Anonymous asked: hey, if you're up for discussion: i noticed a lot of the arguments re: bdsm were the kind of arguments that in other situations might be used against queer relationships. what would the difference be between a bdsm couple having a leash in a grocery store aisle as opposed to two gay men kissing? is it that theres a stigma against choking (man, that sounds weird put like that)? arent they doing their thing wituout asking other ppl to be involved? id love to know ur thoughts if u dont mind.
Oh…kay.
*pours self
a drink*
There’s a
lot to cover here, so everyone buckle up while your queer dom vodka auntie discusses some stuff.
This is regarding this post for anyone who wants to follow along. Here’s the
major points we’re going to hit:
- Sexual vs sensual behavior, AKA sex
vs romance
First off,
we’re going to talk about BDSM—as it should be done, not the exploitative
imitation in 50 Shades. The core of BDSM
is trust: the sub trusts the dom to stop if they safeword out, and the dom
trusts the sub to know their limits and use
that safeword. The three major tenets of
BDSM are Safe, Sane, and Consensual, meaning that everyone in the scene feels
safe because they trust the person they’re with, everyone in the scene knows
what they’re getting into and what they’re doing, and, most critically, they
have agreed to those things clearly
and explicitly. Safe and Sane are pretty
predicated on the people involved knowing what they’re doing, but Consensual is
non-negotiable.
Which brings
us rapidly to point two, consent. This is the major problem with couples
practicing any sort of overt BDSM in public.
The public, merely by their presence, is part of the scene—you don’t do
stuff in public unless the response of the public, the feeling of being watched is somehow part of it, so the
public is involved in the scene—but they have not consented to participation.
Consent in BDSM is (or should be) an intricate thing, based on negotiations
of what people are or are not willing to do, discussion and acknowledgement of
their personal history, and establishing a safeword, a word used to indicate “everything
needs to stop now” that can be used
by anyone involved without protest from other parties. So, for example, if it was me, I might be
like “I have a history of abuse, so I’m not comfortable humiliating a sub or acting
like I’m punishing them,” and the person I was talking with might be like “I’m
not comfortable with being choked, but I’ve always wanted to be tied up.” And then we would go from there with those ground
rules in place, and establish a safeword.
Before we ever discussed a
scene, all of that would be hashed out, and then when we did discuss a scene, it would be something we’d already agreed that
everyone involved was interested in doing and had the option to opt out of.
So, this is
where public BDSM sort of falls apart, yeah?
Because the bystanders have not discussed their boundaries or their
histories, they have not negotiated what they’re interested in, and they do not
have a safeword that will let them opt out of the scene. Suppose one of the bystanders goes up to the
couple and asks, “Hey, could you not choke your girlfriend in public? You’re really freaking my son out.” The couple hasn’t had that discussion with
that bystander, they are not obligated by the BDSM contract to honor that bystander’s
request. Now, it’s the decent thing to
do, to respect someone’s request for what’s really an easy thing, but people…uh,
suck. People suck. Honoring the request to not choke your girlfriend in public actually takes less effort than
doing it anyway, but people suck, so they’re almost inevitably going to go “fuck
you” and do it anyway. Which is NOT how BDSM is supposed to work,
because see above re: Safe, Sane, and Consensual. So, like, there’s that. BDSM is about consent and trust. The bystanders don’t have that foundation of
trust, and they haven’t consented to being part of the scene, so everything
else aside it fundamentally violates the contract implicit in BDSM. If a couple does want to do that sort of public BDSM stuff, that’s what fetish
parties are for, they can pay the necessary money to do it with people who have
agreed and consented to being their audience.
Otherwise, it’s more like catcalling—you
might be getting off on it, but the other people involved just feel creeped out
and vaguely violated.
But here’s
the core of your question: the difference between sexual and sensual behavior.
Okay, so,
sexual behavior is exactly what it says on the tin, it’s about sex. Sensual behavior
is about physical touch and showing affection with no expectation that those
touches lead to sex, it’s about romance. This is where the analogy between BDSM and
queer couples falls apart, because it’s this simple.
- Queer couples want to express
romantic affection through hand-holding, hugging, kissing, etc.
- BDSM couples want to engage in
something that’s intrinsically for sexual pleasure.
And I don’t
want to hear debate about this, kiddos. I
know that BDSM can be nonsexual, I know that some people find it a deep relief
to let someone else take control or to take control themselves, but that’s not
the kind of BDSM relationship that gets flashily displayed in public. Let me posit a scenario, in which I have a
friend with whom I have a platonic dom/sub arrangement. When they’re under stress, they let me take charge,
and let’s suppose that during one of these agreed-upon scenes we’re going
grocery shopping. I might have an arm
through theirs, or I might hold their hand, while I do most of the talking and
instruct them on what to put in the cart.
Any passerby wouldn’t notice anything unusual there—my friend might be
tired, I might be a chatterbox, we might be doing a grocery run so I can make
dinner, hell, maybe I’m just a bossy person.
That’s not something that engages the public in any way, shape, or form. On the other hand, let’s take the example of
a couple who goes grocery shopping in the same way, but one of them has the
other on a collar and chain. That’s about the exhibition, it’s about the two
of them getting off on being seen to
have that power dynamic and all the trappings.
And that’s about sex. It’s about
being titillated by bringing something that’s normally private into the open.
A pair of
gay men kissing in public? That’s not
about sex. That’s about being
romantically attached. And it’s something
that straight couples get away with all
the time, is the thing here. Whereas
it doesn’t matter if that hypothetical couple with the collar and chain is two
women, a man and a woman, or three tentacle aliens and a grizzly bear, that’s
still about sex and therefore still inappropriate to be pushed onto the public
without consent. It’s not about our
culture having a stigma on choking, which…real fast, let me establish that
there’s a very serious difference between having a stigma on, say, tattoos, as
opposed to something like choking. The reason
we have a cultural stigma about choking is because it’s frequently used to hurt
or kill people. America, at the very
least, could stand to have some stricter stigmas about other things used to
hurt or kill people. Like guns. The reason overt BDSM like what’s described
above is inappropriate in public is because it is sexual and it does
disregard the right of the bystanders to consent to their own sexual experiences.
As long as
we’re on the subject, I want to hit one more thing. I think your ask is talking specifically
about the remark that used to be made about “Well, how am I going to explain
two men kissing to my kids?” And kids
are important here. Because, okay, let’s
suppose a four-year-old is presented with these two situations. The two men kissing is easy. That kid has definitely seen someone kissing their partner before, just tell
them that the two men love each other and kissing someone is a way to show that
you love them. Easy-peasy. However, explaining BDSM to anyone involves a
pretty in-depth discussion of human sexuality, and…like, listen. There is a reason that showing children porn
is considered abuse. By exposing the
public to intense BDSM play, you are also exposing kids to a sexual act,
without their consent or full understanding of what’s going on. And we have
pretty much agreed that pulling that stunt is Wrong.
TL;DR: BDSM
of the variety being discussed here is inherently sexual, whereas queer couples
engaging in affectionate contact is not.
Sex acts require consent, and the general public has not consented to
being part of your BDSM scene. Don’t be
an asshole, and if you really want to carry your power dynamics out of the
bedroom, do it in a way that doesn’t force everyone else to be part of
something they have not agreed to and cannot opt out of. I can do a separate post on that if you’re
interested.
Aaaaaaaaall
righty then. I think that covers everything. I hope you’ve all enjoyed this journey into
good BDSM etiquette and the fine art of consent.
Vodka Auntie,
out.
