I get incredibly offended when people tell me my BDSM activities come from a warped and wrong view of gender...especially when it's the strongest feminists in the world who are my partners.

There are so many freaking misconceptions of BDSM.

BDSM:
1) Emphasizes the ability of everyone to give and revoke consent at ANY time. If you aren't enjoying it (dom included), you can call red and it will be respected immediately. That's something patriarchy does NOT encourage. Even in non-BDSM relationships now, I use safewords.
2) Wasn't even developed in the whole heterosexual male-dominant female-submissive dichotomy. It was developed as we know it by WWII gay soldiers in the leather culture with contributions by a few lesbian oriented groups.
3) Is a diverse group of people. You know, a lot of us in the BDSM community AREN'T hetero couples. There are gay couples, lesbian couples, and a spectrum of relationships in which most of the critiques about it being a tool of men to oppress women can't even apply.
4) Submissive women aren't the majority. There are some, yes. But the vast majority are males wanting to be in a submissive position to women.
5) There are a very large number of switches. VERY large. Most people do not stick to one person being dominant over another they can switch roles as they please.

Good point on #5!

I just struggle with critiques of BDSM that assume the bottom is always a woman and the top is always a man at all times.

And BDSM is so just not about tying people up and hitting people. It's about a subtle psychological exchange.

Great post.

I agree. Some people like to say that they're talking about "theory" and it's not personal, but the most I can say to that is "Points for trying!"... shaming a practice without shaming the practitioners, as somebody claimed to be seeking to do on the "Roller Coaster Rides" post, works better in theory than it does in practice because we're talking about something that real people--real women... other people, too, but certainly including women--do.

More to the point, in some cases, we're talking about things that real women are. Some of us like BDSM, but some of us are submissive or masochistic. You can't shame a practice that's at the core of someone without shaming them.

I think what you're saying makes sense in theory, but I have known far too many men who prefer submissive girlfriends in the BDSM sense and that *is* replicated in the way they treat other women in their lives (or their girlfriend in other aspects of the relationship).

Certainly, that doesn't apply in every situation, or even in most of them... I completely agree with your statement that "individuals and their unique circumstances can't be used as a template for everyone else". But, I am in general not comfortable with saying that our sex lives are ever completely detached from other parts of our selves. I definitely don't think there's a simple causal relationship that "a woman liking to be spanked is sending the message to her boyfriend that it's okay to hit women" but I think there are some complex things going on in any kind of sexual relationship, and those need to be explored - seriously and directly, in our personal lives as well as in abstract theoretical discussions. (And sadly, the fact that many people in this society *do* view women and men as monolithic groups means that many individuals will probably carry that into the bedroom.)

This post = yes.

I've got submissive tendencies. And I happen to like it, on occasion, when my partner calls me "degrading" names. But, on the other hand, I don't wear makeup or high heels, so I guess I'm just perpetually hanging out, waiting for my arraignment with the feminist judge, jury, and executioner.

I'm frustrated by these mainstream feminist shitstorms about the patriarchal implications of women liking or doing X, Y, or Z. This ceaseless finger-pointing and forced-polite intoning is distracting us from more important shortcomings, like our tendency to veer into self-involved, racist, transphobic, disability-invisibilizing discourse whenever possible, our lack of a kickass feminist recipe-sharing website, and a dearth of cute cat pictures. You know, the stuff I care about. The stuff that really matters.

In all seriousness, I do think we devote too much time to very abstract notions of how fucking this or wearing that or sucking those will facilitate our society's irreverent jaunt towards patriarchal hell in a hand-basket, and not enough time considering the very concrete damage we can do as feminists and wannabe allies. High heels and getting spanked aren't the tip of the iceberg; they're the tail end. Yes, I like it when my partner calls me a slut in bed. No, I do not give a shit if that contributes in some imperceptible way to the patriarchal pecking order. There are much, much scarier parts inside of me that I'd prefer to gawk nervously at. Like how I'm more afraid of passing a tall gangly black man at night than an Urban Outfitters-clad white hipster dude. Like how if you ask me what issues women with disabilities are facing I'll sputter "Um. Inaccessible buildings? Desexualization?" and trail away weakly. Like how I can derail a trans-centric thread with my proud cisgendered complaints of how those other cis idiots derail a trans-centric thread. Like how I've told someone before, in a non-kink situation, that I was okay with having sex when I really wasn't. Those are my "internalizing your shitty society" demons, and they hurt real live people. What are yours? Taking sexy photos, getting chained up to your bed and having your nipples slapped? Really? Really? That's all you got? What are you, Mother Theresa?

At some point, it becomes more useful to pick your inner battles and fight those instead. As generally privileged feminists we need all the self-critical shaming we can get, and here we are wasting it on child's play. BDSM? Screw BDSM, let's talk race, people! Let's talk community-building (or lack thereof)! Let's talk cute cat photos! Let's uproot that anchor and move the hell on!

(Disclaimer: please, no one tell me to get my own blog or I'll tell you to get your own comments section.)

Why yes, I am commenting drunk at 7:45am, what's it to you.

Question: Does something like using cheap handcuffs, with no violence or degrading talk, count as BDSM?

I have submissive tendencies, but have also experimented with dominating my ex-boyfriend. I tied him up with his own belt, held him down, talked dirty and made him do what I wanted him to do. It was all in good fun. Does this mean that his submissive role-playing encouraged me to then go out and dominate every man I see? Obviously not or I would earn a lot more money than I do.

I think it's sexist to attempt to control a woman's sex life by shaming her for her submissive sexual desires. Sometimes, even women can contribute to the patriarchal system they claim they are against, because they want to imprint their brand of feminism on other women.

Also, as already mentioned by other commenters, bdsm is a sexual practice that can happen between gay, lesbian, and transgendered couples, too. What does one lesbian dominating another have to do with patriarchy? Bdsm is a sexual practice and should not be associated with oppression or deviant/criminal behaviors. It would be like saying blowjobs are a part of the partriarchy's evil plan to rule over women.

I actually think that vanilla sex can be much more patriarchal and oppressive than bdsm. I think back to when I was 19 and dated a much older man who was abusive to me. All of our sex was hetero-vanilla, missionary-style and the only way I ever came with him was by getting myself off after all his grunting and sweating was over and he fell asleep. We had traditional sex and then he was abusive to me. Does that mean that I can attempt to correlate bad vanilla sex with domestic violence? If so, I'm all for it. If we're going to fabricate causal relationships between sex and oppression, I would much rather argue that we should try to eliminate sexual practices that do not lead to female orgasms.

If anyone is going to attempt to make a comparison between me getting a few spankings and rape culture, I would like to see some actual research that shows there is a direct correlation between bdsm and domestic violence. I want to see factual evidence of a connection or else I am going to say that the argument is biased and irrelevant.

Are there a few bad apples in the bdsm community? I'm sure there are, but that is true of any group. It's easy to make an emotionally colored argument against a sexual practice that some people may find offensive, but it's a lot harder to draw any legitimate conclusions.

I would like to add that BDSM is not a production of power but a utilization of power within a relationship where the people involved, be they a couple or poly gay straight trans, etc etc, are in agreement to the terms and conditions to their play. For instance, whether the roles extend outside the bedroom or whether they are kept clearly withing the parameters of their safe zones, whether they choose to wear a collar or some symbolic jewelry of their roles. These things are highly individualized as the article states.

I actually think that vanilla sex can be much more patriarchal and oppressive than bdsm. ...If we're going to fabricate causal relationships between sex and oppression, I would much rather argue that we should try to eliminate sexual practices that do not lead to female orgasms.

Seriously.

As a queer woman who is mostly dominant in bed, I've encountered many (_many_) men who prefer to be "submissive" -- and in most cases, their idea of submission involves (not limited to) doing things to please their female partner and bring her to orgasm the way she likes it.

It's yet another case of Patriarchy Hurts Men, Too: the healthy desire on the part of a man to want to please his partner requires the psychological "space" and negotiations of a bdsm context.

It's enough to make a girl (who likes to sometimes be with men) want to go kinky.

If you read the last lines of my post, you’ll see I have no problem asking questions about the roots and consequences of BDSM. I do, however, have a problem with forming causal relationships between the private actions of a few and the subjugation of an entire gender.

For one, I want to know what exactly you think goes on during BDSM (specifically woman-submissive situations, because these seem to be the situations you’re so angry about). Do you think there’s some big confederation of women who LOVE to get cut, brutally beat or forcibly penetrated? If so, you have completely misunderstood what this whole BDSM conversation has been about.

Also, the idea that BDSM practices reinforce the patriarchy in general is confounded by the fact that they are widely practiced by people all over the gender spectrum – obviously they are not just perpetuated by heterosexual males looking to abuse women, or heterosexual females looking to get dominated. And judging from what can be gathered here on feministing and elsewhere, it seems like female-dom is more prevalent in what would normally be identified as heterosexual encounters. Since gendered-roles are so variable, the individual component seems to be much more important than patriarchal gender norms.

Finally, I take issue with this:
“…your selfish need to get off condemns her and us to another cycle of inane discourse on whether any woman owns the right to use violence to get off. And, in case you are wondering, you do not.”

The language here seems to frame individual sexuality as a matter of public safety. Women’s sexuality has been seen as public property for so long, that to condemning anyone for seeking personal sexual satisfaction is a much, much bigger adherence to patriarchy than anything that goes on between consenting adults. Maybe if society encouraged women to seek personal sexual satisfaction, then we could begin to question the social constructs around BDSM. But until then, no woman should be shamed for finding what fulfills her sexually.

If you read the last lines of my post, you’ll see I have no problem asking questions about the roots and consequences of BDSM. I do, however, have a problem with forming causal relationships between the private actions of a few and the subjugation of an entire gender.

For one, I want to know what exactly you think goes on during BDSM (specifically woman-submissive situations, because these seem to be the situations you’re so angry about). Do you think there’s some big confederation of women who LOVE to get cut, brutally beat or forcibly penetrated? If so, you have completely misunderstood what this whole BDSM conversation has been about.

Also, the idea that BDSM practices reinforce the patriarchy in general is confounded by the fact that they are widely practiced by people all over the gender spectrum – obviously they are not just perpetuated by heterosexual males looking to abuse women, or heterosexual females looking to get dominated. And judging from what can be gathered here on feministing and elsewhere, it seems like female-dom is more prevalent in what would normally be identified as heterosexual encounters. Since gendered-roles are so variable, the individual component seems to be much more important than patriarchal gender norms.

Finally, I take issue with this:
“…your selfish need to get off condemns her and us to another cycle of inane discourse on whether any woman owns the right to use violence to get off. And, in case you are wondering, you do not.”

The language here seems to frame individual sexuality as a matter of public safety. Women’s sexuality has been seen as public property for so long, that to condemning anyone for seeking personal sexual satisfaction is a much, much bigger adherence to patriarchy than anything that goes on between contenting adults. Maybe if society encouraged women to seek personal sexual satisfaction, then we could begin to question the social constructs around BDSM. But until then, no woman should be shamed for finding what fulfills her sexually.

I'm a straight woman and I've felt titillated by fantasies of acting as a submissive ever since I was a very young girl - rape fantasies, which moved onto gang rapes, and gang bangs.

Just because I enjoy this with a mutually consenting adult male, doesn't mean I actually want to raped in the true meaning of the term.

I have complete control over my submission fantasy, or in real life being play-acted. And it's completely irrelevant to the feminist cause going on outside the bedroom because sexual fetishes are just that - they're just fetishes.

A person who has a foot fetish doesn't degrade people's feet - it's just a fetish and it's confined to the bedroom. It doesn't DEFINE your entire personhood, it's just a fetish.

I have an absent father, and always will, so I do have a major stumbling block in terms of my most important male relationship. This may likely be one of the root causes of this masochistic/submissive fantasy/preference in the bedroom.

Fortunately, it is just a bedroom fetish, so it's very safe for us to play out our roles, fantasies, and fetishes in our bedrooms, as playful and curious expressions of our perplexing and complex sexualities.

Well luckily I have neither attachment issues nor a high tolerance for patronizing crap. So how about you try that explanation out on me?

Oh, and you should probably try not to hurt women, it tends to be more effective than not trying.

No one else has asked you any questions either, I thought you wanted to "discuss why what happens in bedrooms in neither purely sexual nor acceptable." I also thought you said you were going to provide some answers rather than just incredibly biased and leading questions.

Why do you find it easier to embrace someone sexualizing severe personal issues and projecting them onto their sexual identity in such a way as to get great sexual pleasure from getting raped?

Easier than what? And I don't embrace sexualizing severe personal issues, what I embrace is the right of women to define their own sexualities. That's also what I want to protect and condone. No one is talking about getting sexual pleasure from rape except you.

As far as your choice of language goes I wasn't making any assumptions, merely pointing out a fact. "Not trying" to do something is not nearly as effective a means of preventing it as trying not to do the same thing. Actively trying not to harm women strikes me as much more revolutionary than simply not trying to harm them.

In terms of "addressing women who actually think rape is a sex act," I'm not sure what to tell you other than to reiterate that no one here has equated the two except you. If you are talking about women whose only sexual experiences have been abusive and so they do not know anything else, of course that is horrific and heartbreaking. But that is not what BDSM is and it is not what this post is discussing. In my honest opinion, conflating the two is offensive and minimizes the real pain of sexual assault.