Bitchy made me do it

I was reading back in Bitchy Jones’ Diary last night and was again stirred and moved and amused and made curious by it. I have to be careful over there, as her blog never fails to draw me in to several hours of reading.

When I first picked up on her blog nearly a year ago, it made me start to think hard about the image I put forth as a pro domme – and, frankly, about whether I wanted to continue being a pro domme at all. So much about the culture of pro domming has always been ugly and alien to me, and I spent a lot of time trying to put my finger on why. Is it the exploitation of men? Of women? Is it the obvious fact that most of the men who see me are, in essence, cheating on their wives and partners? I spent a lot of time in my first couple of years of domming figuring out what things made me feel icky and what things don’t, and how to minimize the former and capitalize on the latter.

But Bitchy – looking from the outside of the industry as she is – was able to outline the problem for me perfectly. She writes well on many topics and at length, but her central thesis, if her blog can be said to have one, is something like this:

The image of the dominant woman and the submissive man are broken. The prevailing submissive male culture dictates that said men are worthless, less than men, unworthy to be touched by Women who are Superior, and deserve punishment, enforced chastity, and feminization at the hands of Dominas, whom they should worship as Goddesses. This image, rather than empowering women, pedestalizes them and robs them of their sexuality, locates their power in their appearances rather than in their total persons, and suggests implicitly that femininity is actually inferior, seeing as 1) “forced” feminization is reserved for submissive “sissies,” and 2) dominant women are only allowed to have sex with submissive men if they use a strap-on cock and fuck them up the ass.

Add to this the prevailing notion that certain things germane to being female (getting penetrated being the biggest example) are by their nature submissive, and you’ve got one fucked-up image system going on.

The major problem, that Bitchy goes over and over against the protests of many (especially pro dommes), is that the image of the Big Bad Dominatrix is the only mainstream image of dominant female sexuality there is. As such, it robs women like her of any recognition of their sexuality.

Essentially, the idea of dominant female sexuality – that a woman could actually be in control during fucking, or that she could come from taking a burly, masculine man and causing him pain – is so scary that it needs to be desexualized, dehumanized, the sweat and blood and come taken out of it, and turned into a high-heeled, latex-sheathed, small-penis-humiliating freakfest where a woman’s stilettos are a more powerful seat of sexuality than her cunt.

As she so trenchantly points out, Sometimes I think femdom is like a horrible warning. This is what can happen if you replace actual women being turned on with women’s whose job it is to pretend to be turned on.

Or, as an excellently smart commenter puts it,

Inside kink we have a sexist, distorting, repressive culture which tries to make people like me believe the norm of my sexuality is play for pay, tries to make men believe their submission is shameful and unattractive, tries to make dominance appear unsexy to women.

If you are working as a pro dom, how is it in your interest that this distortion gets changed? It creates a great deal of your demand.

And this:

[T]his is not about deriding sex workers for being sex workers.

Example. If a prodom said “I can’t have sex with clients because it would be illegal where I live” or just “I prefer not to have sex with clients”, this would be from a perspective of sex work. Nothing to make fun of.

But: “A female dominant can’t have sex with a male submissive, because it would upset the power dynamic / they’re unworthy of our sacred shrines / these wimps can’t satisfy a woman anyway”… Are these lies? Do they sound familiar? Are they ridiculous? Do they have harmful effects?

…This is about prodoms knowingly telling lies about sexuality with harmful consequences, and profiting from these consequences….This is about people who claim that their pompous facade, i.e. their sex worker persona, represents female dominance as a personal kinky sexuality. And that is not okay.

As should by now be obvious, all of this is making me think like crazy. I have long been repulsed by the trend in prodommery toward the apparently sexless ice princess who treats her feminized, submissive wiener-men like shit. And it’s taken me a while to figure out exactly why, but I think I know now.

I want to continue to be a pro domme in addition to continuing to live out my personal kinky sexuality. But 1. I want to be more open about who I am as a total person – partly because it makes my life better to do so, but partly to contribute to dismantling this horrid pro-domme stereotype. And 2. I want to restructure how I market myself to reflect the things I love to do in sessions, not the things I’m expected to do as part of this culture.

This is a long time in coming, and I’ve written about it elsewhere in great angsty detail. But Bitchy, as usual, you’ve caught me out. It’s time to stop perpetuating false images that define female dominance as sterile and male submission as shameful. And it’s time to start putting out there what I truly find hot.

And for the record: me? Totally a sex worker. Let me say it here and now: what I do is sex work, it is a sexual service, and I don’t have manual, oral, vaginal or anal intercourse with my clients because it’s illegal and I don’t want to. A post is brewing about strap-on sex, which Bitchy tends to write about as part of the problem, but which I count as a sex act for the reason that it totally turns my crank. One day soon I’ll write about the one time I broke my no-strap-on-sex-in-sessions rule…one of the hottest sessions I’ve ever known. But that’s for another day.

For now, picture this: a new site by me that highlights my friendliness, my viciousness as a sadist, my sensuality with touch and voice, my wrestling fetish, my work as a healer and therapist, my human connection with my clients, and yes, my sexual desire.

It’s very likely that I’ll never have the guts to do videos where I play the submissive. That part of my sexuality is too private, too precious to me to share with the world in that way. Probably this is also the result of the sickness in our sexual culture: while I experience submission as powerful, I have the fear that others won’t see it that way, and am still haunted by the notion that taking my clothes off and going into that space strips part of my power. (Is it any wonder, when most of the images we have in porn of female submission are all about humiliation and conquest? Again – another post for another day.)

But I think you can safely stay tuned for more vulnerability from me as a domme. More clear expression of my desire. More scenes with models I care about, or am at least hot for.

And more stories here about the kinds of scenes that actually make me wet.

Read Full Post »

Monday Advice: Reluctant Partners

Today I answer two letters that deal with the question: what happens when one of the partners in a desired BDSM scenario is reluctant for one reason or another? It’s a tricky one, but not unsolvable.

I have to say, you are almost a dead ringer for my fiancee. She is also six feet tall, size 12-13 shoe, shoulder length naturally curly brown hair, and with a sensually curvy athletic gorgeously feminine but strong body. I have a question for you, if you don’t mind. She is a sweet, sweet girl and I’m a huge trampling fan. I’m a little over six feet tall and weigh about 155 lbs. I’m kind of wiry and thin. Being a tall strong girl like you are, you probably know where this is going. She’s not a dominant person and I would like her to be more aggressive to help her out in life. I want so much for her to trample me, but I know she thinks she’s too heavy, her feet are too big, blah, blah, blah. What is a good way to ask or warm her up to walking on me? I asked her once about a year ago. She very, very tentatively did so and then quickly stepped off. I’ve been afraid to ask her since. I’ve told her that I’m going to drag a dominant side of her out someday, someway (Marshall Crenshaw anyone?) and have slooowwwly warmed her up to resting her feet on me while laying on the floor. She’s still a bit shy about it. But I want her to take the plunge and walk on me. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks so much for listening!

MJ

Dear MJ,

Marshall Crenshaw notwithstanding, this is a territory where you must, if you’ll forgive the pun, tread lightly. I’m hearing that you have a particular desire from your fiancee – namely, that she trample you. This seems like something that the two of you could work up to, and I’ll talk more about that below. But be careful about the other thing I’m hearing, here: trying to force your fiancee to be a dominant.

In my experience, there’s very little more annoying than a submissive male trying to talk his female partner into dominating him when she doesn’t want to and it’s not in her nature. It’s not that people cannot be taught to dominate, and there are beautiful examples of experienced submissives training “from below,” as it were. But the would-be dominant must be willing – and wheedling, offering submissive gestures in the hopes that she’ll pick up the role, or suggesting that you’re going to “drag” her dominant side out, is probably not going to help you, and will probably just make her feel anything from annoyed to inadequate.

The good news is that you have a specific desire, and having your woman trample you does not sign her up for becoming your full-time Mistress. It doesn’t even have to mean that she’s being dominant – there is a difference between being a “top” (i.e. the “active” partner in a sexualized activity) and being “dominant” (i.e. the one holding the power in a power-exchange roleplay dynamic). You may find that she has a dominant streak eventually, but the first thing for you to do is guide her, safely and consensually, toward the activity you desire, without pushing for the whole enchilada.

As far as asking: you say this is something that really turns you on. If you’re not shy about that fact, she may be more able to get into it if she’s interested in your pleasure. You say that she’s shy about her size; she may be afraid of hurting you. Try setting up a safeword with her, and let her know that you will definitely say the word if she is truly hurting you. Try starting, as you said you have, with you lying on the floor while she puts her feet on you, and work your way up to her fully standing. She can start by just pressing you with her feet while sitting, then resting part of her weight on you with one foot from standing. Make sure she has something, like a wall, to hold onto for balance, and make sure she’s only stepping on safe places on your body: upper back, chest, butt, and thighs. Hopefully, she’ll find that she enjoys it for its own sake, and if you’re really lucky, she may eventually find that dominant streak in herself. If not – then at least you have a new piece in your sexual repertoire.

And don’t forget to keep telling her how incredibly sexy she is. I appreciate the compliments, MJ – but it sounds like your foxy fiancee needs them more.

My boyfriend is a self-proclaimed Dominant. Okay. I’m not what I’d call a naturally submissive person, but I’m really, really ready to give it a go with him. Really. Very much so. BUT – in my trying to explain that it was going to be quite a step for someone like me to engage in that side of the “play” I somehow managed to convince him I’d not truly like it. He doesn’t believe in “switches” he says, and any attempt by me to try to engage provokes comments like “But I know you don’t really like that” from him. DO I HAVE TO TIE MYSELF UP MYSELF! WTF?!?

I don’t understand the “no switches” rule; the idea that he doesn’t want to do anything I don’t truly WANT is… well… nothing short of sweet but I don’t know how to convince him I want to when I do want him to take the “this is hard for me, but in a good way” part seriously. And plain old “how to get it started” advice. A guy acquaintance suggested handcuffing myself to the bed, but… that seems hamfisted, pardon the pun.

Here’s what I’m hearing, and I’m sorry if it sounds harsh to your “self-proclaimed Dominant:” he’s insecure, and he’s misinformed.

First, the misinformed part: switches exist. In fact, if he’s been paying attention, he might notice that a large part of the overall BDSM culture grew originally out of the gay leather scene, in which, in olden days, every dominant was a submissive first. That was the way you came up in the ranks. So by the very nature of old school leather, every dominant is also a submissive. Even laying history aside, you can let your boyfriend know that I and many of my kinkiest friends are personally insulted by his assertion that we switches simply don’t exist. It’s like negating the existence of bisexuals. So: Dear Boyfriend: come join reality! It’s fun over here. We have cookies. And lots of sex.

Laying aside my own pet peeves, though, is the larger point that will probably be of more use to you: he’s scared. He probably wants to do things to you that he finds really hot, but he’s still afraid that that means there’s something wrong with him. BDSM dynamics require boatloads of trust, and it tends to be the dominant’s job to hold a lot of that trust. It is very, very easy to make a mistake and break trust in this type of dynamic, and so sometimes dominants are reluctant to play with people they’re not sure about. What if he hurts you and you hate it? What if you laugh at him? What if you find out something he’s into and freak?

Clearly, your words aren’t enough in this scenario to convince him that this is what you want. Tying yourself to the bed is a little hamfisted, indeed. But you might try something similar. Different triggers, when you’re being sexual with him, might open that headspace for him and indicate your availability. Some classics include kneeling at his feet, crossing your arms over your head when he’s on top of you, or undressing in front of him while he’s still clothed and watching. Try one of these if any of them turn you on, or something else simple. And keep talking: if you care deeply for him – and it sounds like you do – let him know that you’re not going to think less of him for wanting some nonstandard things. Have him introduce some of the things he’d like to do to you in dirty talk before actually doing them. Tell him to write you a letter or email with a fantasy scenario he has in mind, and pledge to yourself not to react badly to it, even if it’s not totally your cup of tea.

It may seem ironic, with him being the dominant and all, but you need to draw him out and make him feel safe.

Let me know how it goes, folks! I’m always reachable here at the blog, or at delilah@dommedelilah.com!

Read Full Post »

And once again, Dan Savage FTW

One of my astute readers pointed out, in response to my post yesterday about SexinChrist.com, that Dan Savage ran a contest just a couple of months ago to find a meaning for the word ‘saddlebacking.’ His purpose was to protest Rick Warren’s (pastor of Saddleback Church) inclusion in Obama’s inauguration; the man is apparently a right-wing homophobic freak.

The winner “by a gaping margin,” as Dan had it? “The phenomenon of Christian teens engaging in unprotected anal sex in order to preserve their virginities.”

Dan’s explication is awesome, too, so I thought I’d share it here so you don’t even have to clicky linky if you don’t want to:

Here’s why this definition is perfect: Saddlebacking, like barebacking, involves one person riding up on another’s backside. But in this case, it’s not the bare-naked cock-in-ass that’s the most important feature of the ride, but the fact that the person being ridden has been saddled—thanks to the efforts of the Rick Warrens of this world—with religious hang-ups and serious misconceptions about sex. Like the barebacker who casually tosses away his health—or his partner’s health—because he believes, quite erroneously, that “risky = sexy,” the saddlebacker offers up her ass because she believes, quite erroneously, that she can get fucked in the ass—vigorously, religiously—and still be considered a virgin on her wedding night.

Rest well, all you freaks. Have an excellent Friday night – and wear your condoms!

Read Full Post »

As promised: Safewords 201 – Some common misconceptions

My basic informational post about safewords is here.

There are a few notions about safewords, however, that I’ve come across and would like to take a moment to dispel.

Myth #1: Safewords are only for players who don’t know each other well.

While it’s true that in part, the use of safewords is for the purpose of communication when one might not know another’s reactions well enough to judge, it’s not always the best idea to drop safewords even when you’ve been playing together for a long time. There are a number of reasons to keep safewords in place, even in a long term D/s relationship Perhaps the top wants to regularly push the bottom’s boundaries and help him or her to grow. Having a safety net can really help when you’re trying to push past limits together. If there’s no way for the bottom to say no, the risk is much higher that someone will get physically or emotionally harmed. Also remember that people change, and relationships shift. What might be okay one day might not be okay the next, and safewords are excellent shorthand for “oh hey I thought this was okay but right now it’s really not and could you just stop it and hold me?” While in longer-term relationships people are more likely to “feel” or “know” when something is wrong by reading body language, it’s by no means foolproof, and without a safeword option, a bottom – particularly a submissive – can easily go silent and feel trapped, and that’s where a lot of damage can be done. More on this below.

Myth #2: If I don’t use a safeword, I can be pushed farther.

I have had a number of people contact me requesting – nay, demanding – that I do a scene with them without a safeword. Usually these people also want some kind of intense corporal punishment – like paddling, caning, or whipping – or to be severely trampled, or to have some other scene that involves a great deal of pain-endurance. They often have a story of the mistress who did this with them and how it was all fine and dandy.

To these people I say: Good luck with that. I won’t be visiting you at the hospital.

Doing a scene with a total or even relative stranger, that could involve physical harm, without a safeword, is just. plain. stupid. What these people seem to think is that if they have a safeword, they will call it, plain and simple, and thus they won’t be able to get past their own pain limitations.

First of all: fucking weh. I’m not here to risk criminal charges so you can push your limits. But second: you’re wrong.

If you do an intense scene without a safeword, the top, if he or she gives a shit about your safety or his or her own, will hold back. You won’t get the incredible, limits-pushing ball-busting you were looking for if the top doesn’t have an idea of how to know when to stop. And you, the bottom, may also get pushed where you don’t truly want to go, and get harmed in the process.

I did a scene with someone who was insistent about not using a safeword. I told him tough nooggies, and we did it with one. Guess what? He discovered that he was too proud to use the safeword, and so he got the intensity he was looking for, while always knowing that he could stop it if he really needed to. One way to combat the desire to play without safewords is to make the safeword something really stupid-sounding, or difficult to say, which may make the bottom less likely to want to use it. But if push comes to shove and the bottom needs an out – that sub will be screaming “I want a pomegranate enema!”

Myth #3: As long as I use a safeword, I’m totally fine.

This is the caveat to what I’ve said above, and it’s a tricky one.

Safewords are useful, yes. And as I’ve said, I don’t play professionally without them, and I usually don’t play personally without them, either. But it’s worth noting that sometimes, they don’t work.

Having a safeword in place, for example, is no excuse to engage in activities that you don’t know how to do safely. It’s all well and good if the bottom can tell you that the caning you’re delivering is too harsh; it’s rather unfortunate, though, if you’ve already struck him in a major organ at top force.

It’s also worth knowing that, for some submissives, it’s possible or even common to go non-verbal during a good scene. This can also happen during a bad scene, and if the submissive can’t drag herself up out of headspace to utter her safeword, she’s likely to endure something that she never wanted to endure – and that’s where harm gets done. If you top or dominate people, be sure that you develop good people-reading skills, or if you don’t have them, know that about yourself. It’s easy, in these intense emotional and physical spaces, for a scene to go wrong and for a submissive to feel trapped like a patient under surgery whose anesthesia has left them paralyzed but awake and unable to call for help. Safewords are great tools, but they are by no means perfect: keep your eyes open and your other senses alert for when a submissive may be in trouble.

Myth #4: It is never, never okay to not honor a safeword.

I’m probably going to catch a lot of shit for this, but here goes: sometimes, for certain experienced players who know each other well, it may be okay to play with ignoring safewords.

I’ve seen this posted in play party rules before: “If you’re going to be doing a scene where the safeword will be called and ignored, please inform the Dungeon Master beforehand.” Seriously? I thought at first. Somebody would do that?

The answer to that is always, of course, that yes, somebody would. But I want to emphasize here that what I’m talking about and cautiously condoning is a planned scene that contains layers of nonconsent play: probably the top will be doing something that will strongly encourage the bottom to call the safeword, and the players are eroticizing the idea of nonconsent even further by having the safeword be ignored.

My sincere hope (and my strong recommendation) is that those engaging in such scenes would have a “real” safeword underneath the ignorable one, that either party could call in case of real trouble. But I can see the power in enacting the scenario where the bottom calls the safeword and the top just keeps going. It’s terrifying, and thrilling, in the way that all the best BDSM scenes are.

But remember: if you are playing with someone who ignores your safeword, and you haven’t previously agreed to it, that is simple abuse. Mistress Hypatia out of the UK has a great piece on this and on the topic of safewords in general.

It’s a complex thing, this kinky world. It drills right into our psyches and our hearts and our deepest fears and desires. Remember that, revel in it, and play safe.

Read Full Post »