I don’t think that we can effectively move forward in tackling issues of sexism, racism, sexuality based intolerances, ableism, and so on, while simultaneously claiming that BDSM is an acceptable reality of sexual expression. I feel like BDSM is where injustice has manifested and been sexualized within the realm of kink. BDSM is the fetishization of power imbalance. How can I argue that power imbalances are not inherent or natural to human beings while simultaneously supporting BDSM as acceptable or harmless? I can’t.
I know I’m going to get shit on for this because anybody who ever expresses a kink critical thought ever on this website is bombarded with hate, but I can’t in good conscience support BDSM.
I’m all for kinky sex. You can be kinky without feitshizing power imbalances and perpetuating the power imbalances that exist in our society in a very real and horrifying way. You can be kinky AND ethical.
{Clarification for those of you who don’t know this: BDSM and kink are not the same thing. They are not interchangeable terms. BDSM is a really fucked up subcategory of kink. Kink is the monolith umbrella for all non-standard sexual play and expression.}
This has given me much to think about. I appreciate your making this point. There’s been something mildly bothering me as of late about BDSM after I started gaining more and more social awareness. This might be an articulation of that exact feeling. I need to think.
I mean for me, I think my BDSM stuff is a way of processing and dealing with the power imbalances that exist in the real world. It’s been repeatedly proven that our fantasy lives are more connected to dealing with stimuli we experience in everyday life, and less connected to what we want the world to look like or a rehearsal of behavior. It’s also for me about having someone whose power over me is entirely based on my desire for them, and often takes the form of “How badly do you want me? If you don’t do X I won’t fuck you, because clearly you don’t want it badly enough.” which is about my consent being respected, in fact it’s about a partner who’s only sexually interested in me if I prove that I want them by doing difficult or uncomfortable things, which is comforting in a society where women are socialized to be passively agreeable and to see sex as a duty within relationships.
For me, also the object of worship is a sort of symbolic opposition to the oppressive forces in the world, a comforting voice of “their judgements are wrong, your world view isn’t absurd, you’re not alone.”
Also I have complicated mommy issues… so that’s a thing.
Your claim that it’s proven that fantasy is a reaction to life rather than a “rehearsal” of behaviour is faulty for a couple of reasons. Fantasy and sexual expression are not the same thing. I may have fantasized about throwing someone in a fire once or twice but I have not done that. Big difference. Furthermore, while it may not be a rehearsal of behaviour or what you would like the world to look like (which it sort of still is, but I’ll come back to that later), it is certainly affecting the world around you when you’re bringing it out of the bedroom and openly discussing it. It perpetuates power imbalances and it perpetuates rape culture. And on top of all of that, we don’t exist in a vacuum. How you react to the world, even through your sexual expression, is going to have the fingerprints of the outside world all over it. I mean, part of the point is that BDSM is not a natural or effective reaction to dealing with power imbalances in everyday life. Actually, bringing power play into the bedroom would only increase stress related to power in every day life because you’re not in any way escaping it, you’re emphasizing it. And finally, if you’re knowingly and unapologetically engaging in activity that perpetuates oppressive ideologies and you continue to do those things and talk about doing those things without apology…. Then you’re obviously okay with openly fetishizing oppression and perpetuating harmful ideologies, which means that you’re okay with a world that looks this way. Otherwise, you would keep it to yourself.
Also, the scenario you explained is not about your consent being respected. It’s about your agency being taken away. “If you don’t do this thing, then I won’t give you what you need.” Within the frame of BDSM, and specifically any dom/sub type of relationship, that’s manipulation. That is the sexualization of power imbalance and it is removing your agency. So, no, it has nothing to do with your consent, because the game is that S/HE has the power to make decisions for you. I’m sure there is some way to play on this tease and denial sort of idea without incorporating BDSM ideology and the dom/sub dichotomy. I’ll have to think on it more.
In the case of worship… You can worship a partner without playing on power roles. You do not need to engage in BDSM to worship someone or to be worshiped.
The idea is that the dynamics of power exchange does not have to be and should not be incorporated into sexual practices because they should not be a part of life at all. If you’re for the liberation of all people, whatever you might label that, then supporting BDSM is entirely counterproductive to your goals because it emphasizes the power dynamic that you would want to liberate people from.
Alright, here’s what really jumped out to me in terms of the rape-yness of what you just said. “if you don’t do this thing, I won’t give you what you need” is absolutely not what’s going on. No one needs sex. If I were to tell a partner “I don’t want to fuck you if you don’t wear a condom” or as a sex worker “I’m not going to fuck you unless you pay me” is not me denying them what they need, having conditions on sexual availability is absolutely every person’s right and suggesting otherwise is disgusting.
The idea that a person shouldn’t be able to put whatever conditions they want on sexual access to their body is rape culture. The idea that a person is ever owed sex is rape culture. The idea that the actual power dynamic of a BDSM relationship is the same as the play power dynamic is also just wrong… I’ve seen so many dom/mes abused by subs, raped by subs that what you just said is incredibly incredibly rape apologist.
Also the idea that the game is always “the dom has the power to make decisions for the sub” is blatantly reductive and false, often times it’s about the sub having agency and choosing to obey. About the sub saying “no, I want you to choose.” Like maybe we’re having a semantic difference here, but like… BDSM to me is not always the consensual non-consent (which is a highly questionable model)
I’ll address your other points later, but that one is just one we really need to discuss.
Except, people do NEED sex and intimacy. And the fact that you could equate my statement to having conditions of sexual availability is just proving that BDSM ideology is rape apology. You’re trying to say that this is fantasy and that it’s about playing a role… Well, then you should be trying to differentiate it from reality, rather than using real and serious problems as an excuse. Absolutely, people do have every right to deny someone sex and they are not wrong for doing so. People NEED sex, but you don’t NEED to give it to them. Nobody is owed sex. Ever. You’re only demonstrating one of my major points. You’re fetishizing consent. That is exactly what you are doing. If the scenario that you explained previously is a legitimate example of conditions of availability, then dom/mes who use safewords are rapists and subs who use safe words are rape victims, and I can make a million other similar claims within BDSM. But it’s not. It’s a fetish. You’re fetishizing rape culture. That is what is happening here.
As to the bit about dom/mes being abused by subs… Yes. I see this a lot too. Mostly I see Dommes being abused by their cis male subs. Because women are still women even in BDSM. I have yet to see how a male sub isn’t just fetishizing a woman in power. I have yet to see that. Ask any professional Domme who isn’t living in la-la land, and she’ll tell you that herself. I don’t see how anything I said about BDSM and power dynamics would contradict that and how that would be rape apology.
“People need sex and intimacy” but if “I’m not going to give you what you need if you don’t do X” as a bad thing implies that them refusing you unconditional sex or intimacy is a bad thing. That’s fucked up
I’m a prodomme, and how are dom/mes who use safewords rapists and subs who use safe words rape victims if I’m correct? That makes zero sense.
I’m saying that it is a roleplay but also that yes there are real people involved, and even if it wasn’t a roleplay, putting limits on the conditions people can put on their sexual availability is rape apologism, putting limits on the conditions people put on their sexual availability even in fantasy is rape apologism.
I’m really sick and feverish, can someone please come and explain this better than I can right now
Also you’re still arguing from compulsory heterosexuality.
Thoughts From The Peacock Angel 