105

43 comments

Image Transcription: Instagram


radicalwomaninagony

BDSM heads will look you in the eyes and say "there's a safe way to drown someone". They think that as long as there's consent, the laws of biology just don't exist anymore and it's suddenly safe to drown and electrocute people and punch them in the head

"But they're sOOOOoOOOoooOOO SWEET and Gentle afterwards!!! :(! They don't actually want to hurt you!! Once they're done dehumanizing you with slurs, beating you, choking you, leaving bruises and marks all over your body they call you cute and it's so romantic!!!"

And what's worse is they dont believe themselves.. these men know they're getting off on putting someone's life in danger, but naive young people do believe them.
This "safe strangulation/ drowning/ electrocution/ torture" BS is all about creating a veil of disinformation which allows for more young women to be groomed into BDSM, with the false belief that they wont be at risk of any "real harm".
The meaning of "Harm" itself is even altered in these circles. Bruises? Burst blood vessels in the eye or under the skin? Cuts and marks on the skin? Even little specks of brain damage where oxygen/blood was cut off? Not harm.
Basically if it doesnt nearly kill you and have you rushed into hospital, you weren't "harmed" to these people.

[–] Chopu [OP] 29 points Edited

Also, even when they do acknowledge you were harmed, they still won't call the dom an abuser. These bsdm clowns love to use the No True Scotsman fallacy and always go "Well he wasn't a real dom then. Cos a real dom knows how to safely choke you blah blah". Ugh there is no safe way to abuse someone. I can't believe this even needs to be said.

Edit: spelling

This "safe strangulation/ drowning/ electrocution/ torture" BS is all about creating a veil of disinformation which allows for more young women to be groomed into BDSM, with the false belief that they wont be at risk of any "real harm".

Absolutely this. All the romantization of this shit is made for women. It's marketed towards women, to groom them into thinking it's normal. And a helluva lot of them think it is, because they have no information stating otherwise.

I'm looked at like I have two effing heads when I say I'm not into strangulation or beatings. The other women are aghast at my frigid, prudish ways.

(I know it's not frigid or prudish, but you'd think I was saying I wanted to become a nun in a convent the way they reacted)

Potentially unpopular opinion? BDSM is a spectrum, so you might have someone arguing (like me) that it's safe because they're thinking of it in terms of fuzzy handcuffs, a blindfold, 'pineapple' means no, and maybe a light spanking. But then I read a comment like yours and see "strangulation/ drowning/ electrocution/ torture" and even I'm like "...yeah, no thanks, dog." Also, the former acts could be grooming/slippery slopes to more extreme acts in certain predatory relationships but all that ever happens in other happy relationships, so yeah.

IDK, I think the people who engage in BDSM definitely have to ask themselves more often why this gets them off, what kind of mental stuff is going on in their heads, if indulging in it will desensitize them to the point of further escalation, and what that further escalation will look like.

(I'm a little sensitive to this issue because it can be polarized to the point of attacking women for writing fictional smut with dubious consent with the attackers comparing it to hardcore filmed pornography in terms of its potential damage.)

(I'm a little sensitive to this issue because it can be polarized to the point of attacking women for writing fictional smut with dubious consent with the attackers comparing it to hardcore filmed pornography in terms of its potential damage.)

Personally, I think 50 Shades of Grey has caused just as much harm to women and girls as hardcore pornography. These women who depict violent men raping and beating women as "sexy" and "fun" are driving this cultural shift just as much as the pornographers are, and their so-called "art" has a primarily female audience. The newest generation of young women believes that BDSM is normal in large part because of the work of E.L. James and others like her.

The people I know who are into BDSM don't like 50 Shades either because the whole relationship is abusive. The male character stalks the female character, steals/sells her car and buys her a new one he approves of and also hires a driver for her to make her "safer", when she breaks up with him, he buys her place of employment and sends her inappropriate work email and pressures her to be around him via being her CEO until she's dating him again...

...and that's just three instances of his shitty behavior. That's the blurred-line, oh-he-does-this-because-he-cares-about-me romanticizing-abusive-behavior I'm worried about.

it's safe because they're thinking of it in terms of fuzzy handcuffs

There is a good post about “light kink” on r/antikink

Consider the "fuzzy cuff," aka handcuff. Remove the layer of useless fuzz and you're left with a solid metal ring. It's not designed for pleasure. It's not even designed for comfort. It's designed to immobilize a criminal, as quickly and cheaply as possible.

The fact that it can be removed without a key, or sports an added "fuzzy" surface is a false comfort. Handcuffs have a raw metal edge which sits directly against your flesh. Maybe that's acceptable for a prisoner being transported from point A to point B. But during sex that shit is put to the test. You're pulling on them, you're laying on them, you might even be tied to the bedpost by them. That shit hurts in a very unsexy way. Your wrists look like raw hamburger afterwards. They can literally give you nerve damage. Having sex in handcuffs is legitimately bad for you.

Advanced kinksters don't use handcuffs, they buy dedicated bondage cuffs made from leather, latex etc.

But even here in /r/antikink, when someone refers to "harmless 'light' kink" they'll probably mention the "fuzzy" cuffs.

Fair enough. The fuzzy ones I was thinking about weren't metal, but rather leather/latex with velcro instead of a key.

So we're agreed.

[–] anxietyacct 10 points Edited

That's true but it may be a product of more people experimenting with BDSM because it's now mainstream. I'm pretty sure the community itself was always very "extreme". And they also fetishize a lot of real injustices (i.e society forcing women to be submissive and real-world racism).

I agree. All BDSM is abusive in some way, but there are definitely levels. Spanking may be wrong, but it isn't the same as strangulation.

Maybe TMI, but I can't get into the spanking thing because it reminds me of being a child. I don't want to feel powerless, childlike, and humiliated during sex—it's such a huge turn off if a guy tries it.

Honestly that's probably why a lot of guys like it.

I'm a little sensitive to this issue because it can be polarized to the point of attacking women for writing fictional smut with dubious consent with the attackers comparing it to hardcore filmed pornography in terms of its potential damage.

I understand what you're saying, women have long been judged for writing about "indecent" topics (or writing at all).

But the huge difference is that written erotica technically harms nobody when it's created. Nobody is actually being beaten or spat on while being filmed, unlike pornography. Porn isn't fake is one of the hardest messages for people to understand. They might be acting out "fantasies" but the acts they're engaging in are VERY real. So in terms of overall damage, porn is still 100 times worse.

There's a real conversation to be had about written erotica, though. Many sexual offenders have lots of hardcore sex stories saved on drives, or actually printed out (!!!). And some of them read exactly like how-to manuals on committing heinous sexual crimes.

The thing is that women don't tend to write those kinds of stories, so once again it's male depravity that's the core problem—not the written accounts of sexual encounters themselves.

I realize that's probably an unpopular opinion here, but I just can't get nearly as worked up over women writing erotic stories with dubious themes. A lot of times the women are writing about things that happened to them, and I'm not sure how to feel about that. I don't want to tell women what is appropriate or not when trying to understand what happened, and if writing it down helps them I can't exactly object.

A lot of times the women are writing about things that happened to them, and I'm not sure how to feel about that.

Do you have a source for this? I always assumed the opposite.

Many sexual offenders have lots of hardcore sex stories saved on drives

I really doubt even extremely naughty female-written fanfiction resembles this, but the danger is that people, having no frame of reference, assume that the smut is the same thing.

[–] demonista 15 points Edited

Strangulation is another big one, probably the biggest because it's the most mainstreamed out of the particularly dangerous acts, to the point it's considered vanilla by most under 30 and is part of sex for most college aged people. This is what was always coming w BDSM, is always what lurked beneath, under the veneer of "safe sane consensual". Even when bdsm heads were publicly saying "dont strangle/drown/etc" a decade ago, many practitioners never did the more dangerous acts, but "risk aware consenual kink" (aka wartime level torture) and "24/7" (aka slavery) have been open common undercurrents in bdsm for decades.

Let alone something even less controversial and normalized like "consensual nonconsent" (aka forcible rape, other physical and sexual assault being eroticized, no/don't/stop/I'm scared of you/you're hurting me!/shutting down/crying /screaming/etc don't mean stop, don't), to the point where "vanilla" sex often is said to need a "safe word". "Consensual " nonconsent is so normalized it's even being defended and seen as rather harmless in this damn thread.

I remember even 15+ years ago bdsm communities, practice were seen by relatively mild practitioners as going too far, being desensitized, etc. That bondage, hitting, clothespins on flesh, milder Dom/sub roleplay, hot wax on flesh, etc were seen as "weak", "not really bdsm", practically vanilla, etc. Even in the 70s, there was a lot of eroticization of Nazism in bdsm inc Nazi/Jew roleplay, carving swastikas, "reclaiming" swastikas & other Nazi memorabilia, torture devices/means, aesthetics (which has been mostly ignored/erased/forgotten in the 21st century), scarification, serious burns, severe whippings... (And bdsm as a whole and at its core is pretty much a distillation of the witch hunts, slavery, abusive incest/the patriarchal family/marriage, ruling class male sexuality, prostitution and most recently Nazism combined. Sadism and masochism were named as they were for real, clear reasons: named after ruling class males who practiced it using women, kids in prostitution, servants.)

Another aspect of mainstreaming is even found in top/bottom: they've gone from bdsm terms in the 20th century to "what & who gay/bi men ARE" or even "what & who lesbians, bi women ARE", in a couple decades. (When even most gay/openly bi men didn't use the terms as labels until the last decade, thanks to growing up on internet porn.)

[–] Limeslimeslimes 11 points Edited

Slap a kink or BDSM label on something and abuse becomes consensual, despite only one party being tortured and the other doing the torturing. You can't consent to being abused.

Eg "risk aware consenual kink" (aka wartime level torture) and "24/7" (aka slavery) have been open common undercurrents in bdsm for decades.

A huge amount of true crime stories involve both of those things, especially the slave contract.

You seem to know a lot about BDSM. Do you have any links critiquing BDSM from a feminsit perspective??

[–] demonista 6 points Edited

Some of the most damning evidence about bdsm comes from its defenders eg https://ncsfreedom.org/resources/research/ Truly chilling what's in it eg defenses of rape, half saying that it's fine for not even safe words to mean no (that NOTHING means stop), including kidnapping & marital rape BC "kink", most knowing that most bdsm is actually rack, consensual nonconsent, etc.

For historical feminist analysis: Sheila Jeffreys, Dworkin, the anthology Against Sadomasochism. Max Dashu also discusses it eg ties to slavery & the witch hunts.

I've done reading off n on for about 20 years about radical feminism, the "sex wars", etc.

It used to be an open secret that bdsm was quite influenced by Nazism. Bdsmers would literally show up at gay, lesbian, feminist, etc events in swastikas and Nazi uniforms, often claiming they were reclaiming it, that it was just a Hindu symbol & how dare anyone object. Even to Pat Califia carving a swastika onto a Jewish woman in "Nazi/Jew" roleplay. Places/events even had controversies w public bdsm--they wanted to publicly engage in extreme acts that were traumatizing to other women eg engaging in ritual/bdsm cutting of another bound woman in the showers & defending doing so was a specific example at Michfest. So much for consensual, huh.

This idea is still very much alive eg the view held in those surveys by some that even kidnapping, men beating & raping his wife scenarios should be able to be played out publicly without interference.

There's even some info online about this eg how tied the leather & bdsm community (which mostly overlapped) was to Nazi aesthetics, symbolism, politics, occupation, the Holocaust... Eg sexualizing Nazi soldiers as an adolescent leading to embodying it as an adult

Pat Califia carving a swastika onto a Jewish woman in "Nazi/Jew" roleplay

ugh. one of those "kinks" that I wish I didn't know about... but then again, "raceplay" is supposed to be an acceptable thing so I'm not surprised in the slightest.

Just as an FYI to others I was into the goth and also kinda sorta bdsm scene for a while and I never saw Nazi stuff. Maybe that was popoular in some areas but not where I was.

With many topics it's really "live and let live" until you think about it more. What does it say about men who get off to their partner's pain and cannot have normal intercourse anymore? Similar to Johns using prostitutes, once you think about it for a bit, you realize it is actually disgusting.

"Moral BDSM" is an oxymoron, too.

I just don't get how anyone can believe that sadism is okay. If someone gets sexual pleasure out of committing violence on another person, they are mentally not well.

A friend of mine recently said he hopes fetish lifestylers don’t get lumped in with TIPs and pedos. When I said I don’t care as it hurts women and is a small price to pay, he proceeded to mansplain BDSM to me and all their rules. I didn’t want to go into my own experience of it so I just said I don’t understand how people can get off on hurting others and left it at that. It’s like you can’t really trust any man sometimes.

Why is suffering eroticized?

You've got me thinking about how much we glorify suffering in a lot of cultures, particularly very Catholic heavy cultures. It's pretty prevalent in America as well, but due to the Protestant work ethic.

Suffering is seen as noble to a lot of people. Comfort, enjoyment, and pleasure are seen as sinful, the sign of moral defect.

I think this mindset developed over time because it justified how shitty everyone's lives were. You have to have something that keeps you going despite all the misery. It gives some kind of meaning to the senseless tragedies we experience in life, the ones we can't even begin to understand.

After centuries of this the idea of suffering as a good thing is pretty hard to get rid of. People cling to it as a reason to withhold empathy from others ("this tragic event will build character!") and I personally think it's because most people can't manage their emotions well and become too emotional drained to offer actual support and empathy to others (especially right now with the economy, wars, politics, etc).

I can't explain the allure of eroticising suffering, though. Seriously, I can't fathom being arouses by hurting someone else, it's completely foreign to me.

Because men are degenerates and their sexuality is irredeemable

You can do serious damage just trying someone up too tightly/for too long. Bodies are surpringly breakable.

[–] Julie92845 9 points Edited

I was once into BDSM, except it wasn't nearly as extreme as it is now. Tied to the bed kind of stuff. Hit with a soft horse crop. Not that it's heathy or okay, but it's a far cry from doing something that can actually cause serious injury or even death. I didn't even know anyone else who was into things that could do that even within the community. It was all varying levels of psychologically and emotionally dangerous, but physically? Not at all.

I can't wrap my mind around what they're doing now.

I used to think BDSM was, like, blindfolds, light spanking, and tied scarves. Which seemed weird to me but hey, nobody's getting hurt. Wasn't until I saw BDSM porn categories that I realised that there were seriously fucked practices.

Yeah it's super disturbing to learn how far some people go. Like I have actually cried reading about some of it.