Category Archives: discussions

Tidbits-tentacle pr0n and machine-fuckery

UPDATE:
Due to this case has come to my attention, I will edit this post so no misunderstanding will come from it. First of all, this is a post about sexual fantasy, as well as performance art. Anyone else who consider it to be something else is a nutcase.

So, my exams are almost over, but I’ve still got procrastination to do.

What do you know of the history of fetishes?How old exactly is the wish to be flogged or the fetishization of feet?
Take a look at this and you might be surprised.
My favorite is the tentacles.

I think I can look at that picture and never get bored of it. It might sound odd, and I am quite terrified of my fascination. A couple of weeks ago there was a bondage performance at **** and **** was tied up, suspended and flogged with large squids, covered in color. It was an intense performance,but I was left somehow questioning it. All of the images I’ve seen so far with squids and octopus pr0n, have been with them being alive and active, engaging sexually with another body. The squids used in the performance were dead bodies, and so some of the fascination was removed.There was still the tactility of it, the shine and the gore, but many of the possibilities of the multiple legs were gone, as they were dead.
All in all though I’m really fascinated, because this really is on the border of fascination, at least if one considers the bestiality issue. The fantasy of sex with a tentacle-creature somehow transcend the usual notion of bestiality, or does it really? Is that something that we have made up in our heads, yet again? There is strong cultural connotations here, but we also have the mythical creatures of Medusa and her hair. Some more here for your viewing pleasure:


This
version of tentacle-pr0n is the funniest one though.

One more link before I have to dig deep down in to sociological theory.
This one is a list a couple of ‘impractical’ fetishes and while I can agree with some, and laugh at some other, what caught my attention this time, was the technosexuality/technophiliac. While everyone who knows me pretty much know I shag a lot of nerds (can’t help it) I am actually not that in to technology or even computers for that matter. But I always loved Bjork’s video:

And I can’t help finding the imagery so fucking hot. It is the same fascination that I hold of the concept of cyborgs, the merging of human and ‘machine’ as parts of each other. But then again, there is the concept of sex-dolls, those machines who are made in to looking exactly like a human woman, and even respond to touch, etc. This concept freaks me out, not because of it’s nature, but from where those who are engaging in this type of research and what kind of femininity they invent.

In any case, soon exams are over and I can breathe a bit. Strange that I keep on writing so much when I know I have exams. I think it is called procrastination.


Testing the waters

So, there is a couple of different notions of waters that I’m going to write about in this post. First, water as a fetish, then waterbondage and what comes with that. Lastly,  watersports, or piss-play.

It is an odd thing, discovering a new fetish. I started this journey about two years ago, a journey into pervery, and all of this is of course a continuous exploration. Of those things that has been most remarkable has been the fact that I started to do needles, which, for anyone who knows me and knows about my knifephobia, is a huge step. Another step, not as big, but certainly interesting, was how I a couple of months ago realised that I have a fetish for water, a fetish that I have previously not pronounced as one. But here it goes: I’m a aquaphiliac/hydrophiliac. How did I come to that conclusion then? Well, I actually needed to see it in print in order to connect the dots from the past, the present and the future. A little book that described different types of fetishes, and one of them was having a fetish for water, in what ever shape or form that fetish might be experienced. For me, it is mostly about sensation. There is something in water that makes me feel alive, that makes me feel strong. The slickness of skin, turning into an element of nature, in some ways transcending a notion of flesh. Flesh that sometimes does not seem to be enough becomes perfect or bettered in water, and it becomes something that I can more easily relate to. Through moving in water, I feel myself more. That is of course something that almost all of my sexual practices bring with them, but extra clear when water is involved.

I’ve always felt good in water, swimming, taking a shower, standing in the rain (had numerous colds due to my love to stand in rain getting soaked, especially in the spring and during the summer), my head being held down under water, someone forcing me to shower in cold water, being led to believe that I am drowning. Water-boarding or getting showered by a cold stream. A cock in me, while head being held under the surface, feeling him fucking me and not caring about me shaking. And fingers clinching my nose shut, my body held by a tight rope harness, dipped and seeing him through the surface. Or being threatened, hanging close, close to the surface. Beneath or below the surface, expectation, fear and focus.

Emma Alexa snorkelling by Richard Knightly

First of all, the sensation of water, the touch of water is very erotic. The slick, flowing part makes my skin breathe in a different manner, much like the feeling of latex. I think there is a correlation there. If you ever had showered or taken a swim in latex, you know what I am talking about, and if you can but have not yet done it, do.
So this is more than BDSM, it is sensation. It is a fetish and it is a practice. And do you know what?  I miss my fetishes. At the moment I’m dealing with a body that does not feel like mine, and because of that, certain fetishes that has the nature of being associated with touch, latex is now very far away from me.
But that is another post. But anyhow, I’m missing my fetish. And curse the day that there became a divide in the BDSM and fetish world. Because I want all the crackers. Greedy fucking girl. I tortured the VISA card the other week, and looking forward to all the slick items that will drop in to my postbox.

But it was water I was talking about. My body becomes a possibility, a movement and is soaked. Like when he grabs my body and force my face into the stream of water coming from the shower head. Says nothing, just holding me there, grasping for air. I cannot distinguish the details of his face because of the stream of water, but I can feel his eyes all over my body,watching my reactions.

And in water I become a tease. Before play and when we are just suppose to shower I’m rubbing myself against more things than soap.  It is one of the few occasions when I can seduce and feel seductive. The water streaming over my body makes me powerful, even when it makes me grasp for air.

Then there is the piss. The watersports  and this is something that has to do with humiliation. As it is one of my partners main-fetishes I did not write it off immediately, although I must say I never thought about it until he spoke of it.  No harm can be done trying yes? :)

Golden Shower, Model: BoyKitten, Photo by Razoir

This was hard for me, on many levels. I guess I’ve been socialized into the whole thing about bodily-fluids as waste and as ‘unclean’. There is nothing ‘unclean’ about piss really, but to make my brain understand that is another story.
I crave the feeling of being stripped of control, pushed deeply down in to something that is for someone else and with me as a mere object, a frame and/or a receptacle. This is not about fetishist pleasures, that is not the objective. It touches on different elements of sexuality, such as disgust/abject, submission, fronts and layers.

Disgust/abject, because sex and piss are so far away from each other, at least where I come from. As many others, I grew up learning all about staying clean, not making a mess, about the body as a limit of what is appropriate or not. The physical body (especially female) is one of constant improvement, a degradation of all that is seen as ‘not feminine’ enough, a special hiding-place created for the bodily excretions, such as urine, feces, spit, menstrual blood, snot and pus. Which can seem a bit odd, because women are still also so often seen as the body she inhabits and nothing more. But the tampon has to be hidden, there is only joint pissing if one has to go somewhere where there is no other alternative.
And I’m kind of riding on top of all this. While often being accused of not being especially feminine (when did I even say I was!?) and not really that bothered by periods (especially after the arrival of the MoonCup, everyone should have one!) for a number of reasons, I still find pissplay hard.

Submission is hard. It is not easy, even when one could pretend it is. It is about merging and meeting desires on terms and conditions that sometimes can be ever so changing. I could say that communication is everything, but when everything has been communicated then? What is there left? When engaging in piss-play I want to trust, and I do. But my brain keep on giving me smart, little comments, worrying about things I should not, because he will take of it. He knows and does it, always. So how can I get in to a frame of mind? Is this because I feel like I loose something when it happens? Is this about the fronts and the layers?


Fronts and layers…yes.  When sitting squatting, fully dressed, being told to piss, it goes against something strong in me, something that makes me not even want to be in the same room as someone else while they are taking a piss otherwise. I want to be squeaky clean in a way, I like order. I like concepts that are tangible within that framework. In a messy room, my thinking patterns becomes fucked up, in clothes that are not what I usually would pick I feel trapped. As a creature of habit and control, I yearn to be picked in to pieces and maybe even put back again. That is where the layers come in. How many layers can one reach? Doll once spoke of people as being onions, multi layered and always changing. But when does one start to cry as the onion is dismantled? Strangely enough, I can often brush off the humiliating feeling, I am so focused on that I know that I might get clean. It is easier to rip a front than to strip layer after layer.

All of this makes me sound like I don’t like watersports. And while there is a certain truth about that I don’t fetishize the piss nor the tactility  associated with it, I yearn to be dismantled in that way that I think I can see how piss would. And that is something I never thought I would say.
And the deeper he goes, the deeper I want him to push me And in the end, I might cry. Out of relief, happiness and the feeling of safety.


Ex-gay? Ex-dominant? Ex-switch?

You heard of the exgay movement? About the ex-sm movement? Take a look at this, but be warned, it is very painful.

This is slightly different than you might see in general from an ex-gay movement. This is a man who by his own choice wishes to stop being a pro-dom.  It is a story of a man who has been abused from the early start of his life, from bullying to living with his father who, according to him, had ‘deviant desires’, using dogs as sexual instruments on women, involving his son in pornographic movies, the son became a ‘lap dog’. The dad took his own life, and  the rest of this man’s story is one of abuse (rape, abuse from people he trusted, violence, etc). As the documentary goes on, it becomes clear for me as a viewer that this is exploitative documentary.

At one point Rick says, after some type of fisting session that involves removing feces from the bottom of the submissive, ‘This is all a part of the human cycle, don’t judge me’.
And I kinda don’t want to judge him. His past life catch up with him, and the grim reality of lonelyness is a harsh one. The harshest. And Rick is honest.  The documentary is called ‘Me and my slaves’ but it should be called ‘Me and my pain’. It is hard to watch a human being in pain.
This is him, trying to perform his own absolution saving himself. The christian concept of absolution,attracts to those who are in so much pain, to those who cannot see any way out of a life they consider as doomed.

“I’ve lost myself…I’ve given it up, there is nothing there that I can do.”
Rick

And for that, I will not go through the whole documentary here with you. There is so much to say about this man. But I’m already exploiting him enough.

In the movie Bruno, with Sasha Baron Cohen as the austrian fashionista/reporter/celebrity, there is a specific favorite part of mine He reaches a decision to become straight, because all of the other male celebrities in the U.S are straight.  So he finds someone who can make him straight.  This is in no way on the same levels of Rick, in terms of despair, but it still says a lot about those people who seek out or get forced in to the ex-gay movement. The despair felt, because ones sexual and emotional level is not on the same as the normative society’s. A  society that can punish you, shun you, kill you, ignore your very existence. What then does that mean, this whole regiment of becoming straight? By being around men and being socialised into becoming a straight man, not thinking about men in a sexual sense, the gay or bisexual man is supposed to become liberated from what is seen as a troublesome practice and instead find a woman to marry.Being gay according to the ex-gay movement is something that you choose to do, it’s a choice in terms of sexual practice, and this practice is wrong.  The impure thoughts of a broken individual that is becoming healed through therapy. For this movement, they do seem to have very little appreciation of  any possible emotional links to a person of the same sex, and if there is, they are taught and can be re-wired.
So here we are then. Bruno is going to be rewired. Or is he?

Can we apply the same concept to BDSMers? That we ‘are’ sadomasochists, that our bodies inhabit the lust as a essence and there is nothing more? What would that stance actually mean in terms of fighting for BDSM-rights, or queer rights? These are important questions. Is BDSM something that we are or something that we do? I can’t answer that for you, but this is where I am coming from.
My personal stance is that I am a queer person.  With certain tastes of sexual practices. I can’t define my self as a submissive or as a bottom.  Those are not a direct, linked part to my identity.  It’s something I do.  But also, by doing, I can reclaim it, bit by bit, becoming more, going further in to myself and getting to know parts of me. Parts that are not constant, but ever so changing. Parts that I maybe have not been able to reach.

I think I might be looking for something. I don’t know really what, and if there is ever a final point in which I can rest, or if I even want there to be one, but in the meantime, I can rest in those discoveries I’ve done about myself today, in this minute. It is not about being essential. It is about exploration and appropriation of feelings, practices and structures.

 

Here is a clip of one of the ways in which Bruno is supposed to become straight.

I know, I know, the mockery of the military is brilliant on so many levels but there is one more reason why I’m posting this. Because the ex-gay movement exist and it needs to be meet and challenged for what it is.

I don’t want to pass judgement on those who seek council in the hands on the ex-gay movement. We live in a world that is homophobic, sexist, racist, misogynist, etc, and it can be so fucking lonely. What I will pass judgement on is those who exploit the fears that they themselves manage to maintain.
They are, in short:

Utter Fucktards.


The Lies about the Ten Lies-part 3

We have Zxenu Cronstrom Beskow onboard as our guestblogger. He examines the radical feminist claims abut ‘lies’ told by BDSMers.

The first part
Second part

Part 3: “Sadomasochism versus Radical Feminist dogma”

If Farley had openly accused sadomasochists of not conforming to the dogmas of her particular brand of radical feminism, then she had been correct. But this is not what she is doing. Instead, she’s exploiting mainstream society’s contempt for BDSM in an attempt to establish her very special discourse as if it was a objective reality or consensus viewpoint. She’s establishing a world view where society itself is “sadomasochistic” and where her own brand of radicalism is the ONLY valid resistance against mainstream society. Lets take a look at the remaining four points.

2. Sadomasochism is love and trust, not domination and annihilation.

Good relationships, sadomasochistic and vanilla (conventional/mainstream) alike, are based on love and trust. Of course, there are also bad relationships. There are also sexual relations that are based on mutual lust rather then love. Such a relationship can still be mutual and non-abusive if it contains enough trust and respect.

Farley’s examples are not even examples, merely shallow propaganda. David Koresh was a destructive religious cult leader, not a sadomasochist. Of course HIS kind of dominance was bad – and so was his heterosexuality and masculinity. If he is being to be used as an example of sadomasochism being bad on a general level, then he can just as well be used as an example of heterosexuality being bad on a general level, or of men being bad on a general level. Then again, there are radical feminists who would agree with that kind of argument.

Farley also uses some sexual fantasies as examples. And indeed, these particular fantasies certainly do not seem loving. Then again, they are fantasies. The love and trust is not about the fantasies themselves, but about how they are handled. Also, there are a lot of sadomasochistic fantasies that are very much about love, and many heterosexual and homosexual fantasies that have nothing to do with love.

4. Sadomasochism is consensual; no one gets hurt if they don’t want to get hurt. No one has died from sadomasochistic “scenes.”

Regardless of her sexuality, a victim of abuse is a victim period, not a masochist. She may or may not ALSO be a masochist, but this is entirely beside the point. By the definitions that sadomasochists typically use, abuse (sadistic or otherwise) is not sadomasochistic. The word sadomasochism include the word masochism, and this word implies that the person on the receiving end is there as a masochist, not as a victim.

Thus, BDSM and sadomasochistic sex can never be abusive, but only in the same way as vanilla lovemaking can never be abusive: If it turns abusive, then it is no longer lovemaking.

Of course, there are many sexual relations – vanilla and BDSM alike – that have started out consensual, but later turned abusive. This is a real problem, but it doesn’t men that all sadists (in the BDSM sense of the word) are abusers, and it does not mean that all heterosexual men are abusers either.

Furthermore, there are people who have died from vanilla lovemaking, so of course there are also people who have died from consensual BDSM play. Heart attacks are a common cause in both cases, but when it comes to advanced forms of BDSM there is also the issue of people being inexperienced and lacking proper safety education. Just as with mainstream sexuality, porn is NOT a good teacher for how to do it in real life. Even in its advanced forms, BDSM can be LESS dangerous then vanilla sex – but only if people know what they are doing.

Deeper in her argument, Farley practically claims that it is impossible to consent to BDSM – that the masochist is a brainwashed victim who does not know what she really want or an addict unable to say no. While a convenient excuse to disqualify the experiences of women who don’t share Farley’s dogma, it is simply not true for masochists in general, regardless of gender. (Farley’s argument seem to assume that the submissive is always female and the dominant is always male.) Of course there are individual masochists and victims of manipulative sadists who fit this stereotype, just like there are destructive vanilla relationships that contain addiction or cultlike tendencies.

6. Sadomasochistic pornography has no relationship to the sadomasochistic society we live in. “If it feels good, go with it.” “We create our own sexuality.”

Mainstream society is most definitely not sadomasochistic in any definition of “sadomasochism” that EITHER the sadomasochists themselves OR the mainstream society would agree with. Farley is taking theoretical constructs of radical feminism for objective reality here.

10. Sadomasochism is political dissent. It is progressive and even “transgressive” in that it breaks the rules of the dominant sexual ideology.

Seen from a non-totalitarian perspective, this statement contains an obvious truth. Although sadomasochism, just like homosexuality, is becoming more and more accepted, it is still far from mainstream.

To deny this, one must reduce reality to two groups. On one side, the one and only true resistance (in this case radical feminists) and on the other side the evil conspiracy and all its minions, including all resistances that do not conform to the orthodoxy of the one and only true resistance.

Of course, this only covers the matter of dissent. Far from all dissent is constructive, progressive or transgressive in any good sense of any such word. If one can reasonably consider BDSM and sadomasochism to be good things depends on your point of view.

In BDSM, dominance and submission is optional and not based on gender. One can be dominant, submissive, both or neither, regardless of whether one is a man, woman, intersexual or a gender-undefined queer-person. Being a dominant doesn’t give you any right to dominate someone who doesn’t want to be dominated by you or in a way that he doesn’t want to be dominated. Being a submissive gives you a right to chose who to submit to, when, how and to what extent.

From a queer-feminist perspective, this is very liberating and a useful tool in the struggle for freedom and diversity. From most other feminist perspective, it is neutral: Neither a good thing and a help, nor a bad thing and a threat.

From a totalitarian conservative or radical feminist perspective however, it is inherently evil. It is, by definition, a lie – Or at least a contradiction in terms. One core belief shared by patriarchal conservatism and radical feminism is that men are, by definition, dominant/oppressive, while women are, again by definition, submissive/oppressed. While the conservatives consider it good and the radical feminists consider it evil, both sides agree that That’s Just The Way It Is. Thus, the dominant women and submissive men of BDSM must be explained away for their worldview to remain intact. And an all-out attack is always the easiest defense.

By Xzenu Cronström Beskow

The author is a  queerfeminist veteran, active both in struggles against sexual abuse and  for the rights of sexual minorities. Xzenu has  academic degrees in psychology and sexology.


The Lies about the Lies, part 2

First part by Xzenu Cronström Beskow can be found here.

To recap, the ten lies that Melissa Farley claims to uncover, are:

  1. 1. Pain is pleasure; humiliation is enjoyable; bondage is liberation.
    2. Sadomasochism is love and trust, not domination and annihilation.
    3. Sadomasochism is not racist and anti Semitic even though we “act” like slave owners and enslaved Africans, Nazis and persecuted Jews.
    4. Sadomasochism is consensual; no one gets hurt if they don’t want to get hurt. No one has died from sadomasochistic “scenes.”
    5. Sadomasochism is only about sex. It doesn’t extend into the rest of the relationship.
    6. Sadomasochistic pornography has no relationship to the sadomasochistic society we live in. “If it feels good, go with it.” “We create our own sexuality.”
    7. Lesbians “into sadomasochism” are feminists, devoted to women, and a women-only lesbian community. Lesbian pornography is “by women, for women.”
    8. Since lesbians are superior to men, we can “play” with sadomasochism in a liberating way that heterosexuals can not.
    9. Re-enacting abuse heals abuse. Sadomasochism heals emotional wounds from childhood sexual assault.
    10. Sadomasochism is political dissent. It is progressive and even “transgressive” in that it breaks the rules of the dominant sexual ideology.

Part 2: The Strawman Sadomasochist
To some extent, all ten points listed in part one are to some extent a “Strawman Political” version of sadomasochists. In this part I will focus on six points where this “Strawman sadomasochist” is the main problem, while the next part will instead deal with the four points where the main problem is radical feminist dogmatism.

1. Pain is pleasure; humiliation is enjoyable; bondage is liberation.

For some people, the RIGHT kind of pain in the right degree and context can indeed be enjoyable. Same thing goes for humiliation and for being tied up with ropes – which is what the word “bondage” refers to in a BDSM context. (BDSM stands for sadomasochistic sexual practices: Bondage & Discipline, Dominance & Submission, Sadism & Masochism.)

During my decades of experience with the BDSM scene, I have *never* encountered a person who claims that all pain is enjoyable. However, I have often encountered this stereotype among people who are prejudiced against sadomasochists and their BDSM practices.

It is also worth noticing that this first point of Farley’s is homage to the novel 1984 and the propaganda of the evil regime in that novel: “War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.” The problem here is not the homage itself, but that she attributes it to the sadomasochists. The strawman sadomasochist she is “exposing” have more in common with the villains of children’s comic books, standing on mountaintops shouting “Muahaha, I’m EVIL!” to the raging thunderstorm, then it has in common with actual people. I assume that Farley has made up the ten points herself, incorrectly presenting her prejudice against sadomasochists as if it was the actual opinions of actual sadomasochists. If the list actually do come from someone who claim to be a sadomasochist, and Farley has not twisted the words or ripped them out of context, then Farley has indeed been extremely lucky with finding a source that is easy to mock. Continue reading


The Lies about the Ten Lies, by Guestblogger

Ve: When I first read Melissa Farleys piece ‘Ten Lies about Sadomasochism’ I wanted to respond.  I did not know how, but kept the text in the back of my head.

Then, time went by, and I did not give a proper response. Instead, a couple of weeks ago I saw the text was mentioned in a discussiongroup. Closely following, I realised a fellow sex-positive activist who is also an acquaintance of mine was saying all that I never managed to express when it came to Farley’s badly informed rants.

So here, we proudly present our first guestblogger; here is Xzenu Beskow and the first part out of 3, with an examination of the claims made by Melissa Farley.

Part 1: Totalitarian categorism in Radical Feminism

It is said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and this metaphor is very true for totalitarian branches of radical feminism. Tough everyone divides things and people into categories, it is all too easy to make the categories into prisons instead of tools. This is the point at which categorization turns into what I call categorism: When categorization by skin color or ethnicity turns into racism, where categorization by gender turns into sexism or transphobia, where categorization by sexual orientations turns into homophobia, heterophobia or paraphobia.

Feminism focuses on the categorization of people into men and women, and on the oppression of the second category. At best, this focus is liberating by fighting oppression and by making oppression visible. At worst, however, feminism can be misused to lock people into narrow categories of what it means to have a certain gender or sexuality. And thus, certain branches of radical feminism are infamous for prejudice against gender identity minorities (notably transsexuals, for example with Raymond’s book The Transsexual Empire) and against all sexualities that do not fit their narrow normative orthodoxy.

Such orthodoxy can be relatively harmless when it is very far from what the mainstream believes. If a debater claims in the name of feminism that all heterosexual women are brainwashed victims of male rapists, then the debater is unlikely to accomplish anything other then giving antifeminists an opportunity to ridicule feminism as such. But if the same debater instead claims that all masochists are brainwashed victims of sadistic rapists, then the debater has a chance to cause real harm to real masochists since this sexual minority is already viewed with mistrust and prejudice by many in the mainstream.

One good example is Farley’s “The Ten Lies of Sadomasochism”. In this text, the author makes the claim that there are ten claims that sadomasochists usually make about themselves. She also claims that these ten statements are lies, and that she has successfully exposed them as such.

Three things are wrong about this statement. First of all, her list is highly questionable. Some claims are twisted into generalizations, others are outright outrageous. It is obvious that it is the list of a radical feminist who want to portray sadomasochism in a bad light, not a list that the sadomasochist subculture would agree on. Thus, her whole argument is based on a “Strawman Political”. (See http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StrawmanPolitical )

Second, not only does she use heavily ideological definitions of what certain words mean, but she also pretends that sadomasochists agree with her definitions of these words.

Third, she generalizes in ways that very consistently imply the word “all” without using the word itself. She talks about how all sadomasochists are, without ever using the word “all”, taking for granted that all sadomasochists form one coherent group. This kind of generalization is a hallmark of categorism.

The ten so-called lies are:

1. Pain is pleasure; humiliation is enjoyable; bondage is liberation.
2. Sadomasochism is love and trust, not domination and annihilation.
3. Sadomasochism is not racist and anti Semitic even though we “act” like slave owners and enslaved Africans, Nazis and persecuted Jews.
4. Sadomasochism is consensual; no one gets hurt if they don’t want to get hurt. No one has died from sadomasochistic “scenes.”
5. Sadomasochism is only about sex. It doesn’t extend into the rest of the relationship.
6. Sadomasochistic pornography has no relationship to the sadomasochistic society we live in. “If it feels good, go with it.” “We create our own sexuality.”
7. Lesbians “into sadomasochism” are feminists, devoted to women, and a women-only lesbian community. Lesbian pornography is “by women, for women.”
8. Since lesbians are superior to men, we can “play” with sadomasochism in a liberating way that heterosexuals can not.
9. Reenacting abuse heals abuse. Sadomasochism heals emotional wounds from childhood sexual assault.
10. Sadomasochism is political dissent. It is progressive and even “transgressive” in that it breaks the rules of the dominant sexual ideology.

In the next two parts we will take a closer look at each of these claims. I have divided this into two chapters: The Strawman Sadomasochist and Sadomasochism Versus Radical Feminist Dogma.

To be continued

By Xzenu Cronström Beskow

The author is a  queerfeminist veteran, active both in struggles against sexual abuse and  for the rights of sexual minorities. Xzenu got  academic degrees in psychology and sexology.

 


On racism & fastfood-pr0n

Apparently, there is even shaky things going on in the pr0nbuisness. If I hear one more person saying the words ‘credit’ and ‘crunch’ in the same sentence I will probably tie a noose and give it to that person. But apparently, even the buisness of picturing people making whopiee is feeling it and trying to find ‘new’ ways of continue being able to sell. Violet Blue (she is awesome and will have her link in the list ASAP) writes about the question of ‘interracial’ pr0n and the ‘humour’ and ‘tongue in cheek’ of the mainstream pr0n companies that is not supposed to be racism at all. Or is it? Where is the titles like ‘Oh, no she is fucking a white, ugly middleclass, fat idiot with nothing behind his skull‘ . But then again, pr0n is big buisness, that title would not sell and buisness must go on, giving people what they want. Yeah right. Adult Video News (AVN) claims that interracial pr0 is the recessionproof category in adult video industry, but Violet Blue is examining that statement in this brilliant column in San Fransisco Chronicle pointing towards standards and racism in the industry of pr0n.

We all know about roleplay and taboos being broken but Blue hit the nail on the head when she says:

“On closer inspection, there’s something more than a little disingenuous about AVN’s sense of humor. We all know that porn is built to part you with your hard-earned cash and proffer fantasies; sometimes certain kinds of fantasy or roleplaying can be sexy: taboos, whether actual or perceived, are always hot, right? The positive ability of porn is that is can show partnering that is charged because it crosses racial boundaries; I believe that damage is not done by the FACT of crossing those taboos, but in the WAY those taboos are crossed.”

AVN responded with what can only be describes as a unfounded, personal attack on Blue, rather than thinking about what the implications of her text and questions actually mean.
To read the whole story, click here.

This is so fucking important to talk about with the mainstream pr0nindustry that exists today.  And it stinks of racism, orientalism, sexism and plain stupidity. Cause there is so much more to it. This blatant commersialised shit does not get me turned on, but someone else might. I don’t like pr0on to be honest. I am tired of going through hords of shit to find 3 minutes of hotness. Cause the stereotypes are nothing more.Madison Young who is interviewed for the column puts it perfectly by saying:

“The LA porn world has gotten to the point where the majority of the material that they are producing is something that I would call ‘fast food porn.’ It’s junk food. Offensive and artery-clogging porn.”

I like organic things, I like food where I can taste something and recognise it as an actual taste. But must confess that I occasionally have a burger or two. D00m on me. How about you?
//

Ve


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 41 other followers