No tags yet.
If you read my last post, you know my amazing wife/domme really knows how to fuck my ass. She is a wizard with the Steely Dan. If you have read from the beginning, you know that we have sex when and how she wants. I can make suggestions, or requests, but it's really up to her. Most times, sex is a happy surprise, and it is happening more frequently and with better quality than at any time in the last decade, probably decade and a half. She doesn't ask me, she tells me. I have consented to this arrangement, and given that I have safewords, I consent to it every time we make love. I am livin' the dream, so to speak. But writing that makes me think of the word: Consent.
I have learned since May that the kink community fixates on consent. Because of the potentially dangerous behavior, this is a must, but it isn't the first thing a vanilla person thinks about when they think about people into BDSM. I know that I didn't, and it was recent enough for me to remember my perspective clearly.
Now our arrangement might seem inarticulate from the perspective of someone who is a regular on the BDSM scene. We have very few rules or limits to our power exchange, which might be a recipe for disaster in another relationship, but because we are layering it on decades of a loving, committed relationship, so many of the things others need to articulate are already laid out for us.
I took a while to get to this, because none of this is my central point. Instead, I look at the Kavanaugh hearings and allegations of sexual assault, and think about the multiple times my wife received negative or criminal sexual attention, over her entire life. I won't talk politics, but I think some of the fundamentals of the kink community would make a GREAT baseline for sex education in schools. No, I don't mean how to safely hogtie your partner. I mean how to discuss your relationship with your partner, or your desires with a potential partner. In episode 200 of her podcast, Ruby Ryder talks about so many of the emotional limitations men suffer from, but also talks about how generally accept "hard to get" behavior also creates a dangerous environment. I encourage you to listen to it (link is only to part 2. There are three great parts) but also to think about your teen years (as if you haven't been, what with the news). I recall very little help in learning about my raging hormones, or how to talk to people in whom I was interested. I knew I wanted something, I just couldn't articulate it or figure out how to get it. I had no tools, and very CLEARLY understood that the subject was considered taboo. Society set completely unrealistic goals for teens in regards to sex, but presented them as if they were a no-brainer. Worse, society had a double standard for men and women, one that is still in place. Women were/are something to be had, and it was their duty to fend off advances. I think you know what I mean, so I'll just move to the hook. If the kink community's style of consent and communication was taught to students, and they were empowered to have meaningful discussions about their desires, and taught to understand the consequences of fulfilling those desires in a shame-free environment, a lot of our current issues with consent would evaporate. "Boys will be boys" as a mantra to excuse male hornyness expressed in an abusive or borderline manner is poison. Playing "hard to get" similarly engenders a dangerous environment. Even teaching "No means no" is dangerous, because it (realistically) establishes a system (at least among heterosexuals) where the man's job is to make the request in the face of assumed negativity. "Yes means yes" is so much more sane. It is so much more positive. It establishes a system wherein consent is a positive affirmation, and both parties' feelings and desires are well articulated. This may seem like a quibble, but part of "yes means yes" is that you articulate your desires, you don't make assumptions. Your partner endorses these desires, and understands your intent. It doesn't have to be a D/s contract, or even written down. I could be as simple as saying "may I kiss you?" and when getting a yes, just kissing the person.
This kind of consent takes two willing and active participants, however. Both need to be honest actors. I'm thinking about the relatively recent reporting about Aziz Ansari and a woman that had a "the worst night of her life" with him. I won't pass judgement or say what I think about it, except that neither person seemed to have been communicating effectively. She didn't articulate a solid "NO!" so there was no violation of the "no means no" rule, but he also didn't get an informed "YES!" With honest communication of the type one sees in the kink community as the BASELINE, ambiguity in sexual relationships would be difficult. All of this was really spurred by our recent experience at a BDSM/Swingers Club. Of course the guidelines and rules were articulated well, but Mrs Fillmore noticed and appreciated something that I missed. She saw these women out exploring their sexuality and kinkiness, and rejoiced in their ability to do so in a safe environment where no one would try to do to them something they were not interested in. I never had to think about it, because I didn't grow up as a woman, experiencing the pressures women do, so it was a real lightbulb moment for me. The safest place for them to explore their sexuality was a place where people get their asses tanned to a hot pink every night.