54

In a lot of BDSM discourse and especially libfems trying to make people comfortable with it there's a lot of this BS "the sub is the one ACSHUALLY in control not the dom because they set the boundaries" logic that drives me insane..

The one with the whips, chains, dominating tools, other bdsm items at their disposal is the one in power. Not you just because you think you can ask them to stop. Guess what? they can choose not to and you're still tied up and in a vulnerable situation.

"being dominated is empowering because the sub is in control and chooses when the dom stops teehee"

In a lot of BDSM discourse and especially libfems trying to make people comfortable with it there's a lot of this BS "the sub is the one ACSHUALLY in control not the dom because they set the boundaries" logic that drives me insane.. The one with the whips, chains, dominating tools, other bdsm items at their disposal is the one in power. Not you just because you think you can ask them to stop. Guess what? they can choose not to and you're still tied up and in a vulnerable situation. "being dominated is empowering because the sub is in control and chooses when the dom stops teehee"

Show comments

20 comments

Of course subs are not in control. But i also feel that female doms aren't either. Their so-called subs come in and call all the shots. That monologue in Ensler's play is a lie. Dominatrix'ing is not power. There is o/antikink btw.

[–] hmimperialtortie cats plz 14 points

Yes, a dominatrix isn’t in power for the same reasons any other prostituted woman isn’t.

Speaking of dominatrix. I remember a story from one user here said her parents were in a dominatrix and male sub relationship. Her mother the dominatrix was abused by her male sub, became very mentally ill and was afraid that he was going to rape their daughter (u know the user who wrote this). She learn this by reading her diary. So yeah this proves bdsm as a whole no matter the dynamic will always be abusive to women with the men calling the shots.

The person who has the power is the person able to ignore a « no ».

I remember reading that somewhere, and I found it extremely useful as a tool to dispel the bullshit used to sugarcoat so many dire situations. Yes you can put boundaries, but if the person in front of you can decide to ignore the boundaries without any issue, then you’re not having the power, they let you think you have control, but you’re still under their power.

No a prostitute doesn’t have the power, because the client can ignore a no and rape her, no one will do anything. Can the prostitute ignore the no of a client? She can’t.

No a sub doesn’t have the power, because the dim can easily ignore a no. Can a sub ignore the no of a dom? She can’t.

Yes, thank you, this is one of the many dumb arguments I came across when I wanted to learn why BDSM and sexual sadism is different than abuse after all. (needless to say, they couldn't convince me ever since) If you are a "sub" who is immobile because you're in bondage there's nothing you can do if the "dom" decides to ignore your wishes/safe words etc. and just do what they want with you.

As if "choosing" to be abused and degraded is any better. Even if the woman had "control," she's still the one being treated like shit. It's sick no matter how you look at it.

The dom is in charge whether or not those boundaries are violated.

BDSM advocators are predatory jokes.

I remember reading something ages ago written by a woman who had left BDSM, about how subs are made to feel like safe wording is letting the Dom down. So that technically she could say no and end the scene, but they’re manipulated and trained not to. As well as being praised for pushing past their boundaries.

Not to mention kinks like consensual non-consent. And the whole concept of punishment. Can you say no to punishments, or does that defeat the purpose?

Dom - sub is irrelvant. Only the men are in charge. That is what male sexuality is all about. They wouldn't have it any other way.

Usually in heterosexual domination the man is in charge and the roles of “Dom” and “Sub” mean little

Ah, true, that might be it. I mean, if a man goes to a woman and says “I want you to do this, this, and this to me because it turns me on” and there’s not even any consideration of what the woman wants, yeah, I can see your point

Reminds me of a specific Christian response when women started fighting for emancipation and suddenly it was all about women as "the heart of the home"

It’s always that weird phrasing, too: “the one in control.” As if the dom can’t stop whenever they choose.

Load more (3 comments)