If what I’ve been saying in this FAQ is accurate, then why haven’t more people heard this? Why are the prevailing images of SM so negative?’, ‘There is no doubt that they are negative. Not long ago I was informed that there are some members of the Winnipeg (Canada) police department who believe that alt.sex.bondage is ‘a textbook on how to torture women for sexual pleasure. It’s obscene.’ Said police were considering how to deal with a.s.b on obscenity grounds. Last year in England, a group of gay men who had gathered for an SM play party in which they were using whips for pleasure were arrested and charged with battery, EVEN THOUGH they had all agreed to be doing exactly what they were doing, and WANTED to be doing it. Consensual SM is illegal in England. How can this be?
The crucial distinction here is between consent and non-consent. The difference between whipping someone in a scene and assaulting them on the street is the difference between sex and rape. If everyone involved agrees to what is happening, it is not a crime. If they do not, then it is. This distinction is not difficult to understand, and being involved in SM makes it very clear. SM practitioners are more familiar with consent issues than most, and as such are less likely to commit crimes of the sort that people confuse with SM. And NONE of the material in this FAQ advocates ANY kind of nonconsensual, criminal behavior.
Unfortunately, there are many who would be arbiters of what others may and may not legally consent to do. I believe that consenting adults should be free to do as they wish in the privacy of their homes. There are many who don’t believe this is acceptable. It serves them to confuse the issue by claiming ‘SM people are sadistic rapists’ when in fact we are nothing of the sort.
This problem is exacerbated by the body of ‘scholarly research’ on SM and related practices. Almost all the books written about SM and other alternative practices in this century have been written by psychologists and therapists (i.e. people outside the scene), and almost all have portrayed SM as a dangerous practice, indulged in only by ‘unhealthy’ individuals. The reason? Healthy individuals weren’t the subjects being studied; rather, the subjects were all seeking psychological treatment from the authors of the books! The ‘studies’ completely ignored the many many well-adjusted, happy people who were also into SM. It’s easy to conclude SM is harmful when your only experience is with psychologically maladjusted SM people, and when you aren’t interested in presenting a balanced view (as few authors are– psychologists can be as sexually judgmental as anyone).
(In reality, people have practiced sadism and masochism throughout history. Many are the saints who scourged themselves in the name of the Lord. Using intense sensation to reach altered states of mind is a practice as old as humanity itself–and hence can be considered in no way ‘unnatural’.)
Moreover, our society (as do most societies) tends to ostracize the different. If you don’t fit the mold, you’re weird and dangerous. People into SM don’t fit the mold. This is why there is such pressure to remain anonymous in the scene; people have lost their jobs, partners, children, and liberty by having their sexual preferences revealed to their community. This stems from the same source: lack of understanding of what we do and why, and lack of respect for what is different.
And of course there are people who just aren’t into SM, and would rather not be confronted with it; this is altogether fine with me. I just want these people to understand why they should not (and do not have any grounds on which to) outlaw me and my friends for what we do.
These issues are very controversial, even now. In the 1992 Oregon state ballot, voters narrowly overturned a measure named OR 9, which contained the following paragraph:
——–State, regional, and local government and their departments, agencies, and other entities, including specifically the State Department of Higher Education and the public schools, shall assist in setting a standard for Oregon’s youth that recognizes homosexuality, pedophilia, sadism, and masochism as abnormal, wrong, unnatural, and perverse and that these behaviors are to be discouraged and avoided.——–
Homosexuality, sadism, and masochism are neither wrong nor unnatural. All three are consensual ways of living and loving that many people enjoy. They are not for everyone, but nor should everyone be told that they are for no one. Note also how this measure seeks to confuse the issue by grouping homosexuality, sadism, and masochism together with pedophilia — a practice which is seldom consensual. Legislating what consenting adults may and many not do in private is neither healthy nor democratic.’, ‘
(In recent times there have been a spate of articles about how SM is entering the mainstream. Madonna’s book Sex and her new movie Body of Evidence are examples of this trend. Hopefully this will lead to more people feeling free to express their love as they choose — so long as it’s consensual!)