‘More acceptance’ of S&M needed

[Imnobody4]

talkradio.co.uk/news/more-acceptance-needed-sm-activities-19032230392
My morning isn't starting well. Haven't heard the programme - not sure I could stand it.

Like I said, I know there are men with sissy fetishes who like to be humiliated etc etc.

During my time in the Green Party, I saw a number of new members join and then immediately propose a new policy for debate at Conference.

They were always calling for 'more acceptance' of their own particular lifestyle/sexual practice. And by that, they meant that they wanted children to be introduced to the subject as early as possible - and then for the "acceptance" to be reinforced during PHSE sessions at secondary schools. It was always men who proposed these things, never women.

Most were given short shrift and told to go boil their heads because the party had environmental and social justice priorities.
The Queer wing of the Green Party embraced them as yet another marginalised group to add to the LBGTQWERTY soup.

They would, wouldn't they?

abuseofpowercomesasnosurprise
I think lessons need to be updated to reflect the realities of a new generation growing up with this unfettered (haha) access to porn.
So...education, specifically around consent, and understanding the factors that may go into consent. Education needs to specifically tackle porn. Teens need to be able to deconstruct what they’re seeing and feeling.
I just don’t know beyond that. I doubt criminalising participation in bdsm is the answer.

I like the peanut ones. Sorry that’s M&M’s

Julietee I agree with you about education, but there does also need to be greater clarity within a legal framework too. Kids should be taught that any sex acts - particularly including violence - need to be consensual or else it is abuse, as well as telling them that they can be prosecuted for ABH if they don't obtain consent. However, such education is pointless if we are seeing cases where the police fail to prosecute horrific acts of violent sexual abuse citing lack of evidence, because the perpetrator claims it was consensual. In principle I don't agree with making (consensual) BDSM illegal, but then again something has to change. Now that the old 'she was asking for it' excuses for rape have been widely socially discredited, it seems that a new form of abuse is creeping in. Women may consent to sex, but there is confusion about where women stand legally if that sex turns violent, and there really shouldn't be. I didn't consent to being hit, and as a DV survivor I found it traumatising (I froze and dissociated), but what can I do? Just accept that sex involves being violently attacked now because the law doesn't recognise this as a form of abuse? Not acceptable.

At first glance I read this as ‘ more acceptance if M&S is needed’ bit of a desperate ad campaign but then again still makes more sense than acceptance of S&M - consenting adults off you go but leave it behind closed doors, I for one don’t need to hear these dullards droning on about it.

I think that now we've got to a point where major media is asking if the Geneva Conventions apply in the bedroom -- well I'm going to kinkshame the hell out of that.

www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/waterboarding-kink-sex-bdsm-torture-779066/

If men feel free to do to women what would have gotten them hanged in Nuremberg, I'm going to kinkshame the hell out of that too. Or what would be done at Abu Graib. What would see them in the Hague on war crimes charges after Bosnia.

Decades ago women engaged in consiousness raising to understand that what they regarded as personal problems of the domestic sphere were actually political problems of power in the world.

Women have also to raise the subconsious. Feminism means looking into oneself and beyond oneself. It's work, it's hard, etc. It takes a whole lot of courage.

But promulgating a culture in which we're seriously asking if the Geneva Conventions apply to women in sex is here's the word I'm going to use with no apologies dishonourable to girls and women of the world in the deepest meaning of the word.

The problem is queer theory/sexual liberation arguments have been promoted everywhere, and feminist analysis and literature have been dismissed as ‘prudish’, ‘patronising women’, ‘denying women’s agency’, ‘demonising men’, etc., by those promoting this narrative. So we have queer theorists/sexual liberationists dismissing actual feminist analysis, and replacing it with the idea that S&M is a harmless choice that is made by individuals, in a vacuum, without any societal influence, to no one groups benefit or detriment.

Since masochism is usually engaged in by women and sadism by males, they have to explain why that is, (since they have dismissed the feminist explanation) it leads them to conclude that women are just innately more likely to be masochist. Dismissing feminist analysis and replacing it with queer theorist’s/sexual liberationist’s arguments, allows the old sexist arguments to re-emerge and gain renewed legitimacy (and as others have pointed out has led to a culture where men use the defense that a woman consented to being abused). It is also why heterosexual men with AGP believe their desire to be sexually humiliated or objectified makes them a woman or that they have a ‘woman’s brain’ etc, and is the reason they are being celebrated as ‘progressive’, rather than being condemned as sexist men with a fetish.

Even queer theorists/sexual liberationists that do understand that their masochism has been shaped by outside influences, often argue that it helps them to process trauma, or they say that they can’t change their responses so they just ‘make the best of it’.

It is obvious which group of people benefit by the promotion of queer theory/sexual liberationist narratives, and which group suffer, it becomes even more obvious (as if needed to be) when they have to dismiss decades of feminist analysis and demonise actual feminists in order to gain legitimacy for their allegedly ‘progressive’ narrative. I am a 30 something lesbian and I have never accepted the queer theory/sexual liberationist narrative, I was introduced to radical feminism (actual feminism) as a young teen, now young women are bombarded by queer theory, their only knowledge of actual feminism is the demonisation of it that queer theorists propagate. What needs to happen in my opinion is more feminist consciousness raising around these issues, which would benefit all women, there is a reason why queer theorists/sexual liberationists feel they have to demonise and silence actual feminists.

Excellent post stop

I agree with every word

It needs to be shoved back in the closet where it belongs.

Hear hear, fermat, bicker and stop

"Excellent post stop

I agree with every word

Ditto.

Trying to tag S&M onto other things, muddying the difference between 'sexual orientation' and 'sexual preference', stuck using the same ole 'it's innate I can't help it' line.......Even when it was the lesbian and gay community doing it. The language of 'sexual liberation' was never that 'liberating' for women. Who benefits most, because it wasn't us...........

I am a bit confused re the woman on the mountain - pp came across a naked woman, tied from a tree, with clothed men taking pictures and didn’t do anything ? Surely she could have been an abducted woman ? She could have been being assaulted ? I don’t understand why consensual sex would be the first thing the friends thought of, because it would be the last thing I would think.
I would have called the police.
More generally, I feel the same as horse, above.

radical feminism (actual feminism) ..

Yes, stop

As opposed to liberal feminism (man pleasing feminism).

I would have called the police.

So would I. The risk of spoiling their possible kinky (illegal) outdoor fun is not an acceptable reason to not help someone who is potentially being sexually asssulted and may be at risk of being murdered.

Yes the woman on the mountain is a horrible story. I hope it's not true.

The woman on the mountain story I think shows the way society grooms us to turn a blind eye to violence against women, or worse still, collude. It's the same thing as led that woman at the trial of the Ulster rugby players to give evidence saying "well, I saw her through the open door, but she turned her head away and didn't say anything so I assumed she was okay."

I think that we are all in agreement that any human being deserves protection from abuse.

It is not OK to expose children of either sex to adult sexual activity, let alone S&M, and I cannot see anywhere on this thread where anyone has suggested that it is OK.

Where it gets complicated in the issue of human sexual desire, and female sexual desire specifically.

I grew up in a highly dysfunctional family where I was abused emotionally, violently and sexually. My parents never cuddled me or my siblings and one thing I remember very clearly from my childhood is the sound of my sister hitting herself (she was actually punching herself on the leg) at night as she said that it induced a happy feeling that allowed her to go to sleep. Obviously this is not a good thing and it says something about the lack of loving, reassuring bodily contact we experienced from our parents. I think it also indicates how performing an act that is painful releases a flood of endorphins into the body that create a “high’ a feeing of euphoria, that is conducive to relaxation and that can effectively suppress anxiety, albeit temporarily.

My sister used to punch herself in the leg so she could go to sleep, however lots of people, as adults, discover that spanking, or some other similar pain inducing act releases endorphins into the body and the resulting euphoric feeling, for some people, has an aphrodisiac effect.

Some people discover this feeling and it becomes a central part of their sexual lives. In many situation it has nothing to do with dominance / submission or anything like that, it is simply that a particular activity that may look violent to an outsider, is a way for them to access a naturally occurring drug within the human body that allows them to let go and enjoy sex in a way that they might not be able to do without engaging in such an activity. This is especially true for people who have experienced sexual violations and who feel “stuck in their head” and unable to let go during sex.

Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Well obviously is would be much better if people could naturally feel relaxed and let go without having to be spanked, whipped or whatever. It would be much better if nobody was molested as a child, raped or raised in a sexually repressive environment, all of which can leave people with flashbacks and anxieties that prevent them from relaxing and enjoying intimacy.

Maybe it would be better for someone to receive counselling or psychotherapy rather than to be spanked? The problem is that the psychotherapy and mental health fields are full of “kink aware” therapists who may place already vulnerable people at risk of abuse via cults. Counsellors and psychotherapists are expensive to consult privately and the NHS waiting times are long.

If someone has discovered that they enjoy a certain activity and it makes them feel happy and sexually fulfilled, and if they are enjoying this within a loving, trusting relationship, why would anyone want to ban them from engaging in it?

I am mentioning this because it is a huge issue for many people. A related issue is that some people can only enjoy sex when they are in an altered state via alcohol or drugs. I have had long discussions with women who enjoy spanking and related activities as a prelude to or aspect of sex because they have given up alcohol and drugs but still want to experience something relaxing and euphoric so that they can enjoy sex and achieve orgasm.

Just to clarify, I am not suggesting that this is “the answer”, the above is only one aspect of why some people enjoy some BDSM activities. There are many others.

Some people have much more “vanilla" sex lives but enjoy occasional BDSM to spice things up, especially if they are in a long term, monogamous relationship. Is this really such a terrible thing? Do the posters here really believe that a loving couple who enjoy occasional forays into power play and spanking should be criminalised? I am astonished that anyone could even suggest this and yet some here seem to be saying exactly this (if I have misunderstood please let me know).

This very funny song by Victoria Wood comes to mind. It is a song about a woman in a LTR who would like to enjoy sex but her partner is much more interested in lagging pipes and watching TV. The reason why this song is so amusing is that it reflects a reality for many women. There are many threads on mumsnet started by women in exactly this kind of situation. LTRs can sometimes be like that. After the initial bloom has worn off a situation may arise where one person wants sex more than the other person and it becomes a source of acrimony and tension. The situation in which the female wants sex and the man does not is far from uncommon and this is why this song is amusing to many people and why it is so popular. Towards the end of the song the female narrator Freda says "Not meekly, not bleakly. Beat me on the bottom with the Woman's Weekly Let's do it, let's do it tonight”

Is it really so terrible for Freda to want to be beaten on the bottom with the Women’s Weekly?

I have to say that I don’t think it is a terrible thing. Freda is simply expressing a wash to be desired, ravished etc. This is a very, vey common kind of desire, so common as to be almost universal. I do not believe that it needs policing, banning, criminalising or therapising away, unless of course it is making Freda feel bad about herself. If Freda is happy about wanting to be beaten on the bottom with a magazine then I don’t feel that the police need to be involved, that Freda needs psychotherapy or that she should be encouraged to read the collected works of Andrea Dworkin or Shelia Jeffreys, that is unless she is interested in such material in which case crack on.

Thanks for coming back hoodathunkit. I love that Victoria Wood song.

I think most of us know that. I realise that descriptions I've read of "subspace" do read to me very much like an endorphin high from exercise.

The problem is the normalisation of this. It's gone from being a fairly niche pastime, where, in virtue of being niche, people tended to think about what they were doing and about consent, to "this is the way people have sex..." - where that message is given by men, without much space for women to object.

Have a look at the relationships boards, specifically the threads by women getting back into the dating game in their 40s after divorce. There's loads of posts about "we had sex for the first time and he came on my face without so much as a by-your-leave/tried to choke me/rolled me over and tried to have anal without asking/slapped me across the face..." Activities which, when I was in my 20s, would have been considered kink, and something you had a conversation about first, seem to have now become things men just expect to be able to do to a woman's body - her feelings on the matter being irrelevant.

Which is why "your kink is not my kink and that's okay" is so bloody helpful. "Your kink is not my kink, so you should bloody well ask, not assume" might be a better one. But even more so "You may have your kinks, but nothing compels me to say yes to them."

Women shouldn't be subject to emotional coercion ("if you weren't such an uptight prude you'd try it just once") or sexual assault (sexual acts sprung upon them without prior discussion) or an expectation that their pleasure is irrelevant (that terribly sad thread recently where a woman said they'd tried anal fingering, she hated it and it hurt, but her boyfriend still wanted to have anal sex, so how could she relax and use enough lube to get through it? Lots of responses saying "you don't have to" and "LTB" - but it didn't seem to have occurred to her that no matter how much her boyfriend wanted to do something, she did not have to say yes).

That's what we object to - the way kink blurs into rape culture, a culture of grooming and coercion, a culture where women's sexual pleasure comes second (or doesn't feature at all) relative to a man's desire to re-enact what he's seen in porn. The fact that some women genuinely like this sort of thing doesn't make that rape culture go away.

(Personally, I hope Frieda got all the tenors in the male voice choir... while wearing stilettos and an oven glove.)

Should read "YKISNMKATOK" is so bloody UNhelpful. Gah... Proof read, woman, proof read.

Thank you for a considered post Fermats

I think we are in agreement about many things.

There is so much more that I would like to write about this, I'm pushed for time at the moment.

I think most of us know that. I realise that descriptions I've read of "subspace" do read to me very much like an endorphin high from exercise.

Absolutely agree with this. I personally get my endorphin highs from exercise and cold water swimming. :)

Loot more in your post I am in agreement with, but more later

Lots more in your post I am in agreement with, but more later

damned butter fingers

Proof read, woman, proof read.

this lol

Julie I have a question - what do you consider “mild” and “extreme” BDSM? What lengths does your partner go to to ensure you are consenting not just frozen and in trauma?

And how do you feel about the fact your fetish prob leads to other people being nearly killed by men totally normalising that level of abuse by watching it?

It's absolutely true and you seem to have overlooked the fact that I said that I had no mobile signal so calling the police was out of the question.

If you haven't been to some of the remoter areas of New Zealand you may find it difficult to believe that you can be a good half-hour drive from any sign of habitation. We were up a mountain that it had taken us several hours to climb. A proper mountain, a ski resort mountain. No phone signal and at least an hour's scramble down to the car. That was presumably why they were there — because it was the last place they expected to be interrupted. I am told that outdoor S&M is quite a thing: I'm not into it, I don't know.

And I was with three Kiwis, all of them right-on and what they would call feminist, all united in the belief that what we were seeing was good old S&M. Even if they hadn't persuaded me to ignore what was going on I couldn't have phoned the police and I would then have had to take the decision to intervene, possibly without the back-up of the woke Kiwis, possibly with dangerous men, up a mountain on foot in the middle of effing nowhere.

It's easy to know exactly what you'd do in such circumstances in retrospect and from the safety of your own home. It's more difficult when you're on the spot.

Causing harm to someone is already illegal, I'm unsure what more anyone could do.
Surely awareness about BDSM is about educating and understanding, a healthy BDSM relationship does not centre around sex and those within the community follow a strict guideline of Safe, Sane and Consensual. There are of course individuals who will abuse it, as there are in all aspects of life.
A sadist involved in kink does not only achieve pleasure from giving pain, but from the masochists pleasure in receiving it.
In 'true' BDSM relationships it is the sub who holds the ultimate control, and their emotional wellbeing is the number one priority.
50 shades is not what BDSM is. If it was real life it would be three movies about people having heavy conversation. The majority in the community want people to understand that, so that it's easy to spot an abuser and so they are not labelled as such.
Furthermore, there are a huge number of relationships under the BDSM umbrella, lots of which involve no pain at all.
The misconception that BDSM is whips and chains does need to be addressed and I would agree that BDSM porn can be dangerous and should be illegal, but to say consensual adults who partake in private are mentally unwell is a very out dated and inaccurate view.
I am in a very loving 24/7 BDSM relationship.