RE: BDSM and Feminism (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

Delvin -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/1/2005 9:00:54 AM)

My apologies for posting back to back, but re-reading I wanted to make another comment that falls in line with LordOfDiscipline's reply.


Any topic, any "group" seems to fall into this "we are right, you are wrong, listen to us, make it law"...

Moral Majority
BDSM Professionals
etc (the list of "groups" are staggering)

O/one should always becareful when saying, "My way is the right way, your way needs to be changed".

D



thetammyjo -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/1/2005 10:10:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KittenWithaTwist

I guess my question here is: How do you reconcile your BDSM with any thoughts you have on women's rights? Also, if you are a female dominant who owns male submissives, do you feel that that has anything to do with possible political/feminist motivations, such as, for instance, putting a man in an assumed "woman's" place?



I wrote an article on being a dominant and being a feminist that was published in 1997 (was it?). I'm not going to repeat it here but I will tell you that some people who claim to be feminists are really just interested in controling other women's sexuality, probably for the same reasons other groups have been interested in doing so: power or fear.

I heard that I was only dominant because its what my men wanted me to be. *laughing so hard I can hardly sit upright*

My point is that the core of feminist beliefs -- that women should have the same opportunities as men cause they are all human beings first and foremost -- has been interpreted many ways. Some of these ways want to bash any type of sexuality they don't understand.

There are two good books ("Coming to Power" and "The Second Coming") that addressed the issue. You might be able to find these in used book stores. They are primarily focus on the issues as they played out in the lesbian communities of the 1970s and 1980s.

You are not alone in how you feel, KittenWithaTwist, nor are you alone in being targeted. Just remember that you could just as easily be targeted by other philosophical and political groups and that just become some so-called feminists attack you does not mean that they represent all feminism or all feminists.



thetammyjo -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/1/2005 10:13:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Padriag

But there's another problem with feminism I often see, and its exactly the reason we have this thread. As women, you really ought to be concerned with it. The problem is this. Feminism wants women to be free.... so long as its free to be what feminism defines you should be. Contradict the party line and you find that "freedom" quickly evaporates and some of those hateful feminist will just as quickly attack you as the men they blame for all the world's evils. That's not freedom folks, you've merely traded one master for another.



What party line?

Feminism is a broad sociopolitical movement that has many different branches.



thetammyjo -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/1/2005 10:19:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: night101owl

I am a feminist, and I find the movement to still be relevant. In the U.S., reproductive rights are still under attack, rape victims are still being blamed, and gender still has a huge impact on the practical choices available to us. On a global scale, women are still beaten, mutilated, and murdered for being women. It's important.

At the same time, I believe that women's sexual choices should be given respect. My ability to analzye what I'm doing and why I'm doing it should not be second-guessed, just because they aren't the choices someone else might make. There's a lot of debate within the feminist movement around this issue.

I think that the confusion in the livejournal post comes from the fact that, for many women, some of the stuff in BDSM is triggering of real abuse and real sexism. In an way, BDSMers are playing the cultural trauma when they indulge in gender-based roles, much the same way they're playing with cultural trauma if they do a nazi scene. Yes, it is possible for consenting adults to go to that space without imposing the real oppression associated with those images. At the same time, they can't expect just anyone who sees it to be cool with it.


I think you've said this very, very well, night101owl.

As another feminist, I agree with your ideas.

This is just one reason why I've done a lot of education about BDSM to the general public. If people do not have information, they can only see the world and others through their eyes.

For example one of my sisters dated and then married an abusive SOB -- sometimes after he'd rape and beat (or reverse the order) he'd said "I don't why you crying, its just a little SM, bitch" as a way to excuse himself.

When she found out I was doing BDSM she freaked out -- she assumed I was bottoming and she assumed it was a cover for abuse. What else could she assume given her experiences? So I took the time to educate her. She still doesn't like it but she also accepts that I'm part of this world and that has helped her get a start on dealing with her abuse realistically and personally.



Raphael -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/1/2005 10:26:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thetammyjo

What party line?



I'm not Padraig but I rather imagine he's referring to the Mckinnon/Dworkin axis. They insist that their brand is the only feminism, refusing to debate or acknowledge in any way the likes of Camille Paglia, for instance, and for the most part get away with it.





Lordandmaster -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/1/2005 10:51:54 AM)

Well, I agree that the "McKinnon/Dworkin axis" alienates a lot of people, but it's not fair to consider that the only kind of feminism. Even if they DO consider themselves the only legitimate feminists (and I'm not convinced that they do), that hardly means they really are the only legitimate feminists.

Martha Nussbaum represents a completely different kind of feminism, one I find a lot more attractive (although, alas, she happens to be a very unpleasant person).



Padriag -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/1/2005 11:22:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Raphael

I'm not Padraig but I rather imagine he's referring to the Mckinnon/Dworkin axis. They insist that their brand is the only feminism, refusing to debate or acknowledge in any way the likes of Camille Paglia, for instance, and for the most part get away with it.

I actually didn't have anyone specific in mind when I wrote my posts. When I referred to extreme feminist, just about any such example would probably work. I try to not target specific individuals since my intent isn't to make personal attacks. Its not a person that bothers me, but an incorrect way of thinking. Dworkin, who died this past spring, was controversial to say the least. While I could characterize either her or her politics or the things she wrote, I won't for the simple reason that would too eastily turn this into an Andrea Dworkin debate rather than what it should be, a discussion about the relationship between feminism and this lifestyle in all its various forms.

What I am rather pleasantly surprised with have been the lucid and rational comments as well as the overall discussion. We've had rational adults having a rational adult discussion... not a shouting match nor a political sparting match... its been nice.

As for myself, I still consider myself a "peoplist." I believe in equality before the law and equal opportunity. I believe we ought to be judged as individuals according to our own merits, according to our accomplishments, according to what we actually do. In most cases I could care less about gender or skin color or where you were born or whether your parents are rich. I say most because, well, when it comes to dating I get picky, but thats a whole other kettle of fish. [;)] (Sorry guys, I just don't swing that way LOL ). I don't identify myself as a feminist or as part of any other special group because my interest in fair play isn't for any one group, its for everyone... hence a "peoplist." I don't believe I'm alone in that, I think there are a growing number of people who share that feeling.

Women's rights was ultimately about two things... free choice for women to choose their own lifestyles and freedom of social mobility, that is having the same opportunity to rise in social status as others. For the most part, and with increasinly rare exceptions, women have that in the US and many other industrialized nations. Time and old age will likely do the rest at this point. What bothers me about extreme feminists is their apparent desire to eradicate any remnant of the past social order or the culture that has evolved from it... from how we live to how we talk to even how we have sex (the argument that if the man pursues or is aggressive in any way, that somehow equates to rape, which is an extremist view to say the very least). Such extremist seem to give little thought or regard to the impact their proposed changes would have on society (or the resultant loss of social cohesion which could very literally topple entire nations). Nor do they seem much concerned with the fact not all women share their goals... and worse they tend to look at women who don't share those goals as being naive or ignorant in need of being "properly" educated and enlightened. Tyranny in any form, whether its the tyranny of the majority or the tyranny of the few, is an unhealthy thing and to be avoided.



Raphael -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/1/2005 12:39:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

Well, I agree that the "McKinnon/Dworkin axis" alienates a lot of people, but it's not fair to consider that the only kind of feminism. Even if they DO consider themselves the only legitimate feminists (and I'm not convinced that they do), that hardly means they really are the only legitimate feminists.



Well I could bombard you with pages of quotes and actions from that circle to demonstrate that that is exactly what they claim, but as Padraig says we don't want this to become personal. I only mentioned those two names as a sort of shorthand for a much larger number of names that share a basic underpinning in terms of worldview that the rest is built on.

I agree wholeheartedly that they are not the only kind, I'm just pointing out what I perceive as being the problematic element to the discussion. Until one defines what feminism is under discussion, it's a rather pointless discussion - one person may be talking about one conception, and others another, and so they'll not even connect.

It is my experience that many people have picked up elements of that school, unexamined, and identified that as what feminism is, and also that most people that identify as anti-feminist are really against that school in particular, and either don't know about or have no problem with the vast array of feminists outside of it, from Queen Silver down to Paglia, McElroy, Strassen, etc. etc. (Not to discount the very real existence of some raving mysogynists as well, of course - but again it's important to distinguish the one from the other.)

As the original posters question was about how feminism relates to her choices, I do think she must think a bit about what exactly she means by 'feminism' before there will be any clear answer, and that's what I'm trying to get at. It's not a light subject - the surface differences may seem extreme, but they're the result of even more extreme differences in basic principles and worldview underneath them. Not something that's going to be cleared up by a few casual postings on a bulletin board.

>R





Lordandmaster -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/1/2005 5:16:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raphael

I agree wholeheartedly that they are not the only kind, I'm just pointing out what I perceive as being the problematic element to the discussion. Until one defines what feminism is under discussion, it's a rather pointless discussion - one person may be talking about one conception, and others another, and so they'll not even connect.


I agree with that. Being for or against "feminism" is virtually meaningless.

quote:


As the original posters question was about how feminism relates to her choices, I do think she must think a bit about what exactly she means by 'feminism' before there will be any clear answer, and that's what I'm trying to get at. It's not a light subject - the surface differences may seem extreme, but they're the result of even more extreme differences in basic principles and worldview underneath them. Not something that's going to be cleared up by a few casual postings on a bulletin board.


But I don't necessarily agree with that. A forum discussion CAN be edifying; the problem is that the participants usually aren't committed to informing themselves and taking each other seriously enough to profit from discussion. But the medium itself isn't to blame. I've learned a few things from forum discussions.



Simian -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/1/2005 7:49:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: night101owl

I am a feminist, and I find the movement to still be relevant. In the U.S., reproductive rights are still under attack, rape victims are still being blamed, and gender still has a huge impact on the practical choices available to us. On a global scale, women are still beaten, mutilated, and murdered for being women. It's important.

At the same time, I believe that women's sexual choices should be given respect. My ability to analzye what I'm doing and why I'm doing it should not be second-guessed, just because they aren't the choices someone else might make. There's a lot of debate within the feminist movement around this issue.

I think that the confusion in the livejournal post comes from the fact that, for many women, some of the stuff in BDSM is triggering of real abuse and real sexism. In an way, BDSMers are playing the cultural trauma when they indulge in gender-based roles, much the same way they're playing with cultural trauma if they do a nazi scene. Yes, it is possible for consenting adults to go to that space without imposing the real oppression associated with those images. At the same time, they can't expect just anyone who sees it to be cool with it.


It would be wise if the fear factor of political motivation and the assumed discrimination of freedom to express oneself was removed. As mentioned many times in this thread, politics is a human deficency, trying to right an assumed wrong or discourse, by imposing its selfrighteous moral code and dismantles the very goals it aims to achieve, waving the banner of freedom and liberty.

In my experience no matter the group of participants invoved it is humanly impossible to remain free of the beaurocratic system. It seems to be a viral codependant blog on the face of the human psychie. It emerges in the most unlikely places and begins often in the kindegarten LOL! Maybe politics is an extension of the animal hyrachical system yes I think so.....

As for femism, myself being lesbian and having experienced firsthand the internal disputes and politics of femisits I will say I am asshamed by their blindness and denial hiding in the light of the righteous. They unwittingly follow the dominant white male supremists in their attitude and dictatorship. How pathic! Yet I am yet to see them securely handle themselves within a field of men and remain equal to. Most feminsits I have seen operate from political fears have coward in the face of a mixed gendered room or carried on with such bravado that the falsity is blaringly obvious. As my father would say "sticks out like dogs balls."

To have gained a truely powerful sense of self and be at one amongst all men is a battle well worth the investigation. To be a survivor of the plights feminists so verhmently oppose and to understand the true nature of bdsm and submission whether male or female is a victory. I think feminist forget that womin rape womin and womin are pediphiles of their own children, mothers abuse their children too, and many men are victims of sexual abuse.


The modern skewd femistic ideal is disunified immediately in its seperation from the global picture therfore weakened. I do not laugh at the idea of feminism in its original sence it was a battle well worth the voice. It is the indoctrination of political opinions in modern feminism and the voice of inexperience that grandstands, issues that the speaker my have only read in texts, that causes me to revolt.

There is definatly sub groups in the catagory of feminism.
When it comes down to it we are all animals no greater or lesser than the any other life form. To think seperately from this is to fall short of the wheel of life *sighs

Many of us know that religion is one of the biggest wrongs! That the bible is based on bias and discrimination that man wrote the bible and man indocrinates its disease.
To then stand up and say though shalt not abort is invariably playing god on earth. The only feeling I have for those poor souls removed from the nature of god is remorse. They continually try and control those not willing to submit.

I believe any group indocrination is a wrong. Unity is attainable and sustainable only in space and silence, unless of coure you are an ace sub/slave. *winks

All in all it is only our person experiences that can influence our beliefs, in the end the painting is our own creation.

Simian



Soulhuntre -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/2/2005 9:14:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: IronBear
The bottom line is: "They have a pair of feet and they can walk away if they so desire. That is their right which no honest and sensible Dominant would disagree with. IMO


Oh man, I can't decide whether I would rather be dishonest or non-sensible :)



Soulhuntre -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/2/2005 9:35:58 AM)

What I find interesting about this topic is how it is generally ignored. The radical left is deeply influenced by the extreme "hyper feminist" crowd (as they are most extremists) and these peopel pose an absolute and direct threat to the BDSM community.

But all anyone ever does it talk about how dangerous the "Religeous Right" is in activist circles.

Look, the Right has it's problems to be sure... but if I, as a dominant, get in trouble with the law because of BDSM it will more than likely before some overzealous feminist prosecutor trying to brand me a rapist after applying a rad-fem inspired overly broad "morning after regret" law and preventing me from showing evidence of consent thanks to rape-shield. It won't be becaase the Pope thinks I am evil.

As a communityw e need to wake up, look at the actual ways we are attacked and what philosophy inspires those attacks. The religeous nuts are a problem but they don't hold a candle to the damage done to freedom int he name of "protecting the victims".

On a humurous note, I have some posts on my blog that gather some of the more hilarious anti-BDSM feminist quotes from the web.

* Welcome SM readers…

* BDSM and Radical Feminist Chicks…

My favorite so far? This one about sums it up...

quote:

So I was wondering--what is wrong with just saying that SM is an expression of mental illness, or some better way to say that. An expression of self hate, self destructive, really really sick behavior? No one says this and you know, its just what I have been thinking lately (well thats what reading more Dworkin will do for a woman huh!). I really do think it is an expression of a sickness-self destructiveness that comes from living in patriarchy, internalized self hatred, hatred of ourselves as women, identification with the oppressor and taking on his role in hurting women and chidren.



night101owl -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/2/2005 11:19:18 AM)

Oh holy christ on a crutch, PLEASE do not make the mistake of believing that the folks who post in the Chararchy represent feminism. When I and my other extreme radical hyper-feminist friends get together, we CRINGE at what goes on in that forum. We RAGE about it. Absolutely unchecked privilege, from class, race, cisgender, ability, etc., infests those posts. Those people are truly messed up in a number of ways.

I believe that the tenets of feminism, taken to their most extreme, radical end, are NOT anti-BDSM, and I object to your equating extreme feminism with those right-wingers who claim to be feminist.



anopheles -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/2/2005 1:28:54 PM)

Feminism appears to have a negative connotation. Especially within the BDSM realm, feminism appears to have been mixed up with "female superiority".

There is no such thing as female superiority.

There is no such thing as male superiority.

There are people that choose to exercise their control over others, and there are just as many people that choose to submit to the will and decision of another, whether they be man or woman. What it boils down to, is that it's better off to choose to submit or Dominate "SOMEONE", as opposed to "some woman" or "some man"





tarnishedhalo777 -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/2/2005 1:50:27 PM)

OH my what a question,I will definately need to ponder this one.

I have been practicing self-control in so many areas of my life,part of my being an over-achiever, however, in the perfect world(which I don't live in) I would find a man that recognized the potential in me so that I could surrender the control.
I think the setting limits would be negotiated as time went and I learned I could trust him totally.I worry about emotional hurt/pain much more than physical.
SO I guess if I trusted him enough the wanting to surrender would be more powerful



tarnishedhalo777 -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/2/2005 1:56:29 PM)

your explanation makes sense to me.
and after all don't Doms push those limits in time in the relationship?



night101owl -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/2/2005 2:35:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tarnishedhalo777
and after all don't Doms push those limits in time in the relationship?


Not necessarily. I personally know of at least one (probably several, but it's a private issue) relationship in which the bottom was interested in going a whole lot further than the top, and so it was the top who set the limits. And over time, the bottom did push those limits (through mutual discussion), to varying degrees of success.

Whoever has the most conservative (for lack of a better word) hard limit is the one who sets that limit. Certainly limits may be relaxed over time as trust grows or "the usual" becomes less thrilling.



ManOwner -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/2/2005 4:52:02 PM)

quote:

KittenWithaTwist:

if you are a female dominant who owns male submissives, do you feel that that has anything to do with possible political/feminist motivations, such as, for instance, putting a man in an assumed "woman's" place?


Nope, but I still believe that the anal and cross-dressing stuff that many are into is about that.



tarnishedhalo777 -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/2/2005 5:20:03 PM)

Gotcha, I guess it all boils down to whatever is considered acceptable for the parties involved.
I spent most of my time in D/s as a bottom-topping a SAM, and he basically didn't have limits (no trips to the hospital,lol)where I was concerned,since he was the one training me to top.
There was no Domme/Dom we were equals out of the bedroom.
Still so much to learn.



tarnishedhalo777 -> RE: BDSM and Feminism (10/2/2005 5:21:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ManOwner

quote:

KittenWithaTwist:

if you are a female dominant who owns male submissives, do you feel that that has anything to do with possible political/feminist motivations, such as, for instance, putting a man in an assumed "woman's" place?


Nope, but I still believe that the anal and cross-dressing stuff that many are into is about that.


That's a new train of thought as many Domme's write in here that male subs into that are denying their homosexual desires.

let me clarify that before I catch some flack.
Those aren't my beliefs.

Personally, I have discussed w/ my exboy and a potential one,cross-dressing them and I say now that I am a switch b/c i don't think I'll find a Dom that likes the strap-on and I enjoy it far too much to give it up.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875