negotiation

Food for Thought: Jason Reitman's 2004 Short Film "Consent"

Fri, 2011-12-30 12:04

So I've been thinking a lot (a lot) about issues of consent, of sexual abuse, of "gray areas," of stereotypes and assumptions, and, especially, about accountability. Last summer, here on this blog, at No Seriously, What About Teh Menz, and in various comment threads around the intertubes, I started digging deeper into what I saw as just one or two incidents of violent sexual assault I experienced as a child -- one at age four at the hands of a ~12-year-old neighbor girl, one around age 14 at the hands of a ~17-year-old neighborhood bully.

The more I've been digging into it the more I've come to realize that, you know, I grew up in a culture that was pretty rife with sexual abuse -- enough so that I only really registered the above-mentioned incidents. But the kid who was the closest thing to a best friend in elementary school? Duh, let's see, he and his sister were foster kids who's father taught them all about "corn-holing" and "fuck-rubbers?" Gee, only this summer did it occur to me to wonder why they were foster kids? The core of the new-to-town teens I hung out with in late high-school and after I dropped out but before I left home? The variously emancipated and/or runaway boys and girls who at times seemed voraciously sexual(ized) but spoke in fluent 70's-era "sexual liberation?" The ones who's attitudes and behaviors deeply influenced much of my own early sexual aspirations? It only recently occurred to me that a contemporary assessment would be that they'd been groomed to the nines both by adult influences. And speaking of grooming and sexual abuse, how about the handful of distinctly predatory adult "youth counselors" (inside a much larger group of entirely decent, appropriate ones) who advocated boundary-crossing in ways that, while not necessarily unsound advice overall, nevertheless advanced their own "hands on" agendas with various "promising young people?"

Let's not even talk about the barkingly predatory "pre-date-rape" alcohol, cocaine, and Quaalude drenched college music bar culture I lived and worked in where it seemed at the time to be perfectly "cool" for more experienced bar patrons and bartenders to take over-intoxicated young men and women home to "crash." Where what this year would be called morning-after gaslighting was considered just helping the erstwhile partner get "perspective."

And all that's got me wondering where have those early influences left me!?!?! What else has been done to me? What else have I let happen? What else have I done in all earnestness? What impact have I had on others?

It's been bugging me a lot. Sort of a hard, fast replay of the old Will Rogers line, which I cite frequently, that "it's not what you don't know that'll hurt you, it's what you know that just ain't so."

Anyway, while I could launch into how my latest runaway train of thought about consent and assumptions has been accelerated by Clarisse Thorn's controversial but excellent exploration of forgiveness vs. accountability in On Change and Accountability, or how it was set rolling by Rachel Hills' Best of 2010: “But women don’t rape!”: sexual pressure, rejection and the male sex drive discourse, and how at the moment I'm feeling a bit like the only people one should really trust in sexual situations are the meticulous negotiation fetishists in the kink community (for instance see item #4 in Andrea Zanin's Expectations of Dominance: Picking Through the Tangle.) But I'm still not feeling completely collected about it, and besides, at the moment I'm feeling all Maslow's hammer about unstated assumptions that can interfere unspoken and even verbal consent... and so at this point any conclusions I draw are likely to be, um, over the top.

So instead I'd like to point out this cute little 2004 video short Jason Reitman and his then-partner Michele Lee called "Consent." It's not perfect (the text "romance deserves better than this" at the end of the credits is a little ambiguous) but it nicely captures how little we're able to communicate with simple yeses, nos, and you-want-tos.

YouTube link via Caitlin.

The BDSM Community is a Great Source for Concrete Advice on Applying "No Means No"

Mon, 2011-06-27 20:19

Note: Still on a happily hectic family vacation on the awesomely laid-back Greek island of Lesvos and so posting and comment moderation will continue to be sparse.  Today or tomorrow we're going to try and get over to Skala Eresou, which in addition to being Sappho's birthplace is also supposed to have an awesome beach.

It's really great to keep spreading the message that "No means no" and as a slogan "no means no" is memorable and effective. But a slogan isn't really adequate for helping people navigate real-world situations: you also need real-world illustrations and examples. Sarah Sloane offers an example from the BDSM community that ought to be part of mainstream Relationships 101.

Keep in mind that you do not need to have a reason to say no – you are entitled to say no for any reason (or even no reason) at all. It’s YOUR decision whether to play or engage in sex. You also do not need to give them a “rain check” or tell them maybe another time unless you want to – in fact, in my experience it’s been worse for me to tell them “maybe” instead of just saying no and leaving it alone.

When I came up in my leather community, I was taught that one of the things that bind us together is a sense of respect; part of that is respect for ourselves and our ability & power to say no, and part of it is respect for the other person that we’re talking with. Honesty – not the blunt, hurtful kind, but the compassionate kind – will be something that both you and the person that you’re being honest with can live with.

Practice saying no – to your mirror, to friends, in writing – and use those practice sessions to feel more comfortable and confident when you say it. When you’re in a position where you’re not sure what to say to the other person, tell them that – and ask them if you can get back to them. Take the time you need to make a decision; it’s a very rare situation to have a potential play session with someone that you will literally never see again, so there’s no need to pressure yourself into deciding. And when it comes down to it, remember that no means no – and if the person in question spends time trying to talk you into it, or becomes defensive, then that should be a clear indication that it’s not someone that you wanted to play with in the first place.

Source: Fearless Press

It's almost a cliché in social theory that minority or alt communities will be more accurately aware of their differences and similarities than will the mainstream culture they're embedded in. And that therefore they may have useful insights that the mainstream culture would benefit from. Cliché or not, the BDSM community really has necessarily invested considerable time pondering issues of peer pressure, consent, and maintaining mutual respect. Of course, Sloan's case demonstrates that, being human beings, BDSM people often need active coaching and sometimes frequent reminders. But, being human beings, everyone else frequently needs those same reminders as well.

Via Viviane's Sex Carnival

Svutlana on Shared Fantasies, Intimacy, and Boundaries

Fri, 2010-10-15 10:44

Svutlana, in her trademark broken English, endorses an important point about intimacy in relationships: everyone’s entitled to a little bit of mental privacy. Answering a man who questions whether his long-term partner could be sincere when she says she has no sexual fantasies, she hits the nail on the head.

Svutlana be extreme sorry for say this, but you need for immediate get for fuck over need for extract fantasies from wife, Mr Fantasy. If wife say she no have fantasies, she no have fantasies. Even if wife have fantasies that she hide from you, you no have right for demand access for them and feel insult when she no comply with your wishes.

In Svutlana opinion, no matter how extreme faithful you be, there be limits for what you should expect from monogamy.

Source: Svutlana of Svutlandia

And just to be clear, I’m not saying this because I’m a privacy absolutist (I’m actually relatively sanguine about limits to privacy.) Instead it’s that I strongly subscribe to relationship therapist and theorist Esther Perel’s philosophy that while intimacy is obviously important in relationships too much intimacy begins to sabotage sexual desire.

There’s also the bit about how for many people, sharing or acting on fantasies can deaden them — even long-term cherished ones.

As to the question of fantasies Svutlana points out correctly that not everyone has them. She adds that women aren’t as likely as men to have repeated, strongly-themed fantasies, easily pinned down fantasies. (I’m not sure the gender declaration holds up but it’s certainly true that a lot of people’s fantasies are almost indefinably vague.)

She points out that her correspondent seems to want to know his partner’s fantasies not just because he’s hurt that she’s “withholding” but because he’s hoping there’s something in it for him.

You say for self, “But want me for find out what wife fantasy be so can increase her sexual pleasures!” and maybe this be true for some degrees, but you really want for see if maybe wife think up something excite you never think of before for get you off. And you also want for know everything about wife, include her most privates thoughts, for make you feel important and feed your ego.

And here’s where it gets cool: Svutlana says that instead of prying into your partner’s possible fantasies it might be more effective to suggest a range of broad fantasy scenarios that you’d enjoy trying and seeing whether any of your ideas work for them. She says that while fantasies can be hard to pin down most people have broad themes they respond to.

I’d just add that in addition to respecting each other’s boundaries, sharing your ideas is at least a good way to start a conversation. (Hint: if you feel vulnerable sharing your fantasies then… that might explain why they feel vulnerable about sharing theirs, right?) By risking your own vulnerability you create space where they might feel comfortable risking theirs.

"Vanilla" vs. "Kink" - Calico on Normal vs. Abnormal Psychology

Tue, 2009-05-12 14:48

Further reflections on “vanilla,” “kink” and negotiations. At Sex 2.0 I finally got to meet Miss Calico of Dominatrix Next Door. A week or two ago Calico wrote with warmth and fondness about a BDSM scene she played in with an acquaintance. In addition to sounding eye-rollingly painful for her (which I can handle) her description sounded dangerously out of control (which alarmed me.) I mentioned this to her, in rather maudlin terms that surprised both her and her top.

We talked about it a little further when we met in person and she said, with some exasperation, that she hadn’t thought it was necessary to write about the extensive email, phone, and in-person negotiations she and her partner had gone through to detail exactly what they intended to do together, what to expect from each other, what their limits and squicks might be, what their contingencies would be, nor did she think it necessary to talk about their communications before and during the scene nor the details of aftercare afterwards.

I said it made perfect sense that she wouldn’t want to do that in her post but that I thought it would be nice for her to talk more about negotiation and aftercare in her blog because a lot of (CoughVanillaCough) people who might like to try kinky things would probably have better experiences if they knew more about it.

The blank look she gave me was worth the price of the plane ticket. “People already know to do that,” says she. So I tried to rephrase it, saying that I knew people heard about things like “safe words” but not so much else and that there really wasn’t a lot of discussion of “sub drop” and aftercare and that it didn’t just come naturally because negotiation, communication, reconsideration, and aftercare isn’t really part of standard heteronormative scripts. _[Aside: would The Ethical Slut. What was different, though, and what drove home the point was Calico’s sense of shocked aggravation not with what happens during vanilla sex but with what generally doesn’t happen before. And after. (Think being criticized for driving race cars by people who don’t even wear seat belts.)

Which leaves one wondering which practices, exactly, should and should not be discussed in the sexual disorders and fetishes sections of ab-psych classes.

Chicken Soup for BDSM Aficionados

Mon, 2009-02-02 14:47

Ms. Inconspicuous of The Seduction of Infidelity illustrates the difference between BDSM and abuse.

I wail, the pain of such an abrupt, forceful penetration reverberating with pleasure in my body. He teases me, torments me…tortures me. Going hard and deep, then slowing down and taunting me with his words. Telling me how he’s going to take me with no mercy. Take me how he wants me. Take me screaming. Take me pleading for him to stop. Take me until he can’t stand it any longer.

I shiver and shudder in his words, each one sending a delicious thrill through my body.

Then, in a quiet and intense moment of sexual pleasure coupled with violence, I sniffle.

I am used to him turning from light to dark—unleashing a beast when he has come in lamb’s skin—but I am not used to the quick turn the other way (not until he orgasms, at least).

I sniffle, sick and feverish.

“Oh, honey…”

Something in him clicks and all the tension goes out of his body. He kisses me and kisses me, holding my head in his gentle palms, smoothing back the mussed hair from my forehead. He pushes up my blindfold and takes my tied-together wrists from their secured location above my head; instead placing them around his neck.

Read the quote in context here.

I don’t know why lovers play any of the sexual games with each other that we do. And if you’re not familiar with or comfortable with submission and dominance then the story might make no sense at all.

But there’s a difference is that unlike real cruelty or real abuse a game is only a game, and therefore can be called on account of rain, or sniffles. And that makes a huge difference.

—-

Incidentally it have made more sense for Ms. I to have communicated her illness before her partner came over. The rules of sex safety apply even when the infection is traditionally socially transmitted. Negotiations of BDSM also apply in both directions, meaning that even though she was up for their usual activities he might have preferred negotiating different rules for their encounter. That plus he might have brought some chicken soup.

Update: In comments Ms. Inconspicuous pointed out that she did warn him. My bad. Actually my worse since the aside sort of detracts from my main point and her story. I apologize.

User login