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:
- BDSM etiquette
- Consent
- 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.
