Mon, 16 Apr 2007 20:19:25 GMT

Okay, here's the essay. It could probably benefit from a bit of revision, but it is what it is. I'm leaving it public on the off-chance that someone wants to link it to someone else. Keep in mind that I'd never submit this to a professor, and that this was simply a task.. and if I made any factual errors, feel free to correct me on 'em. :]

            "Well-behaved women rarely make history."
                        -- Laurel Thatcher Ullrich

     BDSM and feminism are two incredibly polarizing concepts -- each with a strong group of supporters, some conservative, some radical; each with detractors who seek to, at the very least, rid themselves of that which they abhor. Quite frequently, the supporters of male-dominated BDSM sneer upon self-proclaimed feminists, while the radical feminist legions demand an end to BDSM, as it encourages violence against women and sets the feminist movement back significantly.

      It is difficult to explain the great divide between consentual kink and modern-day feminism without briefly touching on the history of feminism and the basics of BDSM.

     Feminism was originally a movement geared towards gaining equality with men; Mary Wollstonecraft was quoted as saying "I do not wish them to have power over men, but over themselves." Wollstonecraft, frequently referred to as the first feminist philosopher, penned A Vindication of the Rights of Women in 1792, arguing that natural, God-given rights cannot be given to one segment of society and denied to another. However, Wollstonecraft believed in the superiority of masculine strength, which to this date causes debate over whether or not her works can be considered feminist.

      In 1919, American women were granted the right to vote, thus moving them one step closer to true equality. Excepting times of war, however, women were expected to stay within the home and be happy in their domestic duties. It was not until the 1960s that the second wave of feminism began, ushering in unprecedented change.

      Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique was released in 1963, and it quickly became an icon for the feminist movement. The book shatters the belief that women are happiest at home; Friedan's work gave voice to the millions of women who sought something deeper than domesticity. Several years later, Friedan moved on to found the National Organization for Women, which sought to end sex discrimination, and "to bring women into full participation in the mainstream of American society now, exercising all privileges and responsibilities thereof in truly equal partnership with men." (NOW Statement of Purpose, 1966)

      Radical feminism developed in the late 1960s as a result of the failures of liberal feminism; while liberal feminists sought to gain equality and protection under the law, radical feminists sought to be free from the patriarchy. Liberal feminists, including Friedan, believed that radical feminism would polarize the women's movement with its oft-acerbic rhetoric, holding that sexual politics are overemphasized at the expense of political reform.

      In 1975, three years after the Equal Rights Amendment failed to be ratified, Susan Brownmiller's Against Our Wills was released, bringing with it the beginnings of the third wave of feminism. Her most memorable phrase was “pornography is the theory and rape the practice.” She argued that some men used, and all men benefited from the use of rape as a means of perpetuating male dominance, thus keeping women in a constant state of fear.

      The Feminist Sex Wars began in the late 1970s; anti-porn feminists were pitted against sex-positive feminists, debating, among other things, sadomasochism in the feminist community. The anti-porn feminists maintained that there was nothing feminist about sadomasochism, maintaining that the scene was rife with violence perpetrated against women. Gayle Rubin, a cultural anthropologist and sex-positive feminist, summed it up best:

...There have been two strains of feminist thought on the subject. One tendency has criticized the restrictions on women's sexual behavior and denounced the high costs imposed on women for being sexually active. This tradition of feminist sexual thought has called for a sexual liberation that would work for women as well as for men, The second tendency has considered sexual liberalization to be inherently a mere extension of male privilege. This tradition resonates with conservative, anti-sexual discourse.

      Rubin noted that feminists criticized BDSM for eroticizing power and violence, and for reinforcing misogyny. It was argued that women who choose to engage in BDSM activities were making choices that were ultimately harmful towards women. Sex-positive feminists found this to be insulting, arguing that women were given the choice to engage in BDSM, and do so out of desire.

      And so ends the history lesson.

      I consider myself a feminist, yet I practice BDSM. I submit to a man, not because I believe in a natural order of male dominance, but because it pleases me. I serve him not because it is my duty as woman, but because it is my duty as slave – my agreed-upon duty. We speak with each other as equals; I am unafraid to call him out if he is wrong. In fact, I am unafraid of him. He wields the power in the relationship, because I made the choice – I made the conscious choice to give him that power, to let him reign over me.

      And it is that choice which alienates me from the radical, anti-porn feminists. They read the words of Dworkin and MacKinnon and look down upon women who choose to engage in BDSM; they sneer at us and refuse to listen to those of us who are happy. They point to their anecdotal evidence of violence in the scene, placing their hands over their ears when BDSM-positive anecdotes are offered up for study.

      How can you be happy? You're blinded by the patriarchy.

      I am a feminist. I believe in a woman's right to vote; I believe in a woman's right to earn equal pay; I believe in granting a woman equal protection to men under the law. And yet I love to be tied up, to be smacked around, to feel the sting of leather against bare skin. I longed for these things since the long-lost, awkward days of puberty, when I discovered just how wonderful an active imagination could be. Books like My Secret Garden put my fantasies to the page, letting me know that I was not alone in my desires.

      And yet I constantly hear that women in the scene are abused constantly; that BDSM needs to be eradicated, so that these poor, helpless women caught in the scene can finally be free. While I do not doubt that there are instances of abuse in the scene, I also doubt that the scene is made up entirely of abusers. When I utter the safeword, the scene stops and the discussion begins. He does not ignore my safeword and continue beyond my limit; he does not hurt me unless I want it – and I do want it. What we have does not work for everyone, but I have always contended that there is no official right way to practice BDSM.

      One of the more popular anti-pornography blogs featured a post last year, this time from the male's point of view, decrying BDSM and its horrendous crimes against women. Shortly thereafter, the comments section filled with like-minded feminists virtually nodding in agreement. However, I found the most intriguing comment to be posted a month after the original post was made. In the comment, a user known as RedTheda wrote:

“We cannot simultaneously hold women up and try to empower them and then turn around and say they don't have the power to get out of abusive relationships, that we must erase BDSM from the earth to stop the chance that she might be abused. A healthy, sane woman knows the difference between something that she finds enjoyable and something that she didn't choose, that was forced upon her, that she finds to be emotionally scarring and unenjoyable.”

      During the writing of this essay, I realized that I previously felt as if I could not be a feminist if I were kinky, and vice versa. After some thought, I reconciled it with the reminder that feminism, at its base, is about the right to choose, and the right to be equal; and though I may be a slave, I am human, as is my Master, and in that regard, we are equal.

      I suppose my feelings on the subject are best expressed by one of my heroes, Gloria Steinem:

      “... We are talking about a society in which there will be no roles other than those chosen or those earned.“

Tue, 11 Oct 2005 05:09:18 GMT

it's really simple; don't promote, don't start drama, and don't be offended if i don't add you back.

stealing second after second