Ethical/moral/political limits?

This is another one of my 'inspired by' thread. This time, inspired by Marquis's thread and Netzach's comments about the BBC fetish.

I have been approached once by a black sub man who wanted to bottom for me, and who made it clear that he was getting off on being topped by a white woman. He also specified that scenes playing on the black slave/white master theme were a big turn on for him. I declined to play with him. The reason being that I couldn't reconciliate that with my politics and my ethics. I couldn't see myself reproducing, even just in play, the black slave/white master dynamic. Too close to reality.

Also, one of my hard-limit is that I don't engage in 'forced feminization' humiliation scenes. I'll happily put a boy in sexy lingerie, but I'll do it because I find it hot. However, being a woman (and yes, maybe a tad feminist) I'm really not keen on the idea that wearing stuff I wear and performing feminine should be 'humiliating' for a man. Same for 'forced het/bi/gay' humiliation scenes. I'm happy to facilitate some boy-on-boy action for instance, and if the boy I'm doing it for is 'straight', I'll probably tease him for how hot he's getting sucking on that cock and will play on his straight/masculinity anxieties. But I won't 'humiliate' him for 'being gay'. Again, being queer myself, I'm not exactly OK with the idea that being queer should be humiliating.

I have however called women 'dirty horny bitch' and other variations on that theme more than once, usually when said dirty horny bitch is making me really hot. So, not really being consistent with my politics here. I blame it on my cock.

My question: Do you have any ethical/moral/political limits in terms of your BDSM? And if/when you play in public, are there scenes that you wouldn't do for ethical/moral/political reasons (i'm thinking for instance of nazi/gestapo interrogation/torture scenes, which can be seen as offensive/of very bad taste by some people around)?

You might find the discussion in this thread on similar issues of interest. We are not into the public play scene so I can't really answer on that level based on experience, but I suspect for me I would still do what I felt was OK in private as long as it was a fully consenting scene.

I actually don't have problems with any of those sort of scenarios you suggest if it is something which works for both or all involved. Having done extensive feminist, sexuality and multi-cultural studies, and living in environments which have brought it to a more practical than academic level, I have to agree with most of my lecturers who said often it is what is in the mind of the non-minority person which causes the problem, not that of the minority. For example, if someone is LGBT or black or Asian or white or Muslim or Christian or male or female or any number of other labels which can been included in PC lecturing these days, and they get off on being humiliated in play based on these unchangeable parts of themselves, who am I to sit on my pedestal and tell them I will not participate as it is demeaning to or discriminating against them?

Personally if I were in the position of pyl in that situation I would feel very strongly that the PYL was someone with issues and preaching unnecessarily at me about something which was more their issue than mine, and from that point I would not be interested in playing with them on any terms. Discrimination is about intent, and the mindset behind that intent. IMHO if it is a turn on part of play for the pyl, and maybe also for the PYL or at least possible for them to include it in a useful way, I see no harm whatsoever. Sometimes we can be too sensitive when it is not called for and not sensitive enough when it is really relevant and needed. I find a lot of what comes under the PC umbrella as totally ridiculous these days, even those which could be applied to me for my comfort/protection from supposedly discriminating behaviour.

Catalina

DeservingBitch said:

My question: Do you have any ethical/moral/political limits in terms of your BDSM?

Click to expand...

I don't play casually, and have never been interested in a partnership with someone whose ethics, morals, and political views are ill-matched with my own.

Aside from that overarching "limit", I can't think of a time when I've been asked to fulfill a fantasy or engage in play that I find morally, ethically, or politically repugnant.

I have my own ethical limits on what I'll do to a partner, but these don't have anything to do with humiliation/degradation per se. That's an area of kink that just doesn't interest me.

I have limited experience in terms of real time scenes, but so far I think i almost completely separate my fantasy from the beliefs and principles that define me, although they are at complete odds with one another. For example I find rape and violence repugnant yet on a personal level I find the fantasy of rape/forced sex scene thrilling and a huge turn on.

I would draw the line in terms of choosing a partner though, whether in a D/s or vanilla based relationship. I wouldn't compromise or consider them if they were bigots or racists or held views that were the complete opposite to my core beliefs.

DeservingBitch said:

My question: Do you have any ethical/moral/political limits in terms of your BDSM? And if/when you play in public, are there scenes that you wouldn't do for ethical/moral/political reasons (i'm thinking for instance of nazi/gestapo interrogation/torture scenes, which can be seen as offensive/of very bad taste by some people around)?

Click to expand...

Absolutely. One example would be public leash play. I simply refuse to allow my gal to wear collar and leash in public. Not going to happen. While I am perfectly fine with our M/f relationship, it is not an image I seek to reproduce in public simply because it provides the wrong message insofar as gender equality is concerned. No, I have no problem with other people that do, but I refuse to do so myself.

I have also run lightly into the white Top and black bottom issue, and in discussing the idea of ownership, race came up. It was a non-issue in this particular case, as ownership was not going to occur, but it is germane to this thread to relate that it did come up, and that it was something that pushed the comfort envelope for me.

Insofar as Nazi interrogation scenes are concerned, I don't know that I would have too much trouble with them so long as they were kept to a sort of pulp feel. Yes, it removes some of the punch, but it also removes a great deal of offense. In short, keeping the ideology out of the scene, and just playing up the sneering interrogator with the cheesy accent.

Aside from that, I have numerous ethical/moral/political limits in general. Most people do. SSC/RACK falls under that particular banner. So does "If we break our toys, we can't play with them". I do know what you are saying though, and that would be ethical/moral/political limits beyond the usual. Frankly, the more I think about it, the more I can find that I would not do. Not sure how much of it would be a called a limit, and how much would simply be chalked up to being too tasteless to do though.

ETA: Minx's post did make me think of something else, and that would be scenes that I find ethically/morally/politically repugnant, but I do them anyway, and rape fantasy is the premier example. Rape bothers me at a deep level, but I will still do it at times. Not gonna happen publically though.

catalina_francisco said:

You might find the discussion in this thread on similar issues of interest. We are not into the public play scene so I can't really answer on that level based on experience, but I suspect for me I would still do what I felt was OK in private as long as it was a fully consenting scene.

I actually don't have problems with any of those sort of scenarios you suggest if it is something which works for both or all involved. Having done extensive feminist, sexuality and multi-cultural studies, and living in environments which have brought it to a more practical than academic level, I have to agree with most of my lecturers who said often it is what is in the mind of the non-minority person which causes the problem, not that of the minority. For example, if someone is LGBT or black or Asian or white or Muslim or Christian or male or female or any number of other labels which can been included in PC lecturing these days, and they get off on being humiliated in play based on these unchangeable parts of themselves, who am I to sit on my pedestal and tell them I will not participate as it is demeaning to or discriminating against them?

Personally if I were in the position of pyl in that situation I would feel very strongly that the PYL was someone with issues and preaching unnecessarily at me about something which was more their issue than mine, and from that point I would not be interested in playing with them on any terms. Discrimination is about intent, and the mindset behind that intent. IMHO if it is a turn on part of play for the pyl, and maybe also for the PYL or at least possible for them to include it in a useful way, I see no harm whatsoever. Sometimes we can be too sensitive when it is not called for and not sensitive enough when it is really relevant and needed. I find a lot of what comes under the PC umbrella as totally ridiculous these days, even those which could be applied to me for my comfort/protection from supposedly discriminating behaviour.

Catalina

Click to expand...

I dont see where someone saying, this goes against my beliefs, against what I'm personally comfortable with, is discrimination. So many times it's been said here, "your kink is not my kink, but that's ok". If that statement is true, then it should also hold true that no one.. whether pyl or PYL should participate in a scene that goes against their conscience... either politically or morally... for whatever reason.

Maybe my reading comprehension is off, but I dont pick up that it's something they would do if it were PC to do so, but that they're saying I'll go up to this point, I cant do that and follow my own conscience. No where in there did I pick up that they berated the person asking for it, just that they could not do that.

EmpressFi said:

I dont see where someone saying, this goes against my beliefs, against what I'm personally comfortable with, is discrimination. So many times it's been said here, "your kink is not my kink, but that's ok". If that statement is true, then it should also hold true that no one.. whether pyl or PYL should participate in a scene that goes against their conscience... either politically or morally... for whatever reason.

Maybe my reading comprehension is off, but I dont pick up that it's something they would do if it were PC to do so, but that they're saying I'll go up to this point, I cant do that and follow my own conscience. No where in there did I pick up that they berated the person asking for it, just that they could not do that.

Click to expand...

What I was saying was that say for example F presented me with an Afro American pyl he wanted me to top for his amusement, and that pyl expressed a desire to include and focus mainly on humiliation play based around their colour/race/historical based inequality because it really does it for them...while I have a long history of standing up for racial rights publicly and privately including breaking the law by openly living with an indigenous man, I do not translate that to play if it is going to work for the other person, and for me to jump up and down and start announcing I don't want any part of it because it is morally/ethically wrong just seems a little misguided, judgemental, and to me discriminatory in telling a minority person what should and should not turn them on based on my privileged anglo based perceptions and views in everyday RL. RL and sexual fantasy play are 2 different things.

I am not about to put myself in the position of making another feel bad about their sexuality meter, simply because taken out of the context, and their not consenting and requesting such treatment, it would be abusive. To me it is as minx said, no different to fighting for changes in rape laws to protect survivors and yet participating in rape play, or advocating and actively raising awareness in regard to DV and yet going home at night and being consensually beaten by your PYL or consensually beating your own pyl...you can't always wrap things up so neatly and applying them across the board in the same way in all contexts, and often by doing so you can be offending far more than if you accepted a person's kink and right to play in the way which brings them freedom and joy...sort of like feminists and pro-feminists telling women they cannot and should not be submissive, they cannot be stay at home mothers, they cannot wear make-up, they cannot be feminine because it is offensive and wrong and giving in to the patriarchial ideal.

Catalina

That is your belief.. mine is different. I just couldnt do it, even if it were "just play". There are some things that I just cannot do and wont do. I am the only one my conscience speaks to and I'm the only one who has to answer to it. I should not be forced to go against it just because I dont want to hurt someone else's feelings.

ETA: Why not point someone to another person who shared their kink than force myself to do something I'd LOATHE and hate myself later... just because it was something that turned them one and I didnt want to offend them. I do have the right to say "no, that's something I cannot do" and leave it at that. I can say no. It's all well and good that you have no issues with RPing a rape scene with someone. But someone who DOES shouldnt have to just go along with it just to not offend.

EmpressFi said:

That is your belief.. mine is different. I just couldnt do it, even if it were "just play". There are some things that I just cannot do and wont do. I am the only one my conscience speaks to and I'm the only one who has to answer to it. I should not be forced to go against it just because I dont want to hurt someone else's feelings.

ETA: Why not point someone to another person who shared their kink than force myself to do something I'd LOATHE and hate myself later... just because it was something that turned them one and I didnt want to offend them. I do have the right to say "no, that's something I cannot do" and leave it at that. I can say no.

Click to expand...

I actually didn't say you had to do it if you hated it, unless of course you are under orders, but more so you do not need to confuse reality with fantasy play otherwise we are saying those who are the rapist in rape play could obviously rape anyone, or anyone who enjoys whipping their partner could also go out and whip anyone with glee...RL and play are nt necessarily the same thing or even remotely close.

Catalina

Then I apologize for the misunderstanding in my reading comprehension. I gathered from your post that if I were to refuse someone's request to play in something that went against my conscience, then I was running the risk of making the person feel discriminated against.

I am not about to put myself in the position of making another feel bad about their sexuality meter, simply because taken out of the context, and their not consenting and requesting such treatment, it would be abusive.

Click to expand...

That lead me to believe that you were a proponent of just doing whatever they asked even if it went against my own personal beliefs..

EmpressFi said:

Then I apologize for the misunderstanding in my reading comprehension. I gathered from your post that if I were to refuse someone's request to play in something that went against my conscience, then I was running the risk of making the person feel discriminated against.



That lead me to believe that you were a proponent of just doing whatever they asked even if it went against my own personal beliefs..

Click to expand...

Is OK as these topics often mean we sometimes miss what is actually being said. I do wonder though how we rationalise our decisions. I am not so sure it is 100% correct to think of them as moral/ethical decisions but more so perhaps trigger point decisions. Why I say that is because I do not think those who have problems with race play, but have no issue with SM or rape play are saying it is OK to rape another or judge them based on their race, or even to beat a woman and yet we class it as something not ethical to do because we do not agree with it in RL...that is where I think it gets muddied.

Catalina

DeservingBitch said:

My question: Do you have any ethical/moral/political limits in terms of your BDSM? And if/when you play in public, are there scenes that you wouldn't do for ethical/moral/political reasons (i'm thinking for instance of nazi/gestapo interrogation/torture scenes, which can be seen as offensive/of very bad taste by some people around)?

Click to expand...

I don't think those scenes aren't done because they are uncorrect for whatever reason, but because they are not a turn on or even a turn off. It's a bit like the chicken/egg problem - is it a turn off because its uncorrectness is a major issue or is its uncorrectness a major issue because it's a turn off? As you state, you enjoy certain types of uncorrectness and therefore you do them nevertheless and that you are inconsistent (I bet everyone is). So.. is the uncorrectness not just an excuse, because we are looking for a reason why it's not a turn on?

I'm ok with it based on a lot of what cat said.

I'd also add that playing with a black guy or a latino or asian guy in this way is a complicated morass of political mess. Yeah, he wants to objectify a white chick based on her femaleness (it's always double bonus points if I mention I'm Jewish for some reason) into objectifying him based on his race. Seems a fair shake in some ways.

I also think that thinking things is fine. If you're enacting stuff without actually hurting anyone else and blowing off some of your psychic steam, I think that's a good thing more or less. I don't think I'm replicating the oppression by exploring it. I had a lot of hang ups till I had a black client explain to me "I have to fight these ideas every day and win win win - I want to be safe to fight them and lose for just a little while."

THAT made sense to me, really clicked. And it felt arrogant and cowardly to me, to say "no no, that offends my ability to say I never thought that stuff or even imagined thinking it."

I don't think this is the kind of scene I want to do in public though, I find that there's an obnoxious level of "hey look how offensive I am" when people trot out Nazi regalia to events, it's just gauche to me, not problematic.

Netzach said:

I also think that thinking things is fine. If you're enacting stuff without actually hurting anyone else and blowing off some of your psychic steam, I think that's a good thing more or less. I don't think I'm replicating the oppression by exploring it. I had a lot of hang ups till I had a black client explain to me "I have to fight these ideas every day and win win win - I want to be safe to fight them and lose for just a little while."

THAT made sense to me, really clicked. And it felt arrogant and cowardly to me, to say "no no, that offends my ability to say I never thought that stuff or even imagined thinking it."

Click to expand...

This makes an absurd amount of sense. Nice.

I don't think this is the kind of scene I want to do in public though, I find that there's an obnoxious level of "hey look how offensive I am" when people trot out Nazi regalia to events, it's just gauche to me, not problematic.

Click to expand...

Exactly. In private, whatever floats your boat, but we take risks offending as is. Why add additional reasons to offend in public when they are not necessarily core to the kink being represented? It's like the consensuality argument against whipping your naked submissive in your front yard. The sub may consent to the scene, but the neighbours haven't. Well, at a play party, I consent to seeing other people play, but I don't consent to watching genocidal ideologies (in this case) being spewed about pointlessly.

I probably have limits along these lines. No one has, or I expect will, ever push them on me, so that I find them though.

*chuckles*

.............

Homburg said:

Well, at a play party, I consent to seeing other people play, but I don't consent to watching genocidal ideologies (in this case) being spewed about pointlessly.

Click to expand...

I don't really see how Nazi play is any more "pointless" than age play, or any other kinky fantasy representations of stuff that would be abominable if actually carried out.

On the other hand, I understand that certain images or behaviors are disturbing to people for all kinds of reasons, and why you might want to avoid them. So you cull the guest lists for your own parties carefully, or leave someone else's party if you are disturbed by what's going on. No problem.

JMohegan said:

I don't really see how Nazi play is any more "pointless" than age play, or any other kinky fantasy representations of stuff that would be abominable if actually carried out.

On the other hand, I understand that certain images or behaviors are disturbing to people for all kinds of reasons, and why you might want to avoid them. So you cull the guest lists for your own parties carefully, or leave someone else's party if you are disturbed by what's going on. No problem.

Click to expand...

It's not a moment that makes me want to leave in a huff, it's just one of those things at a party like a really super loud ungagged screamer that makes me go "God, leave your psychodrama at home, asshole" - I don't have to *like* it.

(Although I'd like to work over a really muscular blond in Nazi getup really really really hard sometime - I could do it at home and be OK)

Netzach said:

It's not a moment that makes me want to leave in a huff, it's just one of those things at a party like a really super loud ungagged screamer that makes me go "God, leave your psychodrama at home, asshole" - I don't have to *like* it.

Click to expand...

I know what you mean.

My usual M.O. in response to behavior that I consider "gauche" would be to walk into another room and make jokes about the culprit with my friends.

That is, unless the guy were breaking house rules or pissing off the host - in which case I'd help toss him out.

JMohegan said:

I know what you mean.

My usual M.O. in response to behavior that I consider "gauche" would be to walk into another room and make jokes about the culprit with my friends.

That is, unless the guy were breaking house rules or pissing off the host - in which case I'd help toss him out.

Click to expand...

I might get off watching that.

catalina_francisco said:

I actually don't have problems with any of those sort of scenarios you suggest if it is something which works for both or all involved. Having done extensive feminist, sexuality and multi-cultural studies, and living in environments which have brought it to a more practical than academic level, I have to agree with most of my lecturers who said often it is what is in the mind of the non-minority person which causes the problem, not that of the minority. For example, if someone is LGBT or black or Asian or white or Muslim or Christian or male or female or any number of other labels which can been included in PC lecturing these days, and they get off on being humiliated in play based on these unchangeable parts of themselves, who am I to sit on my pedestal and tell them I will not participate as it is demeaning to or discriminating against them?

Personally if I were in the position of pyl in that situation I would feel very strongly that the PYL was someone with issues and preaching unnecessarily at me about something which was more their issue than mine, and from that point I would not be interested in playing with them on any terms. Discrimination is about intent, and the mindset behind that intent. IMHO if it is a turn on part of play for the pyl, and maybe also for the PYL or at least possible for them to include it in a useful way, I see no harm whatsoever. Sometimes we can be too sensitive when it is not called for and not sensitive enough when it is really relevant and needed. I find a lot of what comes under the PC umbrella as totally ridiculous these days, even those which could be applied to me for my comfort/protection from supposedly discriminating behaviour.

Catalina

Click to expand...

Oh - I totally agree with you that it's not my place to judge what other get off on. I thought I made it clear that those were limits *I* have, and that the reasons for refusing to engage in the kind of scenes I described are all *mine*. For instance, I never suggested to this black guy, or the the numerous guys who were into 'forced feminization' that they are fucked up or whatever for getting off on these things, or that they had the wrong politics or ethics or whatever. What I was trying to express is that my own politics/ethics make it impossible for me to eroticize those things.

I'm also aware that my brain is being selective in the stuff that I can eroticize and not. That's what I was trying to suggest by mentioning that while 'forced feminization' ticks me in the wrong way, calling a woman a dirty horny bitch makes me wet. Which you know, my politics/ethics would normally find reprehensible if it was not in a 'play' context. But that, I'm able to eroticize.

DeservingBitch said:

Oh - I totally agree with you that it's not my place to judge what other get off on. I thought I made it clear that those were limits *I* have, and that the reasons for refusing to engage in the kind of scenes I described are all *mine*. For instance, I never suggested to this black guy, or the the numerous guys who were into 'forced feminization' that they are fucked up or whatever for getting off on these things, or that they had the wrong politics or ethics or whatever. What I was trying to express is that my own politics/ethics make it impossible for me to eroticize those things.

I'm also aware that my brain is being selective in the stuff that I can eroticize and not. That's what I was trying to suggest by mentioning that while 'forced feminization' ticks me in the wrong way, calling a woman a dirty horny bitch makes me wet. Which you know, my politics/ethics would normally find reprehensible if it was not in a 'play' context. But that, I'm able to eroticize.

Click to expand...

I guess my mileage is such that I used to find the whole notion very icky, but with a good partner I respect a bit (I liked that client a lot) I found that it could be a turn on. I think race play is a very contextual turn on for me. I'd pretty much never do it with a bottom unless it was their idea, though, I don't think I have that much of a taste for it. It's one of those interesting boundary-pushing things that I've come up against in my experiences.

My moral/ethical values are what they are and whether it's in play or something else, I won't go against them. That's one of the reasons that I believe choosing your partner well, at least for me, is the smart thing to do. I know we've talked about it here before, but I'm not going to go against my own moral code for anyone. But the person I choose to submit to would never ask me to because it is similar to his moral code.

But my choosing not to do something that is against my own moral code really has nothing whatsoever to do with how the action may affect the person who has asked it of me. It has to do with my own beliefs and my own values. If someone wants you to behave in a way that others would find morally reprehensible but you are okay with in that setting, to use Netz' example, it really isn't their right to judge your choice.

Netzach said:

I don't think I'm replicating the oppression by exploring it. I had a lot of hang ups till I had a black client explain to me "I have to fight these ideas every day and win win win - I want to be safe to fight them and lose for just a little while."

Click to expand...

That's very similar to what that guy was saying to me. And yep, it makes a lot of sense to me. The same way that me bottoming to someone and being called stupid and being asked to do stupid stuff is cool - a lot of my life revolves around me having to constantly prove that I'm brilliant, so it's nice when I'm being given the opportunity to be dumb.

But even if it makes sense to me, I still couldn't do it. White guilt? Maybe.

The force feminization and force bi/gay humiliation play - it's something else. I don't care why someone gets off on it, and i get that it may be coming from the same place as the black guy wanting to do a race scene or me getting off on being called stupid. But there's no way for me to be cool with the idea of humiliating someone for looking/being like me. It's just not my idea of fun.

Hi Beachgurl2 - Catdiver.