Critique of BDSM

Summary of Points

Each point elaborated on below

1. Defining BDSM.
2. Against the outlawing of BDSM.
3. People who are sexually aroused by BDSM should not feel ashamed of their desires, since these desires are not freely chosen but were conditioned into us by living in a sadomasochistic culture. Many critics of BDSM have themselves felt sexually aroused by BDSM role ‘playing’ or pornography.
4. A secular critique BDSM.
5. A sex-positive critique of BDSM. It is not anti-sex to be anti-sexualization of dominance, degradation, abuse, oppression.
6. A kink-positive critique of BDSM. There are other forms of kink besides BDSM, and these are unproblematic.
7. BDSM and the question of ethics.
8. Countering the claim that criticism of BDSM is akin to homophobia.
9. BDSM as one of many symptoms of living in a world which is capitalist, patriarchal, racist, etc.
10. BDSM is often sexist, racist, homophobic, ableist, classist/capitalist, ageist, etc.           
1. Sexism
2. Racism
3. Homophobia
4. Ableism
5. Classism/Capitalist
6. Ageism
11. BDSM validates the desires (if not the actions) of real abusers.
12. BDSM roles can leak into “real life” interactions (i.e. act dominantly or submissively towards one’s partner outside the bedroom, and towards others in general). There is a private sphere / public sphere connection.
13. Why it’s problematic for people who have an authoritarian role or personality in “real life” to engage in BDSM in the role of a dom/sadist.
14. Why it’s problematic for people who have a subordinated role or insecure personality in “real life” to engage in BDSM in the role of a sub/masochist.
15. Why it’s problematic for people who have a subordinated role or insecure personality in “real life” to engage in BDSM in the role of a dom/sadist.
16. Why it’s problematic for people who have an authoritarian role or personality in “real life” to engage in BDSM in the role of a sub/masochist.
17. The issue of consent. Given previous psychological wounds many people carry into BDSM, the presence of “free choice” should be critiqued, even if the presence of “consent” is not denied.
18. Beyond consent. Much like a crack addict consenting to purchase crack from a dealer, consensual practice of BDSM can still be destructive to participants. 
19. Predatory doms. Some doms/sadists are consciously manipulative, and calculatingly exploitative. They seek out subs with low self-esteem, knowing that people like this are more likely to want to sexually act out their self-hatred in the form of BDSM, or can be easily persuaded to “consent” to BDSM. The sub’s self-hate is considered erotic.
20. Conclusion.

*****************************************************************************

1.  

BDSM is an abbreviated acronym, which in its full form should really be: BDDSSM. It stands for: bondage, discipline, domination, submission, sadism, masochism. It refers to the sexualisation of these activities and dynamics.  

The dynamics of domination, degradation, violence, oppression, slavery, or abuse are acted out by consenting partners for their sexual gratification. Or, people may consume pornography that depicts dynamics of dominance, degradation, violence, oppression, slavery, or abuse.   

Light spanking, biting, hair-pulling, and other mild acts done without the intention of establishing dynamics of dominance/submission, or of causing pain or degradation, but rather as an expression of passion, out of the enjoyment of the sensation, or some other benign motivation are not considered BDSM in this group.

But the same mild acts done with the intention to establish dynamics of domination/submission, or to cause pain or degradation, are considered BDSM.

For mild acts, whether or not something qualifies as BDSM depends on inner motivations, desires, intentions. For moderate or extreme acts, these are always considered BDSM because they are inherently degrading, painful, or dominating and it cannot be argued that these intentions are not present.

There is wide variation in the specific roles that get acted out, but they are always characterised by dynamics between two broad roles: the “top” and the “bottom”. Tops are dominators (doms) and/or sadists. Bottoms are submissives and/or masochists.

There is also wide variation in the specific scenarios that get acted out, but they always falls into two broad dynamics: that of the willing victim and that of the unwilling victim.

The willing victim dynamic can include, for example, acting out roles of a master and his (or her) obedient slave, or a father and his 8 year old daughter who enjoys sexual abuse. The unwilling victim dynamic could include the straight homophobe beating or raping the ‘fag’, or again a father and his child-age daughter but in this case she screams and resists his sexual abuse.

There is pre-consent in BDSM that the dom/sadist is not supposed to heed the sub if s/he screams in pain or terror, says ‘no’ or ‘stop’, or utters other sounds and words which normally communicate displeasure or refusal.

The proscribed moral code in BDSM is to decide ahead of time on a ‘safe word’ (such as eraser) which the sub can say if s/he wants to refuse or stop an activity. The replacement of screaming, or of words like ‘no’, ‘stop’, with the safe word is not only for the sub’s protection, but also so the fantasy enactments of slavery, rape, etc. can feel as realistic as possible. If it didn’t feel real, they might not get off.

*****************************************************************************

2.  

We do not believe that the state should outlaw BDSM practices between consenting adults. We do seek to critique, raise public consciousness, and change the social conditions which socialize some people into finding BDSM sexy.

*****************************************************************************

3.  

We believe that people who are sexually aroused by BDSM should not feel ashamed. After all, it’s not like we freely choose our sexual desires. What turns us on is largely shaped by our conditioning, and it so happens that we live in a sadomasochistic, oppressive, hierarchal culture. To paraphrase Andrea Dworkin: *The question is not ‘Why are some people into BDSM?’ but ‘Why isn’t everybody?’*

In fact, many of those who are strongly critical of BDSM have themselves experienced sexual arousal at pornographic images of BDSM, or have even participated in BDSM with a partner or partners. Defenders of BDSM hear this and argue that these people have internalized BDSMphobia just as LGBTQ people have internalized homophobia, and that they should learn to cast off their shame and embrace their sexual desires. This is akin to saying that people who have racist beliefs should embrace their racism. But like those turned on by BDSM, those with racist beliefs should not feel ashamed, since it’s not their fault they were born into a culture that conditioned them to be racist, but they should nonetheless work to deconstruct their racism and purge it from their mind.

Since we do not have much control over what turns us on, we should not feel ashamed of problematic desires. But not feeling ashamed of problematic desires doesn’t mean we should embrace them, defend them, and fail to critique them. And what we do have control over is our actions, what fantasies we choose to indulge in, and whether or not we defend BDSM. Also, by indulging in non-BDSM sexual fantasies and acts, we can retrain our sexuality to respond to respect, equality, and pleasure instead of degradation, domination, and pain.

This position should not be compared to the homophobic position that LGBTQ people can and should retrain their sexuality to heterosexual. There is evidence that our sexual orientation towards a particular sex or sexes is inherited at birth – and even if it isn’t inherited, attraction to the same sex (or someone of ambiguous sex) is unproblematic and thus there should be no attempt to change this sexual orientation.

*****************************************************************************

4.  

We are critical of BDSM not because we are religious fundamentalists, but because we are fundamentally opposed to the idea that domination and abuse are sexy.

*****************************************************************************

5.  

We are critical of BDSM not because we are anti-sex, but because we are anti-dominance and anti-abuse -- even in fantasy form.

*****************************************************************************

6.  

We are not against kinky sex, just BDSM. There are many ways to be kinky besides dominating and degrading.

*****************************************************************************

7.  

We believe that it is problematic, unhealthy, and dangerous to sexualize and celebrate dominance, degradation, oppression, slavery, or abuse.  

We find the sexualization of violence and slavery troubling because people should work on feeling outrage and compassion in response to those things, not on feeling pleasure and desire in response to them.

Bdsm nurtures those parts within ourself that fetishize abuse, and it reinforces our empathetic disconnection and compassion deficiency. So much of the suffering (both real abuse and the failure to act to stop  it) in this world stems from disconnected empathy and deficient compassion, so we should not be doing anything that so strongly reinforces that. We should be doing the opposite instead, working to build and strengthen our compassion.

More concerns related to the unethical aspects of bdsm are discussed in later sections (see 10 – 19).

*****************************************************************************

8.  

Those who defend BDSM often claim that those who are critical of BDSM are similar to homophobes who take a moral stance against homosexual or ‘queer’ sexual attraction and activity. This is a preposterous comparison which offends many queer people who are critical of BDSM, including myself. Homosexuality is erotic desire towards those of the same sex. BDSM is erotic desire towards fantasies of domination, degradation, violence, abuse, oppression, or slavery. There is a world of difference between the two.

*****************************************************************************

9.  

As leftists and progressives, we understand that dominance and abuse are rampant in our society via the forces of capitalism, patriarchy, racism, homophobia, imperialism, dictatorships and pseudo-democracies, abusive families, and so on. Moreover, dominance and power-over is generally glorified by the mass media and most cultures via the worshipping of the rich, of macho men, of people of high status and influence, of exploiters, etc. We understand that the sexualization of dominance and abuse by some people is just one of the many unfortunate symptoms that people experience as a result of living in a sick and toxic world.

*****************************************************************************

10.  

BDSM is often sexist, racist, homophobic, ableist, classist/capitalist, and any other form of oppression or bigotry that can be imagined. This is why it is so alarming and problematic that it is the norm in communities of progressives, even feminists, to be uncritical of BDSM, and often downright advocate it as liberating and transgressive.

Why is it that we condemn it when people express bigoted views – and yet we think it’s fine when the same bigotry is eroticized? Is sexism suddenly OK if it makes a guy’s cock get hard? Is racism suddenly OK when it makes a woman’s pussy wet? Is homophobia OK if it leads to orgasm?

Few BDSMers are into all of the things listed below, but most are into at least one.

1.  

BDSM and Sexism: Men dominating and controlling women is considered erotic. Men physically abusing women is considered erotic. Men raping women is considered erotic. Sometimes it is women dominating and abusing men, or men dominating and abusing other men, or women dominating and abusing other women. But even in these cases it is often still male dominance and abuse against females that is eroticized. The female dom/sadist degrades her male sub with gendered language, calling him a pussy, slut, bitch, little girl. And it tends to be the macho male as the dom/sadist and the sissy ‘fag’ as the sub, or the butch dyke as the dom/sadist and the femme as the sub. Furthermore, it is a fact that amongst males and females into BDSM, females are much more likely than males to be subs, and males are much more likely than females to be doms/sadists. 

2.  

BDSM and Racism: There is a category of BDSM called ‘race play’. Racial oppression is considered erotic. Violent hate crimes are considered erotic. Hateful, hurtful slurs like ‘nigger’, ‘kike’, ‘spic’, ‘sand-nigger’, ‘chinc’, are considered erotic. A White master ruling over a Black slave is considered erotic. A nazi officer torturing a Jewish concentration camp prisoner is considered erotic. A border patrol cop catching a Mexican trying to cross the border illegally, and then raping them as payment for letting them cross, is considered erotic. The lesbian therapist, activist, and researcher Melissa Farley writes in her essay “10 Lies About Sadomasochism: “My silence about lesbian sadomasochism ended when I saw two anti Semitic sadomasochists at a women’s festival. One woman who wore a yarmulke was being walked like a dog with a chain around her neck by a woman in Nazi ‘leathers.’”

3.  

BDSM and Homophobia: Gay bashing is considered erotic. Homophobes raping gay men as punishment is considered erotic. Homophobes raping lesbian women to show them that ‘all they need is some good cock to go straight’ is considered erotic. Hateful, hurtful slurs like ‘fag’ and ‘dyke’ are considered erotic.

4.  

BDSM and Ableism: There is a big ‘demand’ amongst doms/sadists for disabled people. Amputee fetishism is huge. Wheelchair fetishism is also quite popular. What is considered erotic is the helplessness of the disabled person. Of course it is not at all sick or immoral to be sexually attracted to disabled people. But that’s when this is a true attraction based on the person’s humanity, and the disabled person’s helplessness is not eroticized. In fact, a respectful attraction recognizes that disabled people are not helpless. Fetishization of disability is very different from genuine, respectful sexual attraction. Fetishization objectifies the disabled person and enjoys thinking of them as helpless and perhaps even in pain. 

5.  

BDSM and Classism/Capitalism: The boss sexually harassing an employee is erotic. The boss giving the employee an ultimatum: either I rape you or hire you, is erotic. The ‘man of the house’ verbally abusing and spanking the maid is considered erotic. The purchasing of sex, using money to rent the control and ownership of another human being, to turn a human being into a commodity, is considered erotic.

6.  

BDSM and Ageism: There is a category of BDSM called ‘age play’. The dom/sadist stays in the adult role and the sub pretends to be a child. Child molestation is considered erotic. Incest is considered erotic. Parents or adult authorities physically beating or verbally abusing their children is considered erotic. Parents dominating and controlling their children is considered erotic. The geriatric nurse assaulting or raping the elder is considered erotic.

*****************************************************************************

11.  

As mentioned, it tends to be the norm to approve of BDSM  amongst progressives, feminists, hipsters, and those living in major urban centers in the ‘West’. Approval of BDSM sends the message that dominance is ok, that wanting to dominate and degrade others is ok. It validates the sick desires (if not the actions) of those interested in engaging in BDSM type acts without consent.

For example, think how much less ashamed wannabe child molesters would feel if they know that society approves of the BDSM scenario of "age play", where one adult pretends to be a child getting molested by the other adult. Is it not a mixed message to send that sexually abusing a child is wrong, but the fantasy and desire to do so is unproblematic? Wannabe child molesters are more likely to become real child molesters if they receive such mixed messages. 

There are already many cultural forces influencing people to abuse others. Do we really need to add to this?

The desire of batterers to rule over their partners, and to subdue their partners with violence, is also validated. Again, they may not receive approval for their abusive actions, but the message is sent that the desire to rule over someone else, and to hurt them if they are disobedient, is unproblematic. We all know that the first step to overcoming a problem is to admit that we have one. How likely will batterers be to admit their desire to dominate is sick, if society is sending the message that it’s not?

And on the other side of things, batterers can tell themselves that their partners don’t mind being controlled and hurt: “She doesn’t mind it. I heard lots of women like being treated this way, anyways. It gets them off.”

Do we really need to be giving abusers any more ways to excuse their behaviour?

*****************************************************************************

12.  

Just because BDSM involves role-play and fantasy does not mean that it should be beyond critique. The claim that people into BDSM can keep a rigid separation between their sexual desires and their behavior in their daily social interactions is unlikely. People who enjoy acting out sexual fantasies of victimization and domination have absorbed and internalized the sickness of this world. The vast majority of them will never attempt to act out these sexual fantasies non-consensually, but one has to wonder to what degree their interactions with others, relationships, choices, political opinions, etc. carry echoes of their sexual interests -- even if ever so subtly.

Again I will quote from Melissa Farley’s article “Ten Lies About Sadomasochism”:

“The sadistic sexual relationship sets the tone for the rest of the relationship. Submitting and giving in during a disagreement, for example becomes a sexualized act. And real physical violence can and does occur as a natural extension of the inequality of the sexual relationship. Hitting someone is usually a sadistic act. Assault and rape do occur in lesbian relationships - and they are normalized by the patterns laid down sexually.”

These dynamics do not just leak into how a dom/sub couple treats each other outside the bedroom. It can also leak out into how they interact with others in the community. Would not sexual doms/sadists be more likely to treat others in a way that is controlling, dominating, rude, authoritarian, narcissistic, self-absorbed, without compassion, even subtly or blatantly abusive? And what about subs? Would they not be more likely to accepts harmful mistreatment in real life? To be passive in the face of oppression because they feel falsely empowered through submission rather than truly empowered through resistance? Melissa Farley writes:

“Sadomasochism has everything to do with sexism, racism and class in the real world. It is very much related to internalized self-hatred. One Samois member wrote:” To be a good bottom [masochist], to please my mistress, is a very powerful feeling. Those lessons I have learned in my bed, I can take into other aspects of my life and see how that makes me powerful…to enjoy every moment of what I’m doing.” (Linden et al., 1982)”

*****************************************************************************

13.  

It is harmful for people who have an authoritarian role or personality in “real life” to engage in BDSM in the role of a dom/sadist.

The desire to dominate, degrade, and hurt others usually comes from a person’s own psychological wounds. People who are into BDSM are more likely to have been abused, especially during childhood. And abuse teaches victims that relationships can only be hierarchal, can only be between dominator and dominated, abuser and victim. Or even without abuse, the experience of living in a racist patriarchal capitalism is enough to teach these lessons and do psychological damage.

There is an internal sense of helplessness which they seek to repress by dominating others. There is an internal sense of fear of victimization that they seek to repress by becoming an aggressor. There is an internal sense of worthlessness that they seek to repress with a front of grandiosity and infallibility. This dominating, aggressive role is acted out sexually and consensually in BDSM, but may also be enacted outside of the bedroom in relationships with others in the community. As I said in section 12, those who are sexually aroused by domination and sadism are more likely to be prone to treating others in a way that is controlling, dominating, rude, authoritarian, narcissistic, selfish, without compassion, even subtly or blatantly abusive.

These people are in serious need of healing. They are in serious need of understanding that power need not be about power imbalance; that there is such thing as healthy power that is shared in relationships of equality; that you don’t need to have power over someone else to have power within yourself.

Acting in the role of a dom/sadist prevents such healing, and it prevents such lessons from being learned. It just deepens old wounds and reinforces old lessons. And it may also strengthen personality traits that make these people prone towards controlling, rude, selfish, uncompassionate, even abusive behavior in “real life”. Whether their subs are acting as obedient slaves or as unwilling victims, it is reinforced to the dom/sadist that others have no legitimate feelings, and only his/her own feelings matter.

*****************************************************************************

14.  

It is harmful for people who in “real life” are insecure, submissive, or have low self-esteem, to engage in BDSM in the role of a sub/masochist.

As with the desire to act in the role of the dom/sadist, the desire to act in the role of the sub comes from psychological wounds. As mentioned, those into BDSM are more likely to have been abused, especially in childhood. And even if they were not abused, the experience of living in a racist patriarchal capitalism is enough to do psychological damage and to teach us that relationships are by definition hierarchal.

The particular psychological wounds which attract someone to the role of a sub vary. Therapist and trauma specialist Judith Herman, on page 56 of her book “Trauma and Recovery”, points out that the desire to be coupled with someone who is dominant might be due to a sense of extreme helplessness and fear. Thus, there is a desire to be with a partner who they perceive as "strong" and in control.

Another reason might a sense of internalized shame and self-hatred and thus a sense of needing to be punished.

Another reason is a sense of worthlessness that makes them doubt that anyone could ever truly love them. They thus believe someone can only love them if they’re an obedient slave. A sense of worthlessness can also create a fear of abandonment. And what better way to guarantee you won’t be abandoned if you are owned by a master?

There are many other such reasons that could be listed, but in all cases there is a link to psychological wounds.

These people are also in desperate need of healing. Yet taking on the role of sub just perpetuates or even deepens their psychological wounds.

In terms of self-esteem, how can it help their self-esteem to be called insulting names? To be hit and hurt? To be ordered around? To act out scenarios of rape in which their pleas of “No!” or “Stop!” are ignored?   

In terms of fears of abandonment, how can this be healed by sexual role playing where approval is dependent on submission? How will they ever learn to believe that someone can love them for who they are as a separate individual with their own desires and opinions, if they have only experienced love for being a submissive or a slave?

In terms of a sense of helplessness, how does it help them to heal when they are being ordered around as a slave? Or, at the more benign end, being pampered and ‘taken care of’ as if they are a pet (so long as they are a ‘good’ and obedient pet)? Both are forms of control and domination. Both reinforce their sense of helplessness and incompetence and fear of taking control of their own life. A healthy, healing relationship would be one in which their partner encouraged them to exercise their agency, to be free and take self-control, both inside and outside the bedroom. Allowing them to act as a sub may keep these subs inside of a zone that feels safe and comfortable, but it does not encourage them to grow and become independent and confident. It stifles their confidence. It teaches them that the only way they can be powerful is by merging with their all-powerful, god-like dom. 

*****************************************************************************

15.  

When critics of BDSM draw attention to the ways that a person with low self-esteem and insecurity has these issues reinforced by acting in the role of a sub, the defenders of BDSM are quick to point out that people with low self-esteem and insecurity sometimes take on the role of the dom/sadist. They claim that it is healing and liberating for an insecure person to act as a BDSM dom/sadist. They claim that this can help such people gain confidence and self-esteem.

But acting in the role of a dom/sadist does not heal any wounds. These wounds were caused in the first place by an oppressive, hierarchal society and sometimes also by abuse. In both cases the lesson learned are that relationships are inherently hierarchal. And acting in the role of a dom/sadist reinforces this lesson, and it teaches that the only solution to powerlessness is to become a dominator of others.

I will repeat what I wrote in section 13, as the same thing applies here: These people are in serious need of healing. They are in serious need of understanding that power need not be about power imbalance; that there is such thing as healthy power that is shared in relationships of equality; that you don’t need to have power over someone else to have power within yourself.

*****************************************************************************

16.  

When critics of BDSM draw attention to the ways that the submissive role reinforces low self-esteem and insecurity, the defenders of BDSM are quick to point out that some subs are actually powerful people in “real life”, even cocky and authoritarian.  Many of them are men in positions of authority such as the CEO of a big company. For the sake of convenience, I will refer to these people as “CEO subs”, although I recognize that many of these powerful, confident subs are not CEOs.

Defenders of BDSM argue that “CEO subs” are just looking for an escape from the burdens and pressures of authority. They claim that by acting out the role of sub, they get to experience a type of freedom – that is, freedom from responsibility.

But is this a benign escape? By definition, “CEO subs” have positions of authority in “real life”, and often have dominating and authoritarian personalities. And we know that authority is often oppressive. The boss, the patriarch, the banker, the politician. The most famous “CEO sub” was Hitler, the genocidal dictator. Do we really want to take the pressure off people in authoritarian roles like this? Isn’t that just enabling them?

The fact that some “CEO subs” are attracted to the sub role for the aforementioned reason proves that hierarchy is destructive to both the oppressed and the oppressor. Of course the oppressed are much more wounded by these dynamics, but it seems that even the oppressors suffer to a degree. If oppressing others wasn’t dehumanizing and destructive to the oppressors, then why would we find “CEO subs” who are looking for escape?

But there are multiple reasons a “CEO sub” might be attracted to the sub role. Another reason is to escape the guilt they might feel for oppressing others in “real life” – either obedient subordinates (workers, etc.) or unwilling victims (abused children, etc.). “CEO subs” act out scenarios where they experience subordination and degradation as pleasurable. Through this they can convince themselves that those who they subordinate in “real life” don’t really suffer. That in fact they may enjoy their subordinated position. By experiencing the fantasy of subordination as pleasurable, they distance themselves from feeling any real empathy for the brutal reality of subordination that people experience. They can narcissistically project their own pleasure onto their real life subordinates, and those overlook the actual pain of these people. Guilt becomes unnecessary.

The role of “CEO sub” is even harmful to the person who enacts this role. The tendency of the “CEO sub” to be a cocky, dominating, authoritarian person in “real life” is a result of the same psychological wounds described in section 13. I will quote from that section to make my point:

There is an internal sense of helplessness which they seek to repress by dominating others. There is an internal sense of fear of victimization that they seek to repress by becoming an aggressor. There is an internal sense of worthlessness that they seek to repress with a front of grandiosity and infallibility

And, as stated in section 14, acting in the role of a sub just perpetuates and deepens a person’s feelings of helplessness, fears of victimization, and low self-esteem. Therefore, BDSM prevents the healing of, and does further harm to, “CEO subs”.

*****************************************************************************

17.  

Given the psychological wounds and previous traumas that people carry into BDSM, the presence of “free choice” should be critiqued, even if the presence of “consent” is not denied. “Free choice” is an idea promoted by ultra-libertarians and post-modernists who don’t recognize the profound impact that society, culture, and our personal life experiences have on shaping everything about who we are. Does the victim of child sexual abuse, who has been taught that she is worthless and that her sexuality is degraded, freely choose a life as a prostitute or porn actress?*** Does the war veteran suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder freely choose to drink to oblivion everyday? Do people who have been raised in a racist, patriarchal, capitalist, pseudo-democratic society “freely choose” to act out sexualized scenarios of domination, degradation, oppression, and abuse?

*** In a study of 200 San Francisco prostitutes, 85% reported being sexually abused during childhood. (Farley et al., Prostitution and Trafficking in Nine Countries: An Update on Violence and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder; 2003.)

*****************************************************************************

18.  

Even if the issue of consent is not called into question, a critique of BDSM looks beyond the issue of consent to the issue of harm. Because that is what participants of BDSM are consenting to – the harming of themselves and their partners. (The ways in which BDSM is harmful to participants was briefly explained in numbers 13 – 16.)

How many women in the past, and even today, are “happily married” to controlling patriarchs – truly believing that it is a woman’s natural place to be ruled over by a man? This is a consensual relationship. But it doesn’t change the fact that it’s a sexist, unjust relationship.

Often kids consent to physical abuse as punishment from their parents. They believe and say: “I deserved it. I was bad. They hit me because they love me and want me to learn right from wrong.” But this doesn’t change that they are victims of physical abuse. True, they are under age, and so can’t consent to be hit. But there are even some adults in abusive relationships who say and believe similar things.

BDSM defenders might argue that not only is there consent, but there is also pleasure – whereas in the above examples there is not. But there is also pleasure experienced in smoking crack. And much like a crack addict consenting to purchase crack from a dealer, consensual practice of BDSM can still be destructive to participants. It may be that they mean no harm, and it may even be that they care about their partner’s wellbeing very much. Yet both doms/sadists and subs/masochists are perpetuating or even deepening their own wounds and each other’s wounds, just as drug dealers do when they consensually sell drugs to an addict, or when the addict consents to injecting heroin.

*****************************************************************************

19.  

And there are also predatory doms/sadists who knowingly take advantage of subs/masochists. They prey on those with low self-esteem and do not care that they perpetuate and deepen the damage.

These doms/sadists are consciously manipulative, and calculatingly exploitative. They purposely seek out subs with low self-esteem, who have been abused in childhood, because they know that people like this are more likely to want to sexually act out their self-hatred in the form of BDSM. They also know that people like this are so insecure that they expect to be rejected and abandoned by loved ones, and so they can be easily persuaded (manipulated) into “consenting” to BDSM – for fear that if they don’t, their partner would leave them, and then who else would ever want to love them? (And even when doms/masochists aren’t trying to be manipulative, many of those in the sub/masochist role only consent out of fear of abandonment.)

These types of doms/sadists tend to be extra turned on by the low self-esteem of the sub, and turned on by the knowledge that they are deepening these self-esteem wounds.

Defenders of BDSM deny that these predatory doms exist, or that if they do exist they are a tiny minority who are condemned by the rest of the BDSM community. But there is evidence that these predatory doms, though perhaps they are a minority, are not a small one. Many of the personal ads on CraigsList for doms seekings subs are clearly posted by predatory doms. Here’s just one example which I am including not because it’s the worst I could find but because it’s so short:

http://toronto.en.craigslist.ca/tor/cas/1025196474.html

Hit and Run - m4w - 29 (downtown)

Reply to: pers-1025196474@craigslist.org
Date: 2009-02-07, 4:38PM EST

Rough, sexist prick wants to treat you like daddy used to.

You must be clear about your wants and needs, and be fragile and feminine.

Reply XXX

*****************************************************************************

20.  

Approval of BDSM by progressives is counter to our overall goal of an egalitarian, classless, casteless, and truly democratic society. We should see BDSM as a symptom of the lack of such a society, and like any other such symptom, we should mourn it, not defend it or celebrate it.