The post I didn’t want to write - for so many reasons - I mean what is the point, I’m going to get trolled/linked to death, but most of all because I know it’s going to bring some seriously unpleasant people to this blog (some of which I hope I’ve negated by the *’s). I mean yes trans wars was mad - but mostly there was nobody who came on who was nasty ya know? Anyways - deep breath. First of all I’m reprinting this in full because it’s probably the best thing I’ve ever read on the subject, and it says most of what I want to say, incredibly elegantly. It’s an interview with Audre Lorde by Susan Leigh Starr on the subject of lesbian S /M specifically Samois, the lesbian S & M group formed in the late 70’s.
Without a rigorous and consistent evaluation of what kind of a future we wish to create, and a scrupulous examination of the expressions of power we choose to incorporate into all our relationships including our most private ones, we are not progressing, but merely re-casting our own characters in the same old weary drama…SM is not the sharing of power, it is merely a depressing replay of the old and destructive dominant/subordinate mode of human relating and one-sided power, which is even now grinding our earth and our human consciousness into dust.–Audre Lorde
Leigh: How do you see the phenomenon of sadomasochism in the lesbian community?
Audre: Sadomasochism in the lesbian-feminist community cannot be seen as separate from the larger economic and social issues surrounding our communities. It is reflective of a whole social and economic trend in this country.
Sadly, sadomasochism feels comfortable to some people in this period of development. What is the nature of this allure? Why an emphasis on sadomasochism in the straight media? Sadomasochism is congruent with other kinds of developments going on in this country that have to do with dominance and submission, with disparate power; politically, culturally and economically.
The attention that Samois is getting is probably out of proportion to the representation of sadomasochism in the lesbian community. Because s/m is a theme in the dominant culture, an attempt to “reclaim” it rather than question it is seized upon us as an excuse not to look at the content of the behavior. For instance, “we are lesbians doing this extreme thing and you’re criticizing us!” Thus, sadomasochism is used to deligitimize lesbian-feminism, lesbianism and feminism.
Leigh: So you’re saying that the straight media both helps amplify the phenomenon within the lesbian community and that they focus on lesbians in particular as a way of not dealing with the larger implications and the very existence of the phenomenon in the world?
Audre: Yes. And because this power perspective is so much a part of the larger world, it is difficult to critique in isolation. As Erich Fromm once said, “The fact that millions of people take part in a delusion doesn’t make it sane.”
Leigh: What about the doctrine of “live and let live” and civil liberties issues?
Audre: I don’t see that as the point. I’m not questioning anyone’s right to live. I’m saying we must observe the courses and implications of our lives. If we are talking about feminism then the personal is political and we can subject everything in our lives to scrutiny. We have been nurtured in a sick, abnormal society, and we should be in the process of reclaiming ourselves, not the terms of that society. This is complex. I speak not about condemnation but about recognizing what is happening and questioning what it means. I’m not willing to regiment anyone’s life. If we are to scrutinize our human relationships, we must be willing to scrutinize all aspects of those relationships. The subject of revolution is ourselves, is our lives.
Sadomasochism is an institutionalized celebration of dominant/subordinate relationships. And, it prepares us either to accept subordination or to enforce dominance. Even in play, to affirm that the exertion of power over powerlessness is erotic, is empowering, is to set the emotional and social stage for the continuation of that relationship, politically, socially and economically.
Sadomasochism feeds the belief that domination is inevitable. It can be compared to the phenomenon of worshipping a godhead with two faces, and worshipping only the white part on the full moon and the black part on the dark of the moon, as if totally separate. But you cannot corral any aspect within your life, divorce its implications, whether it’s what you eat for breakfast or how you say goodbye. This is what integrity means.
Leigh: That relates to two central arguments put forth by the women of Samois: that liberal tolerance is necessary in the realm of sexuality and that the “power over” part of the relationship is confined to the bedroom. I feel, as you do, that it is dangerous to try to cordon off such a vital part of our lives in this way.
Audre: If it is confined to the bedroom, then why was the Samois booklet: [What Color is Your Handkerchief?: A Lesbian S/M Sexuality Reader] printed? If it is not, then what does that mean? It is in the interest of a capitalist profit system for us to privatize much of our experience. In order to make integrated life choices, we must open the sluice gates in our lives, create emotional consistency. This is not to say that we act the same way, or do not change and grow, but that there is an underlying integrity that asserts itself in all of our actions
The erotic weaves throughout our lives, and integrity is a basic condition that we aspire to. If we do not have the lessons of our journeys toward that condition, then we have nothing. From that life-vision, one is free to examine varying paths of behavior. But integrity has to be a basis for the journey.
Certain things in every society are defined as totally destructive. For instance, the old example of crying “fire” in a crowded theatre. Liberalism allows pornography and has allowed wife beating as First Amendment rights. But this doesn’t fit them into my life-vision and they are both an immediate threat to my life.
The question I ask, over and over, is who is profiting from this? When sadomasochism gets presented on center stage as a conflict in the feminist movement, I ask, what conflicts are not being presented?
Leigh: How do you think sadomasochism starts? What are its roots?
Audre: In the superior/inferior mold which is inculcated within us at the deepest levels. The learned intolerance of differences..
Those involved with sadomasochism are acting out the intolerance of differences which we all learn: superiority and thereby the right to dominate. The conflict is supposedly self-limiting because it happens behind bedroom doors. Can this be so, when the erotic empowers, nourishes and permeates all of our lives?
I ask myself, under close scrutiny, whether I am puritanical about this-and I have asked myself this very carefully-and the answer is no. I feel that we make integrated life decisions about the networks of our lives, and those decisions and commitments lead us to other decisions and commitments-certain ways of viewing the world, looking for change. If they don’t lead us toward growth and change, we have nothing to build upon, no future.
Leigh: Do you think sadomasochism is different for gay men than for lesbians?
Audre: Who profits from lesbians beating each other? White men have been raised to believe that they’re God; most gay white men are marginal in only one respect. Much of the gay white movement seeks to be included in the American dream and projects an incredible rage when they’re not included in the standard white male privileges, misnamed as American democracy.
Often, gay men are working not to change the system. This is one of the reasons why the gay male movement is as white as it is. Black gay men recognize, again by the facts of survival, that being Black, they are not going to be included in the same way. The Black/white gay male division is being examined and explored by some. Recently, for instance, there was a meeting of Third World lesbians and gays in Washington. It was recognized that there are things we do not share with white lesbians and gay men, and things that we do,, and that clarification of goals is necessary between white gays and lesbians, and Third World gays and lesbians.
I see no essential battle between many gay men and the white male establishment. To be sure, there are gay men who do not categorize their oppressions and who work for a future. But it is a matter of majority politics: many gay white males are being pulled by the same strings as other white men in this society. You do not get people to work against what they have identified as their basic self-interest.
Leigh: Some of the things that you’re saying is that the politics of s/m is connected with the politics of the larger movements?
Audre: I do not believe that sexuality is separate from living. As a minority woman, I know dominance and subordination are not bedroom issues. In the same way that rape is not about sex, s/m is not about sex but about how we use power. If it were only about personal sexual exchange or private taste, why would it be presented as a political issue?
Leigh: I often feel that there’s a kind of tyranny about the whole concept of “feelings,” as though, if you feel something you must act on it.
Audre: You don’t feel a tank or a war-you feel hate or love. Feelings are not wrong but you are accountable for the behavior you use to satisfy those feelings.
Leigh: What about how Samois and other lesbian sadomasochists use the concept of power?
Audre: The s/m concept of “vanilla” sex is sex, devoid of passion. They are saying that there can be no passion without unequal power. That feels very sad and lonely to me, and destructive. The linkage of passion to dominance/subordination is the prototype of the heterosexual image of male-female relationships, one which justifies pornography. Women are supposed to “love” being brutalized. This is also the prototypical justification of all relationships of oppression-that the subordinate one who is “different” “enjoys” the inferior position.
The gay male movement, for example, is invested in distinguishing between gay s/m pornography and heterosexual pornography. Gay men can allow themselves the luxury of not seeing the consequences. We, as women and as feminists, must scrutinize our actions and see what they imply, and upon what they are based.
As women, we have been trained to follow. We must look at the s/m phenomenon and educate ourselves, at the same time being aware of intricate manipulations, from outside and within.
Leigh: How does this relate specifically to lesbian-feminism?
Audre: First, we must ask ourselves, is this whole question of s/m sex in the lesbian community perhaps being used to draw attention and energies away from other more pressing and immediately life-threatening issues facing us as women in this racist, conservative and repressive period? A red herring? A smoke screen for provocateurs? Second, lesbian s/m is not about what you do in bed, just as lesbianism is not simply a sexual preference. For example, Barbara Smith’s work on woman-identified women, on “lesbian” experiences in Zora Hurston or Toni Morrison. It is not who I sleep with that defines the quality of these acts, not what we do together, but what life statements am I led to make as the nature and effect of my erotic relationships percolate throughout my life and my being? As a deep lode of our erotic lives and knowledge, how does sexuality enrich us and empower our actions?
Like Audre Lorde, I think that you restrict what people can do sexually at your peril. B*SM (please read the asterisk as a D to avoid those pesky search engines) is not illegal in the UK, nor should it be. Causing actual bodily harm is illegal, and is illegal even if the person assaulted consents. And there are very good legal reasons why that should remain the case - the most pressing being that if the law were changed (as was proposed after R v Brown by the John Major government) it would be near impossible to obtain convictions in domestic violence cases. The fact that the sexual practices of a minority would then be legalised is not in my view sufficient to make this change. All forms of assault not specifically excepted (not only B*SM) are illegal - and the arguments advanced in favour of a law change, most often that people would be deterred from seeking treatment for injuries gained in B*SM don’t stand up to scrutiny. When I last checked hospital casualty departments didn’t shop people to the police, - the defendants in Brown were convicted because they filmed themselves. Compare this to the nightmare of having to prove in every single case of ABH that the victim didn’t consent and you begin to see the problem, particularly in domestic violence cases.
But, but that’s not the issue is it? As a lesbian it’s impossible to avoid the subject of B*SM Now obviously we’re talking about a fairly broad church (I use the word advisedly) here which further muddies the water. The question is really - is this an issue for feminism, or it merely an issue of individual sexual practice?
First of all, I agree with Lorde, I don’t think we can ignore why or how people find sado masochism attractive. Most of us would probably have no difficulty in understanding why say spanking, or the spontaneous infliction of some physical pain could be sexually arousing. But that’s not what B*SM is about, it’s about ritualised power relations. And this is the bit where I’m completely lost. Yes “helpful” trolls, I’ve heard the arguments ad nauseam. It’s about trusting someone completely, the sub is really in control blah, blah de blah, blah. And I still don’t buy it. It doesn’t matter who’s in control, why does anybody have to be in control?
Like most people I could cite a number of reasons why I’m not interested in B*SM - I don’t know how you do it without bursting out laughing (that’s the thing I’ve heard most people straight and gay say). It seems, like mountaineering to involve buying a lot of ridiculously expensive specialist clothing. And if you are a public figure who does B*SM you’re absolutely bound to get caught and have the piss taken out of you by the News of the World (and if you don’t believe me put the words ‘Max Mosley’ into you tube, and yes his father WAS Oswald Mosley, famous fascist). But the main reason I’m not interested in B*SM is I just don’t get it.
There are bits of B*SM, particularly Male dom/Female sub stuff that are plain horrific, because they’re just too much like real life abuse of women. I could link to sites here which would make most people’s hair curl. I’m not going to. There is lesbian B*SM which is horrific, particularly the stuff produced by Pat Califia. Which is why I find Califia’s works being seized in Canada not a particularly good anti censorship argument, though it’s always trotted out on a regular basis (apart from the fact that Califia is of course no longer a lesbian). The themes of B*SM as Lara pointed out below, are all too frequently racist. They are all all too frequently fantasy rape and child abuse (Yes I know trolls, it’s a role play, it’s empowering, it’s cathartic, I’ve heard it, believe me, I’ve heard it). The argument that there are male subs, or female dommes, or that lesbians do it doesn’t seem to me to be much of an argument in favour of B*SM, any more than saying that there are a few rent boys around is an argument in favour of prostitution.
But let’s assume for the sake of argument that we have two lesbians practising B*SM. Is it anyone’s business but theirs? You know fully consenting and all that, is it really anyone else’s business? Can they be feminists?
Well maybe if they live on an island and in the middle of nowhere, and never speak to or in any way communicate with the rest of the world. But let’s go back to Lorde, we cannot isolate what we do in the bedroom from the rest of the world, any more than we can isolate what we had for breakfast from the rest of the world. If you promote rape and child abuse as subjects for erotic role play - how can that not affect the rest of the world? How can it not affect the rest of the world if you promote the availability of racist and violent pornography?
But most of all how can you promote the eroticisation of power relations and not embrace unequal power relations in the rest of your life? And if you don’t believe in equality how can you be a feminist? How can you crave social justice and eroticise power? That’s the bit I buy least of all.
And that’s because I have personally met women who are dominant in B*SM, who are dominant and manipulative in other areas of their life. And women who are subs who have seriously fucked up heads. Coincidence? - maybe, maybe not. But, helpful trolls, this is why have an opinion on the matter, this affects MY personal relationships. I am not just sitting here in my anti sex (but strangely phallic) radical feminist tower opining on things I have no experience of because I have been too busy weaving organic yoghurt covers for my Sheila Jeffreys first editions.
We don’t have original ideas, we may think we do, but we don’t. Everything we think comes from out there somewhere. The eroticisation of power comes from the wider society in which we are immersed and if you internalise and practice that you reflect it back into the wider society. B*SM is promoted as a ’sexuality’ but it is not. It isn’t even a sexual practice. It is the ritualisation and control of human sexuality. For all its promotion as the wild, radical and passionate face of sexuality, it is the complete opposite, hedging sexuality about with rules and regulations and allowing the avoidance of intimacy. It is for those who are scared they might lose themselves, and thus find themselves. But most of all it’s anti love.
