, it’s actually female BDSMers, especially lesbians, who have suffered the most as a result of this form of feminism. (Oh, and trans women, of course.) That’s political ideologies for you.
lalouve: oh dear, I suppose it would be. Don’t think the scene is quite as bad around here, but I’m in no real position to tell.
by maymay
27 Oct 2009 at 15:57
@Sharktooth:
You’re totally right. That’s why this was a blog post, not a conversation with one of them. :) Have you ever seen that scene in Thank You For Smoking where the main character is teaching his son about how to win an argument. They’re arguing over which is better, chocolate or vanilla flavor icecream, and at the end of the argument, his kid says, “But you didn’t convince me.” His answer was: “But I wasn’t after you. I was after them,” he says pointing at passerbys.
Pingback
by Alas, a blog » Blog Archive » Questions I Want to Ask Entitled Cis Het Men, Part 2: Men’s Rights
28 Oct 2009 at 03:59
[…] There are fragments: some insight might be drawn from the ways in which many BDSM communities create non-oppressive frameworks within which we have our deliciously oppressive sex. With practice, one can get shockingly good at preserving a heavy dominant/submissive dynamic that still allows both partners to talk about their other needs. Surely that understanding of sexual roles vs. other needs could be adapted to the service of gender identity. Yet so many BDSMers still fall prey to the same old gendered preconceptions. […]
by Jokerine
28 Oct 2009 at 12:35
We’ve been having huge discussions on BDSM in the german blogosphere recently and the fronts are equally hardned.
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.
by Jokerine
28 Oct 2009 at 12:37
Damn wanted to check the “Notify me of followup comments via e-mail”-button. Sorry.
by maymay
28 Oct 2009 at 14:57
Jokerine,
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.
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.
by Jokerine
29 Oct 2009 at 17:29
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. I would really like to learn more about experiences of power in BDSM. I can understand being drawn to power play, though I’ve never had a partner willing to explore that with me. I also totally agree with the linked blogpost, as would most BDSM critical feminists as well (I think). I guess I’ll just continue reading here. It’s not really my way to comment so quickly after discovering a blog, but I felt I could add some insight on anti-BDSM feminists. And 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. ;)
by maymay
29 Oct 2009 at 18:43
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.
You might find MaleSubmissionArt.com, which is another blog I keep dedicated entirely to exploring power dynamics and masculinity from a feminist angle, interesting.
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.)
by Jokerine
29 Oct 2009 at 19:07
Re: the cars, I’ve heard about the traffic sign thing as well. In fact my local green party wants to institute cohabiting/signfree spaces because of this. But this is really kind of a tangent.
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.
by maymay
29 Oct 2009 at 19:22
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.
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.
Some people learn through conversation, not reading. That’s why I think it’s important to talk, and write, and listen, for instance. :)
by Jokerine
29 Oct 2009 at 19:33
She reblogged the most recent image from your tumblelog. And I was curious about the person behind the pictureselection.
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.
Pingback
by Maybe Maimed but Never Harmed › On Youth, Sexuality, Education, and Your Fears
31 Oct 2009 at 23:49
[…] even more upsetting, why should things feel that way for so many people, of all ages, about many topics, in countless places around the world? Can’t we do better than this? Don’t you also […]
by kage
30 Jan 2010 at 14:42
I absolutely love this post. I hate reading dom assholery…one domestic discipline site went ot about how women are innately submissive and men dominant because men penetrate and women are penetrated. a) that is so reductionist and so boring. b) are you so insecure that you have to reduce half of the population to people inferior to you? c) subs are subordinate, not inferior.
Thanks again, maymay, for being a voice of reason in the darkness.
Pingback
by I am no Hercules « Maybe Maimed but Never Harmed
15 Nov 2010 at 00:28
[…] or dressing up in fetish wear, or whatever) often felt just as alienating and often just as downright fucking sexist and classist and exclusionary as what they said they were breaking free from in the hegemonic […]
Pingback
by What porn companies can learn from the Giffords shooting « Maybe Maimed but Never Harmed
13 Jan 2011 at 02:50
[…] on our own 24-hour news cycle who have, working together, utterly failed to shun this and other sexism in BDSM porn within our own metaphorical political […]
Pingback
by “Good boy,” and other kinds of complicated sex « Maybe Maimed but Never Harmed
31 Mar 2011 at 18:26
[…] That’s totally cool (and fun), but by your own admission of being “an equal partner,” that’s not really what’s happening. Put another way, the liminal space of “wanting what we don’t want” problematizes dichotomized notions of control to a degree that threatens much of the powerful/powerlessness fantasies intrinsic to most BDSM discourse. The BDSM community, writ large, enjoys either/or thinking to an astonishingly damaging degree—not to mention how disgustingly sexist they are. […]
by Lucy
16 Jun 2011 at 03:01
I’ve encountered a lot of this on one of my blogs. Submissive men have a sexual fantasy of being controlled by women and try to transfer it to the whole society. So what started as a “I like to be a slave to my girlfriend” becomes “all men should be slaves to all women”.
Having dealt with these for a while now, I think I can say they’re just trying to make their fantasy even hotter by contemplating a societal implementation. This, I believe, is what lies behind terrible websites like takeninhand.com and it’s counterpart elisesutton.com. They are trying to justify their private sexual fantasies by making that particular lifestyle the “right” one for everyone to live. And then they go into attempts to persuade people that this lifestyle is best for everyone. Their problem is they mistake and blur their personal fantasies with political activism.
I have written critically about this on my hubpages account and I’ve gotten into big arguments with people thinking I was attacking female supremacy as a lifestyle for individuals when I was actually attacking female supremacy as an imposed societal rule as some where suggesting.
Let’s not forget, if something like giving head is seen as submissive to you, then that is your personal perception. You are perfectly right to refuse it on those grounds but you should know that for many others it might not feel submissive at all. Therefore you are being unfair if you assume everyone feels the way you do and label oral sex as an act of submission and anyone who does that, is therefore surrendering their autonomy. Speak for yourself, feel for yourself and let others do the same.
by Clarence
22 Nov 2011 at 19:44
it’s too bad she will never see this, but Lucy’s perceptions match my own. It seems the majority (not all, obviously MayMay) of submissive male bloggers who mention female supremacy seem to want to take it beyond a personal lifestyle/sexual kink choice and are convinced it would be better for the world as a whole.
And like Lucy says, this seems to apply to both male subs/female dominants and female subs/male dominants.
Now, while I believe in equal rights, I do not believe in equal sexual psychology between group “female” and group “male”. I do believe that -even accounting for societal influences – more women inherently desire submission than men and so most representations in BDSM will and would always be primarily hetero male/ sub female – the fact is, as you do an excellent job of pointing out , that our societal narratives and narratives within the BDSM community are often so fucked up that this effect and prejudices such as Your Kink is Not Ok are excarbated. I hope that someday soon we can change that.