cliterature

Female fantasies are diverse, yet a recurring theme is the idea being subordinate–the flip side of being protected and cherished is, it seems, being mastered.  It is never a fantasy that has done much for me but over the years I have seen that it continues to top the charts of most common female fantasies.  As a reader and writer of romance it is hard to ignore how popular the ’swept off her feet’ fantasy remains, even in the form of “forced seduction” (and beyond).

 In sexual terms this subordination may range from a simple preference for the so-called “missionary” position to bondage and extensive roleplay–up to and including voluntary lifestyle slavery.  But having fought very hard to give women independence, feminism forums often have difficulty tolerating, let alone accepting, sexually subordinate fantasies.  For example, a few days ago Stacey May Fowles wrote: “inability to accept BDSM into the feminist dialogue is really just a form of kinkophobia, a widely accepted prejudice against the practice of power-exchange sex.” 

And I would agree with this.  I think we fall prey to a common logical fallacy that I have discussed before–in confusing that girls can do anything with the idea that they must.  Ultimately it is not the role of feminism to change what being a woman is, so much as open up the possibilities of what she may choose to be.  Because if we simply change a constricting subordinate role with a constriction autonomous or dominant one, what have we really achieved?

Freedom includes the ability to choose service, servility and even subordination–be it to a career, an ideal, a God, a country, a woman or a man.  It maybe service that is lifelong, for part of life, part of the day, or one aspect such as sexuality.  After all, each of us choose to be obedient to some degree, in some ways, some of the time for some reasons.  We have, variously, employers, family, clergy, policemen and judges, teachers and mentors… and some have a master or mistress (or some other form or degree thereof) in sexual activities.

It is naive to conflate the fantasy, even the reality, of surrender with the status of victim.  The difference, the real power, is in choice.  A person who is financially, legally and psychologically emancipated can walk away from a relationship that does not suit her.  She may give up her power but equally she may take it back.  The choice of sexual subordinate is in no way equivalent to the violence of sexual abuse because the not only consent, but active choice, drives the voluntary submissive–and the conscientious modern master.  And, as Fowles notes on relation to bondage (but it is true of many other forms of subordination) “regardless of appearance, by its very nature BDSM is constantly about consent.”

And I say this as a female who, on a visceral level, simply does get why anyone would want to be subordinate.  But then I don’t get why some people like to eat anchovies, watch basketball or run marathons–and I am not going to make moral judgments about those who do.  (Okay, maybe the marathon runners but that’s a whole other issue).  And that applies equally to women and to men, gay and straight etc etc.  There are subordination, and even humiliation, fantasies of many kinds and within a culture of consent they are simply part of the diversity of human desire.

There are endless debates about whether female subordination fantasies are so common because of basic biological reasons, or due to roles taught to woman as part of a patriarchal culture.  But ultimately I don’t think nature versus nurture is a the point.  Each one of us is a complex product of genes, environment and experiences–creating desires that, so long as they can be satisfied within a context of the constant availability of autonomy and constant presence of consent, should not be a source of shame.  Feminism should never become a missionary position of the mind, replacing the universal edict of female subordinate with a universal edict that bans the surrendering of power in any context.

Women and men alike are free to surrender their freedoms to others, as individuals and collectives.  We respect and honor this choice in the contexts of religious service, the rule of law, and volunteers such as in charities and the armed forces.  And as in any case where a person enters a vulnerable state, scrutiny is appropriate, but honestly–choosing to be spanked or bound should really not be such a big deal.  No single way of enjoying sex is the ‘normal’ or the ‘ideal’.

Sometimes is can be tricky to explain to a guy why gender myths(a.k.a. gender stereotypes or false beliefs) are/can be a big deal.  Partly this is because most of the gender myths we are taught as children continue to just seem plausible to us throughout life.  The other is that myths about males are a bit more insidious than those about women.  Women are characterised as weak, emotional, hysterical and erratic.  Being characterised as strong, logical, laconic and herois doesn’t seem like such as bad deal (until you try to live up to it all the time without ever showing a hint of weakness).

It can be helpful to illustrate how gender myths can be unnecessarily limiting by reach for example from the past, and examples relating to the male gender.  In fact there is one particular example that I have found to very effectively in getting the point across.  I will illustrate it with some quotes from what was considered a rather progressive book about sexuality, circa 1912.

 ”…the growing man [up to the age of 25] needs the semen secreted to develop his own body.  It is now recognised as a fact that the semen, if not dissipated, will be reabsorbed by the system and aid materially in the development of the body.  Boys who waste this “elixir of life” during their youth do not develop as they should.  The youth who practices masturbation …  during this period of development is wasting energy he never can regain.”

That’s right, it was commonly believed that a male up to the age of 25 should (could) abstain from any emission.  And what would happen if he did not?  Well according to this author:

“…self-abuse has a weakening effect on the body … capable of producing the most serious of results, such as insanity, idiocy, impotency and sterility … Children who have developed the habit of self abuse usually sleep badly, become thin and haggard looking, peevish, nervous and excitable.  Some even have convulsions.  Older boys who are masturbators usually get  a sallow look and hang-dog expression.  They become  absent-minded and lose their frank expression.  The young man with this habit becomes overshy as he is conscious of doing something that should be condemned. Adult masturbators may show no signs otherwise than that they are cowardly and mean-spirited … He lacks the willpower necessary to succeed in any undertaking and drags through life as a failure.”

These days we joke about going blind or getting hairy palms.  But this was a real basis for shame and confusion for boys who did what came naturally.  They must genuinely have feared becoming a coward, pervert or weakling.  In fact this belief lingers in certain subcultures to the present day.  Young boys were watched closely, sleep on hard beds with light blankets on the understanding that being warm ’stimulates’ erotic desires–in fact if possible they were mean to sleep outside or at least with a window wide open.  Using condiments on food was also considered dangerous and cold baths both a preventative and curative treatment.  Children born to men under 25 are described as likely to be deficit and under-developed.

It may seem funny now, but I doubt it was at the time when many boys would have been ashamed of something they were told was, on a moral and scientific basis, abnormal.  How would we know which of the beliefs we hold today might eventually be shown to be just as fallacious?  It may seem easy to dispute the opinions in an old book (one that goes on to discuss ‘race suicide’ and the advisability of sterilising imperfect humans). 

But irrational shame still lurks in the form of gender myths in our own day to day lives.  We obsess about our sexual attributes, orientations, the strength or absence of libido, our appearances, our fantasies, what we view and read–and equally we are judgemental of others based on the very same things.  It should be simple, really.  There should be no shame where no-one is harmed.  But false science and moralising convinces many people that what comes naturally to them harms themselves or others.  And it is hard to sort truth from myth when another camp, especially on the online Wild West, will suggest any kind of abuse is actually normal and loving.

It may take a funny example to make the point.  But gender myths limit how people behave and who they are, not just sexually but in every way.  Some of these limits are beneficial and prevent selfish abuse or others, and some are arbitrary and perverse with a needless legacy of shame and self-loathing.  The trick, as ever, is telling the differemce between the two.  Or at least trying to.

 * Quotes from Himself: Talks with Men Concerning Themselvesby EB Lowry and RJ Lambert (Forbes & Company, Chicago, 1912)