HarperJean on the latest BDSM and feminism kerfuffle:
"I've been thinking lately that any "examining" relative to sexual desires is better focused on their effects rather than their causes.
We could stipulate, purely for the sake of argument, that someone's desires for dominance and/or submission are the result of bad relationships, bad role models and sexist culture. So what? I don't think feminism is about abstract notion or morality or purity. The relevant question is not where desires come from but where they take you. Do your submissive fantasies and/or experiences leave you feeling good about yourself and your relationships? Do they contribute to safe and satisfying relationships? Do your dominant fantasies and/or experiences lead you to actually denigrate or abuse your partner, or others around you, or have other harmful effects? The Feministing commenter who said it would be better for people's communities if they didn't do BDSM seemed to hint at such an effects-based analysis, but didn't offer anything to support it.
Surely, some people do experience kinky fantasies or play in ways that are harmful to self-esteem, intimacy, personal autonomy or mutual respect. We might say that they're "in it for the wrong reasons," but whatever the reason what's important is that, at least in the ways they're currently doing it, being in it is not good for them or for others.
So, I think it is not helpful and can be hurtful to ask someone to examine and justify where their desires come from. By contrast, at least as a piece of advice, examining how you're going about it and what it is doing for you seems just fine. And in fact that's something how-to writes, presenters and other community figures often do advise.
Of course, either way it could still be used as a bludgeon, because it can still carry the assumption that the examining can only have one result and if you reach a different one you're just wrong."
http://trinityva.livejournal.com/1000547.html
Yes, exactly. I was planning a post along these lines, but she nailed it so well I don't think I have to. Suffice it to say that I've always found "where did this come from?" (which is inevitably the kind of answer feminists are looking for when they ask us to "examine" our desires) to be a singularly unproductive question. A thing's origin has nothing to do with its value, or its morality.
1 comment:
One could say that part of the difference between the two sides of this debate comes down to whether they agree with this statement: "A thing's origin has nothing to do with its value, or its morality."
Since I believe a thing's origin has everything to do with its morality, that might cast light on why I'm against BDSM. Similarly, since you don't believe in any connection between where something comes from and its morality, that helps explain your position.
Post a Comment