Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

alysdragon — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 07:39:16 -0700

Okay, before I start I just want to say that if this turns into internet sniping I will... I don't know what. Scream, probably, or collapse into a corner. Debate is fine, but for the sake of my sanity, could keep it friendly please. Also, if we get trolled (as similar threads have been in the past) can we just ignore it and move on? All okay with that? Cool. Basically, I thought I'd share with you something that's been bothering me for a while and see what people have thought about it. Something that has come to my attention is that way BDSM, particularly the S&M aspects, is handled in literature that is not erotica. It's quite a long post, for which I apologise. Now, as I've said before, I write Gothic fiction, which means that safety, and frequently sanity, is something that none of my characters would touch with a barge pole. It's also very sexual work, and there is a lot of stuff about maschoism and the death drive in there, so I know the danger zones where some readers will say 'that BDSM stuff' when really, it's not, it's about the weirdness in the human psyche that is handled safely through things such as BDSM, or, you know writing. I'm also one of these writers who thinks fiction, especially fantasy, should not really be contrained by 'real life' in the mundane sense; the moralities of fiction need not be the moralities of everyday life, for example. But neither of these are what has been bothering me. My problem is with straight, or literary fiction - ie, that set in the 'real' world, with 'real' characters and everyday moralities - using any kind of kink as a sort of short-hand for the problems of the character, either moral or mental. The short hand I've encountered too many writers using seems to be something along these lines: Any man who gets any kind of sexual pleasure out of beating, binding or humiliating a woman (or other man, and no, it's always physical, there is never anything more psychological here) is invariably some kind of closet abusive power-mad maniac. He is, essentially, bad. Often he is a powerful man, at least within his social circle, and there is often the suggestion that the woman involved is on some level unwilling. Any reciporical behaviour from a partner makes him deeply uncomfortable, suggesting insecurites. There are rarely any Dommes, although I have spotted one or two who conform to the male description above. Top women tend to be dominatrixes, and are paid either in drugs / political power or actual money for their behaviour. Invariably wild, unbalanced, often addicted or self-delusional they die violent, tragic deaths, or suffer breakdowns. A rare exception to this case is a young, slightly self-deluding woman whose bedroom self is a strict mistress - this type only tends to occur in order for her to encounter, and mortify an older, more vanilla lover in those stories about men having midlife crises getting it on with younger women. Submissive men are always personally powerful and often rich. Generally paired with the dominatrix type, their whole act of submission (which usually requires a gimp mask) is clearly intended as irony, but also serves to reveal even more deep seated insecurities. Submissive women, on the other hand, poor things, are almost always victims of abuse whose enjoyment of the behvaiour is questionable, and, anyway, portrayed as some kind of stockholm syndrome. There seems to be a higher acceptance of submissive women, also, because it's assumed it is 'natural' that they behave like that. The overwhelming message is that this may be fun at first, but it lead to madness, abuse and possible death. The only 'okay' way to get involved is to try it once (at your partner's request, if a man, or if you're a woman, because your friend has told you about it) and then freak out a little and never try it again. As I'm sure the good people of this forum can tell, this unusual shorthand has absolutely no application to real life. As an eg, one of the Doms I know, when met socially, a humble, considerate and caring person, who always attempts to mend a quarrel. In his personal life, he is compassionate, helpful and non-violent. He has never been in a fight, and is always the first person that people turn to in a crisis. In other words, the total opposite of a power-crazed would-be wifebeater. Yet, because he likes his kink, he is essentially being defamed by too many writers - some of them good writers who should know better - who use his lifestyle choices as a shorthand, and thereby perpetuates the myth of BDSM as a nest of abuse. That, unsurprisingly, makes me angry. So, what I want to ask is, has anyone else found this? Does anyone know why it occurs, or where it originates? And, also, any non-erotica (or romance) books that don't do this, and have characters having kinks that are never disparaged or undermined in the course of the book, because I've yet to find one that doesn't. Thanks trudging through the the post. Any takers?

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Sidney Bristol — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 08:09:43 -0700

I haven't read any fiction with BDSM elements that wasn't romantic, so I'm not your target for this question. I do, however, have a fairly decent grasp on BDSM in general, so I'll answer the other questions. :) IMO, these characters that you're having problems with, are probably written from people who don't have a working knowledge of BDSM. They're writing fiction where the emotional and relational aspects of BDSM don't play into the story. It sounds like in the books you're talking about, being non-romance books, need a way to show the character and his/her actions as being bad or wrong, and a casual audience will be shocked at that, unlike a romance or more kink aware audience. That said, I write BDSM and I make an effort to educate myself, socialise with and represent a wide variety of people, backgrounds and styles of life I can. I think what happens is that someone reads a book with a little kink, they try writing some or they're told how well it sells, and they go for it, without ever researching it or understanding the complex dynamics and variety of people who participate in that lifestyle. The first book that pops to mind that shoots a lot of these stereotypes in the foot is Natural Law, by Joey W. Hill. It's a Domme book, and the hero/sub is an alpha type, and yet is a sexual submissive. On the flip side, it does have some of the types you said you don't like.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Coffeedrinker — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 08:24:12 -0700

Yes to all counts and as exasperated here. But... in erotica and romance BDSM rarely fares any better. So I would include those.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Sidney Bristol — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 10:20:07 -0700

There are professionals who are trying to positively influence the writing community about BDSM. I'd suggest looking into Dr Charley F...I can never spell her last name and it's incredibly simple. Dr Charley is a sexologist, radio personality and all round amazing person. She just pub'd a book, BDSM for Writers.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

aurelius.rabbit — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 11:12:39 -0700

The media portrayal seems unable to view BDSM as a lifestyle that many well-balanced adults have, instead allowing its status as evil boogyman to go unquestioned. There is a hypocracy going on, because no public figure will come out of the closet (dungeon?) despite statistical likelihood that a large number of politicians, pesonalities, actors, musicians are likely to have these interests. However, when the Max Mosley/prostitutes thing came up a couple of years ago, there was a surprising amount of sympathy in the media and 'on the street' with the view that he (and indeed anyone) should be free to indulge in whatever kinks he chooses. As for positive character portrayals in fiction, I'm stumped. Can't think of any.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

alysdragon — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 14:21:50 -0700

But, my real problem is you can usually tell from the character's other behaviours that they are bad-and-wrong, or at least well off the rails. It almost seems to be there for the shock value, at times, eg, look, this person exploits EVERYONE! And, because it's this sort of gratuitous presentation, it's not only bad writing, but it also strikes me as very smug. Especially as the 'good' characters tend to be vanilla to the extreme. Now, from some of the rubbish I've spotted this in, I can just shrug and get angry, because idiots will be idiots. But sometimes, these are good writers, writers I love and respect for their craft, for their subtle and nuanced views of people - even when they are presenting murderers or torturers, you know? I mean, I understand as other posters have mentioned, that mainstream views of the scene are generally negative, but I'd expect better from these people than letting such biased cliche undermine their art.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

toofrailathread — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 16:08:27 -0700

Out of curiosity, could you please define the difference between a Domme and a Dominatrix?

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Contemptus — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 21:55:45 -0700

I'm not an expert, but I've always thought, personally, that a Dominatrix was a woman who considered topping a job,while a Domme was just a female top. Am I off-base?

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Coffeedrinker — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 00:08:53 -0700

No, a Dominatrix usually is a sex-worker. A Domme is a dominant woman. "Top" means any active role in BDSM and can be anything, e.g.Domme, sadist, bondager, keyholder, spanker and so on.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Coffeedrinker — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 00:12:38 -0700

I'm asking this cautiously - do you really consider romance with BDSM elements being less filled with stereotypes and prejudices? I've yet to find really well-written BDSM which isn't a dire re-hash of always the same over-popular myths.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

gsusan11 — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 03:01:38 -0700

[quote=alysdragon]My problem is with straight, or literary fiction - ie, that set in the 'real' world, with 'real' characters and everyday moralities - using any kind of kink as a sort of short-hand for the problems of the character, either moral or mental.[/quote] [quote=alysdragon]Does anyone know why it occurs, or where it originates? [/quote] Regarding the first quote, if you are referring to the number of authors who use "BDSM" as back drops for serial killers, etc, I believe that is primarily based on the incidences of it used by actual serial killers. Many serial killers use elements of BDSM in their fantasies and preoccupations prior to committing their crimes. There are a number of books on the market that delve into the minds of serial killers and how their fantasies are conceived. I have read several in my research for murder mysteries. As to the second quote, I think that lies with Hollywood. Look at the way they depict BDSM and the individuals involved in with it. Just my thoughts, SusanG

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Coffeedrinker — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 04:49:56 -0700

You are mistaking two things for each other. There is psychologically relevant (as in a disorder) sadomasochism and there is BDSM. Serial killers definitely are not BDSMers or engaging in BDSM (though there was on serial killer who preyed on BDSMers).

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

alysdragon — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 06:52:03 -0700

I have to say, I don't read a lot of Romance. However, I know there are romance writers who write about specifically BDSM relationships and was at least hoping, as it's kind of central to their plot, that they would do the research. But I don't have the experience to verify this, I'm assuming that you do and am happy to conceed that they are just as bad as their 'lit' fic or sci fi counterparts.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

alysdragon — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 06:59:07 -0700

[quote=gsuan11] if you are referring to the number of authors who use "BDSM" as back drops for serial killers, etc, I believe that is primarily based on the incidences of it used by actual serial killers. Many serial killers use elements of BDSM in their fantasies and preoccupations prior to committing their crimes. There are a number of books on the market that delve into the minds of serial killers and how their fantasies are conceived. I have read several in my research for murder mysteries. [/quote] I'm not, I'm talking about ordinary people in ordinary situations - or the equivalent of ordinary situations in a fantasy/ sci fi setting - who get their rocks off through use of sex toys, bondage or minor S&M/ D/S play, and are therefore portrayed as somehow mentally unstable, and possibly evil. I don't know much about serial killers and their psychology, althoughI'm inclined to agree with Coffeedrinker on this one and say that, although they may have a sadomaschoistic behaviours, for them it's not a kink but a failure to interact with the world, and other people, as meaningful beings, ie. a faliure of empathy, or in some cases symptomatic of being an affectionless psychopath. S&M, in the kink sense, is not about that at all. [quote=gsuan11] As to the second quote, I think that lies with Hollywood. Look at the way they depict BDSM and the individuals involved in with it. [/quote] Possibly it is Hollywood. There is a kind of morbid fixation with kink in a lot of modern films, but then, is that because it is a wider social phenomenom? (the fixation, I mean, not the kink itself)

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Coffeedrinker — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 07:38:26 -0700

I actually meant Sidney Bristol further above with this comment, but yes, I've read quite some BDSM erotica/romance and it really is a turn off rather than anything starting the head movies. For one thing I find it completely stereotyped, it's practically exclusively D/s (as if BDSM was that narrow), the vast majority revolves around the same old scenarious again and again (I don't know any r/l BDSMers who do those, well except for prodommes) and a lot of it is inherently sex-unfriendly, often either misogynic, or misandric. Then there's little zest, little real fun, none of the glee, certainly very little sensuality in it, and it seems none of the authors are capable of at least writing D/s which does not include humiliation or training or both plus a lot horribly worn commonplaces, which their ancestors de Sade and Reage and Sacher-Masoch sure worded better. The rest of the spectrum is almost non-existant, with a very few stories where you really get your fantasy stirred for the money. What's so shocking is that this includes a lot of the so-called big names. And all dominants and submissives are sort of the same, there are few variants there. It's as prejudiced in a way as what you describe.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Relocation — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 17:08:57 -0700

I hope that I write them realistically, since I'm in a 24/7 relationship. But nothing I write counts as literature, and I can ee your problem. I don't know how to explain the terrible handling of SM to you, but if it would please you, I can refer you to or go ask on another forum I mod if anyone has recommendations for literature not like that.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Pinkclaws — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 07:27:40 -0700

I see your point and it's something that annoy me too. Most of this happen because people aren't making the research necessary about it, most of them think that BDSM, bondade, S/M, D/s and etc are all the same. Beside like it was said most of them read something of this genre and decided to write about it and Hollywood of course has it's part. I also think the readers are to blame because people will write what they see selling. Once I read a "BDSM" story where the man raped his best friend (yeah right...) and even used a car part for it, I don't remember it but the protagonist was seriously hurt. And then I read some womans/girls saying how they liked that scene and how hot it was and that they wanted for they to end together 0.o I just don't get people.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Sidney Bristol — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 09:14:30 -0700

Terminology. Dom/Domme - the Dominant in the relationship, always cap the D Dominatrix - usually, but not always, someone who is paid for their services. Most of the time when I've talked with professional ladies, they say this does not include sex. sub - the submissive in the relationship, always lowercase the s Master/slave - these relationships are similar to the D/s, but are on a 24/7 basis and the slave has relienquished their right to safeword out - this is consentual, and I'm talking in broad generalities. Top/bottom - The top in the relationship/play/scene performs the act on the bottom. Again, a very general definition. There's a ton of terminology. I forget the website that has a really good list of terms and working definitions. I'll look it up tonight and post a link.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Coffeedrinker — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 09:21:32 -0700

How about adding Sadist and masochist who cover at least as much territory as Dom/me and sub? ;-)

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Sidney Bristol — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 13:03:18 -0700

My knowledge of that is veeeeeery limited. I didn't want to take the chance of offering terms I wasn't comfortable explaining without referencing the website I mentioned above. Sorry, it wasn't my intention to be exclusionary.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Coffeedrinker — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 13:57:10 -0700

It's a sore point, sorry :-) It is also a sore point when an author for instance writes someone is a Sadist, but all which happens is pure D/s with loads of humiliation, exclusively negative pain and a completely different set of motivations on both participants count. My main beef is the complete lack of ulterior facets of BDSM in mainstream erotica. It's either maledom or femdom D/s, with sometimes a bit dabbling in chastity (usually badly misunderstood!) and Total Power Exchange (this is what you described as being M/s). Master/slave relationships do exist which only encompass playtime or sexuality, so that is less rigid than you implied. The terms you need are TPE and 24/7. Meta-consent is something not just D/s relationships dabble in, some Sadists/masochists also do so, as well as those who exclusively engage in sex of the rough variant. And then there are switches, who can switch between just about everything - not just the relevant pairs. E.g. I play occasionally with a Dom who switches to masochist (not to submissive). And then there are completely asexual BDSMers, these guys are totally non-existant on the plate of erotic writers, I have yet to find a story featuring them. I could go on, ;-) I haven't even started on all the other kinks, there are so many, and so many are very sensual, erotic and interesting. So sorry, this IS a sore topic ;-)

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

lunaKM — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 16:23:07 -0700

You would be assuming that real life BDSM practitioners are not ridiculed or have their kinks disparaged. Writing often mirrors real life. Not a day goes by that I don't get hate mail or right wing Christians who believe what I do behind closed doors is wrong and/or is a mental illness. It was only recently that SM was removed from the psychological disorders dictionary. So, from a writer's standpoint who has no first or second hand knowledge of BDSM, it comes off in certain ways. Media also perpetuates a negative view of D/s and SM especially by using the word 'sadist' or its other non-consensual pain infliction. There are many non-fiction bios and memoirs out there that portray BDSM in a positive light.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Relocation — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 17:35:47 -0700

Sadism and Masochism still are considered disorders, but on a different scale than sexual SM as we discuss it. May I ask how the right-wing Christians and people sending hate mail know you're into BDSM and have your mailing address? I... want to avoid that

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

lunaKM — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 19:53:45 -0700

I'm online. Everywhere. I have several blogs, am open and quite vocal about who I am (just google my nickname). I run a couple newsletters that have my mailing address on them and I have it on my website too for people to contact me.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Relocation — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 01:14:16 -0700

It's unfortunate that the wrong people use it, then...

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

alysdragon — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 13:01:18 -0700

Ouch. I would say that I assumed it didn't because I've never encountered anyone who's into BDSM who has been subjected to anything that extreme. It's awful that you have to go through that, and you have my sympathies. That said, though, once again this is often from writers who I assume should know better, and they are not simply portraying it as a disorder, or saying that it is unacceptable - it is something far more insidious than that because they can easily claim to be portraying it objectively. The judgement is implicit; kink is always portrayed - totally incidentally - as part of a downward spiral in someone's life. It's not wrong of itself, they seem to say, but simply that vanilla sex is what people do when they come to terms with themselves; at the very least, kink is a phase out of which someone will grow. If they're lucky. Which makes it seem to me like they have at least some second hand knowledge - and possible first-hand experience - of kink and, not liking it themselves, have cast moral judgement upon all who do enjoy it. Less overt, as I say, but possibly more dangerous. Yes, life informs writing, but, once we are beyond extreme views, the attitudes we encounter in writing - here dismissive, there condescending and slightly negative - warp our world view and confirm existing prejudices. Which is why it worries me. Yes, positive memoirs and non-fics are great, but that in a way, is preaching to the converted - I'd say this stuff needs to be brought into the mainstream.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

lunaKM — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 13:41:41 -0700

[quote=alysdragon] Yes, positive memoirs and non-fics are great, but that in a way, is preaching to the converted - I'd say this stuff needs to be brought into the mainstream. [/quote] I see why you'd like to make it mainstream, but consider, if you will, how long it took us to begin accepting homosexuality being portrayed in TV, film and in books. It was a difficult birthing and it is very likely that BDSM and it's wide range of fetishes will experience just as difficult a time in being accepted as another way to love and experience life. And come to think of it, homosexuals are not equal yet, they are still played up, mocked, humiliated and treated as negative in books and other media. I think we need to work on one problem before we try to move on to the next.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

the_devil — Sun, 30 Oct 2011 04:52:21 -0700

Different nations deploy their own interpretations of the World Health Organisation's list of disorders. In many countries cross dressing, fetishises and SM are still classifiable as mental health disorders. Google 'Revise F65' for more info. It's a not for profit Norwegian based group that campaign for, with some success, the delisting of these sexual preferences internationally.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Christopher D. Jones — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 12:57:17 -0700

The sign of a brilliant artist is to take formulas and break them. If you possess the ability to think outside of the box, then do it, and don't discount the entire literary world for being cliched because you've come across a good idea. By going out of your way to stress your BDSM relationships as non-stereotypical, you are in fact, reinforcing the stereotype.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Christopher D. Jones — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 13:04:25 -0700

[quote=alysdragon] As I'm sure the good people of this forum can tell, this unusual shorthand has absolutely no application to real life. As an eg, one of the Doms I know, when met socially, a humble, considerate and caring person, who always attempts to mend a quarrel. In his personal life, he is compassionate, helpful and non-violent. He has never been in a fight, and is always the first person that people turn to in a crisis. In other words, the total opposite of a power-crazed would-be wifebeater. Yet, because he likes his kink, he is essentially being defamed by too many writers - some of them good writers who should know better - who use his lifestyle choices as a shorthand, and thereby perpetuates the myth of BDSM as a nest of abuse. [/quote] A person that is a dominating sociopath is going to be that way in all aspects of their lives, including sex. This makes for a static shallow character, sure. [quote] That, unsurprisingly, makes me angry. So, what I want to ask is, has anyone else found this? Does anyone know why it occurs, or where it originates? And, also, any non-erotica (or romance) books that don't do this, and have characters having kinks that are never disparaged or undermined in the course of the book, because I've yet to find one that doesn't. [/quote] I haven't done any reading on the subject. I don't really care really. A scene is a scene. I hope my readers to not be connoisseurs of any one genre, but just average folks enjoying my carpet ride.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Christopher D. Jones — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 13:05:50 -0700

BDSM tops tend to be very sensitive caring individuals. They may have had checkered pasts that have crafted their unique life outlook. A psychopathic jerk will make a terrible domination since he can't recognize boundaries.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Saker Pup — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 20:21:36 -0700

[quote=alysdragon]The overwhelming message is that this may be fun at first, but it lead to madness, abuse and possible death.[/quote] Does anyone else remember way, way back (mid-90's and earlier) when the only YA novels that included sex did so strictly as a morality fable and the characters always ended up pregnant/whoring/on crack/etc? It's kind of like that. Total After-School Special territory. Because it's outside the norm and therefore the only people that could engage in it must be similarly outside the norm and if you're outside one norm you must be outside ALL THE NORMS THERE'S JUST NO OTHER WAY TO MAKE SENSE OF IT. Because everyone who's into a little kink is also a fan of heroin and underage kids, just throw everything at the wall until the scariest combo sticks. It's lazy writing, which is enough to make me hate it. And all those boys strung up in the dungeon? They wouldn't be there if they didn't want to be. That's what people need to get: If everyone involved isn't getting something out of it, you're doing it wrong.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Inoru no Hoshi — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 01:41:52 -0700

[quote]Master/slave - these relationships are similar to the D/s, but are on a 24/7 basis and the slave has relienquished their right to safeword out - this is consentual, and I'm talking in broad generalities.[/quote] Very broad, since I have heard of M/s/TPE relationships where the s-type very definitely still has the right - and even the expectation - to safeword out of a situation that is too much for them. I, personally, would be very, very skeeved by not being allowed to safeword out of anything - even if we'd been together for years and years, knowing that I could safeword out if it was just toomuch/getitoff/away/lemmedown would be amazingly comforting. YMMV, of course. :) There is really no part of BDSM that is rigidly proscribed - this one couple can do it like that, this other one in this way, that poly group shifts depending on who's playing with whom, etc., etc. It's part of why you should definitely talk and work out what you expect of each other and where your limits are - just because you're familiar with it by x rules, your potential partner(s) might not be: zhe (they) might play by y rules. The one overarching rule is that it should be consensual - if it's not, it's assault and/or rape, flat out.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

aurora17 — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 07:35:03 -0800

This is pretty much identical to the treatment of GLBT people in 1950s-1970s pulp literature--and, as another poster points out, even today. The answer to it: well, pretty much what folks are doing here: (a) write it accurately yourself; (b) speak up, and loudly, when it's done badly. Not a BDSM practitioner myself, but one of the things that I find admirable is the emphasis on consent. If only people were a little clearer about this in general: e.g. in professional settings I've had to remind alleged professionals about what 'informed consent' means, i.e. that the subject/patient always has the right to opt out, at any time, for any reason. People with PhDs regularly get it wrong, generally for reasons of self-interest. So "giving up one's right to safe word out"... is a dubious notion, unless you're not really operating in a framework of basic human rights. The thing that really ticks me off about the way BDSM is handled in contemporary romance is the sloppy conflation of BDSM roles with standard, traditional gender roles, not to mention the even sloppier biological determinism. See Angela Knight's horrid Passionate Ink, in which she claims that all women want to be dominated (in real life) by a so-called alpha male, and that's because biology says so. "Sexual experimentation" with BDSM automatically equates to "submissive woman" (which in her scheme is redundant). [Just as an aside: the pop-culture "evolutionary behaviorism" is far from intellectually respectable among people with real training in biology. Interestingly, or maybe not, those pundits always come down on the side of the current elites and their notion of our place in things.] Having swept up the real-life blood and broken glass from people believing the stuff in fictional scenarios, I'm also inclining to the inclusion of disclaimers and footnotes. In the spirit of which, thank you to those who included references. I will be checking them out.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

serotonin — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 07:35:22 -0800

Both human reason and storytelling are about the manipulation of symbols. The utility of symbols is that they are shortcuts to thinking. They represent things that are very nuanced, in the same way that subway stations represent a city, or that ports of call represent a nation, which is to say: expediently, but not thoroughly. So it is with the symbolic representation of what-it-is-that-we-do by the acronym BDSM. People - including writers - use it as the jumping-off point for all manner of moralizing and fantasy, often without any personal experience beyond what they have read on Google and dreamed of at night. I'll add the same can be said of how a lot of teenage girls write about gay male sex. It is a symbol that expresses something that draws them, even though the reality of it is beyond their grasp.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

panty20111228 — Wed, 28 Dec 2011 05:23:17 -0800

yes, I love bdsm too ? http://www.spicesforlove.com/

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

quixotic_hope — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 17:17:50 -0800

I find this thread really interesting because one of the novels I'm working on focuses on a young woman trying to come to terms with the fact that she is submissive. It's been a hard book to write because I'm worried that it's completely stereotypical and exactly the sort of book that you hate. Most of my knowledge of BDSM comes from a fan fiction story I read a few years ago by a Domme. I've also looked up groups online and try to look at forums, but I'm still afraid of messing it up. The talk here has mostly been about how much it bothers people when Dom/mes are portrayed as evil, which I completely understand. It bothers me when I read stuff like that, too. But is it just as bad to make it seem too much like a vanilla relationship? I personally don't find a lot of pain to be a turn-on, so I wasn't going to write about it in my story - but then does it just sound like the man's bossing his girlfriend around and having kinky sex? I realize this doesn't quite fit here, but it's related so I figured I would go ahead and ask. There's been a lot of talk about what you don't like to read. What would you like to read about? Thanks!

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Dav1d — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 09:59:20 -0800

Curious, how many good writers would chose to write a practical guide to emergencies on an AirBus A380 here? Yet feel okay with creating characters that engage in, practice BDSM? Something I learned many years ago, was to write something I had personal experience with. There are a lot of pretenders out there that use BDSM as an excuse to practice their form of perversion. Certainly I feel that if people truly understood BDSM there would be far more interest in it. There are evil people in this world, there are cruel people in this world. To me that is not what real BDSM is about. It is NOT what serial killers do. A guy bossing his, his plaything around? Is that your concept of BDSM? Better to write a story about a woman who has a poor self worth concept and falls pray to a male who takes advantage, of her poor self worth. In my opinion than imply that it is about BDSM.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

alysdragon — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 09:31:22 -0800

Not all BDSM relationships are about the pain - as you say, not everyone enjoys that. I think it's a question of portraying the dynamic carefully and in a sensitive fasion. Read up on it, ask questions. As Dav1d says, there's a lot more to the d/s dynamic than a bloke bossing his girlfriend around - and you want to avoid it coming off that way. From how I understand this, the Dom/me's needs are ass complex and involved as the sub's, and if it just comes off as an unmitigated gratification for the Dom/me with no deeper psychology there, then you're doing it wrong. Still, that's no reason not to try - do it right. Talk to Dom/mes, talk to subs - if you're unsure about something, post a thread. Again, from what I understand, d/s relationships are not unlike vanilla relationships in many ways. There is love, there is companionship, there is commitment and respect. How much the d/s aspect plays into household chores and the like depends not only on the individual relationship, but on whether it is 24/7, 'playtime only' (I think I've just coined that term, although I may not have done) or somewhere between the two. In fact, one difference which I have noticed is that boundaries - about 'bossing around' and sexual coercian - are actually much more firmly drawn in healthy d/s relationships precisely to avoid the danger than not having clearly drawn boundaries could have for both partners. Of course, peoples' way of dealing with this varies, but communication is always key. Understandably - because of many of the issues raised in this thread - people are very sensitive about BDSM and misportrayal thereof, so be respectful, but do ask people. Actually, a very good thread to look at in this forum is called something like "Conveying love/ reverence through D/S" which might give you a good starting point and introduce you to the right kind of people. Also, @ Dav1d, I have to disagree - one does not need personal experience to write about something. There is also a distinction between fact and fiction. Perhaps for factual manuals, one needs experience, for fiction or an academic study one needs only good, solid research and an open mind. Yes, there would be more interest in, and sympathy for, BDSM if it were more widely understood, but that does not mean only lifestylers should write stories involving it. I have no experience being male, but I write male characters. If I were writing fiction about AirBus A380 emergencies, I would get in contact with someone who worked on an A380 airbus. I would look up testimonies and black box recordings of A380 airbus (and indeed other airbus) emergency survivors. When I couldn't get an answer I would, in the case of fiction, be vague, and in the case of fact, admit the lacunae in my knowledge. I should also point out that quixotic_hope doesn't say the story shows a guy bossing his plaything around, but asks a question - "does it just sound like the man's bossing his girlfriend around?" -which implies a knowledge that this would be a misrepresentation of BDSM, and is trying to avoid that. Anyway, hope I've been of some assitance. Sorry for the long post.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

quixotic_hope — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 00:52:53 -0800

@alysdragon - Thank you so much for your response! I'm glad I at least got one response that didn't tell me to quit and suggest that I was a horrible person. :) You've given me a lot of great suggestions, and I appreciate the time you spent writing that post more than I can probably explain. Thank you! @Dav1d - I'm afraid you misunderstood what I was trying to say. I feel alysdragon did a great job explaining what I was trying to say, but just to say it again: I was never trying to imply that there was something wrong with BDSM or anyone who identifies with that lifestyle. I don't think it's abusive at all. I was just worried about accidentally portraying it as such. Honestly, the reason I'm writing this story is because this is a lifestyle that I would like to be a part of but am too shy and scared to actually try. I'm sorry if people feel that you have to experience something first hand to be able to write about it, but that can't possibly be true because it was then there wouldn't be a fantasy or science fiction section. I don't believe that everyone who writes about a character with cancer has actually had cancer himself (or even necessarily who knows someone who has/had cancer). I'm sorry if you disagree, but I feel that people can still write great stories without first hand knowledge as long as they do their research, which is what I am trying to do. This isn't the only site I am on. I have signed up for several different BDSM forums. I just also posted here because you were all writers and were talking about a topic directly related to my novel.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

vampyre_smiles — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 23:47:54 -0800

Quix, I've noticed that a lot of bad depiction of D/s makes it look like no work on the part of the Dom/me, and a lot for the sub. But really, the Dom/me has to remember a lot and think about a lot and keep things interesting for the sub. Someone I read on a board, not remembering where now, said something like, "The Dom/me has the control, but the sub has the real power. They can both stop whenever they want, but if the Dom/me wants to play, the sub has to play along." I probably butchered that, and I'm a bit sad I can't ask the person who wrote the original. Of course with all of this YMMV. I could tell you a little about my relationship with my fiance. We do "play" a bit, me being the sub generally, but it's very light on S/M, so I'd just leave that out completely. I'd prefer PM to discuss any questions. :)

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Dav1d — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 12:29:29 -0800

I would suggest if quixotic_hope (who knows darn well what she intends) questioned if "...then does it just sound like the man's bossing his girlfriend around and having kinky sex?" If quixotic_hope can't be sure, then I suspect that a lot of potential readers will simply hear little more than it's a male using coercive persuasion to get his girlfriend into having kinky sex. That sounds a little to close to the stereotypical image of a male that doesn't really care about his girlfriend, and cares far more about sex, in my opinion. The characterization of the bossy male adds the question of is this coercive persuasion, mind control, emotional abuse? At best a negative stereotype, or it can be a crime. Perhaps not of the same magnitude as a serial murderer, but a crime none the less. It caries a negative connotation, at least for the male perpetrator. For many that translates into (what they hear) is the guy forcing the girl into having sex she doesn't consent to or actually want. Going back to my original post; I posted what I believed to be clear, that "Something "I" learned many years ago, was to write something "I" had personal experience with." That is what works for me. Somehow that seems to have been twisted into something I did not intend, for that I am sorry. It was never my intention to suggest that one shouldn't write about male characters, because one lacks experience "being" male. Some seem to confuse the word "with" and "being"? I'm surprised that potential wordsmiths would have such difficulty distinguishing between "with" and "being". Not something I expected here. Somehow I've got to suspect one has some experience "with" males, even if one doesn't have experience "being" male. I don't know about anyone else here, but I want to write the best that I can. Often I don't live up to that desire, or intention. Certainly I can write trash, worthless things in my opinion. In my own life I attempt to focus on the things I should do, not the things I shouldn't do. I find my days far more productive that way. For those that only hear a list of things not to do, I'm sorry that was not my intention. While we are on corrections, I wrote in my opinion what makes for a good writer, not being a good writer, in no way makes one a horrible person. There are a lot of people in this world that can't read, let alone write certainly that doesn't make them horrible people! What I heard was a writer, questioning if they could portray BDSM as more than an either or kind of concept. Where one is either into pain, or one is into bossing another around, and getting them to have kinky sex. Perhaps I misread the intent of the original post, I thought this thread was about the negative portrayal of BDSM in the media? I assumed that extended to both sexes involved in BDSM. Perhaps it is a fine line, but I take pride in the simple fact that my partners are there by choice, their choice. Unlike the all to common typical couple I don't abuse my parter because, they feel trapped, nor do I isolate my partners. It's not about tricking, my partners into doing something they do not wish to do. The original post in this thread was about the suggestion that BDSM was too often portrayed in negative ways, with negative associations, I thought. Great the intent, the desire is not to portray BDSM in a negative way! Does that intent then excuse what one hears? Is it acceptable to write about BDSM in ways that leaves the females, as sympathetic characters, and simply perpetuates the male stereotype? I'll acknowledge that one can learn a lot from the Internet, but if someone came to you wanting to know the true meaning of love, would you simply point them at you computer and turn them loose on the Internet? Can one learn the true meaning of love at a porn site? How about a dating site? There is a wide spectrum of information on the Internet, some of it good, some of it poor, and some intentionally mis-portrayed. It is far to easy to find sites that will verify our misconceptions on the Internet. That will validate BDSM is all about pain, and inflicting pain.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

vampyre_smiles — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 17:05:54 -0800

In the case of "being" something, there are some things that you will only have experience "with" (at least directly) BY being in said condition. I don't have first hand experience with breaking a bone, but I have characters who certainly will. But there are people I can ask what it's like. Maybe that's what you intended, but then quixotic can ask people with experience how to write those scenes. As a thought, make it the girl's idea, and have the guy show some reluctance at first. That might help set it up as, "He's not being abusive and yes she wants this."

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

quixotic_hope — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 11:41:42 -0800

[quote=Dav1d] I I suspect that a lot of potential readers will simply hear little more than it's a male using coercive persuasion to get his girlfriend into having kinky sex. That sounds a little to close to the stereotypical image of a male that doesn't really care about his girlfriend, and cares far more about sex, in my opinion. [/quote] You're assuming a lot of things about my story when you say that, none of which are true. My FMC goes to a munch and meets someone who tells her to come to him if she has any questions. Eventually, the two start dating. She was looking to meet someone to have kinky sex with, but that's not all she wants. She wants someone to tell her what to do. She wants to please this man. She falls in love with the MMC, who loves her, as well. She relies on him to make most of her decisions for her. My concern was that this wouldn't be realistic. From what I've seen on BDSM forums, wanting to be whipped and spanked are some of the most common desires, and since she doesn't like either of those (really isn't that big a fan of pain at all), I was worried that it would look less like a BDSM relationship and more like a vanilla relationship where the man is in charge of everything. I never meant to imply that he was forcing her into anything. My concern was that the sex wasn't kinky enough to justify calling it BDSM in any form, which was why I didn't give more details about my story. I didn't think they were relevant. Apparently I was wrong. This post probably hasn't changed your opinion about whether or not I should write this story, but I wanted you to at least understand what I was actually trying to write before you dismissed it.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Dav1d — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 13:50:19 -0800

What can I say? I'm male, and I believe don't try to pretend to know what someone else is thinking. As I recall I ask, or tried to, why does it need to be label as BDSM? Okay I get that you're curious, and you want to write about BDSM. But I'm talking about this story, and the few lines you've given us? So maybe this woman is curious about BDSM, and perhaps this is her motivation to get out and meet her future boyfriend. Why (that's a question, a real one) can't they start their relationship in a plain vanilla way? What's so wrong about that? There are about three common ways to get into BDSM. 1) you're paid X amount of money to allow someone to Y to you. 2) someone forces you into it against your will. 3) you find someone you really trust, at a very deep level. Personally I tend to discount the first as not truly living a lifestyle but rather doing a job, or performing a service. The second is illegal and doesn't present BDSM in a positive light in my opinion, so doesn't really work in this thread. That leaves trust, and I believe real meaningful trust just doesn't happen at the drop of a hat. Everyone has their own comfortable level when it comes to trust. How well would you need to know me, to let me put handcuffs on you in the local mall? :) In theory a safe place, you can always scream for help. Contrast that with say going caving with me, and allowing me to put handcuffs on you in a cave I know? The two are very different, and have different risk. Different risk for both you and me. I don't think I've expressed an opinion about whether or not you should write this story, only about what it should be label as? And again I don't have much to go on, just your opinion that it might seem to vanilla. I tend to respect your opinion. I also never meant to imply you should not write this story. But you heard that in my words. And yes I can be wrong, perhaps no one that reads your story will for a moment think its just another plain vanilla love story. Who is your intended audience? There are lots and lots of things I don't know. You might not be writing for someone such as myself, and that's okay. To clear another point, it was not my intention to tell you what you are thinking, LOL you know that far better than me. It's my opinion that the little bit about this scene you painted for us leaves me with the impression that the guy is forcing his girlfriend into kinky sex. You tell me that's not your intention, I can accept that. Now can you accept that is the impression it gives me? I'm attempting to report my feeling my beliefs. I thought that was what you where looking for? You painted a picture in my head with your words, and this is what I see. I'm NOT saying this is the only possible way to see what you painted. Nor am I saying this is likely to be the most common way it will be seen. Only that this is what I see, hear... And yes I believe a number of others are likely to hear it that way. Yep I went as far as to suggest many others, and I'm not backing off of that. But many others, is not the same as this is the only way it can be seen. You've said she likes/wants kinky sex, but the desire for "kinky" sex, does that make her into BDSM? I would suggest that just the desire for kinky sex doesn't make one into BDSM. Aren't there a number of kinky sex activities that have nothing at all to do with BDSM? Nor is this me telling you, that you need to tell me about the kinky sex. My opinion is they can have a lot of kinky sex, he can never hurt her, and I personally don't see the tie in to BDSM. The flip of that is also true, they can have a lot of kinky sex, he can hurt her very bad, and that doesn't in my opinion mean they are living the BDSM lifestyle. Yep that's likely to get a few comments. Shrug I haven't read your story. I've only read what you've posted. In my opinion your female main character sounds all too much like too many women I've known, who have a poor self image, and once into a relationship are far too often willing to do more than what they should to keep it. You can't earn love, you can't buy love. Again, your right, I don't really know much about your male main character. But I do know that what little I know about him rubs me the wrong way. You've taken what a paragraph to tell me about him and her. And he's one of those people I just know I'm not going to like. But then you're not writing this story for me, and I don't have to like it. In a way that's a complement because with just a few words you've created someone that I have an intense dislike for. Granted that might not be what you intended, but it is a skill in my opinion. You've got me involved, you've got me responding to you, thinking about your story. It's a story that wants to be told, one that creates opinion, I would suggest. Do you have any idea how many stories, here on this board do nothing at all for me? Shaking head, it was never my intention to dismiss your story, to imply it wasn't worth telling. Just to question how you label it.... One can certainly find boards where wanting to whip, and be spanked is very common. But that doesn't have to occur, you're apparently going to the boards that focus on S&M side of things. You might explore the world of bondage, and dominance a little more. There are those who would enjoy say tying their partner to the bed spread-eagle and running a feather over their body... That doesn't have to be painful in the sense of whips, or being spanked...

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

alysdragon — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:56:33 -0800

I second this, but would add, just have them talking. If he's gradually leading her into this lifestyle at her request, or even if they're gradually discovering it together, he'll almost certainly be talking to her a lot about what she likes and be taking things very, very slowly, learning what not to do, but also why she doesn't like things and what it is she really desires. I'll give an example of a way this could play out based on something from my own experience, but reworked so that it fits more to the preferences of your characters. For example, if she thinks that what she wants kinky sex, he might try out something fairly straightforward early in the story, perhaps light bondage, such as handcuffs. She might find that, although she liked the idea, being physically restrained freaks the hell out of her, and when they're talking afterwards about what went wrong, and if there was anything she enjoyed, and she says that although she didn't like being tied up, she liked the way that he was talking to her as he tied her up. Your MMC the realises that what she enjoys more is the psychological side to submission, rather than simply the bondage/ pain aspects. You could then have him use restraints later in their journey together as an aspect of a longer play session, in a situation where her being tied is more to do with submitting than being restrained. Perhaps she finds that, like this, it doesn't scare her, because it's no longer restraint, simply a symbol of her pre-existing, and willing, surrender of control; in fact, she might enjoy it quite a lot - all the more so because in that state she is able to do something she couldn't normally do. If you do have any interiority from the Dom, you could that the reason he tried it again is to stretch her limits a little (personally, I've always felt d/s is more about stretching one's own and each other's limits and boundaries than anything else), and to explore that fear, but have him, during the scene, watching her very closely and worrying about a repeat of the freak-out. You could even have him apologising for trying it again, but explaining his reasons, and the work through of exactly why it worked the second time, but not the first, could easily make them a lot closer.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

Dav1d — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 02:39:24 -0800

Interesting concept/scene, a Dom that is weak, unsure, and apologizing. A Dom willing to take instruction from his sub. A Dom willing to seek the approval of his sub. A Dom willing to justify himself to his sub. A person learning to be a Dom is not a Dom. A sub in control, is not a sub. A scene with a not-dom and a not- sub, might be kinky, it might imitate but it's not DS. The act of sex might imitate parts of Love, but having sex, does mean one loves, is loved. Masters control their fear. Fear puts us out of control. A Master/slave relationship (real world experience) one spends a lot of time talking about control A slave has to have a healthy self esteem, without that one can not submit completely to another. Contrary to the ignorant opinion of many being submissive has nothing to do with weakness. But rather with the inner strength, fortitude to be self confident enough to hand over power without fear. Fear strips control away from us instantly. This causes people to attempt to assert themselves wherever possible to stem their lack of control. Hopefully you can see the conflict this causes when trying to submit to another. We call this attempting to top from the bottom. Trying to instill control when taking on a presumed submissive position. Sorry you don't learn to be submissive in a scene. A Master doesn't permit his sub to freak out in a scene. A good Master doesn't take a scene to the point his slave uses the safe word. This act is as far as east is from west when it comes to describing real Master/slaves D/s lifestyles, you are doing stereotypes here. Pretend. Play. It's as valid as attempting to learn what real love means from an experience with a whore. That doesn't mean you won't find readers for it. You're selling the stereotype here, and that's always safe.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

alysdragon — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 16:01:02 -0800

[Removed by Request]

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

vampyre_smiles — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 18:39:26 -0800

Thank you, Alys. You wrote that much better and more calmly than I would have.

Re: Portrayal of BDSM & S/M in non-erotic literature

quixotic_hope — Sun, 22 Jan 2012 08:07:52 -0800

Thank you all for your advice! Vampyre_smiles, alysdragon, and Dav1d - the three of you have given me a lot to think about. I'm sorry if I started any fights on here. That was not my intention at all.