Post-feminism and BDSM

[Cattypuss]

The phrase "to have one's cake and eat it, too" does not derive from Antoinette. That is the famous, "Let them eat cake!" which actually references the burnt remains at the bottom of a bread pan, rather than the dessert.

Actually the story is that Marie Antoinette heard the peasants complaining that they had no bread and suggested they eat brioche instead - and brioche was, at the time, translated into English as its closest equivalent of "cake".

But current thinking is that the story was made up at the time to "frame" her anyhow.

 

[jenniferbaby]

The easiest way for me to deal with the conflict is simply to stop thinking and just feel, to let the sensations wash over me. As long as it feels right, all is well.

I really think this is your answer right here. Of course there are going to be nuances and complications, and turning off your brain to service your heart and body may not always be easy to do. But at the same time, what else can you really ask of yourself besides to follow what feels right? And in a more structured, role-based environment like D/s, following what feels right may actually be easier than in other kinds of relationships because you have some idea of what's "expected" of you.

The other thing i think feminism has done had been to basically suck all the fun and excitement out of the "negotiation" process. Everything is a conversation, everything becomes civil, mature dialog between two adults. Each side TALKS at the negotiation table about what they need\want\expect in a way that honestly feels way to egalitarian and equal for me. i don't want to negotiate as two rational adults. i prefer to "negotiate" between the sheets or on the floor.

There is some truth to this, but I want to add that these "negotiations" can be extremely erotic and liberating and fun. There's nothing like a truly honest conversation about what we expect and want and need out of each other, using the civility on the surface to explore the passion underneath and see it from a different perspective. Politeness and unruly lust definitely have a place beside each other.

I can only listen to what my friends tell me, which is "fuck the little wench hard until
she quits fucking whining."
Otherwise, I'm completely at a loss.

LOL. That is all.

 

[subish2009]

You and I have been on the same page about this before, but this?:

<snip>
A lot of Doms like to wax on about how they would never put up with a disobedient sub\slave but the fact is there are plenty who really have no problem with it. i think part of the rhetoric against it derives from the online crowd. In a virtual world the only way you can control a woman is for her to be obedient and submissive all the time. This just isn't the case when you are talking about face to face interaction. i've had Doms go on and on about how they would never put up with me and i'm impossible and yet is very easy for Daddy. He just ignores most of it and fucks his holes when he feels like it. The rest is just banter, chatter and entertainment.

Yes, exactly. And your larger point about how you can mesh feminism and D/s, but it's up to each individual to figure out how...yes. I think it's probably hard for most people upon first entering this lifestyle, but once you hit your stride, so to speak, it really becomes a non-issue. Or should do so, IMHO.

My husband and I, also, are still working out exactly how D/s we want to be outside the bedroom. Mainly, I think I want something akin to what you have, ataxia.girl, with your Daddy, though much less intense. I want to be able to tantrum, be ignored, and forgiven. I want to be listened to when I behave like an adult, an equal, like someone with a contributing opinion. That may sound like it's asking a lot, but I don't think it is, within our relationship anyway. And I see nothing anti-feminist about it. It's just genuineness. It's having the freedom to have the kind of relationship I want, sexually, romantically, practically.

If anything, my husband is even more of a feminist than I am. He is a firm believer that the sub has the real power in most (or at least our) D/s relationship. He will hurt me and use me and abuse me as much as he wants, but up to the point that I still enjoy it, on some level. He has no interest in our play turning destructive on some deeper level, and so it is up to me, by his thinking, to make it known to him what is causing me pain on an unacceptable, damaging level (whether that be physical or emotional), and it is also up to me to realize that saying no because I'm scared or intimidated is a soft no that he has a right to push. But ultimately, safewords are there for a reason...I've never used mine, but I know I could.

How is that not feminist?

 

[ataxia.girl]

There is some truth to this, but I want to add that these "negotiations" can be extremely erotic and liberating and fun. There's nothing like a truly honest conversation about what we expect and want and need out of each other, using the civility on the surface to explore the passion underneath and see it from a different perspective. Politeness and unruly lust definitely have a place beside each other.

That may be the case but for me it is so much more fucking fun on the floor with a big rough hand around my neck. Yeah titillating talk is nice and can definitely get me tingly but there is simply nothing like being subdued moment by moment with action and words. There's nothing quite like letting the tongue loose to rage at full throttle just to see if he can take it, just to see how he will react.

i feel safe with a man who can take all that and force his cock into His holes despite it. There is simply nothing else like it.

Mmmmm "negotiation"

 

[ataxia.girl]

Yes, exactly. And your larger point about how you can mesh feminism and D/s, but it's up to each individual to figure out how...yes. I think it's probably hard for most people upon first entering this lifestyle, but once you hit your stride, so to speak, it really becomes a non-issue. Or should do so, IMHO.

i totally agree with this sentiment.

i do also think safe words are not a requirement to maintain a feminist viewpoint. It depends on the individual and what they need\want. i like it without safewords so that's where i'm playing it.

 

[rosco rathbone]

The other thing i think feminism has done had been to basically suck all the fun and excitement out of the "negotiation" process. Everything is a conversation, everything becomes civil, mature dialog between two adults. Each side TALKS at the negotiation table about what they need\want\expect in a way that honestly feels way to egalitarian and equal for me. i don't want to negotiate as two rational adults. i prefer to "negotiate" between the sheets or on the floor.

You are pretty smart, considering that you are nothing but a girl.

 

[ataxia.girl]

You are pretty smart, considering that you are nothing but a girl.

Thanks

 

[jenniferbaby]

That may be the case but for me it is so much more fucking fun on the floor with a big rough hand around my neck. Yeah titillating talk is nice and can definitely get me tingly but there is simply nothing like being subdued moment by moment with action and words. There's nothing quite like letting the tongue loose to rage at full throttle just to see if he can take it, just to see how he will react.

i feel safe with a man who can take all that and force his cock into His holes despite it. There is simply nothing else like it.

Mmmmm "negotiation"

I admit, most of my D/s experience is word-based because of the distance between myself and my partner. I also have a wordy personality and like talking things out and putting things into words. I'm also rather new to this and words have been my main vehicle for discovery. For these reasons, I put a lot of stock into negotiation discussions and find them essential to any kind of play.

I'm also very agreeable and easy-going (for the most part anyway--I'm sure there are some who would disagree with me from time to time ). And when in the presence of a dominant partner, I may get cheeky at times, but there's very little antagonism or resistance in me. So I care less about whether or not a man can take what I dish out at him and more about whether or not we're compatible partners in as many ways as possible.

Being forced to the floor and fucked in all holes sounds nice though. I could use that about now, in fact...

 

[ataxia.girl]

I admit, most of my D/s experience is word-based because of the distance between myself and my partner. I also have a wordy personality and like talking things out and putting things into words. I'm also rather new to this and words have been my main vehicle for discovery. For these reasons, I put a lot of stock into negotiation discussions and find them essential to any kind of play.

I'm also very agreeable and easy-going (for the most part anyway--I'm sure there are some who would disagree with me from time to time ). And when in the presence of a dominant partner, I may get cheeky at times, but there's very little antagonism or resistance in me. So I care less about whether or not a man can take what I dish out at him and more about whether or not we're compatible partners in as many ways as possible.

Being forced to the floor and fucked in all holes sounds nice though. I could use that about now, in fact...

This is basically exactly what i mean by the sizable, perhaps even majority, of participants in forums like this one being mostly online or long distance. Because they are such a huge group they often set the tone for the debate and define the terms. i don't necessarily think there is anything wrong with this. i was an online only player for a long time before i ever took it to the next level.

As for being wordy i'm right there with you, in fact i used think i preferred dialog over anything else. Daddy however doesn't really play that way. i intellectualize things as a way to avoid going to scary emotional places. It SEEMS like i am but i'm really not because i'm distracting and busying myself with all the explaining and negotiating. Daddy makes me relate on an emotional level. When i do all my wordy stuff he just won't engage with it. He always just comes back with a kiss or a hug or reassures me he loves me. It used to make me absolutely crazy but now i understand. He can be very profound when he cares to but he remains a man of few words.

i've said a few times that because my relationship with Daddy is long distance and i am not married to him that actually gives us quite a bit of freedom to explore a different relationship dynamic. There are no kids or mortgages or taxes to worry about. i can yell at him or throw water on him but i can't really spend all his money or ruin his life if i get out of line. Our lives intersect in this nice little safe compartment where we can explore a more primal way of being without really taking all the practicalities of life into consideration to a large degree. Sure sometimes they intrude but not like they would say when you are married to your Dominant.

In that way i skew the dialog myself. i can appear all extreme and edgy but lets be honest. Its one week a month, nights only, in a hotel room. The stuff we do in that room is freaky fun but its not edgy in the same way a full time co-habitating M/s relationship is even if the stuff they got up to was less edgy\extreme\taboo\whatever than some of the stuff Daddy engages in with me.

 

[subish2009]

This is basically exactly what i mean by the sizable, perhaps even majority, of participants in forums like this one being mostly online or long distance. Because they are such a huge group they often set the tone for the debate and define the terms. i don't necessarily think there is anything wrong with this. i was an online only player for a long time before i ever took it to the next level.

As for being wordy i'm right there with you, in fact i used think i preferred dialog over anything else. Daddy however doesn't really play that way. i intellectualize things as a way to avoid going to scary emotional places. It SEEMS like i am but i'm really not because i'm distracting and busying myself with all the explaining and negotiating. Daddy makes me relate on an emotional level. When i do all my wordy stuff he just won't engage with it. He always just comes back with a kiss or a hug or reassures me he loves me. It used to make me absolutely crazy but now i understand. He can be very profound when he cares to but he remains a man of few words.

i've said a few times that because my relationship with Daddy is long distance and i am not married to him that actually gives us quite a bit of freedom to explore a different relationship dynamic. There are no kids or mortgages or taxes to worry about. i can yell at him or throw water on him but i can't really spend all his money or ruin his life if i get out of line. Our lives intersect in this nice little safe compartment where we can explore a more primal way of being without really taking all the practicalities of life into consideration to a large degree. Sure sometimes they intrude but not like they would say when you are married to your Dominant.

In that way i skew the dialog myself. i can appear all extreme and edgy but lets be honest. Its one week a month, nights only, in a hotel room. The stuff we do in that room is freaky fun but its not edgy in the same way a full time co-habitating M/s relationship is even if the stuff they got up to was less edgy\extreme\taboo\whatever than some of the stuff Daddy engages in with me.

I get that. I think that's how my online Dom and I would be if we had the opportunity to be together like that in r/l. Well...not quite how you are with your Daddy, but the part about not having to deal with the mortgage, etc...I totally see how that can free one up to live more deeply in the D/s dynamic than may be possible with one's spouse. I'm glad to hear someone gets to have that experience because many of us never will...

 

[ataxia.girl]

I get that. I think that's how my online Dom and I would be if we had the opportunity to be together like that in r/l. Well...not quite how you are with your Daddy, but the part about not having to deal with the mortgage, etc...I totally see how that can free one up to live more deeply in the D/s dynamic than may be possible with one's spouse. I'm glad to hear someone gets to have that experience because many of us never will...

Well in very unsubbish fashion i informed my husband i reserved the right to have other relationships. Our marriage has an unusual foundation for this day and age but even so it was extremely scary to get to that point. That was almost 2 years ago. These days we are openly non-monogamous and "don't tell unless asked" which neither of us ever has any intention of doing.

 

[Samuelx]

Easily.

Feminism gave me the permission to do what I want to do, and a big part of what I want to do involves being treated like shit in the bedroom.

But I'm sure other people here (wink wink) will be more than happy to talk about this topic in much more depth than I have the patience for right now [/QUOTE


I meet a lot of women who call themselves feminists in BDSM circles....and many of them are cops, lawyers and judges. Most women with a sort of "sub" job ( waitress, secretary, etc) are dommes in bed.

 

[BossySon21a]

Morality, feminism, and whatnot aside, I don't like the idea of being hauled in for assault when playing with other women. I was just reading a thing where Christopher Hitchens assumes you can only laugh at certain things because you want to be cool, not because you may actually think they're funny. This seems a lot like the assumption that you would only refuse to punch someone because you're not hardcore - when in fact, you may just be risk-averse when it comes to the law. I know I am.

That's very smart. The law considers even consensual 'violence' questionable. Like it or not, that has to be considered. You can get into deep trouble with 'games' that go too far, even with total consensuality.

 

[BossySon21a]

The surprised blinking never gets old.

We can talk technique all day long, and I'm all about it. But, at the end of the day, I know my limits, and I don't want to chase them in an arena like this. I mean, honestly, I've had my Rocky moment. I've had that experience where I was in the mix with someone and hit them so hard that blood, snot, and sweat sprayed all over me. Not sexy. No desire to replicate said experience in scene. Or out of scene. My mouth was open. Do not want.

Maybe I'm weird, or just chicken, I dunno.

Nope. You're someone who understands his limits and why they're limits. Very important, and very good reasons.

 

[Homburg]

Nope. You're someone who understands his limits and why they're limits. Very important, and very good reasons.

Thanks, I appreciate this comment.

 

[BossySon21a]

which is sexism. the very definition of sexism is being treated differently on the basis of gender.

No, because the sexes are different, in ways sufficiently consistant to be generalized. It's likely that society will always treat men and women differently. The question is which of those different treatments are reasonable and which are not, and in the case of the later, what to do about it.

Not all problems have solutions.

 

[BossySon21a]

First of all, let me just say generally in this thread that feminsm and women's studies are not synonymous.

No...but they're converging.

There's feminism as a social movement, and feminism as an organized political and social force, and they aren't the same thing either. These days, the later is both highly radicalized to the point that they've alienated many people of both sexes who might otherwise be sympathetic, and tied themselves into theoretical knots in the process (no pun intended in context of this thread).

It isn't an accident that the current-day perception of the word 'feminist' is largely negative.

 

[ZRT]

No...but they're converging.

There's feminism as a social movement, and feminism as an organized political and social force, and they aren't the same thing either. These days, the later is both highly radicalized to the point that they've alienated many people of both sexes who might otherwise be sympathetic, and tied themselves into theoretical knots in the process.

It isn't an accident that the current-day perception of the word 'feminist' is largely negative.

I tend to think of that as political feminism, and as having diverged the way political organizations tend to do, going from revolutionary activist movements to being part of the system.

 

[BossySon21a]

The other thing i think feminism has done had been to basically suck all the fun and excitement out of the "negotiation" process.

As a side-effect of the radicalization of feminism, the public perception has grown, with some foundation, of feminists as shrill kill-joys. Don't flirt, don't look, don't try to be noticed, don't be natural, don't be yourself. This in turn has bred resentment.

This is an oversimplification, of course, but the fact of the perception is important. The first thing that the word 'feminism' brings to mind in the public perception now isn't 'equality' or 'fairness' anymore. The word tends to bring to mind now shrill obsessiveness, simultaneously hostile and fixated on trivia.

An example from a few years ago:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/wnba/2003-07-21-bird-no-bet_x.htm

The bet may or may not have been a good idea, but the reaction to it was nonsense and exemplified the whole problem.

 

[where]

No, because the sexes are different, in ways sufficiently consistant to be generalized. It's likely that society will always treat men and women differently. The question is which of those different treatments are reasonable and which are not, and in the case of the later, what to do about it.

Not all problems have solutions.

my definition of sexism in terms of sex discrimination still stands. If someone gets differential treatment based on gender for something which is non-gender specific like wages, then it's sexism, it's discriminatory and it's wrong.

obviously there are gender differences, but there are also many commonalities and work and ability to do a job are part of the commonalities men and women share and upon which gender has no place.

 

[JMohegan]

No...but they're converging.

There's feminism as a social movement, and feminism as an organized political and social force, and they aren't the same thing either. These days, the later is both highly radicalized to the point that they've alienated many people of both sexes who might otherwise be sympathetic, and tied themselves into theoretical knots in the process (no pun intended in context of this thread).

It isn't an accident that the current-day perception of the word 'feminist' is largely negative.

Of course it's not an accident.

The word feminist is perceived as a pejorative by many because the opponents of feminism were relentless and successful in associating both the term, and the movement, with shrieking militant bitches, as opposed to the legions of non-man-hating, everyday females who stepped out of the home and into the halls of higher education and the corporate, medical, legal, and political worlds - busting through stereotypes, stigmas, and pervasive old boy networks without ever eviscerating a male. Metaphorically or otherwise.

 

[JMohegan]

As a side-effect of the radicalization of feminism, the public perception has grown, with some foundation, of feminists as shrill kill-joys. Don't flirt, don't look, don't try to be noticed, don't be natural, don't be yourself. This in turn has bred resentment.

This is an oversimplification, of course, but the fact of the perception is important. The first thing that the word 'feminism' brings to mind in the public perception now isn't 'equality' or 'fairness' anymore. The word tends to bring to mind now shrill obsessiveness, simultaneously hostile and fixated on trivia.

An example from a few years ago:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/wnba/2003-07-21-bird-no-bet_x.htm

The bet may or may not have been a good idea, but the reaction to it was nonsense and exemplified the whole problem.

If she lost, she faced public humiliation through on-air spanking, and if she won, he had to buy tickets to watch women's basketball? Have I got that right?

I don't think you have to be have to hardcore to see what's wrong with that picture. Jesus Christ.

 

[where]

Of course it's not an accident.

The word feminist is perceived as a pejorative by many because the opponents of feminism were relentless and successful in associating both the term, and the movement, with shrieking militant bitches, as opposed to the legions of non-man-hating, everyday females who stepped out of the home and into the halls of higher education and the corporate, medical, legal, and political worlds - busting through stereotypes, stigmas, and pervasive old boy networks without ever eviscerating a male. Metaphorically or otherwise.

Word.

it's worth also pointing out that there is also feminism as an academic pardigm which tends to look at gender issues including those related to men. Given the increasing interest in emergent and existing masculinities which feminism has exposed, I think it's only a matter of time before we start seeing 'andronism' (or somesuch name) becoming distinct and mainstream from female based gender studies.

I would think once we get to the point we can talk about the many differing masculinities, we can then also talk more easily about the differing femininities which would include the notion of women choosing to take on submissive roles or using their sexuality to wield a form of power.


Disclaimer: I'm very hung over so this might be gibberish.

 

[Netzach]

If she lost, she faced public humiliation through on-air spanking, and if she won, he had to buy tickets to watch women's basketball? Have I got that right?

I don't think you have to be have to hardcore to see what's wrong with that picture. Jesus Christ.

I would have liked to see the Kobe sucks my dick on air challenge.

Where's everyone's sense of humor now?

 

[Netzach]

Can someone explain to me how mainstream anti-genital-mutilation, anti-maquiladora, gee why is there only pink shit for my daughter to buy feminism is highly radicalized and dangerous to men everywhere? I've certainly got my issues with it, but mainly my issues are that we're spending way too much time discussing superficial shit like "is makeup bad" while most of the world's illiterate are women.

If anything, it's anything BUT radical. It would be radical to examine how you transmit messages to your daughter and why, to examine how every single person is affected by the way we deal with gender, and how you yourself might be part of the puzzle, not leave things at "Vogue magazine made my daughter anorexic!" The relationship of mainstream feminism to the beauty industry and the justified but extremely limiting laying of blame solely THERE is an example of how badly radicalization is needed, a bigger leap that calls the underlying stuff into question.

Underlying stuff like, why do so many girls and now boys as well, in their teens feel the desire to disappear physically? Is this just a problem with consumer ideals or is this a manifestation of how out of control they must feel in this culture? Do their parents feel more in control or do they just medicate the same problem differently? It crawls away from gender and pink barbie when you really look at the ugly stuff.