MASARYK UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF SOCIAL STUDIES

Department of Sociology

From Steel to Plush: Symbolic Boundaries, Authenticity and

Inauthenticity in the BDSM

Lucie Drdová

Supervisor: Professor Steven Saxonberg

Brno, 2020 I declare that this thesis was composed by myself, that the work contained herein is my own except where explicitly stated otherwise in the text, and that this work has not been submitted for any other degree or professional qualification except as specified. The second chapter of this work is based on a publication by Drdova, L. and Grochova, M. (2015). „Hra na hrane zakona: Trestne ciny proti zdravi v kontextu BDSM“. In Tauchen, J., Schelle, K. et al.. Trestne ciny proti zivotu a zdravi vcera a dnes. Ostrava: Key Publishing. ISBN 978-80-87475-48-5. The fourth chapter of this work has been published in Drdova, L., and Saxonberg, S. (2019). Dilemmas of a subculture: An analysis of BDSM blogs about Fifty Shades of Grey. Sexualities, DOI: 1363460719876813.

14. 04. 2020 Lucie Drdová Brno ______This research was financially supported by a Specific research project at Masaryk University, project num. MUNI/A/1359/2019. Acknowledgements

Most of all to my mum, who encouraged me to continue with an academic career, supported me in all possible ways and never forced me to end my studies. I love you. I would also like to thank my advisor, Professor Steven Saxonberg, for being the best advisor – friendly and critical at the same time. Many thanks to my partner (and also to my ex-partner) for the tolerance of my weird dissertation topic and patience with me being often over-worked. My biggest thanks go to all my respondents for their interest in my research, their trust and their time – thank you so much. Last but not least, I would like to thank my gatekeeper and his wife for the trust they put in me, the openness of their minds, the continuous access to anything my work needed, their gradual friendship and endless hours of discussions about sociological aspects of BDSM. I wish you and your family all the best. The names of all respondents in this thesis have been anonymized using the most common Czech names by drawing lots.

The names of BDSM clubs and organizations, including streets and location identifiers, have also been anonymized. Only the names of five Czech cities (Prague, Brno, Ostrava, Pardubice, Liberec) and the names of post-communist magazines and

TV shows have remained non-anonymized. Table of Contents

1. Chapter One – Introduction______8

2. Chapter Two – Symbolic Boundaries between Ill and Healthy: Pleasure in Deviance, Deviance in

Pleasure. How Does the Psychiatrical, Sexological and Medical Discourse Frame BDSM?______27

3. Chapter Three – Symbolic Boundaries between Legal and Criminal: Play on the Edge. How Does the

Czech Legislative System Frame BDSM?______51

4. Chapter Four – Dilemmas of a Subculture: How Does the BDSM Subculture Frame Itself and How

Does the Mainstream Culture Frame It? Symbolic Boundaries between Cultural and Subcultural____63

5. Chapter Five – Symbolic Boundaries between Individual and Subcultural: High Fear, High Stakes.

How Was the BDSM Subculture Formed after the Velvet Revolution?______85

6. Chapter Six – Symbolic Boundaries between Old Generation and New Generation: The Elimination of Roles in Role Play? What Was the Generational Development of the BDSM Subculture?______119

7. Chapter Seven – Symbolic Boundaries between BDSM Identity and Non-BDSM Identity. How Does the BDSM Subculture Frame Its Identity in the Context of Institutions?______137

8. Discussion and Conclusion______159

9. References______165 Preface

As an ethnographer, hitch-hiker in abandoned and remote places, Central Asia lover, and female guitarist I’m not a fan of prejudices. I have been living in them most of my life: “They will kill you with Kalashnikovs as soon as you step out of the airport”, or: “That state has a border with

Afghanistan; everyone is surely a fanatic there”. Or my favorite: “You cannot a guitar because you are a girl”. These are prejudices we apply to our loved ones, to discourage them from their own life trajectories. I would like to see myself as a person open to various worldviews, understanding and accepting all kinds of different viewpoints on various aspects of life in different cultures. But then, suddenly, I was caught out on one prejudice in my own culture, unprepared, like a child is caught touching a burning stove. It was a minor meeting, but the extent of my own prejudice struck me. Humbled, I realized I still have a long path towards being an open and understanding person.

That realization gradually made this dissertation happen.

7 1. Chapter one – Introduction

“I put it on my head. It was faintly warm and sticky inside and the thick lining clung to my forehead.

‘I want to know what it really means’ I told myself in a mirror whose cracks had been pasted over with the

trimmings of postage stamps. I meant of course the whole portentous scrimmage of sex itself, the act of

penetration which could lead a man to despair for the sake of a creature with two breasts and ‘le croissant’ as

the picturesque Levant slang has it. The sound within had increased to a sly groaning and squeaking — a

combustible human voice adding itself to the jostling of an ancient wooden-slatted bed. This was presumably

the identical undifferentiated act which Justine and I shared with the common world to which we belonged.

How did it differ? How far had our feelings carried us from the truth of the simple, devoid beast-like act

itself? To what extent was the treacherous mind — with its interminable catalogue raisonne of the heart —

responsible? (…) Impatient to deliver myself from the question I lifted the curtain and stepped softly into the

cubicle which was fitfully lighted by a buzzing staggering paraffin lamp turned down low.”

Lawrence Durrell, The Alexandria Quartet, 1962.

I encountered the BDSM (, , dominance, submission, sadism, masochism) community face-to-face for the first time in the spring of 2012 when conducting one of my research interviews for my diploma thesis dealing with a live-action role play game. I was told that a group of

“BDSM positive” people were attending a tea-house meeting and that I was invited. It was presented, by my respondent, almost like an intimate secret, and I was myself imagining the BDSM tea-house meeting as something dark, secret, vulgar, probably covertly violent, full of black clothes, whips, suppressed emotions, and perhaps even dangerous. I was afraid to go. When I arrived to conduct my interview, none of the above corresponded to what I saw. For about an hour, about fifteen people in plaid flannel shirts or t-shirts and jeans sat around a table and discussed external hard-drives and taking pictures of trains. During the evening, there were several cues or symbols that could be traced back as likely present because of the parallel with BDSM subcultural characteristics as they are presented to an

8 outside observer. However, this apparent discrepancy between how the BDSM subculture is presented in the mainstream view and how the practitioners presented themselves at that meeting constructed the basis of this dissertation.

This dissertation focuses on the ways in which the symbolic boundaries between “BDSM” and

“non-BDSM” are constituted. With the continuing postmodern commodification of and their gradual infiltration into mainstream discourse, the subcultures need to define their position against the acceptance of the subcultural symbols in the mainstream culture. The research question is: “How are the symbolic boundaries between BDSM and non-BDSM created, maintained and legitimized?”.

The aim of this dissertation is to analyze how members of a subculture in a contemporary society define their position against their commercial image and how they maintain the existence of their subculture despite its fragmentation.

Theoretical approach This research is based on the concept of subcultures by Gelder and Thornton (1997), who define subculture as a group of people who share a common problem, interest or procedure and who differentiate in a significant way from the members of other social groups. The BDSM subculture is conceptualized as a postmodern subculture in accordance with Muggleton (2000), who differentiates postmodern subculture from the traditional subculture in three aspects: no social class membership, developed individualism, and high fragmentation of subculture. Individualism is seen as more important than collectivism; diversity and difference as more important than conformism and uniformity. Individuality is seen in contrast to what is conventional and mainstream – members of mainstream society are often seen as a homogeneous mass, while members of a subculture see themselves as unique or original and their subculture as a heterogeneous group, which unites some shared interest or taste (Muggleton, 2000).

9 This study is also based on Thornton’s (1996) theory of subcultural capital, concerning what is

“in” and “out” with regard to the subcultural scene. According to Thornton, subcultural capital is important for the subculture to differentiate itself from the mainstream and the subculture must constantly endeavor to avoid its merging into the mass. Thornton differentiates the young club culture from the mainstream popular youth culture by the criterion of authenticity. She sets the club culture against the mass culture and sees the real threat to the underground subculture in the popularity and gradual change to the mainstream, defined as a loss of authenticity. Thornton argues that subcultural capital is assessed by the degree of exclusivity. Subcultural styles and habits must therefore be protected from being continuously sought and appropriated by the mass. She develops Hebdige’s concept of commodification of subcultures, where, by commodification of its cultural forms, the subculture is deprived of its subversive potential and in its harmless and reificated form then becomes geographically and socially widespread (Hebdige, 1979).

In their study, Muggleton and Wienzierl (2004) describe the mechanism of protecting subcultural capital through discursive defending of defining lines that differentiate the underground taste from the mainstream. The authors see the boundaries that differentiate the subculture from the inauthentic and commercial as porous and permeable, requiring constant supervision throughout the ongoing process of classification and reclassification of specific tastes as legitimate. According to

Evans (1997), these processes of classification and reclassification are put into being, designed and replayed through everyday activities, clothing, worship and other cultural practices.

The structure of meaning of the BDSM subculture is, to a great extent, complex. There are many levels on which members of the BDSM subculture distinguish between the terms “us” and

“them”. On one hand, it is a simple distinction between “BDSM-positive” people and “non-BDSM- positive” people, as well as the cultural meanings, anticipated behavior and ways of thinking that insiders attach to it. On the other hand, the BDSM subculture is fragmented into several groups, which

10 have also different schools of thought. They do not always accept each other as a part of the subculture, nor do they share the same view on the basic question about who should be considered “BDSM- positive” and who should not. Therefore, something is either considered “BDSM” or “non-BDSM” in two different meanings. First, “non-BDSM” can mean a “vanilla”, i.e. something which is not resembling BDSM in any way and is not inspired by or attempting to be BDSM. Second, the “non-

BDSM” can mean the “inauthentic BDSM” – something that resembles BDSM, but is not considered

BDSM by the subculture – for example a mainstream representation of BDSM or BDSM done in a non-subcultural manner. The complexity of this second meaning goes further, as the BDSM practitioners themselves create subcultural subgroups of people sharing similar view on BDSM.

Therefore, each of the subcultural subgroups sees the “true” or “authentic” BDSM in a slightly different manner. The subgroups coexist in the same physical space, but their views on the authentic and inauthentic are unstable and change slightly over time.

I combine two theories of the relationship between subcultural members and the mainstream.

First, Gelder and Thornton’s (1997) theory that members of the subculture need to define their position against the mainstream culture to protect the subculture from merging into the mainstream and thereby becoming extinct (Gelder & Thornton, 1997). Second, Becker’s (1963) theory that members of the subculture group do not voluntarily define themselves against the mainstream; however, mainstream culture defines subcultural members as outsiders. I demonstrate that these two theories should be used together to create a complex and exhaustive picture of the forces between mainstream culture and its subcultures in a society.

According to this theoretical framework, I isolate two views on the symbolic boundaries. The first is how the mainstream culture imposes the boundaries between BDSM and non-BDSM on the

BDSM subculture. I address this topic in Chapter Two (How Does the Psychiatrical, Sexological and

11 Medical Discourse Frame BDSM?) and Chapter Three (How Does the Czech Legislative System Frame

BDSM?).

The second is how the subcultural members themselves create the boundaries between BDSM and non-BDSM. I address this topic in Chapter Four (How Does the BDSM Subculture Frame Itself and How Does the Mainstream Culture Frame It?), Chapter Five (How Was the BDSM Subculture

Formed after the Velvet Revolution?), Chapter Six (What Was the Generational Development of the

BDSM Subculture?), and Chapter Seven (How Does the BDSM Subculture Frame Its Identity in the

Context of Institutions?).

The discrepancy between the mainstream view of BDSM and the subcultural view, and also the strong subcultural identity, is connected with the fact that in Czech society BDSM is often considered taboo. According to Chu (No date), two taboos are universal across cultures: excretion / sex and death.

The literature on taboos defines it as an action (Akerlof, 1980) with an abstract or mental aspect (Fiske

& Tetlock, 1997; Bardon, 2005; Read, 2003; Durkheim, 1963) or as predominantly a verbal issue (e.g.

Newton, 1912). Akerlof (1980) defines a taboo as a strong social norm supported by severe socially- imposed punishment, where the sanctions sometimes follow after merely thinking or considering of breaking the taboo (Fiske & Tetlock, 1997). According to Fershtman, Gneezy and Hoffman (2011), the punishment lies either in the attitudes and reactions of other members of society, when the breaking of the taboo is an observable behavior or there might be a self-inflicted punishment on the person who wants to gain a particular identity and desires to view himself as a moral person defined by the identity.

According to Haidt et al. (1997) and Fessler and Navarette (2003), the self-inflicted costs of thinking about violating the taboo are such negative emotions as disgust or fear (Haidt et al., 1997; Fessler &

Navarette, 2003 in Fershtman, Gneezy & Hoffman, 2011). In accordance with Fershtman, Gneezy and

Hoffman (2011), the taboo is in this conception, and therefore is a form of thought police that governs our behavior and also our thoughts. For Fershtman, Gneezy and Hoffman (2011), taboo on the level of

12 thoughts is something that provides a public benefit or public good that all members of society can share, while other authors define it as an important part of a social identity (Durkheim, 1963; Akerlof,

1980; Akerlof & Kranton, 2000). Fershtman, Gneezy and Hoffman (2011) claim that adopting an identity implies accepting the taboos associated with this identity. Thus, he supports Durkheim (1963), for whom sharing a taboo is a mark of group membership.

Some of the power relations present in the terminology of the BDSM subculture are easy to anticipate, but when we dig deeper into the meaning structures, the predicted simple binary power structure between master and slave shatters into a highly complex structure of power interactions, where power is sometimes located exactly in the hands of those who we might not expect to have any power at all. Because of the safety mechanisms present in the BDSM subculture (e.g. the focus on consensuality and the possibility to stop the scene anytime from both sides), both sides have an equal share of power. This is reminiscent of Hegel’s (1977) concept of the master-slave dependency, where the self-consciousness of both actors is dependent on the other’s recognition of oneself. The slave is therefore aware of himself or herself through the eyes of the master, but the master is also aware of himself or herself through the eyes of the slave. Thus, to maintain his or her self-consciousness, the master becomes a slave of his/her slave’s recognition, while the slave becomes a master of his/her master’s self-consciousness. The BDSM discourse operates with the term power exchange, and is usually defined as an interaction between a dominant and a submissive person, in which the submissive gives up his/her active decision-making and transfers it to the dominant person. The discourse clearly uses the term power exchange to construct the idea that all of the power in the power exchange interaction is located in the hands of the dominant person, i.e. the one to whom the decision-making is partly or wholly transferred. This construction of power exchange could be associated with the common interpretation of the BDSM scene as noticeably real for the actors in a particular time and situation (though still not completely real in the same way that the non-BDSM “reality” is for them).

13 Therefore, in any BDSM scene, the BDSM discourse possibly helps the actors of the scene to transform their shared experience more into the “realness” of their experience.

Method The methodology of the research should correspond to the research question (Blackstone,

2012). Therefore, for the purpose of finding the symbolic boundaries between “BDSM” and “non-

BDSM”, my research is designed as an ethnographic study with complementary data triangulation and discourse analysis. I define ethnography according to Hammersley and Atkinson (2007) and Spradley

(1980), as a method for describing a culture. Furthermore, ethnographic fieldwork involves the systematic study of what the world is like to people who have learned to see, hear, speak, think and act in ways that are different. Regarding the nature of the research field, I combine the “traditional” ethnography of subcultural meetings with virtual ethnography (Hine, 2000) to include also the virtual dimension of BDSM subculture. I apply participatory observation (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007) to examine events in public places. This method is fruitful to find what people think, what they feel, what they believe and what meanings they attach to activities; therefore, I engage in participatory observation in face-to-face events and in the virtual field. I use the triangulation method to complement the interviews and participant observation, where possible and appropriate, with informal interviews, online interviews and online questions in discussion forums. Thus, I search for answers to the same question by using different sources. I chose interview participants in accordance with the strategy of many case study replications (Yin, 1994). Consequently, my research methods include: participant observation with the status of the researcher observer-as-participant at the subcultural meetings as well as in the online discussion forums and Facebook groups, formal interviews with practitioners and short informal interviews (face-to-face and also online).

I complement these methods with an analysis of the discourse in Chapter Two and Chapter

Three to scrutinize the discourse about BDSM in the sexological and criminological fields.

14 In conducting ethnographic research, it is important to get in touch with the members of the group under study. Therefore, I contacted one of the organizers of the BDSM talking events in Brno,

Czech Republic after the first meeting in the tea-room in 2012. Through this initial gatekeeper, I came into contact with many BDSM practitioners and organizers. After six months of initial field research, I met the organizer of different BDSM events in Brno, who was able to arrange my official patronage also at events in Prague. My access points into the subculture included discussion meetings, general

BDSM meetings, Japanese bondage (shibari) events, fetish meetings, BDSM shows and body modification parties. As a source of news about happenings in the subculture, I used specialized websites and Facebook events. My aim was to establish a position in the field as a researcher, in which conducting my research would not be abusive to my respondents in the sense of using them for my research and not giving them anything back, but also in which my position would be marginal in the sense of enabling me to abstain from participating in the BDSM performances and still be taken as a part of the community, rather than a stranger from outside. For example, after several meetings with the two organizers of the BDSM events from one of the groups in January 2013, it became clear that they wanted to organize larger events, but they did not have time and money to look for items in stores.

Thus, in addition to helping them book clubs, I helped them buy items that the organizers wanted for the events (e.g. candles, stamps, vases, sealing-wax, business cards).

The BDSM subculture in the Czech Republic is formed by a heterogeneous group of BDSM practitioners. For the purpose of this research, I consider BDSM practitioners everyone who meets the following three criteria: 1) self-identification with the BDSM subculture; 2) active involvement in the subculture (either in the physical space, i.e. within approximately the last year attending BDSM events, or in the virtual space, i.e. within approximately the last year being active in discussion forums); and 3) internalization of the BDSM subcultural values.

15 The main BDSM events take place in Prague and Brno. However, we can find occasional minor

BDSM meetings in nearly every Czech city. The size of the subculture is relatively large – according to a private Facebook group, there are 2,578 active members of Prague’s BDSM club. According to the largest Czech discussion forum, the number is even higher: 5,237 profiles of BDSM practitioners were online in the last thirty days. Although a total of 37,200 profiles are on the discussion forum, a significant amount of them are non-active, with only 19,210 profiles being online in the last three years

(numbers updated on 28.12.2019).

Members of the BDSM community engage in different types of meetings, the most common of which are discussion meetings (in Czech: “kecáky”), which are organized by different groups at different places, usually regularly either once a week or once a month. There are about seven different discussion meetings in Brno and Prague, at which the program usually involves people sitting around a table in a tea-room, pub or pub lounge, talking about regular things, everyday life, and work.

Discussion then transitions to a BDSM-related theme, with some participants talking together about the topic, while others only listen or talk about different things. Sometimes there is some planned BDSM activity, but this depends considerably on the place where the meeting is organized. If it is organized in a public tea-room or a pub, usually no BDSM activity takes place; if organized at a venue closed to the public or where the people around do not mind, some activities such as bondage or soft spanking may take place. The activities depend largely on the type of subgroup that is organizing the meeting, and they are usually performed later in the meeting or late at night. The talking events are officially open to everyone: BDSM practitioners, people who are interested in BDSM but never tried it (“BDSM curious people”), and occasionally non-BDSM friends of BDSM subculture members.

Another type of meeting, called “action meetings” (in Czech: “akčňák”), are intended to entail substantially more BDSM practices. Action meetings are different from the discussion meetings mainly in who can attend, i.e. usually only invited people who the organizers know personally can attend.

16 People unknown to the organizer may also attend, but this rule varies at each event – either they can attend if a known participant accompanies them (as a “guarantor”), or they can attend if they go to one of the discussion meetings and get to know the organizers. At some events, it is possible to have a guarantor who does not have to be present at the meeting, but he or she must be a well-known person in the BDSM group. The guarantor is responsible for all the activities and behavior of the new participant at the event.

In addition to the above meetings, there are also workshops framed as educational events. These include bondage workshops that focus on fusion bondage, shibari bondage or kinbaku bondage and which occur frequently (usually weekly), spank workshops (significantly less often), needle-play workshops (less often) and hook suspension workshops (around twice a year). A special meeting for

“BDSM novices” introduces newcomers to the various practices that can be performed, how to do them and what to be aware of while doing them. Implicitly, it is also something of an attempt to recruit new people to the BDSM club. To a great extent, it is also a way to unify the behavior, practices and ways of thinking about BDSM among members of the community. A number of private BDSM events are also organized, e.g. parties, birthday celebrations, barbecue picnics, beer drinking in pubs, or private branding rituals.

In the Czech Republic, there are about fourteen different small or large subgroups within the

BDSM subculture. These groups are not strictly divided: people from one subgroup often attend the events of another subgroup. However, most participants have “their own” subgroup, whose events they attend regularly, while the events of other groups are attending only occasionally. The main group in

Czech Republic is centered around two BDSM clubs in Prague. The main group in Brno is the Brno older group that has existed in various forms since about 1996. Then there are younger Brno and

Prague subgroups, focused more on live-action role play games, a fetish group in Brno that has existed since 2005, and another fetish group that split from the first fetish group in the spring of 2013 due to personal disagreements. There are also shibari, yoga and tantric core groups and a broader Brno and 17 Prague shibari group. In Prague, there are also body modification groups centered around two piercing studios. Finally, there are gay BDSM subgroups in Prague centered around gay BDSM clubs and a gay furry & pet-play community. In the next section, I provide a brief overview of the broad fields of subcultural and ethnographic research and outline the position of my dissertation in the context of contemporary research.

Position of this dissertation in theoretical and methodological fields

This dissertation is mostly based on a theoretical approach to postmodern subcultures and on the methodological combination of traditional ethnography and virtual ethnography. Subcultural studies and ethnography are research fields with a long history whose approaches have changed dramatically over time. Subcultural studies have moved from closed and homogeneous subculture studies based largely on class affiliation to fragmented subculture studies whose membership was independent of social status or education. Ethnographic studies have evolved over time from studies of various territorially-separated cultures different from the ethnographer’s culture to studies of smaller sections of a culture more or less familiar to the ethnographer. In the contemporary globalized world, it is not easy to find a culture territorially and culturally separated from the ethnographer’s culture to replicate the ethnographic research from the early days. However, we can use the traditional ethnographic methods to investigate parts of the ethnographer’s own culture.

The idea that the method of ethnography used should vary according to the state of the research field is not new in sociological research (Hine, 2000). Contemporary subcultures are formed (due to the more common internet communication and its availability) not only through personal meetings of the members of the subculture, but also to a large extent through the virtual field, through internet discussion forums, internet discussion groups or private communication of members of the subcultures through internet messages. Personal encounters of members of contemporary subcultures thus have

18 become more a reflection and continuation of the internet existence of the subculture rather than the basis of its existence.

The term subculture was introduced by the School of Urban Sociology in the 1950s

(Huq, 2006; Woo, 2009). In 1963, Becker’s well-known Outsiders appeared, which dealt with the subculture of marijuana users at jazz clubs in New York. The term subculture then re-appeared in the

1970s at the Center for Contemporary Cultural Studies at Birmingham University. This period became the first boom of subcultural studies (Woo, 2009). Research was conducted on youth subcultures, new music and other social subcultures (Huq, 2006). In 1976, Hall and Jefferson published their work

Resistance through Rituals (Hall & Jefferson, 1993). In 1979, a methodological breakthrough took place, as Hebdige published his book Subculture: The Meaning of Style. The book provides the basis for the concept of subculture as a subversive group that brings together like-minded individuals rejected by the majority culture. Hebdige’s work also articulates the reason for the existence of the subcultures (and follows Cohen, 1972): subculture is formed through a common resistance to mainstream culture. After taking into account the existence of a subculture, the mainstream culture’s reaction to the subculture has been negative. The subculture benefits from this attitude towards the mainstream culture with its subversive potential (Cohen, 1972 in Hodkinson, 2002). Hebdige (1979) argues that the commodification of the subculture, where the subcultural elements become available to mainstream culture, leads to the subsequent loss of the subculture’s subversive potential (1979).

In 1985, Maffesoli’s groundbreaking book, The Decline of Individualism in the Mass Society, redefined the subculture as an urban tribe with common interests, common world views, dress style, behavioral patterns and informal interactions (Maffesoli, 1996). In 1988, Hebdige argued that the coherence of subcultures was slowly collapsing and that the golden time of studying subcultures was long gone (Hebdige, 1988 in Huq, 2006). In 1990, Mike Brake came up with the idea, which was further developed in postmodern subcultural studies, that subcultures are not limited to class and education (Brake, 1990 in Woo, 2009). In 1997, Gelder and Thornton reformulated the definition of 19 subculture, which they defined as a group of people sharing a common problem, interest or procedure and differing significantly from members of other social groups. Their concept of subcultural capital is tied to Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital (1973). Thus, Thornton (1996) defines it as a collection of cultural knowledge about a subculture, subcultural commodities acquired by members of a subculture, and knowledge of what is appreciated in the subcultural scene by increasing prestige and what has already emerged from subcultural . Subcultural capital is important for separating subculture from mainstream culture, and the subculture must constantly work on it to avoid merging with the mass. In 1998, Locher described the principle of exclusivity, by maintaining the coherence of its members’ values as shared sympathy and antipathy for the same things (Locher, 1998 in Hodkinson,

2002).

New trends in subcultural studies emerged in the 21st century with the appearance of the concept of postmodern culture. According to Moore (2004), the concept of postmodern culture is characterized by the collapse of hierarchies and boundaries between intellectuals and less educated individuals. In postmodern theory, all cultural products are subject to the same commodification and incorporation processes. Theories about postmodern subcultures reformulate existing subcultural studies in two overlapping ways (Huq, 2006; Woo, 2009). They assume that the conditions of traditional subcultural groups and styles were structurally constrained mainly by the class system. They claim that the characteristic modern forms of culture, social organization and identity have been replaced in postmodernism by their more heterogeneous, fragmented and fluid form (e.g. Woo, 2009).

Muggleton (2000) distinguishes postmodern subculture from modern subculture in three aspects: postmodern subcultures are not class based, they have highly developed individualism, and are highly fragmented. Individualism is valued much more than collectivism and diversity is valued more than conformism and uniformity. Postmodern subcultures are individualist rather than homogeneous, conventional and mainstream. Moreover, subculture members perceive themselves as a heterogeneous group that is united by a shared interest or hobby (2000). 20 Chaney (2004) sees the problem of postmodern subcultures elsewhere: the original concept of subculture is outdated for him, because in the postmodern era the contribution of individuals to subcultures becomes less and less specific (Chaney, 2004 in Woo, 2009). In 2008, Binkley put forward the term “liquid consumption” of subcultural groups and considers postmodern subcultures to be more open to the individual expression of their members than modern subcultures (Binkley, 2008 in Woo,

2009). Theorists of post-modern subculture have challenged the notion of subcultures being social groups with a political, subversive, or oppressive dimension (Woo, 2009). Thus, according to Huq

(2006), the concept of subculture has transformed from a closed social group linked to class affiliation to a social group that is bound to mainstream culture by wider processes, while being distinguished from it by a distinctive behavior and lifestyle.

According to some authors (Clair, 2003; Hammersley & Atkinson, 1995 in Denzin & Lincoln,

2005), the ethnographic method originated in ancient Greece in Herodotus, when he explored and documented traditions and sociopolitical practices among people during the third century BC. Interest in ethnography was then renewed in the second wave of colonialism (during late 19th century) as a way to preserve cultures that were at risk of eradication by colonialism. Historians, poets, explorers and missionaries conducted ethnographic studies using diaries by describing the conquest of other cultures

(Clair, 2003). The founder of American anthropology was Henry Lewis Morgan, who studied the culture of the Iroquois around 1840 (Moore, 1997 in Clair, 2003). Another influential American anthropologist at this time was Franz Boas, who researched the culture of the Kwakiutl in the Pacific

Northwest. He was also a pioneer of a holistic approach to individual cultures (Clair, 2003). In this period, there was a significant shift in research methodology from researching secondary data to the increasing popularity of obtaining directly primary research data (Hammersley & Atkinson, 1995 in

Denzin & Lincoln, 2005). One of the most prominent researchers representing this shift was Bronislav

Malinowski, who studied the culture of the Kula ceremony in 1914. Malinowski laid the basis of participatory observation techniques in his ethnographic methodology during his research on the 21 Trobriand Islands and was also the first who clearly described the fieldwork methodology. He also started to use charts and graphs as well as descriptions of everyday activities to understand society

(Ellen, 1984).

Although classical ethnographic methods persisted at this time, alternative forms of ethnographic methods began to appear slowly in response to the situation after World War II. In his research in 1972, Gregory Bateson focused his ethnography primarily on interaction and communication, and he considered those contextually grounded (Bateson, 1972 in Clair, 2003). At the same time, ethnographic research on gender issues was also explored, such as Betty Friedan’s (Friedan,

1963 in Clair, 2003) study of women suffering from depression or Gloria Steinem’s study of a playboy club (Steinem, 1963 in Clair, 2003). Afterwards, ethnography began moving towards interpretivism and an emphasis on linguistics. In 1973, Geertz laid the foundations for interpretative sociology with his concept of thick description, in which ethnographic researchers should search for networks of meanings and symbols. John Van Maanen in 1988 further describes interpretative ethnography as a research method that represents the social reality of others through an analysis of their own experiences in the world of other people (Maanen, 1988 in Clair, 2003). In 1995, Hammersley and Atkinson redefined the essence of ethnographic research. They argue ethnography should use a wide range of sources of information coming from an ethnographer who has been openly or covertly involved in people’s everyday lives for a long time and collects any data available to shed light on the research topics (Ellen

1984).

Since 1995, ethnography has fragmented into a number of different approaches. Bill Ashcroft,

Gareth Griffiths, and Helen Tiffin postulate that the ethnographic field is becoming so heterogeneous that no set of texts can encompass any existing theoretical position (Ashcroft et al., 1995 in Clair,

2003). One of the emerging postmodern trends in ethnographic research is virtual ethnography.

According to Kozinets (2010), people’s lives have recently been largely digitized, and social scientists have realized that they need to pursue social activities through technologically mediated 22 communications to understand society. Hine (2000) sees the problem of traditional ethnographic description in its tendency to present the research field to appear homogeneous. She suggests, along with Castells (1996 in Hine, 2000) and Strathern (1996 in Hine, 2000), abandoning the traditional vision of the research space as a physically given locality and defining the research space as an organization of fluidic connections of individuals and cultural artifacts. According to Hine (2000), online ethnography is a way to get rid of the limitations of physical space and to focus on the space of links between cultural processes.

Bowler (2010) describes communities in the physical world as groups of people linked together by a common identity or interest. In a similar way, virtual or online communities can be defined as being composed of individuals with shared identities or interests and gathering together for a given purpose. According to Bowler, this shared interest or intention creates space for community members to build relationships from which they can learn from one another and influence society or the culture around them. Kozinets (2010) goes further and rejects any distinction between the online and physical world. He claims that the two worlds have merged into one world: a real-life world that involves the use of technology to communicate, socialize, express and understand (Kozinets, 2010). Hine (2000) agrees with both authors in this respect, and at the same time suggests thinking about cyberspace as part of everyday life and part of face-to-face interaction.

Steve Mizrach (no date) states in his article Technology and the Transformation of Identity that the cyber age creates new types of people’s identities that are not mutually exclusive and we can assume that post-industrial individuals will exhibit some or all of these types of identities at once. Thus, in the future, we can assume that personal identities will become more hybrid and technologically more oriented towards electronic expression, less work-oriented and less somatically anchored. Many kinds of today’s subcultures (cyberpunks, ravers, modern primitives, zippies) experiment with these new kinds of identities as a practice or rehearsal, according to Mizrach, before these types of identities become more common. According to him, these subcultures show in the micro-environment where the 23 larger groups of society will be heading in the future. I base this dissertation on Gelder and Thornton’s

(1997) definition of subcultures. They consider a subculture to constitute a group of people sharing a common problem, interest or procedure and differing significantly from members of other social groups. I refer to the notion of identity in accordance with Mizrach (no date), as multiple, hybrid and oriented towards electronic expression.

In my dissertation, I build on the practical experience of the ethnographic study of contemporary subcultures. Youth subcultures are strongly interrelated and offer the possibility of being a member of multiple subcultures at the same time. People can be a member of several subcultures without compromising the legitimacy of their involvement in the eyes of other members of a particular subculture. In the subcultural ties of the Czech Republic, members of cyberpunk, goth, modern primitives, hipster, BDSM, body modification, LARP, tribal, furry and “metalists” subcultures are united in one intertwined network.

What is important, however, is the way one enters into these subcultural fields. Although it may seem that the current subcultural self-determination of an individual is largely influenced by the long- standing social ties of the individual, my observations and interviews so far do not indicate this. On the contrary, they suggest instead that the vast majority of current active subcultural members have entered the subculture through their own initiative by using search engines, internet communication with subculture members, and subsequent invitations to subcultural meetings. The entrance point to the subculture is in the virtual field, but the physical happening of the subculture takes place in face-to-face events. Therefore, current youth subcultures are on the border of face-to-face and virtual subcultures, and as such we must also approach them in their research – the pure traditional ethnography or pure virtual ethnography is not enough for a research of postmodern subcultures – instead, an adjusted combination of both of these is needed for a comprehensive view of the postmodern subculture.

In the introduction of this thesis, I explained the basis of my research. My research question is:

“How are the symbolic boundaries between BDSM and non-BDSM created, maintained and 24 legitimized?” and I analyze how members of the subculture define their position against their commercial image and maintain the subculture in existence. I base my research on the postmodern view of subcultures, with no class membership, high individualism and high fragmentation. Depending on the standpoint of the importance of subcultural capital to the mere existence of the subculture, I argue that the subcultural styles must be protected from their full appropriation by mass culture.

I isolate two levels of differentiation between “BDSM” and “non-BDSM”. One is the simple distinction between general BDSM subculture and the mainstream culture, which does not resemble

BDSM in any way. The other is the more complex division of different offshoots of BDSM subculture, which have radically different viewpoint on what constitutes “subcultural” and “non-subcultural”.

I use two theories in explaining the relationship between subculture and mainstream and combine them to achieve a comprehensive view of the researched field. That is, I combine Gelder and

Thornton’s (1997) theory on the subculture’s active development of strict subcultural boundaries and

Becker’s (1963) theory, which focuses on the mainstream culture, that is forcefully pushing the subculture to the margins of society.

In the following dissertation, following Becker’s perspective, I first outline the boundaries that are imposed on the subculture from the outside. I then combine them with the boundaries that are created by the BDSM subculture members from inside the subculture (following Gelder and Thornton’s perspective). Regarding the first, although there are many different soft, permeable and flexible boundaries (which I partially examine in later chapters), in the first chapters I mostly focus on the most serious of the boundaries imposed from outside – the boundaries imposed on the BDSM subculture by the state repressive power. In my view, state repressive power consists of the particular system of imposing restrictions (judicial system), the organizations which enforce this system (army and police), and state centers that restrict citizens’ freedom (the prison system and psychiatric hospital system).

Therefore, in the first chapters of this dissertation, I focus on the boundaries imposed on the subculture by the Czech health sector and Czech legal sector as the main decision-makers in this state repressive 25 power. I scrutinize the boundaries between “healthy BDSM” and “unhealthy BDSM” from the perspective of medical discourse (Chapter Two) and the boundaries between “legal BDSM” and “non- legal BDSM” from the perspective of the legal system (Chapter Three).

In Chapter Four, I present solely the insiders’ viewpoint on the boundaries that are constructed in the BDSM subculture towards its differentiation from the mainstream commodified picture of the worldwide BDSM subculture. I do so by examining two blogs, written by international BDSM practitioners, in which they analyze Fifty Shades of Grey. In the following chapters (Chapter Five,

Chapter Six and Chapter Seven), I narrow the focus to the Czech Republic and combine the two theoretical views to present a comprehensive perspective on the boundaries between BDSM and non-

BDSM during the establishment of the Czech BDSM subculture (Chapter Five), during its recent two decade development (Chapter Six) and during both time periods with a focus only on personal and collective identities (Chapter Seven).

26 2. Chapter Two – Symbolic Boundaries between Ill and Healthy:

Pleasure in Deviance, Deviance in Pleasure. How Does the

Psychiatrical, Sexological and Medical Discourse Frame BDSM?

Introduction

Recently, there has been an extensive debate about in the medical context.

Following changes in current diagnostic systems, consensual sadomasochism was subject to major changes within its classification of psychiatric diagnoses in 2018. However, how can we explain this development and why did it happen now? Is there a link between the medialization of the

BDSM subculture and classification of consensual sadomasochism? Or is the decision merely political? This chapter examines the shift in the approach to BDSM subculture in the psychiatric and sexological discourse with a focus on the Czech Republic, where my ethnographic research took place. I describe an overview of the history of sadomasochism in the sexological science over time and across different paradigms. In the analytical part, I then examine the concepts of sadism, masochism and sadomasochism in the two most internationally-used (including in the Czech

Republic) diagnostic manuals: the ICD (International Classification of Diseases) in its Czech translation MKN (Mezinárodní klasifikace nemocí), and DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual).

I use the methodology of the sociology of scientific knowledge and ignorance to study the development of a scientific field and attempt to identify points of contingency or interpretative flexibility where ambiguities are present. Variations may be linked to a variety of political, historical, cultural or economic factors. I scrutinize the shift of the approach on four levels: the presence or absence of the sadomasochistic diagnosis, the position of the diagnosis in the classification, the criteria for diagnosis assignment and the terminology of the diagnosis.

Sexology as a science has a long history dating back to the 17th century, to the first descriptions of gonads and germ cells (Weiss, P., 2010). The first sexologist is thought to be Iwan

27 Bloch, who studied prostitution, sexual morality and sexually transmitted diseases (Weiss, P.,

2010). Foucault (1999) described how in the seventeenth century there was a great deal of openness in talking about sex, but the rise of Christianity changed the approach to it – sex has become a means of religious constraints and a subject of confession.

The terminology of BDSM (bondage, discipline, dominance, submission, sadism, masochism) has significantly changed over time. The fondness for sexual practices that include , power distribution or restraint have a long history both among experts and non-experts.

BDSM deals with the mutual experience of the members, and any strong focus on self-mutilation practices is not welcomed in the subculture. The terms sadism and masochism arose in the 18th century. Sadism was named after the writer Donatien Alphonso Francois De Sade, who described sexual practices involving dominating, humiliating and beating one’s partners in his first book

Justine. His next book, 120 Days of Sodom, is considered the first amateur classification of sadomasochistic practices (Sade, 2006). Masochism is named after the writer Ludwig Von Sacher

Masoch, who describes in his book Venus in Furs sexual practices involving surrender, humiliation and suffering (Sacher-Masoch, 1932).

Sexual behavior did not become significantly associated with the medical discourse until the end of 19th century, when it started to be discussed in the context of health and congenital dispositions. In 1883, Emile Kraepelin published the first classification containing states of psychological weakness, which includes sexual deviations (Kraepelin, 1883). Three years later,

Krafft-Ebing published his work, Psychopathia Sexualis, in which he introduced the words ‘sadism and masochism’ for the first time as a medical classification. He considered all sexual activities that do not lead to reproduction to be sexual psychopathologies and saw the cause of such pathologies in hereditary and inborn, unspecified neurological congenital disorders (Krafft-Ebing, 1886).

Sigmund Freud increased the recognition of the importance of sexuality when he deconstructed the sexual taboo (Weiss, P., 2010). He saw the cause of sexual deviations in the imperfect personal

28 development of individuals (Freud, 1997; McRobbie, 2006), specifically in the instinct fixation.

This occurs when instinct satisfaction stagnates at some of the lower developmental levels (oral, anal, phallic) instead of mature level (genital).

In the beginning of 20th century, sexual cognition began to grow substantially. The first sexological institute was founded by Magnus Hirschfeld in 1919 in . Hirschfeld considered certain types of excitement to be inherent and argued that only socially dangerous acts should be criminalized. He managed to bring about the decriminalization of homosexuality, which was not common at that time as the legal system also criminalized actions in which no one was injured

(Hynie, 1992). He believed that a cure is possible with therapies by the understanding, non- oppressive atmosphere of a therapeutic group. He co-founded the World League for Sexual Reform

(WLSR) in 1921, which coordinated policy reforms leading to scientific openness around sexual issues. With its help, he fought for “justice” for sexual deviants and also recommended castration for pedophiles, but for masochists and fetishists he searched for a compromise solution with detailed lessons for the participants (Hynie, 1992). In 1923, the book Sexual Question (Forel, 1923) was published in a Czech translation. In 1930, the first Czech publication about a sexual theme was

Education for Parenting by Zdeněk Záhoř (1930).

Many Czech experts were trained at the Berlin sexological institute, with the first being

Ferdinand Pečírka, who gained a professorship in sexual pathology in 1921. Subsequently, he was encouraged to create the Institute for Sexual Pathology at Charles University in Prague, but he died unexpectedly, leaving only a thematic library (Hynie, 1992). The second Czech expert who emerged from the Berlin Institute was Hynie, who graduated in 1929.

The theory of the ingenuity of sexual deviations was about to be challenged with the rise of

Bechterev and his collaborator, Uchtomski (Hynie, 1992). Uchtomski reworked Hirschfeld’s theory of the ingenuity of excitement, and regarded sexual fixations an acquired property, as well as other related reflexes. They argue that the sexual fixations appear due to the creation of dominant brain

29 areas in which different, otherwise insignificant, stimuli separate from the original context and lead to increased sexual arousal (Hynie, 1992). At its congress in 1928, the World League for Sexual

Reform proposed to stop labelling deviations as crimes, sins and vices and to instead apply the medical concept of deviation as an illness. They designed a Sexual Penal Code that would only criminalize non-consensual acts. At the congress in 1930, they proposed punishing only socially problematic sexual deviants and also suggested the presence of an educated and responsible expert in every sexual judicial proceeding. A prominent participant from the Czechoslovak Republic, Dr.

Lampl from Prague, proposed castrating sexual offenders, including sadists, and the inhibition of sexual desire with medicaments from epiphysis (Hynie, 1992). The last congress of the World

League for Sexual Reform before WWII was held at Masaryk University in Brno, Czechoslovakia in 1932. In 1933, after the Nazis came to power in Germany, the League was dissolved.

A breakthrough occurred in 1935, when the first medical institute dealing with sexual pathology was established in the Czechoslovak Republic. It was called the Institute for Sexual

Pathology (renamed shortly afterwards to Sexological Institute) and was led by Josef Hynie. He held lectures and consultations regarding pathological psycho-sexual development, conducted analyses of pathological sexual functions, and served as a sexologist in judicial proceedings. His book, Introduction to Medical (Hynie, 1940), emphasizes that reproduction is not the primary goal of sexuality because reproduction is possible without sexuality – the primary goal of sexuality is the selection of a partner suitable for reproduction and the preparation of conditions for offspring (Hynie, 1992). Therefore, he defines sexual deviation as sexual acts that do not encourage people to choose suitable partners for reproduction.

Another book dealing with sexual deviations in the Czech context is Special Psychiatry

(Mysliveček, 1959), which introduces sadism and masochism as active and passive algolagnia.

Mysliveček considers the mild manifestation of sadism to be natural for males and mild manifestations of masochism to be natural for females. This follows Freud, who claimed that the

30 passivity of masochism is tied to femininity and the activity of sadism to masculinity (Freud,

1933). Freud sees the passivity of masochism as the expression of feminine nature and analyzes it through the fantasies of masochistic men who relate to being in typical women’s situations – being castrated, being copulated, or giving birth to a child (Freud, 1961). He believed that masochists convert guilty feelings, which accompany the wish to dominate, into masochism

(Freud, 1953a). However questionable this view may be, this concept at least allows one to see consensual sadistic and masochistic practices as being partly natural, rather than pathological activities (Mysliveček, 1959).

In Czechoslovakia, the expansion of sexology continued to grow, with the first sexological clinic outside of the capital established in 1960 in Liberec. In 1962, Czech sexologist Kurt Freund published the work Homosexuality in Man, in which he introduced penile plethysmography to investigate sexual preferences and dealt with forensic sexology, including and delinquency. He introduced a theory of sexual motivations, in which every sexual behavior includes four hierarchical phases: the phase of the location, the pre-tactile phase, the tactile phase, and the genital phase. Sexual deviants fail in (or do not perform) one or more of these phases (Weiss, P.,

2010). Freund (1962) assumes that some deviations are innate while some may be acquired during the development of an individual either with an external cause (for example brain damage) or learned through imprinting by the influence of an experience.

In 1968, Hynie led the first international sexological congress in post-war Czechoslovakia,

Symposium Sexuologicum Pragense, which also addressed sexual deviations (Hynie, 1992). In

1974, he wrote the books Fundamentals of Sexology I. and II. (Hynie, 1992), which for the first time in Czechoslovakia, distinguishes several kinds of sadism: neurotic sadism (manifested mainly by reproaches to the partner), perverse deviant sadism (when atrocities are committed at least on the level of imagination), and impulsive sadism (when the individual feels an irresistible inner

31 impulse to hurt). He excludes any hard (even sexual) behavior from the diagnosis of sadism if the behavior is neurotic without libido (Hynie, 1980a, 1980b).

The Medical Diagnostic Process There are two currently used classifications of mental disorders in the Czech Republic.

Mezinárodní klasifikace nemocí (MKN) is a Czech local modification of the International

Classification of Diseases (ICD) official world classification. It is designed to collect statistical data of diagnoses across the world. It began in 1853 in France as a classification manual and came into its final form in 1900 at the first International Conference for the Revision of the International List of Causes of Death (Tyrer, 2014). It was developed as a classification of deaths, called the Bertillon classification. In the sixth revision, they merged the classifications of death causes and supplementary lists. Meanwhile, the World Health Organization took over the administration of the

ICD, which is designed for universal health practitioners (Tyrer, 2014).

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) classification is used for clinical diagnosis in the USA, although for insurance billing, the ICD manual coding must be used (First, 2015).

Nevertheless, the DSM classification influences research throughout the world and is used mainly by psychiatrists (Tyrer, 2014). It was first introduced in 1952 after the US military decided it needed to have a useful classification of mental disorders (Tyrer, 2014). It became widespread after the third revision (Decker, 2013; Tyrer, 2014). From that revision, it has used operational criteria

(Feighner et al., 1972; Tyrer, 2014) and in his footsteps, the ICD also later began to adapt to the trend of operational criteria (Tyrer, 2014).

In Czech clinical practice, usually the Czech translation of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) is used (named by the abbreviation of the literal translation of the English title

Mezinárodní klasifikace nemocí and the same number, for example MKN-10). The MKN is obligatory for diagnosis of all diseases, for communication between health professionals, insurance companies and reporting (Mohr, personal communication, 2019). In research, the translation of the

32 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is used more often in the Czech

Republic, and the DSM also has a more informative character (Mohr, personal communication,

2019). The translations of ICD-10 and DSM-5 were performed by terminological committees, which exist in Czech Republic for each of these manuals. The members of these committees of the two manuals partially overlap and are personally interconnected (Pavlovský, email interview,

2019). Until now, the Czech translation has always been fully equivalent to the international version (Zvolský, email interview, 2019a). However, it seems that recently there has been an effort to find equivalent terms in the local clinical field, which are already widely used by experts, in the process of the ongoing translation of MKN-11 (Zvolský, personal interview, 2019b).

Currently, the classifications of ICD and DSM have much in common and it is also possible to convert a diagnosis from one classification system to another (Tyrer, 2014). The two systems reacted to each other and their development is intertwined (Pavlovský, email interview, 2019).

They certainly react continuously to the state of scientific knowledge (Zvolský, email interview,

2019a). In an effort to unify the manuals, experts from Europe are working in DSM working groups and experts from the USA participate in revisions of the ICD (Mohr, personal communication, 2019).

The DSM manuals are (at least since the DSM-III) based on evidence-based medicine. They do not give specific references to all specific changes, but in the comments and in the text sometimes a reference is made to the change. The final form of the manual is always a compromise

– the result of a consensus of experts (Mohr, personal communication, 2019). In the MKN manuals, also, no specific scientific studies leading to a change in classification are recorded (Zvolský, email interview, 2019a). The comments on the ICD-11 classification are held by a community of experts.

Every expert must undergo a membership approval process in the discussion forum (while his/her expertise in the field is assessed), which is dedicated to comments on individual proposed changes.

Comments can be written as a discussion thread for individual diagnoses. From this board,

33 information about the proposed changes goes to the scientific committee, which assesses the proposed changes, and an expert agreement is concluded (Zvolský, personal interview, 2019b). The scientific committees are the Medical Scientific Advisory Committee (MSAC) and the

Classification and Statistics Advisory Committee (CSAC), which oversee the factual accuracy and consistency of classification in terms of expertise (Zvolský, email interview, 2019a). The professional society in the Czech Republic has the opportunity to comment on the diagnostic manuals, and the comments are transmitted from the local level to the international level through

UZIS (IHIS CR – Institute of Health Information and Statistics of the Czech Republic) to the WHO

(Zvolský, personal interview, 2019b). In the DSM, the validity of the already proposed categories is subsequently tested in field trials to test its function (Mohr, personal communication, 2019).

According to Dr. Zvolský, the media discourse in terms of public debate is not directly taken into account – there are no instruments defined for such an approach. It is an effort that only the community of public health and individual medical specialists should comment on the classification (Zvolský, email interview, 2019a). However, as the classification is a compromise among experts’ opinions, “where it does not have sufficient scientific evidence, it is always under the influence of the social climate – an example is the fate of the diagnosis of homosexuality over time and in individual diagnostic systems (currently egodystone homosexuality has disappeared), transgenderism, etc.” (Mohr, personal communication, 2019).

Lately, Czech sexologists have been slowly abandoning the descriptive view of ICD and

DSM systems, because they often see the basis of deviance in a different structure of sexual motivation – the deviance comes exclusively from the intrapsychic characteristics of the individual, which subsequently allows, modulates or modifies the external manifestations of sexual disorder in the form of deviant behavior (Weiss, P., 2002). However, there have been international attempts to introduce a completely new system (for example Research Domain Criteria) based on neurobiology that treats mental illnesses as disorders of brain circuits (Cuthbert & Insel, 2013; Tyrer, 2014).

34 There are many theories of sexual . Some consider paraphilias to be congenital, while others consider them to be acquired during life. Evolutionary biological models consider sexual paraphilias to be innate former adaptive mechanisms. The genetic models consider paraphilias to be hereditary. Neuroanatomic models understand paraphilias as anchored in the same neural rigidities as aggression (Marshall & Barbaree, 1990) and structural anomalies in the right lobe, according to some researches, refer to sadism (Langevin, 1990). There are other approaches that consider paraphilias to be acquired during one’s life. The behavioral models focus on learning paraphilia by social learning, imprinting or conditioning, while psycho-dynamic models focus on traumatic events during one’s life. Other theories see masochism as a deprivation of the social role

(Stolorow, Atwood, & Brandschaft, 1988), depersonalization similar to drug use (Baumeister,

1988) or the production of euphoria by keeping away from body balance (Solomon & Corbit,

1974).

The theories of current Czech sexologists are inconsistent. Until 1989, Czech sexology was highly influenced by the communist regime. As Havelková and Oates-Indruchová found in their study, during communism in the 1950s and 1960s, young people were poorly acquainted with sexuality (Havelková & Oates-Indruchová, 2015). Another study argues that sexual deviants were not present in the scientific discourse because they were simply not the focus of sexologists

(Lišková, 2016a). Deviant behavior was seen to be dangerous for society, and the so-called

“protective treatment” of sexual deviants ordered by the communist police increased during the normalization period during the 1970s (Lišková, 2016a). On the other hand, socialist laws on sexuality were still more lenient than before (Sokolová, 2014). All deviations were judged against the heterosexual norm (Lišková, 2009). The paradigms used in Czech sexology differed substantially including the classification of paraphilias and the inclusion of sadomasochism in them, the identification of the diagnosis and the perspective of treatment options. There are two paradigmatic approaches to sexual paraphilias. The social constructivist approach considers sexual

35 disorders to be a mere social construct. The essentialist approach assumes that paraphilia is an innate biological factor; it is either fully present or not at all. Moreover, paraphilia is a lifelong invariable characteristic (Weiss, P., 2002). The essentialist paradigm is promoted by one of the prominent Czech sexologists, Petr Weiss, and is widely used by experts in sexual paraphilias across disciplines.

Sexual paraphilias could be seen as qualitatively altered human motivations, according to the Czech sexologist Jaroslav Zvěřina, while a rich sexual life or some less common practices cannot be seen as paraphilias (Zvěřina, 2003). Paraphilias are divided into two categories in the current Czech sexological discourse: deviations in activity and deviations in object. According to

Weiss (Weiss, P., 2002), deviations in object are for example , Fetishism or

Transvestism. Deviations in activity are characterized as disorders in the means of sexual arousal and satisfaction and include, besides sadomasochism and others, also two sadistic diagnoses not usually present in the international diagnostics: pathological sexual aggression and aggressive sadism (Weiss, P., 2002). The first is characterized by randomness of the victim’s choice. The attacker has a hunter’s behavior, any co-operation or communication with the victim is undesirable, sudden stunning or killing of the victim is common followed by the aggressor’s sexual behavior, and the aggressor often has a mental defect, a psychopathic personality or is under the influence of addictive substances (Švarc, 2017; Weiss, P., 2002; Zvěřina, 2003). On the other hand, aggressive sadism is characterized by brutal attacks on the victim with the primary goal of abusing the victim

(not ), followed by immobilization of the victim and arbitrary manipulation with the body, such as with a wax mannequin (Zvěřina, 2003). We can also distinguish between hands- on paraphilias, which involve physical contact between deviant and object, and hands-off, which does not involve any physical contact between the two (Laws & O’Donohue, 2008; Rosner &

Scott, 2017). Weiss (Weiss, P., 2002) states that sadomasochism could be divided into many types regarding the main interests of the paraphilic person. We can distinguish sadomasochism fetishistic,

36 aggressive, ideological, immobilizing, spanking, sadomasochism including dog-play, candaulism, asphyxia, sadomasochism including sex with domination and humiliation (Weiss, P., 2002) and pseudo-pedagogical sadism, requiring obedience and discipline in children and adolescents (Weiss,

P., 2008).

According to Pavlovsky (2012), paraphilia is a permanent part of the personality and it can never be cured, we can only adjust the external manifestations of the sexual preference. The treatment is usually cognitive behavioral therapy, less often a biological treatment such as pharmacotherapy or castration (Weiss, P., 2008). The Czech Republic is one of the few countries in the European Union that allows castration of sexual deviants at their own request. According to the

European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or

Punishment (Výbor CPT, 2015), there were seventy surgeries during the 2000-2006 period and thirteen during the 2007-2011 period. The castrations took place in several places, one of which was the psychiatric hospital in Havlíčkův Brod led by Želmíra Herrová. According to Lišková &

Bělehradová (2019), the castrations were performed also in Bohnice and Horní Beřkovice. Surgical castration was usually done as a testicular pulpectomy, in which only the hormone active part of the testicle is removed. Patients were encouraged to store their sperm in a sperm bank and the surgery was supplemented with insight therapy, in which patients learn to understand the mechanisms of their sexual deviance (Výbor CPT, 2014). The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) has objected to the practice of surgical castration in the Czech Republic and proposed a transition to anti-androgen therapy (Výbor CPT,

2015). In 2012, a castration commission was established for approving every surgery and the possibility of castration was subject to several conditions: the patient must be over 25 years of age, have a proven sexual deviation, have committed a violent sexually-motivated crime and have a high probability of committing another, other treatment methods have not been successful, and the patient is currently not in custody or prison (Výbor CPT, 2014, 2015). These conditions have led to

37 the disappearance of the practice of surgical castration in Havlíčkův Brod, and, along with an improvement of a funding system for anti-androgen therapy, to the transition to methods for lowering testosterone levels with medication (Herrová, personal interview, 2019). Currently, the gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist is used as a medication for lowering testosterone levels in sexual aggressors. Every application of the medication must be approved by a health insurance company (Herrová, personal interview, 2019). Though the Výbor CPT has tightened its supervision of castrations through the castration commission, the Czech government went in the opposite direction and in 2017 ratified a new law that extends the range of sexual deviants eligible for the procedure. The minimum age limit was lowered to twenty-one and the condition of having to have committed a sexually-motivated crime was removed from the law (Lišková & Bělehradová, 2019).

According to Kolářský (2008), experts do not predominantly aim to cure paraphilia, they aim to teach people how to live with their paraphilia. Methods can be based on the principles of normalization (the suppression of paraphilic behavior and desires, the practice of ‘normal’ behavior and the practice of avoiding risk situations) and searching for harmless ways to satisfy their desires and release their sexual tension – fiction, masturbation and substitute sexual activities (Kolářský,

2008).

Transformation of Diagnostic Classification The first revision of the ILCD was published in 1900 in France. Although the terms sadism and masochism were known in the medical discourse from Krafft-Ebing’s 1886 introduction, in

ILCD-1 there was no mention of any sexual activity containing pain, restriction or power distribution. Although the differentiation between mental and physical illness was not present at that time, non-puerperal insanity appeared in the manual. The second edition of ILCD from 1909, listed hysteria and other forms of mental alienation. The third edition (1919), listed other forms of insanity and hysteria. In the fourth edition in 1931, dementia praecox appeared for the first time, hysteria was removed from the classification and the other forms of insanity remained unchanged.

38 In MKN-5 (1941), for the first time, manic-depressive psychosis appeared, dementia praecox was renamed schizophrenia and insanity was renamed a . As we can see, sadomasochism was not present in the official diagnoses in these editions.

Was sadomasochism absent in the society during the above periods, or was it classified differently? The manifestations of the various disorders are dependent on the cultural context and significantly change over time. We can take the hysteria as an example – the symptoms in the 19 th century were described as short-term or long-term deafness, inability to walk and inability to speak.

These “conversion symptoms” (physical function disorders due to psychogenic causes) were very common during the 19th century, but they are relatively rare in the present, diagnosed under the renamed hysteria diagnosis F44 dissociative (conversion) disorders. According to Dr. Zvolský, the

International Classification of Diseases started originally as a list of causes of death, and thus it did not include non-fatal diagnoses. Since ICD-6 (1948), it has also contained non-fatal diseases and health-related problems and conditions (Zvolský, email interview, 2019a). This does not mean that the patient was not diagnosed, when the particular diagnosis was not yet in the manual. He/she was diagnosed and the medical condition was recorded by textual description, but it was not sufficiently specified by a classification system (Zvolský, email interview, 2019a). In 1948, the sixth edition of the MKN manual appeared, which included a wide range of mental illnesses. For the first time, there were more categories for such a diagnosis: personality disorders appeared, and were divided into the categories of psychosis, psycho-neurotic disorders including a whole new category of pathological personality disorders of character, behavior and intelligence. The vast array of minor differences in human behavior were pathologized for the first time in history, including asocial, antisocial, inadequate, cyclothymic, schizoid or paranoid personality. The category of sexual deviation appeared here for the first time, listed as a general category without any specifications, and the term deviation remained until the ICD-9 manual (1975).

39 The first DSM was published in 1952 in the and contained a personality trait disturbance category, which included, among other things, sexual deviation, described as deviant sexuality, which is not symptomatic of more extensive syndromes, such as schizophrenic and obsessional reactions (American Psychiatric Association, 1952). This included homosexuality, transvestism, pedophilia, fetishism and sexual sadism – including rape, sexual assault and mutilation (American Psychiatric Association, 1952). The MKN-7 manual (1958) classification of sexual deviations remained almost the same as in the previous edition. Sexual deviation remained under pathological personality as a category without any subcategories and without any major changes. In 1968, however, in the eighth edition of MKN, sexual deviations were excluded from the category of personality disorders and put as a separate sexual deviation category, coming under a general category of neuroses, personality disorders and other non-psychotic mental disorders. For the first time in MKN, the sexual deviation category was subdivided into a list of specific deviations. In the company of homosexuality, fetishism, pedophilia, transvestitism and , the diagnosis of sadism and masochism appeared together, under the “other” category along with narcissism and erotomania. This corresponds to a later theory of Stolorow and

Lachmann (1980), who considered masochists as wounded narcissists seeking attention.

With the arrival of the second DSM manual in 1968, the classification was substantially reorganized: the general category was named: “Personality disorders and certain other non- psychotic mental disorders” and it had a subcategory “Personality disorders”. It describes sexual deviation as sexual intercourse, which is directed primarily towards objects other than people of the opposite sex, towards sexual acts not usually associated with coitus, or towards coitus performed under bizarre circumstances as in , pedophilia, sexual sadism, and fetishism. Even though the practitioners find their preferred practices distasteful, they are unable to substitute them with “normal” sexual behavior. Individuals who perform deviant sexual acts because “normal”

40 sexual acts are not available to them are excluded from this diagnosis (American Psychiatric

Association, 1968). In the category of Sexual deviations, there is also sadism and masochism.

In the ninth edition of MKN in 1979, the category of sexual deviations was renamed

“Sexual Deviations and Disorders” and included some new subcategories as “”,

“Transsexualism”, “Psycho-Sexual Disorder” and “Other Specified Psycho-Sexual Disorders”.

Sexual masochism and sexual sadism were included in the “Other” category along with fetishism.

There is a significant change in the diagnosis from general sadism and general masochism to the specification of the necessity of the sexual context in sadism and masochism.

In 1980, DSM-III was published, in which the general category changed from “Personality

Disorders” to “Psycho-Sexual Disorders” and was now listed under “Neurotic Disorders”. Along with “Gender Identity Disorders”, there was a category of “Psycho-sexual Dysfunctions” and

“Paraphilias” (with the diagnosis of sexual masochism and sexual sadism). There was a shift from general sadism and general masochism to sexual sadism and sexual masochism. The importance of the sexual context of the diagnosis corresponds to ICD-9 from 1979. It also differs from the diagnosis of masochistic personality traits, such as the need to be disappointed or humiliated without connection to sexual excitement (American Psychiatric Association, 1980; see also

Kernberg, 1991; Maleson, 1984).

There was also a shift from the term sexual deviation to paraphilia, which is a more convenient term that contains no normative element. As DSM-III notes, the term paraphilia points out that the deviation – para, is in that to which the individual is attracted – philia (American

Psychiatric Association, 1980). According to the manual, paraphilia is either 1) the necessity of unusual or bizarre imagery; 2) acts for sexual excitement; 3) repetitive sexual activity with humans involving both real or simulated suffering or humiliation; 4) the preference for a nonhuman object for sexual arousal; or 5) repetitive sexual activity with non-consenting partners (American

Psychiatric Association, 1980). The change in the approach to the classification in DSM-III was

41 due to the need for psychiatrists to legitimize their field to health insurance companies that demanded specific medical reasons for medication reimbursement (Mayes & Horwitz, 2005).

Individuals seek mental health professionals or sexologists usually only when they come into conflict with society, even though some people admit to guilt and depression caused by socially-unacceptable, unusual sexual activity (American Psychiatric Association, 1980; see also

Bader, 1993). Their social relationships can be damaged and sexual intercourse can be inhibited in their relationships (American Psychiatric Association, 1980). Regarding gender, DSM-III states that Sexual sadism and Sexual masochism occur far more commonly in males than in females

(American Psychiatric Association, 1980). Baumeister and Butler (1997) also point out that more men than women engage in masochistic behavior (Baumeister, 1988, 1989). Meanwhile, Cross and

Matheson (2006) conclude that there are more masochists in the population than sadists. Weiss

(Weiss, P., 2004) explores this gender issue further, leaning on Money (1996), stating that some deviations are more likely to occur in women (those associated with tactile perceptions, bondage and subjugation). This is because in the pregenital phase, women are more dependent on touch, so it has greater importance for erotic and genital arousal and than it does for men. Weiss also notes that determining the prevalence of sexual deviations in women is complicated by the fact that psycho-physiological investigation methods (especially vulvoplethysmography) in women are not sufficiently reliable. Finally, although some women may have a paraphilia, they are rarely delinquent because of higher social tolerance for non-conforming sexual behavior of women, and usually they are less aggressive compared to deviant men (Weiss, P., 2004).

Regarding sadomasochism, DSM-III notes that the paraphilic imagery can be exciting also for people without a paraphilia. As some publications state, sexual masochism can be compatible with normal, healthy individuals (Baumeister & Butler, 1997). Masochists and sadists complement each other (Money & Lamacz, 1989), and play a kind of power game of the sexually sophisticated

(Califia & Corinne, 1983; Cross & Matheson, 2006). Therefore, sometimes the practice may be

42 playful and harmless, acted out with a mutually-agreeing partner. Sometimes, however, the practice is not reciprocated by a partner or it is even noxious or harmful to a partner or the self – although as

Moser and Levitt (1987) and Scott (1983) show, safety is important for most consensual masochists and usually few people get hurt. For the diagnosis, it is necessary that, in the absence of paraphiliac imagery, there is no relief from non-erotic tension and sexual intercourse or orgasm is not attained

(American Psychiatric Association, 1980). Sexual masochism diagnosis is assigned if either a preferred or exclusive mode of producing sexual excitement is to be humiliated, bound, beaten or otherwise made to suffer or the individual has intentionally participated in an activity in which he or she was physically harmed (or his or her life was threatened) in order to produce sexual excitement, which did occur. A single well-documented intentional episode is enough to attach the diagnosis (American Psychiatric Association, 1980). The diagnosis is said to be chronic, present from childhood (see Stoller, 1975) and first tried usually by early adulthood. Some paraphilics are content with the same degree of the practices over time, while others feel the need to increase the level of practices. The diagnosis of sexual sadism is attached when one of these three conditions is fulfilled: 1) the individual has (with a consensual partner) a preferred or exclusive mode of achieving sexual intercourse in combining humiliation with a simulated or mildly injurious suffering of the body; or 2) the individual inflicted (on a consensual partner) bodily injury that is extensive, permanent, or possibly mortal, in order to achieve sexual excitement; or 3) the individual has repeatedly and intentionally inflicted psychological or physical suffering (on a non-consensual person) in order to achieve sexual excitement (American Psychiatric Association, 1980).

The tenth edition of MKN was widely influenced by DSM-III, with three related categories listed under the “Personality and Behavioral Disorders in Adults” category: 1) “Gender Identity

Disorders”; 2) “Psychological and Behavioral Disorders Associated with Sexual Development and

Orientation”; and 3) “Sexual Preference” (which includes sadomasochism). As we can see, the terms sexual deviation and sexual disorder have been shifted into the term sexual preference

43 disorder, and the diagnosis of sadism and masochism has been combined in this document into the general category of sadomasochism. It is now assumed that if someone is interested in inflicting pain on others, he is also commonly interested in receiving the pain himself or herself. This corresponds retrospectively to Freud’s (1953a) view, who believed that there is a masochist in every sadist and there is a sadist in every masochist. According to MKN-10, sadomasochism is the preference for sexual activity that involves the action of pain, humiliation or restriction of personal freedom. If the subject accepts such stimulation, it is masochism. If he/she rather does it himself/herself, then it is sadism. The subject often feels sexual arousal from both sadistic and masochistic activities (World Health Organization, 2009). According to the list of participating countries, there were no Czech experts who commented the proposals for changes in the ICD-10 manual (Zvolský, personal interview, 2019b).

In 1994, the DSM-IV manual was published. The category of psycho-sexual disorders was renamed as “Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders”. The other categories of “Paraphilia”, “Sexual

Sadism” and “Sexual Masochism” remained untouched. The definition of paraphilia was changed to an emphasis on intensity and distress. According to DSM-IV, people diagnosed with paraphilia should have recurrent, intense sexual urges, fantasies, or behaviors that involve unusual objects, activities, or situations and cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of functioning (American Psychiatric Association, 1994).

The definition of sadism and masochism started to create space for excluding members of the BDSM subculture in the diagnosis. Masochism had been specified by time, realness and distress: now it should be intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges or behaviors involving the real (not simulated) act of being humiliated, beaten, bound or otherwise made to suffer over a period of at least six months – and such fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of life (American

Psychiatric Association, 1994). The reality of the experience is described by Pat Califia (1988),

44 who claims that real and fantasy are defined one against another. According to Barnard (1994), masochism cannot exist without blurring the boundaries between fantasy and reality. Sexual sadism is now diagnosed in the same way as sexual masochism, either by time or by significant distress.

Sexual sadism is defined as the preference of acts (real, not simulated) in which the individual derives sexual excitement from the psychological or physical suffering (including humiliation) of the victim (American Psychiatric Association, 1994) and is practiced either only in fantasies or as a real act with consenting or non-consenting people. The diagnosis of sexual sadism is described by a variety of either solo practices (rape fantasies, self-bondage, self-piercing, self-electric shocks, self- mutilation) or practices with another person of which some, while done with the mutual of the participants, correspond to the practices done in the BDSM subculture. These include different kinds of bondage and spank, electrical shocks (electro play), pinching and cutting (needle and ), forcing the victim to crawl or keeping the victim in a cage (dom-sub play), humiliation, strangulation, torture, rape and mutilation. Other practices do not correspond to those done in the

BDSM subculture, while done either without mutual consent or sometimes even with consent.

Those include knife stabbing, lethal strangulation, dangerous torture, unconsented rape, unconsented mutilation and killing. As Cross and Matheson (2006) state, we can distinguish between masochism as an individual pathology and masochism as a social movement of sensual power role-play subculture (BDSM). In the diagnosis of sexual masochism and sadism, a list of fantasies and practices has emerged in the manual, which partly corresponds to the practices performed in the BDSM subculture.

In 2013, the DSM-V manual was published, in which, along with “Sexual Dysfunctions”,

“Gender Dysphoria” and “Personality Disorders”, there was a general category of “Paraphilic

Disorders”. Paraphilia was defined as any intense and persistent sexual interest other than sexual interest in genital stimulation or preparatory fondling with phenotypically normal, physically mature, human partners (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Paraphilic disorders were

45 further divided into anomalous target presence, anomalous activity preference with and anomalous activity preference with algolagnia disorders (with Sexual masochism disorder and ).

The definition of sexual masochism changed only slightly. New research findings were added to the definition of the personal beginning and persistence of masochism. According to the

DSM-V, the average time of the first such experience was 19.3 years and little is known about the persistence of masochism over time – sexual masochism disorder requires one or more contributing factors, which may change over time with or without treatment. These include subjective distress

(guilt, shame, intense sexual frustration, loneliness), psychiatric morbidity, hyper-sexuality, sexual impulsivity and psycho-social impairment. Therefore, according to DSM-V, the course of sexual masochism is likely to vary with age. Advancing age is likely to have the same reducing effect on sexual preference involving sexual masochism as it has on other paraphilic or normophilic sexual behavior (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).

In the diagnostic criteria for sexual sadism, it is now possible to diagnose individuals who disagree with the diagnosis of sadistic disorder. According to DSM-V, it is possible to apply a diagnosis of sexual sadism to a person who denies any sexual interest in the physical or psychological suffering of another individual, despite substantive objective evidence to the contrary

(American Psychiatric Association, 2013). By substantial evidence, DSM-V means around three non-consenting people in separate occasions. Individuals who admit an interest in the physical or psychological suffering of others but declare no distress about these paraphilic impulses, are not hampered by them in pursuit of other goals, and their self-reported, psychiatric, or legal histories indicate that they do not act on them, could be ascertained as having sadistic sexual interest, but they would not meet the criteria for sex sadism (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).

DSM-V adds data from statistical surveys of the prevalence of sadism in the population. It states that it depends on the criteria for sexual sadism, but it differs widely from 2% to 30%. In

46 addition, among civilly committed sexual offenders in the United States, less than ten percent are sexual sadists and among individuals who have committed sexually motivated homicides, rates of sexual sadism range from 37% to 75% (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).

Regarding gender, DSM-V states that individuals with sexual sadism in forensic samples are almost exclusively male (American Psychiatric Association, 2013), but then it mixes clinically diagnosed sexual sadists with people who practice consensual sadomasochism in the BDSM subculture by stating that in a representative sample of the population in Australia certain researches reported that 2.2% of men and 1.3% of women said they had been engaged in bondage and discipline, sadomasochism, or in the previous year (American

Psychiatric Association, 2013). The mingling of the statistics goes further with notes that females became aware of their sadomasochistic orientation as young adults, and that the mean age at the onset of sadism in a group of males was 19.4 years – while sexual sadism per se is probably a lifelong characteristic, the sexual sadism disorder may fluctuate according to an individual’s subjective distress or his or her propensity to harm non-consenting others (American Psychiatric

Association, 2013). On the other hand, DSM-V, for the first time, clinically differentiates the

BDSM practitioners from the sexual sadists by noting that the majority of individuals who are active in community networks that practice sadistic and masochistic behaviors do not express any dissatisfaction with their sexual interests and their behavior would not meet the criteria for sexual sadism disorder. Sadistic interest, but not the disorder, may be considered an appropriate diagnosis

(American Psychiatric Association, 2013).

The major change in the classification of sadism, masochism and BDSM in sexual discourse comes in 2018 with a new ICD manual, number eleven. It strictly diagnostically separates consensual practices from non-consensual practices. In the category of “Paraphilic Disturbances”, the following diagnoses are present: exhibitionist disorder, voyeuristic disorder, pedophilic disorder, coercive sexual sadism disorder, paraphilic disorder involving non‐consenting individuals,

47 paraphilic disorder involving solitary behavior or consenting individuals. As we can see, the diagnosis of Sadomasochism from the ICD-10 was split into coercive sexual sadism, paraphilia not involving consent and paraphilia involving solitary behavior or consent. The paraphilic disorder involving solitary behavior or consensual individuals is characterized by a persistent and intense pattern of atypical sexual arousal – manifested by sexual thoughts, fantasies, urges, or behaviors – that involves consenting adults or solitary behaviors. One of the following two elements must be present: the person is markedly distressed by the nature of the arousal pattern (the distress is not a consequence of rejection or fear of rejection of the arousal pattern by others), or the nature of the paraphilic behavior involves significant risk of injury or death either to the individual or to the partner (World Health Organization, 2018). Thus, the practices performed in the BDSM subculture

– consensual sadomasochism as well as fetishism – fall here into the general box of Paraphilic disorder involving solitary behavior or consenting individuals, diagnosed only when the individual is substantially stressed by his or her paraphilic behavior or when paraphilic behavior contains risk of serious injury or death. In other cases, sadomasochistic behavior is supposed to be excluded from the clinical diagnosis – although as some authors state, the manual’s structure and suggestions may not have any effect on the actual practice of diagnosing consensual sadomasochists with a diagnosis, because it can merely shift the diagnosis under the new code 6D36 Paraphilic disorder involving solitary behavior or consenting individuals (Moser, 2018). The diagnosis “coercive sexual sadism disorder” appeared for the first time in ICD-11, although its incorporation into the

DSM-V was also contemplated (Moser, 2018). This change might substantially correspond to the clinical practice of Czech sexologists of recent years, who have been assigning locally-specific diagnoses of pathological sexual aggression and aggressive sadism, which are usually diagnosed under the F 65.8 (less often F 65.9) code – another disorder of sexual preference of MKN-10 code diagnosis. There were no Czech proposals to include these two diagnoses into the new MKN-11 manual or to propose them as alternative names for the existing diagnoses (Zvolský, personal

48 interview, 2019b). However, according to some Czech clinical sexologists (Páv & Brichcín, 2019), the diagnosis of pathological sexual aggression loosely corresponds with the new MKN-11 diagnosis of 6D35 Other paraphilic disorder involving non-consenting individuals. In addition, the diagnosis of aggressive sadism could be considered loosely corresponding with the new MKN-11 diagnosis of 6D33 coercive sadism. The ICD-11 should come into effect on 1 January 2022 after a transitional period.

Discussion Changes in medical classifications are inevitably discussed in a social climate, which cannot be perfectly separated from the decision. Indeed, the ever-increasing amount of BDSM plots in the mainstream media, books and films contributed significantly to the image of BDSM as a common social phenomenon during the years between the 10th and 11th revision of ICD manual. In addition, the media discourse has shifted even more widely since the appearance of Fifty Shades of Grey in

2015 and its subsequent broad popularity. As the book has sold nearly 125 million copies, a substantial number of people have suddenly become acquainted with the topic of BDSM, which to some extent has been normalized through a romantic love story.

The Czech medical discourse is highly influenced by the international medical discourse, as diagnostic manuals are internationally irrevocable. While there are some minor alterations in the

Czech medical practice regarding the diagnosis of some kinds of sadism and masochism, the Czech diagnostic practice remains largely homogeneous with the international diagnostic practice. The recent changes in the manuals do not directly influence the Czech BDSM scene.

ICD-11 has placed the diagnose of consensual sadomasochism in a separate chapter creating the impression of depathologization, which has supported the expectations of the general BDSM public and also many experts that this change in classification will have far-reaching consequences to changes in other fields as well. Dr. Zvolský suggests there is a common expectation that the different changes in classifications in the medical discourse could influence the media discourse,

49 which could lead to changes in legislation. However, Dr. Zvolský considers these expectations substantially exaggerated. According to him, the change in classification will not result in real change (Zvolský, personal interview, 2019b). Therefore, rather than seeing a pioneering change of the approach towards BDSM in the manuals, we might be witnessing the final result of a long- lasting shifting of the discourse about BDSM in all other fields.

50 3. Chapter three – Play on the Edge. How Does the Czech Legislative System Frame BDSM? Symbolic Boundaries between Legal and Criminal.

Introduction In the previous chapter, I scrutinized how the Czech medical (sexological, psychiatrical) and psychological discourse shape the boundaries betweeen the BDSM subculture and the mainstream culture. We have seen how the boundaries between physical and psychological illness suddenly appeared and how they have changed over time. We witnessed the appearance of the diagnosis of sadism and masochism in the medical context and the appearance of the diagnostical division between consensuality of acts and non-consensuality of acts. Now, I present a brief overview of the

Czech legal discourse regarding BDSM and the ways in which the legal discourse affects the categorization and everyday life of BDSM practitioners.

The Czech Republic shares the continental, Germanic legal culture (Kmec et al., 2012), which means it has a hierarchical system of only written (not spoken) laws and procedures codified in Civil and Criminal Codes. The most recent Criminal Code is no. 40/2009 Coll., which came into force in 2010. It defines the types of behavior constituting a criminal offense and contains a list of criminal offenses and types of punishment (Kmec et al., 2012). In the decisions of the higher courts, sometimes case law is used to shape legal decisions. Case law is the collection of past legal decisions of courts in which the law was analyzed to resolve ambiguities for current cases.

Although it is often used when it is unclear how to interpret the laws for a particular case, it is not traditionally recognized as a formal source of law (Kmec et al., 2012).

The Czech legal system does not contain the term BDSM and it never has. Therefore, it is not possible to conduct a thorough analysis of the shift of the conception of BDSM or sadism and masochism in Czech law over time. However, it is possible to conduct a simple overview of how

Czech law approached BDSM during the communist era and in the present. Although it does not contain the specific researched terminology, we can find BDSM in Czech law through the analysis

51 of case law and an analysis of the Criminal Code, which describe similar acts or activities. I omitted from the search crimes that are connected to BDSM, but the criminal acts themselves are different from the practices considered by the practitioners to be “BDSM practices”. The Criminal

Code contains an extensive list of practices that it only vaguely describes and that practitioners would not consider to be something they would practice. For this reason, I narrowed my search and analysis only to the clearest acts of physical and psychological violence connected to consensual

BDSM. To be certain of my selection and interpretations, I consulted regularly with colleagues from the Faculty of Law.

From the point of view of the Czech legal system, the BDSM subculture includes some practices that may interfere with a person’s physical integrity and/or a person’s health. Acts that interfere with the physical integrity and health of another person are criminalized in the Czech legal system. As I will show in this chapter, bodily harm is not legal even when the receiver consents to it. Criminal offenses against health are elaborated in sections 145 to 148 of the Criminal Code (Act

No. 40/2009 Coll., Criminal Code). Section 30 of the Criminal Code deals with the injured party’s consent as a circumstance excluding illegality of an act in the case of bodily harm.

In this chapter, I explore current criminal law regarding BDSM in the Czech Republic and how it impacts individuals who practice BDSM. I scrutinize Criminal Code provisions, which are decisive for partners who practice BDSM, and the reasons the state gives for limiting BDSM activities in order to protect one’s health. I also analyze the reasons why, under Czech law, the injured party’s consent does not change the criminal status of the offense and whether partners doing BDSM practices are subject to criminal sanctions.

In the next sections, I first explain a theory of how internal and external classifications help us understand the world. I then introduce the two most common classification manuals in the Czech

Republic used for the medical classification of offenders and victims during court hearings.

Subsequently, I address the particular Czech legal categorization of BDSM and its specifics. I

52 explain how Czech law defines crimes against health and how it deals with the injured party’s consent as well as the reasons for its use or non-use regarding crimes connected to BDSM practice.

In the conclusion, I summarize the findings of the chapter and introduce a discussion on the timeliness of current Czech legislation.

The Process of Categorization Internationally, sadism and masochism are classification categories that have existed since the end of the 19th century. The sexology literature (Weiss, P., 2002, 2010; Zvěřina, 2003) denotes the sexual variation of causing excitement by physical and/or mental suffering, taking power over another person or transferring power to another person. Consensual partners usually refer to sexual sadism and sexual masochism as BDSM. This abbreviation includes a wider range of physical and mental preferences of individuals, and at the same time, clearly defines them. It mostly contains practices involving the pain of one practitioner or his/her submission. The practices of fetishism and body modification (extreme body modification through surgical procedures, unusual piercings or extensive scarifications or tattoos) are sometimes also included under BDSM, due to the similarities in their basic characteristics, even when they do not literally belong to these categories.

Weinberg, Williams and Moser (1984) give a different definition. They define sadomasochism as the coexistence of dominance, submissiveness, role-playing, consensuality and sexual activities.

Beginning with childhood, the categorization process becomes a basic human need in everyday life for people. Categorization allows individuals to simplify the social world to an understandable level, allowing them to better relate to social interactions and everyday reality.

According to Hogg and Abrams, categorization is a fundamental and universal process because it satisfies the basic, universal human need for stubbornness in the cognition process (Hogg &

Abrams, 1988).

Building on the theories of Becker (1963) and Gelder and Thornton (1997), we can also inspect this two-sided relationship between subculture and mainstream culture from a slightly

53 different angle. We can see this relationship as widely connected to two types of categorization: internal and external. Internal categorization can be further distinguished by individual self- identification with a certain group of people and collective self-identification of a certain group of people with an existing external classification (self-identification with a specific label). Individual self-identification consists of self-awareness of individuals and self-assignment of the individual’s identity to the selected category. Individuals, who identify as something, help to define the content of the category and the meanings assigned to it – along with the collective self-identification of a wider group of people. On the other hand, external categorization consists of a non-participating external group or individuals who categorize other people according to given criteria in a predetermined category.

These criteria and categories can be defined by experts in the field, or by using one’s

“common sense”. Jenkins recognizes three orders of phenomena intertwined in reality, namely: 1) the individual order (the reality as seen by the individual); 2) the interaction order (the reality of relationships between individuals); and 3) the institutional order (the reality of symbolically ordered practices) (Jenkins, 1996). Categories are created and maintained in all three orders via the communication of individuals in institutionalized contexts. These contexts vary in placement on the imaginary continuum of formality, from informal contexts (for example, in the context of primary socialization) to highly institutionalized contexts (for example, science) (Sanderova, 2006).

The categories of external categorization remain unchangeable in relation to the contents and meanings in the group. Individuals with the possibility to change their contents lie outside the given categorized group. All actors that socially interact are subject to both types of classification, which are inseparable and complementary to each other. The external classification necessarily lies within the internal classification, even if only in the form of rejection or resistance. Jenkins (1996) then recognizes five options for the relationship between external and internal categorization: 1) the two categorizations can be identical and reinforce each other; 2) they can be slightly different and

54 interact somewhat; 3) external categorization can be recognized internally through the recognition of authority; 4) the internalization of external categorization can be imposed by somebody with power; or 5) the mutual relationship of both categorizations can be entirely rejected. In everyday life, these categorizations are inextricably linked to one another in the dialectical process of identification. Social groups thus define themselves and are identified and defined by others

(Jenkins, 1996). Although the internal classification of the individual is not simply the same as the external classification of the same individual, both classifications are involved in a mutual relationship. In the next section, I outline the main tools for external classification – the two most used classification manuals for BDSM in health practice and its use regarding BDSM.

Means of Categorization

Classification Manuals The history of health classification extends to the very beginning of the 20th century, when the first manual for the causes of death came into print. Since then, this classification system has changed substantially, but it is still used in its modern version. Czech health experts use two diagnostic classification systems to classify sadomasochism in the Czech Republic. The first is the

ICD-10 classification, which defines sexual sadism and masochism (F65.5) as a preference for

“sexual activity” that involves pain, humiliation or the taking away of personal freedom. If the subject prefers to receive such stimulation, it is masochism. If they administer it, it is sadism. The subject often experiences sexual arousal from both sadistic and masochistic activities (World

Health Organization, 1993).

The second is the American psychiatric classification DSM-5, which defines sexual masochism (F65.51) as the coexistence of two phenomena. The first comes from feeling repeated and intense excitement from being humiliated, beaten, placed in bondage or other types of torture.

These feelings must have been manifested in fantasies, desire or behavior for at least six months.

Second, the individual pursues these sexual desires against the will of another person, or these

55 sexual desires and fantasies bring clinically significant fear or deterioration in the social, professional, or other important field of the individual’s life.

Sexual sadism is defined in DSM-5 (F65.52) as the coexistence of two phenomena. The first requirement is that the person has spent at least 6 months attaining repeated and intense excitement from the physical or mental suffering of another person manifested by fantasy, desire or behavior. The second requirement is that the desires were oriented toward a non-consenting person, or by the fact that these sexual desires and fantasies cause clinically significant fear or deterioration in an individual’s social, professional, or other important field of life (American Psychiatric

Association, 2013).

Obviously, the two definitions differ quite substantially based on which individual they would, or would not, consider sadistic or masochistic. While the ICD-10 classification includes all individuals who engage in practices involving pain, humiliation or restraint (without time limitations), the DSM-5 characterizes sadists and masochists as only those individuals who are severely restricted by their sexual preferences in life or who are practicing these acts without receiving consent. At present, the ICD-10 classification is used almost exclusively for the diagnosis of sadomasochism in psychiatric and psychological practices, as it is also the main classification system for health insurance companies. A more detailed classification of DSM-5 is often used in psychiatric and psychological science and its associated research.

Crimes Against Health In some cases, the Czech legal system considers BDSM practices to constitute crimes against health. Crimes against health are defined in part two, chapter one, section two of the

Criminal Code of the Czech Republic. This part contains a total of five different items that are similar but differ in the degree of severity of consequences and/or culpability: §145 (severe bodily harm), §146 (bodily harm), §146a (bodily harm from excusable motive), §147 (grievous bodily

56 harm due to negligence) and §148 (bodily harm due to negligence). However, not all of them are applicable for BDSM practices.

Bodily harm and grievous bodily harm are terms defined by section 122 of the Criminal

Code and causing bodily harm itself is not sufficient to meet the criteria for being considered to be criminal. From the Czech legal code and case law, we can clearly see that in the case of bodily harm, health problems must last for at least seven days; however, the required minimum duration of health problems is judged on a case-by-case basis (Novotny, Vanduchova & Samal, 2010).

Grievous bodily harm occurs in the cases referred to in section 122, item 2. It usually means that an organ (or a part of the body) has been lost or a major change is noticeable in its shape or function. In some cases, it must be a permanent condition. In other cases, a long-lasting condition is sufficient. Bodily harm and grievous bodily harm can be both physical and psychological

(Novotny, Vanduchova & Samal, 2010). As some of the practices actually may interfere with the physical integrity of a person, BDSM subcultural practices meet the criteria for partner violence.

Partner violence concerns violent acts that occur between persons who are together in their private life and fear their partner (Marvanova-Vargova, Pokorna & Toufarova, 2008).

Thus, according to the criteria described and defined above, some common BDSM practices would meet the criteria of a crime based on sections 145 (severe bodily harm), 146 (bodily harm) and 147 (grievous bodily harm due to negligence). The excusable circumstances (as described in

§146a – bodily harm from excusable motives) gives the offender the possibility of requesting a lesser penalty when used during the court hearing. Therefore, intentional offenses in which the perpetrator’s motive was excusable are more leniently penalized (Novotny, Vanduchova & Samal,

2010). Regarding the last item (§148), we cannot classify BDSM as a crime of bodily harm due to negligence, because in §148, the law refers only to a specific offender – victim relationships (e.g. employment relationship).

57 In this section, I showed that BDSM practices in the Czech Criminal Code meet the criteria for severe bodily harm, bodily harm and grievous bodily harm due to negligence. In the next section, I examine the question of consent of the injured party.

Consent of the Injured Party The Criminal Code lists circumstances that make an act legal, such as when the injured party gives consent (provision §30). These circumstances have certain features in common. They apply where the criteria for a crime are met and apply to all crimes, unless expressly excluded.

Cases are expressly excluded when the acts either cause social harm, are purely illegal or are considered to be criminal from the outset (Kratochvil, 2012). As criminal law mainly protects the interests of society as a whole but also serves to protect certain interests of individuals, we could falsely assume that the consent of the injured party in the case of BDSM practices could lead to the offender being acquitted in court.

The injured party’s consent originates in the Roman principle Volenti non fit iniuria (“to a willing person, injury is not done”). Therefore, in areas where a person has full control of his or her rights, it is up to him (or her) to allow someone to interfere with them (Samal, 2012). However, in the case of crimes against health, provision §30 of the Criminal Code (the circumstances that make an act legal, including the consent of the injured party) cannot be applied, as the Criminal Code expressly excludes this (in §30, article 3, where the restrictions in the use are listed).

This restriction appears in the Criminal Code because the right to health (as well as the right to life) cannot be freely available to the victim, which is based on the Roman principle Dominus membrorum suorum or videtur (“No one is to be regarded as the owner of his own limbs”). It is clear that such a concept of the right to health, and the right to life, is based on social perception.

This concept considers the will to end one’s own life, or the will to harm one’s own health (or let

58 others harm it), to be a manifestation of mental illness. Such conduct is therefore socially inadmissible and also excluded by law.

BDSM, however, is not the main public theme regarding the consent of the injured party and the criminal status of the act. The restrictions of the use of the “injured party’s consent” are usually discussed by lawyers, the media and broader public in connection with (the impossibility of) their use for crimes against life, particularly in relation to euthanasia or assisted suicide. Several cases have also been dealt with by the European Court of Human Rights (Pretty v. United

Kingdom, decision ECtHR from 29th April 2002, complaint no. 2346/02; Haas v. Switzerland, judgment ECtHR from 20th January 2011, complaint no. 31322/07; Gross v. Switzerland, judgment

ECtHR from 30th September 2014, complaint no. 67810/10; Lambert and others v. France, judgment ECtHR from 5th June 2015, complaint no. 46043/14).

The question of circumstances that make the act legal for the crime of “killing on request” was also discussed in the preparation of the new Criminal Code. However, the proposal was not accepted and these circumstances have already been dropped from proposals that followed (Samal,

2007). Therefore, health and life in the Czech Republic still have absolute protection, regardless of the victim’s will. However, while the question of a victim’s consent to death is very lively and topical, consent to bodily harm is not an issue with broad social interest.

Conclusion In confronting the definition of BDSM, as outlined above with the definition of crimes against health, I isolate three groups of practices. The first group of BDSM practices consists of those that are not directed against a protected interest (health). The second group consists of practices that are directed against this protected interest, but do not exceed the intensity necessary for meeting the level of bodily harm or grievous bodily harm (as defined in section 122 of the

Criminal Code). The last group consists of practices that interfere with the legally protected interest

59 of health, i.e. that meet the criteria for the crime of grievous bodily harm, bodily harm or negligent grievous bodily harm.

As stated, it is not possible to make such an act legal on the grounds set out in provision §30 of the Criminal Code. That is to say, even if the injured person had consented to the act, paragraph three of this code expressly makes this act criminal in cases when it leads to bodily harm. The consent of the injured party will make some effect from the point of view of criminal law, as it will be relevant in terms of the sentence imposed – an extraordinary reduction of imprisonment may be considered, according to the specific situation. In addition, in the case of “bodily harm from negligence” or similar reasons, it is possible for the courts to decide against punishing the perpetrator (Samal, 2012).

However, the specifics of bodily harm cases cannot be ignored. It is clear that Czech law does not value the consent of the injured party to bodily harm, and thus always protects the health of a person, even against his or her will. The law does not accept the possibility of the voluntary consent to having one’s health damaged. For if one would consent to it, it would be considered to be a manifestation of a mental disorder. However, according to some authors who deal with legal theory (Stankova, Scerba & Vichlenda, 2014), this classification as a manifestation of a mental disorder is not appropriate for the case of BDSM because an injured partner participating in a

BDSM activity cannot be classified under any of the victim typologies used for the categorization of crime victims.

The question of excluding the unlawfulness of acts that threaten the injured person’s health is a highly sensitive and controversial issue even when it was done with the consent of the injured party. However, the criminalization of an act that manifests the sexuality of those who engage in it voluntarily, of their own free will and by agreement, clearly interferes significantly with the right to the private life of these persons and hinders their right to behave in accordance with their identity

(Kmec et al., 2012). Importantly, the right to behave in accordance with one’s identity is not

60 supported by the ECtHR case law, even though BDSM practices fall within the sphere of the right to private life in its case law. Regarding this area, the ECtHR allows countries to use their own discretion. As evidenced by cases where such practices were criminalized in individual countries, the ECtHR found no violation of Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v. United Kingdom, decision ECtHR from

19th February 1997, complaint no. 21627/93; K.A. and A.D. v. Belgium, judgment ECtHR from

17th December 2005, complaint no. 42758/98 and 45558/99).

Although BDSM subculture includes some practices that may interfere with a person’s physical integrity and/or person’s health and, therefore, in the Czech legal system they meet the criteria for crimes against health, the Czech BDSM subculture members are mostly unaware of the exact wording of the laws that deal with BDSM subculture and practices. As I show in Chapter

Five, they share a common awareness of the interpretation of the laws, without knowing the law itself.

The Czech legal system has undergone substantial changes since the fall of communism. In particular, the written law of crimes against health has changed considerably from the old Criminal

Code (1961) to its latest revision (2009). In the case of bodily harm and serious bodily harm, the penalty of imprisonment is now significantly higher than before. Moreover, today, when the crime is committed against groups, pregnant women, children under 15 years, witnesses, health workers, or with the motive of race, ethnicity, nationality, political belief, religion or repeatedly, it has an even stricter penalty. In the new wording of the Criminal Code, also the mere preparation of these acts is now considered to be a fully-fledged crime. On the other hand, there is a new element in the

Code for the case in which “bodily harm [comes] from an excusable motive”. The excusable motive may be fear, bewilderment, confusion, other excusable states of the mind, or the previous reprehensible actions of the injured. In the case of bodily injury from an excusable motive (even in the case of severe bodily injury), the length of imprisonment is lower. It can be lower than the

61 normal lower limit. In addition, the upper limit is also significantly lower. In the case of such crime against a group of people, a pregnant woman, a child under 15 years of age or in the case of death of the victim, there is a lower limit – but the penalty is considerably less severe than in the case of the corresponding act without an excusable motive. In the case of “serious bodily harm from negligence”, the suggested imprisonment length has remained nearly the same since 1989.

Thus, the written law has severely tightened the punishments over time. However, it introduced the excusable motive, and the legal practice itself has become more tolerant toward

BDSM practices, as I show in Chapter Five. BDSM practitioners are reacting to this change by reducing their inner personal fear. Because they have less fear, they are more willing to publicly show their personal BDSM interests. However, the legal restraints regarding body modification

(which leave permanent bodily damage) are seen as very impractical, as they leave the entire industry of body modification in a gray zone between crime and legality. Moreover, some practices

(e.g. needles) can be considered to leave a permanent mark on the body, and therefore they may be considered far more serious than the more dangerous practices, which, however, leave only a temporary mark.

Therefore, although BDSM practitioners currently feel much more secure in the legal position of BDSM than previously under communism, there are still areas where the legality of the act runs counter to the practitioners’ view of common BDSM practices. Practitioners are thus doomed to operate on the edge of the law, knowing that if someone wanted to, they could lawfully bring them to court. However, to date, it appears there are no specific cases of prosecution solely for engaging in particular BDSM practices in the Czech Republic. The Czech respondents who I interviewed were not aware of any such cases, and I have not found any such cases in my investigation of Czech case law. Fear of a lawsuit thus currently remains present for BDSM subculture members, but only in a very ambiguous and vague sense.

62 4. Chapter Four – Dilemmas of a Subculture: How Does the BDSM

Subculture Frame Itself and How Does the Mainstream Culture Frame It?

Symbolic Boundaries between Cultural and Subcultural

Introduction

There are different standpoints regarding the relationship between subculture and the outside world. The boundaries between the mainstream culture and the subculture can be imposed in various ways on the subculture, or the subcultural members can create their own boundaries between the subculture and the mainstream culture. The previous two chapters examined the problematics of the classification system for the BDSM subculture, which is created by an entity outside the researched group and (forcibly) imposed on it. I scrutinized two principal means by which the society restrains the

BDSM subculture: medical and law framing. In this chapter, I investigate the boundary-making from a completely different perspective – from the perspective of the BDSM subculture participants.

Recently, many studies have emerged from different academic disciplines and perspectives regarding the BDSM community. Psychological and sociological studies have focused mainly on the psycho-social characteristics of BDSM practitioners (Richters et al., 2008; Wismeijer & van Assen,

2013), the experienced stigma of sadomasochism (Brown, 2010; Lindemann, 2013; Meeker, 2013), the depathologization of BDSM and the need to demystify and decriminalize consensual SM (Beckmann,

2001a, 2009; Ridinger, 2006 in Kleinplatz & Moser, 2006; Thompson, 1994; White, 2006 in Kleinplatz

& Moser, 2006; Wright, 2010), and the psychological mechanisms of BDSM – either in a broader sense

(Connolly, 2006) focused on couple dynamics in sexual and asexual pairs (Cutler, 2003; Sloan, 2015), or on the construction of sexuality itself (Faccio et al., 2014). In addition, clinical psychology research has focused on how to work with clients practicing BDSM (Barker et al., 2007; Hoff and Sprott, 2009;

Jozifkova, 2007), while sociobiological, biological and medical research has dealt with the possible

63 pre-conditioned causes of BDSM tendencies (Yost & Hunter, 2012), the measured physical and sexual reactions of BDSM practitioners (Monteiro et al., 2015; Stockwell et al., 2010) or the bio-metric system for the safety of BDSM practitioners (Noessel, 2006). Ethnographic research has analyzed the development of BDSM communities in Germany, the USA, and Brazil (de Melo, 2010; Facchini &

Machado, 2013; Luminais, 2012; Martin, 2011; Weiss, M.D., 2006b). Beckmann (2001b) analyses the development and diversification of the BDSM scene in London, focusing on the commodification of the scene and the manner in which knowledge is created and distributed. She further discusses the manner in which BDSM is seen as a pathology and the way it impacts the mass media. She is particularly interested in subcultural practices and the importance of consent, as well as the subcultural rules concerning dominants. Her study shows that BDSM has a variety of meanings for the practitioners, particularly in relation to transcendence (Beckmann, 2001b). There have also been phenomenological, semiotic and other qualitative studies on the practice of BDSM (Bardzell, 2006;

Prior & Williams, 2015; Stiles & Clark, 2011; Turley et al., 2011), the consent, ethics and beneficial outcomes from BDSM (Fulkerson, 2010; Nielsen, 2010; Powell, 2010) and the media representations of BDSM (Barrett, 2007; Beckmann, 2001b; Comella, 2013; Weiss, M.D., 2006a, 2009). Finally, criminological research has focused on how the BDSM subculture conceives disability (Beckmann,

2001b) and legal studies have scrutinized the laws connected to BDSM practices (Attwood and

Walters, 2013; Bennett, 2013; Cowan, 2012; Khan, 2009).

In 2012, Fifty Shades of Grey became a highly popular novel and subsequently in 2015 a

Hollywood film. The purpose of this chapter is to analyze the view of BDSM that the story portrays, which provides us with a unique and valuable insight into how the BDSM community sees itself compared to how the BDSM community is seen by mainstream culture. As Bauer (2014) shows, there are no clear boundaries between BDSM practitioners and non-practitioners since the majority can potentially gain pleasure from BDSM practices. Moreover, the social context often determines whether people end up practicing BDSM or not. Although there is a broad continuum in the level and form of 64 self-identification with the subculture among the practitioners (Beckmann, 2009), we can still draw an indefinite line between those who live with the BDSM subculture and self-identify themselves as being members of that subculture and those who do not. As Weiss (Weiss, M.D., 2011) defines it, the commitment to community and to BDSM as a form of social belonging is what differentiates the

BDSM subculture members from non-members. My aim in this chapter is therefore to help uncover how some subcultural members construct and negotiate the boundaries between the BDSM subculture and those who do not belong to this subculture. Instead of applying a pre-defined category of BDSM subculture members, I define the members from an insider point of view, which considers BDSM membership to be based on self-identification. In particular, I focus on the set of practices and the meanings attached to that subcultural self-identification.

Images associated with BDSM as a devoted practice (such as clothing styles, piercing, language expressions) are becoming more visible in the commercial field (Dymock, 2013; Langdridge, 2006;

Martin, 2013; Wilkinson, 2009) and in some cases also more acceptable (Wilkinson, 2009) in mainstream society. However, the visibility is connected to damaging stereotypes about BDSM practitioners (Wilkinson, 2009). As Weiss puts it:

The visibility of BDSM is not directly connected to acceptance, tolerance and sexual

freedom, because the acceptance through mainstream media is predicated on normalization

and some modes of understanding on the contrary reinforce the division of sexuality into

normal/abnormal, privileged/policed and healthy/pathological. (Weiss, M.D., 2006a: 4)

As Langdridge and Butt (2004) note, BDSM is becoming an increasingly popular and public sexual story. The difference between BDSM as a commercial field and BDSM as a devoted practice is becoming blurred, not only in the material sense, but also in terms of the language used.

Fifty Shades of Grey began as a blog for fans of the film Twilight, presenting stories similar to

Twilight. Subsequently, it was self-published as an e-book, with sales reaching 125 million hard copies and e-books in 2015 (The Guardian, 2015), making it one of the best-selling books of all time. Given 65 that Fifty Shades of Grey became a very popular book about BDSM, and the story became even more widely known once it was made into a Hollywood film, it has had a significant influence on the mainstream view of BDSM subculture. It tells the story of a literature student, Ana, and a young business magnate, Christian Grey, who meet and fall in love. Ana dreams of a wonderful romantic relationship, but Christian does not seek such a relationship; instead he wants her to be his slave.

Christian considers himself an active BDSM dominant person and he treats Ana as a ‘naturally’ submissive girl. As Barker (2013) notes in her analysis of the concept of consent in the book, Christian insists on a kind of negotiation in the sexual side of the relationship, but his behavior in other aspects of the relationship is far from consensual. Although Ana does not consider herself submissive, she is manipulated into engaging in BDSM practices. Ana is portrayed as a person with no ‘sexual agency’, with no ideas or desires of her own, and she appears to be passively receptive to the male. She thus conforms to the highly problematic gender stereotype in which males are active and females are passive. After many twists in the plot and a number of erotic scenes, Ana asks Christian to beat her as much as he wants so that she can find out what a BDSM relationship is like. Christian does so, and then she leaves him crying.

In this chapter, I first outline my theoretical approach to culture, subcultures and BDSM.

Subsequently, I discuss the methodology I use for the analysis of blogs about Fifty Shades of Grey.

Finally, I provide the analysis itself and conclude.

Theoretical approach Contemporary BDSM subculture has a long history dating back to the leather subculture in the

1930s (Beckmann, 2009; Califia & Sweeney, 1996). However, the rise of the internet in the late 1980s became an important milestone in the evolution of the subculture, as it provided a platform in which people with the same interests could easily communicate and spend time together in a virtual space

(Weiss, M.D., 2011). I consider this virtual space to be extremely important in the formation the BDSM subculture, which relies on meetings and subcultural events. Using a virtual ethnographic approach, 66 this analysis focuses on the shared BDSM subcultural knowledge of what is ‘theirs’ and what is the mainstream view of them. Specifically, I reconstruct the collectively shared subcultural knowledge by using a virtual ethnography method that adapts in-person ethnographic research techniques to study the communities formed partially through computer-mediated communications. I undertake this by analyzing the two most popular BDSM blogs worldwide and the comments therein. The blogs’ text form makes the implicit subcultural knowledge become explicit by openly confronting the subcultural members with the mainstream image of them and their relationships.

With the increasing commodification of subcultures and their gradual infiltration into the mainstream discourse, subcultural activists increasingly feel the need to define their position against the deployment, exploitation and misrepresentation of their subcultural symbols in the mainstream culture.

In this chapter, I show how some members of a particular subculture in a contemporary society define their position against their commercial image and how they maintain a subculture, despite its fragmentation.

This chapter uniquely combines two theories of the relationship between subcultural members and the mainstream. It starts with Gelder and Thornton’s theory that the members of the subculture need to define their position against the mainstream culture to protect the subculture from merging into mainstream and thereby becoming extinct (Gelder & Thornton, 1997). I combine Gelder and Thornton with Becker’s (1963) theory that members of the subculture group do not voluntarily define themselves against the mainstream; however, mainstream culture labels subcultural members as outsiders. There is a long history of specific scientific beliefs that have shaped the social construction of sadism and masochism as a pathology and the sedimentation of such stereotypes into mainstream sentiments, which have also impacted practitioners in relation to their definitions of the self (Bauer, 2014;

Beckmann, 2001a; Califia and Sweeney, 1996; Langdridge, 2006; Plante, 2006). Therefore, the power to keep the borderline between the subculture and mainstream culture lies in the hands of the dominant and relatively more powerful mainstream culture. I show that both of these theories are fruitful for 67 studying subcultures; and, moreover, that they necessarily coexist in the same space and indispensably need each other to create a complex and exhaustive picture of the forces between mainstream culture and its subcultures in a society. I argue that there is no possibility of presenting a coherent picture of a subculture by using only one of these theories and omitting the other. In other words, following Gelder and Thornton, the subculture group needs to define itself, but it does not define itself in a vacuum

(Gelder & Thornton, 1997). It defines itself in a situation in which it feels pressure from the mainstream culture, which, as Becker (1963) notes, is constantly trying to define the subculture in its mainstream terms. Thus, there is a constant interaction and tension between the subculture and mainstream culture.

I view the relationship between subcultures and mainstream based on a general conception of subcultures as well as on a specific conception of the BDSM subculture. Gelder and Thornton define a subculture as a group of people who share a common problem, interest or procedure, and who differentiate in a significant way from the members of other social groups (Gelder & Thornton, 1997).

Subculture participants perceive that their values come into contrast with what is conventional and mainstream. They see members of mainstream society as a homogeneous mass, while they see themselves as a heterogeneous group that unites diverse individuals with some shared interest or taste

(Muggleton, 2000).

In developing an idea that a subculture must define its position vis-a-vis the mainstream culture,

Gelder and Thornton develop the useful notion of subcultural capital (Gelder & Thornton, 1997). She notes that subcultural capital is important for the subcultural group’s ability to differentiate itself from mainstream culture. The subculture group must constantly work to avoid merging into the mass and it must actively define what is “in” and “out” in the subcultural scene. Gelder and Thornton differentiate subculture from mainstream culture by the criterion of authenticity. They see the real threat for underground subculture in its popularity and its transformation into becoming mainstream, which leads to a loss of authenticity (Gelder & Thornton, 1997). Gelder and Thornton argue that subcultural capital 68 is assessed by the degree of exclusivity. Subcultural styles and habits therefore must be protected from being continuously sought and appropriated by the masses (Gelder & Thornton, 1997). They develop

Hebdige’s concept of the commodification of subcultures, in which through commodification of its cultural forms, the subculture is deprived of its subversive potential, and in its harmless and reified form, it then becomes geographically and socially widespread (Hebdige, 1979).

Muggleton and Wienzierl (2004) analyze the mechanism of protecting subcultural capital through discursive production and reproduction of the defining lines that differentiate the underground taste from the mainstream. The authors describe the boundaries that divide the subculture from the inauthentic and commercial as porous and permeable, requiring constant supervision throughout the ongoing process of classification and reclassification of specific tastes as legitimate. According to

Evans (1997), these processes of classification and reclassification are created, designed and replayed through everyday activities, clothing, worship and other cultural practices. My theoretical argument is that the members of the subculture actively define their position against the mainstream culture. Yet, at the same time, the mainstream culture helps define the subcultural group. Consequently, there is constant tension between the subculture group and mainstream culture. Becker (1963) claims that the members of the subculture are pushed out of mainstream society through a labeling process that mainstream society applies to them. The members of the subculture are therefore forced by the outside mainstream culture to constantly create boundaries between themselves and the mainstream. My approach is more suitable for analyzing the first aspect; that is, the active defining of the subcultural position against the mainstream from subcultural members.

Based on Becker’s (1963) and Muggleton and Wienzierl’s (2004) insights, I develop a model of five different forces, which form the symbolic boundaries between the BDSM subculture and the mainstream culture. The relationship is always dialectical and fluid and therefore my five points indicate this dialectical process. Subcultures need mainstream culture for their existence; subcultures cannot develop without a mainstream culture, which in turn cannot develop without subcultures 69 pushing it. First, subcultures attempt to separate themselves from the mainstream to maintain their authenticity and existence (e.g. a T-shirt stating: “I was into BDSM before Fifty Shades of Grey”).

Second, at the same time, subcultures attempt to support a broader appeal of themselves to the mainstream in order to make them legally and sociably accepted (e.g. public BDSM events, shows, street celebrations and pride events). Third, the BDSM subculture actively attempts to support the spread of its values to protect BDSM newcomers from the danger of abuse from those outside the subculture who pose as subcultural members (e.g. regular subcultural events designed only for total

BDSM beginners to teach them the complete basic principles of BDSM). Fourth, mainstream culture isolates the subculture by labeling it “deviant” (e.g. the banning of Fifty Shades of Grey in public libraries in Florida). Fifth, at the same time, however, mainstream culture, in the context of capitalism and consumerism, commodifies the symbols of BDSM subculture by using them in different contexts inside the mainstream culture and changing the symbols’ meaning in the process (e.g. the Fifty Shades of Grey trilogy itself along with the related literature and merchandising that plays off the trilogy).

Tsaros (2013) sees the main means of the successful commodification of Fifty Shades of Grey in hetero-normative notions of femininity and female sexual agency, and also in a tendency to normatively limit the depictions of sadomasochistic desires. The mainstream culture commodifies

BDSM in its representations without capturing the values inherent to the BDSM scene, such as consent, safety, the value of open negotiation and communication, the use of safety-words and gestures, as well as the practice of checking-in with the submissive person to find out whether they are all right. As

Langdridge and Butt (2004) and Langdridge (2006) put it, consent is a core concept of the BDSM practitioner’s self-understanding and is crucial for an activity to be defined as BDSM. These rules have developed over time in the subculture to ensure ethical conduct (Bauer, 2014). This is necessary to protect the members against abusive behavior (Nordling et al., 2000). These rules also protect BDSM practitioners against accusations of violence with its slogan “Safe, sane, consensual” (Weiss, M.D.,

2011). 70 Method This chapter uses the virtual ethnographic method for reconstructing the collectively shared subcultural knowledge, which I define in accordance with Kozinets (2006) as a qualitative and interpretative methodology that adapts in-person ethnographic research techniques to study the communities formed partially through computer-mediated communications (for further details about virtual ethnography see Bowler, 2010; Dlouha, 2012; Garcia et al., 2009; Hine, 2000; Kozinets, 2009.

For further details about in-person ethnographic research, see Clair, 2003; Denzin & Lincoln, 2005;

Ellen, 1984; Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007; Spradley, 1989). In my analysis, I use the only two blogs that contain chapter-by-chapter style comments on Fifty Shades of Grey (found on the first 20 pages of a Google search for “bdsm blog 50 shades”). In these cases, the blogger writes a post about each chapter of the book before reading the next chapter, which provides a researcher with much richer data than a usual blog column about a whole book. The bloggers write the reviews mostly for readers belonging to the BDSM subculture. They introduce the reviews with the words “I read and review Fifty

Shades of Grey so you don’t have to.” and “Sex. Feminism. BDSM. And some very, very naughty words.” Many of the comments from readers openly claim that they are engaged in BDSM.

Consequently, even if I do not have a representative sample of all BDSM practitioners, by examining two popular blogs that discuss the book in more detail than other on-line sites, I gain insight into how at least a certain portion of the community perceives the book.

The first blog comes from Pervocracy (Pervocracy, 2013), who claims she is 27 years old, living in Boston, graduated in film and rhetoric, is now studying nursing and is currently working in a hospital emergency room. BizzyBiz (BizzyBiz, 2012) is the author of the second blog, who states she is

36 years old, was born in Chicago, is now living in England, graduated in gender and sexuality and is currently working in the field of mathematics. They do not openly define themselves in the blogs as dominant or submissive (or with any other BDSM term).

71 There is an explicit and implicit subcultural knowledge present in every subculture. The explicit subcultural knowledge is conveyed to members by the description in manuals on how to engage in

BDSM correctly, in subcultural workshops, and in various regular thematic meetings for beginners and advanced (Newmahr, 2008; Weiss, M.D., 2011). This form of knowledge transmission is specific to contemporary BDSM subculture open to everyone interested in joining and actively educating its members (Bauer, 2014). The explicit knowledge has already been thoroughly scrutinized in previous research, whereas the implicit knowledge has not been studied extensively. I enrich the virtual ethnographic method with a documentary analysis, in which I conceptualize my analysis following

Bohnsack (2014) as a reconstruction of the implicit knowledge that underlies everyday practice and gives an orientation to habitualized actions independent of individual intentions and motives.

Therefore, this analytical approach focuses, in the complexity of the utterances of subculture activists, on the core of the implicit knowledge that lies underneath their words and is shared by the whole subculture.

This implicit knowledge uncovered with the documentary method corresponds to part of

Thornton’s (1996) definition of subcultural capital as a way of displaying the subculture’s dedication.

As Maffesoli (1996) notes, the identities of individuals are fluid and contextual. The subcultural dedication displays itself through implicit knowledge when activists use temporary subcultural slang or when activists show knowledge of new subcultural techniques. The first part, according to Thornton

(1996), is a material form of subcultural manifestations in visible appearance, clothes, hairstyle or the collection of subculturally-significant material objects. This implicit subcultural knowledge must be used by the subculture in certain established ways to be effective in showing one’s dedication. Thornton

(1996) adds that this knowledge must appear completely effortless when subcultural participants use it.

For Thornton (1996), the act and way of using this part of the subcultural capital is the essential sign that differentiates those who are merely doing the same or similar activities from true subcultural

72 members. It also determines the position of an individual within the subculture. Thus, this chapter focuses on uncovering this implicit knowledge.

Results In many cases, BDSM practitioners see their subcultural identity as being central to their personal identities and sometimes also central in determining their lifestyle. Nevertheless, they still usually see it as something detached from their personal character traits. Although Beckmann’s research (2009) shows that some practitioners are not committed to the subculture in the same way as others and they do not see BDSM as central to their identity, other researchers such as Newmahr (2011) and Weiss (Weiss, M.D., 2011) confirm the devotion of the subcultural members to their subcultural identity. Subcultural members commonly use the argument that BDSM practitioners are just the same as non-BDSM practitioners in most of their personal aspects and they simply differ from other people in their BDSM interests. They see their BDSM identity as being stable and lifelong, but also as simply one part of their lives. According to the blogs, this contrasts with Fifty Shades of Grey, which depicts

BDSM activists as having one-sided personalities, where their entire being is based on their BDSM identity.

The causes of BDSM Two types of mainstream reasoning of BDSM practitioners’ preferences appear in the book

Fifty Shades of Grey. One is based on events from their past (most commonly their unusual childhood, family upbringing or early sexual experiences). The second is based on the general characteristics of the mental state of a person (most commonly depression, self-hatred, being asocial or general weirdness). This stereotype of BDSM as a pathology has a lengthy history and continuous impact on the public image of the BDSM subculture. Though consensual sadomasochism was partly exempted from the recent International Classification of Diseases ICD-11 (World Health Organization, 2018), the long-term stigmatization in the medical discourse contributes to negative stereotypes in public discourse and in media (Beckmann, 2009). By contrast, the bloggers see personal BDSM interests as 73 mostly being life-long, without any precise beginning. Moreover, subcultural biographical narratives usually claim that their interest in BDSM began early in childhood or early adolescence, though usually without an awareness of what it was at that time. Fifty Shades, by contrast, depicts BDSM practitioners as having been abused in childhood, having had other problems with their childhood or as engaging in

BDSM after having been violently forced into these practices by their partner.

Both of the bloggers argue against the view that BDSM behavior comes from traumatic childhood experiences. In fact, they oppose the idea that there is a causal explanation for why people practice BDSM. They also oppose the book’s psychological view of BDSM practitioners as having an inner hatred towards themselves and a feeling of not deserving to accept love. They further criticize the view that self-hatred is a sign of BDSM practicing. Their points fit in well with Baumeister’s (1988) distinction between self-hatred and uncomfortably high self-awareness. Baumeister considers BDSM practices to be an escape from high self-awareness by the unavoidable focus on the immediate present and on bodily sensations, and by low-level awareness of one’s self as an object. BizzyBiz argues that the book depicts BDSM as a kind of escape route, which provides practitioners with an inner excuse for accepting loving feelings that they otherwise cannot accept due to the constant inner hate. She depicts this as a stereotypical view of BDSM practitioners, and states that this view does not correspond with the actual experiences of BDSM practitioners. Pervocracy articulates BDSM as a sexual preference of free choice, a source of amusement and a fully joyful mental and bodily experience:

I don’t think we’re meant to be totally repulsed by all those overheated descriptions of

sweaty bondage sex. But I guess we’re supposed to be, like, turned on by it but also know

that it isn’t right and mustn’t go on? We’re supposed to cluck our tongues reproachfully and

feel bad for the poor girl... If I’m going to enjoy BDSM, call me a pervert who’s actually

violating the status quo rather than sternly upholding it while still getting my rocks off, but

I’d rather enjoy BDSM. (Pervocracy)

74 However, BizzyBiz does accept the notion in Fifty Shades that one often takes on a BDSM lifestyle as a consequence of being introduced to it. She describes BDSM as something people gravitate towards during their lives “because they like it, not because someone fucked them up”

(BizzyBiz), and states that people would have the same character and desires even without the subcultural experience. Without a subcultural partner, BDSM would remain unrealized, locked in people’s imaginations. As BizzyBiz puts it:

[Christian] probably wouldn’t be any different sexually [if a previous girlfriend had not

introduced him to BDSM]. [Christian] may have come to it later in life, or [Christian] may

have gotten into a relationship with someone who wasn’t compatible in that way and it

would have remained just a fantasy forever (many, many people are in exactly this

situation), but nevertheless, the interest in bondage and domination was probably always

lurking there somewhere.

Consent Both Pervocracy and BizzyBiz see a significant difference between their view and the author’s depiction of consent to and rejection of practices and activities in BDSM relationships. Their view is backed up by scholars writing on the topic. Bauer (2014) points out that the concept of consent is presented as being given in the BDSM subculture. In her study of BDSM consent, Athanassoulis

(2002) concludes that three conditions must be met for consent to be valid: first, the consent should represent the agent’s self-interest. Second, consent must be given freely. Third, consent must be given voluntarily and knowingly; the choice to consent should be under the agent’s control and the agent should understand what the consent is about.

Bauer (2014) problematizes the idea of consent, stating that it varies in its degree of specificity; sometimes unspoken assumptions collide and it also has flexible boundaries. He proposes the term

‘working consent’ to distinguish consent as a dogma from consent based on personal integrity and respecting boundaries. Beckmann (2009) remarks that the media coverage of BDSM ignores the 75 importance of negotiating consent. She stresses the open and communicative atmosphere of BDSM meetings, where personal agency, safety, holistic understanding of bodies and established patterns of negotiating all play important roles. Pervocracy makes a point that within the BDSM subculture, anytime someone is against a particular practice, others must accept this. She connects this point to safety issues in relationships. According to her, the practice of ignoring somebody’s opposition to a practice conforms to the non-subcultural depiction of a dominant. BizzyBiz goes even further with this argument when she describes ignoring somebody’s rejection as being an act of rape, without any links to BDSM subcultural practices:

Anyone who answers that [a rejection of a date] with ‘I took care of your little objection,

now you must date me’ is someone you cannot trust to listen to ‘no’, and that is not hot and

domly, it is fucking scary... Unfortunately, I think this might be trying to show his

domliness. I’ve heard people before claim that not taking no for an answer is very

dominant. It’s an attitude that scares the shit out of me. Someone who can’t deal with not

getting their way can’t be a safe partner for anything really, but they especially can’t be a

safe BDSM partner. (BizzyBiz)

Such a representation of consent in BDSM is fundamentally problematic in terms of the normalization of patriarchal violence and a representation of practitioners as people enjoying violence.

One of the basic ways in which the book’s view might be seen as significantly different from the subcultural view is the mutual position of the negotiation and the BDSM roles. In the book’s depiction, the mutual negotiation of BDSM practices is already a part of the BDSM scene and the behavior of the practitioners has already been negotiated inside their BDSM roles. The BDSM bloggers, by contrast, claim that the negotiation about mutual BDSM behavior takes place while the participants are outside of their BDSM roles. Instead, they negotiate while they are within their everyday roles in a non-BDSM context.

76 Negotiation Pervocracy states that the whole process of negotiating about BDSM roles in the book is depicted as a negotiation about the price when buying a car, in which the negotiations resemble a battleground where each side attempts to gain at the other’s expense. In her view, the negotiating process within the BDSM subculture, by contrast, is rather a game in which both sides win and gain from their ability to develop mutually-enjoyable activities. Thus, Pervocracy writes:

It’s not ‘negotiating’ like you’re buying a used car. You’re not in an adversarial relationship

trying to drive a hard bargain. In fact, you’re an abusive fuckwad if you drive a hard

bargain... The point of BDSM negotiation isn’t to find a compromise between the dom’s

need to hurt and use and the submissive’s sense of self-preservation. The point is to work

out activities that will be enjoyable for both of them... Yes, they [Christian and Ana] do a

thing they call ‘negotiation’, but for god’s sake. Maybe we need to change the name to

‘collaborating on a mutual plan’ or something. (Pervocracy)

According to the bloggers, within the BDSM scene consent is taken as an explicit expression of consent, in contrast to the book, which uses consent as either giving in to the requirements of the dominant during negotiation inside a field of power and inside the BDSM roles, or the state of not having objections against a dominant’s decision. Entering a BDSM relationship is seen by the bloggers as a mutual and ongoing negotiation that is supposed to be between people who are already informed about the subculture. In their view, introducing someone to a BDSM relationship without informing him or her properly about what the BDSM relationship is like, is highly unethical. Furthermore, a person who is not well-informed about BDSM subculture cannot give full conscious consent to enter the subculture.

Essential desire According to some studies, BDSM does not comprise the pure inner essence of one’s personality and is rather performative, make-believe or theater. Authors such as Bauer (2014) go so far as to consider

77 BDSM a social construction over a common majority population. Stear (2009) considers BDSM a make-believe game; an objective fictional realm created by properties combined with principles of generation. Weiss (Weiss, M.D., 2011) considers BDSM a performative act and explains that

“becoming a BDSM practitioner, even if imagined to spring from a core or essential desire, requires self-mastery and self-knowledge that is bound to community rules, techniques, and perspectives”

(2011: 29). Similarly, Foucault (1990: 27) claims that “one performs on oneself, not only in order to bring one’s conduct into compliance with a given rule, but to attempt to transform oneself into the ethical subject of one’s behavior”.

According to Beckmann (2009), the BDSM subculture rejects an abstract morality. A person is able to respectfully deal with others only when he or she has established a profound knowledge and care of the self (Beckmann, 2009). This care of the self is a reflexive attitude, which is a base for personal

(contextual and relational) ethics and leads to self-mastery, self-sufficiency and happiness (Beckmann,

2009). Weiss (Weiss, M.D., 2011) adds that this mastering of knowledge differentiates the core members of the subculture (lifestyle, heavy, experienced practitioners) from the non-members

(bedroom, unsafe, newbie practitioners).

Taylor (1997), Taylor and Ussher (2001) and Beckmann (2009) argue that BDSM has different meanings for different practitioners. It can mean dissidence against hegemonic patriarchal heterosexuality, plain pleasure and fun, an escapism from reality, a learned behavior, an intrapsychic interest, a pathology, an inexplicable behavior, or a transcendence to spiritual experiences (Taylor,

1997; Taylor & Ussher, 2001). BDSM enables the construction of different realities based on intentionality without any biological, psychological or sociological determinants (Beckmann, 2009).

Beckmann (2009) associates various types of this transcendence with spiritual experiences. She notes that some scholars have perceived BDSM as an institutionalized religion (with the goal of giving up one’s will and the bodily practices leading to a feeling of identity with something). Others have seen it as providing the context of ritual behavior of particular non-modern cultures (with the goal of 78 breaking through the sensory routine, which is achieved through extreme body practices such as torture, fasting or drugs). Yet another view is to see BDSM as a form of mysticism (with the quest for truth and reality that goes beyond merely sensory or intellectual spheres, and is achieved through the spontaneous flash of absolute power or ecstasy).

Another approach has been to analyze BDSM in the context of mainstream societal values – with the goal of transcendence of these values and perceiving BDSM subculture as a liminal space that enables transgression (Beckmann, 2009). Regardless of the practitioner’s personal reasoning, the state apparatus attempts to regulate the sexual expression of the state citizens in a forceful way

(Athanassoulis, 2002; Langdridge, 2006) through its legal and healthcare system, symbolically owning the bodies of its citizens and forcing them to behave in a way dictated by the state (Taylor, 1997).

Depending on the level of personal commitment, which may vary (Beckmann, 2009), the practitioners of stigmatized sexualities therefore attempt to justify their conduct in order to have a political argument for the state. The justification of BDSM behavior could sometimes lie in the argument that BDSM behavior is natural and the practitioners cannot change their essence (Plante, 2006).

According to the bloggers, Fifty Shades depicts domination as an attribute that is irrepressible and

BDSM as being natural in all kinds of situations. The bloggers, by contrast, state that those in dominant roles keep their dominance under their self-control. The BDSM subculture develops norms for the behavior of its members and rules for playing a submissive or dominant position. The basic, “golden” rule according to Beckmann (2009) is the necessity of trying a particular practice in the submissive role first, so that one is able to perform it safely later in a dominant role. The dominant in a scene must be extremely sensitive and experienced to be able to distinguish between the submissive’s feeling of being hurt and feeling of painful pleasure (Beckmann, 2009). The internalization of such rules demonstrates the dedication of the members to the subculture. According to Beckmann (2009), the negotiation should include talking about sex history, medical problems, pain tolerance, , prior experience with

BDSM, a list of practices that they want to do, might do or would not like to do, safe-words, fantasies 79 and the reason(s) for playing a particular scene. Furthermore, the bloggers point out that within the

BDSM subculture, negotiation and consent must take place before any kind of BDSM activity; that is, not only before activities that contain obvious pain, sexual undertones or sex, but also before actions that deal with more subtle and less recognizable activities regarding domination and submission of people used during usual conversation. As Pervocracy writes:

Also, there goes ‘but not until we negotiate and you consent’, for the umpteenth time. I

guess it doesn’t seem [in the book] like such a big deal [the fact that they were doing the

BDSM activities before negotiating about them] because it’s not a sexual or painful thing,

but this is still domination. I think E.L. James is trying to do a ‘but it’s just a part of who he

is and he can’t turn it off’ thing here, but fuck that. He can fucking control himself for the

length of a conversation, and if he can’t, he has no business in any kind of relationship,

much less a D/s relationship. (Pervocracy)

According to the bloggers, obedient behavior in an everyday situation, described in the book as

“naturally born submissive”, is not an expression of a BDSM submissive person. The bloggers deny any link between people’s behavior in everyday life and their behavior during BDSM scenes. They call

Ana’s behavior “topping from the bottom”, which they explain is a subcultural term for the case in which a submissive attempts to change the decision of a dominant to the submissive’s benefit or comfort. They argue that a true submissive would not act in such a manner. BizzyBiz writes:

[Ana] starts negotiating – she’ll let him [Christian] spank her if he tells her more about

himself... She is trying to manipulate him, and it’s working. In D/s this is called ‘topping

from the bottom’... and it is heavily frowned upon. She’s as bad as sub as he is a Dom... if

Christian were the Dominant the author attempted to portray him as earlier in the book, he

would have called her on this immediately. Instead he’s like Here, enjoy these Ben Wa balls

[Venus balls] while I spank you nicely. (BizzyBiz)

80 Conclusion Fifty Shades of Grey presents BDSM as a central aspect of a person’s personality and character.

According to the bloggers, though, the subcultural discourse sees BDSM identity as being central to personal identities and central to one’s lifestyle but detached from personal character traits. In the subcultural discourse, one’s BDSM identity is considered to be lifelong and substantially consistent over time. The bloggers claim that the mainstream discourse wrongly places BDSM practitioners into two categories: those who become practitioners because of previous experiences, and those who become practitioners for psychological reasons. The members of the subculture not only oppose both of those claims, they even deny that there are any reasons at all for people to become interested in BDSM.

The book depicts BDSM activities as something that, by nature, are unwanted and forced experiences.

In contrast, the subcultural discourse sees BDSM as something people gravitate towards during their life. In their view, one usually joins the BDSM scene after voluntarily being introduced to BDSM practices together with an inexperienced partner, or by an experienced partner.

Negotiation is the main instrument for becoming aware of personal boundaries. In the book’s depiction, the negotiation between the dominant and submissive person takes place already inside the

BDSM roles; however, in the subcultural conception, the negotiation takes place outside each person’s

BDSM role. The meaning that is attached to the activity of negotiation also differs in the book and in the subcultural view. According to the bloggers, the book depicts negotiation as an activity in which both negotiating sides attempt to reach a compromise between the practices one person enjoys and the practices the other enjoys. Thus, each side seeks to gain some advantage from the discussion. In the subcultural view, by contrast, negotiation entails finding similar enjoyable practices for both sides.

According to Plummer (1999), contemporary sexual ethics should be bound to context, meaning, consent, diversity, respect, and responsibility. He builds on Foucault, who postulated the need for a new form of general ethics, which would center around the relationship to the self in interrelation to others

(Rabinow, 1997 in Beckmann, 2009). Those who limit the freedom of other people are free individuals

81 who have instruments for governing others (Beckmann, 2009). As Bauman puts it, the ethical paradox of the postmodern world is the fullness of moral choice for the agents, but lack of universal guidance for it (Bauman, 1992 in Beckmann, 2009).

Regarding subcultural boundaries, in this chapter I show that the boundaries between the subculture and culture are continuously constructed and disassembled dialectically by both sides. I develop my dialectical approach by combining Gelder and Thornton’s view of subcultural members with Becker’s (1963) view of mainstream culture. Gelder and Thornton note that subcultures strive to be protected from merging into the mainstream by defining their position against the mainstream culture (Gelder & Thornton, 1997). Meanwhile, Becker (1963) argues that mainstream culture labels subcultural members as outsiders. Deviance can be, according to Becker, defined in four ways: first as a plain statistical deviation; second as an inner pathology or product of mental disease in a medical discourse; third as a plain failure to obey particular group rules; and fourth as a successful act of labeling the people who break the rules as deviant and such behavior as deviant (Becker, 1963). A mainstream stereotype uses a specific belief about the pathology of sadism and masochism, which is equivalent to one of Becker’s definitions of deviance: an inner pathology or product of mental disease in a medical discourse. This widespread belief about the pathology forms the BDSM practitioners’ relationship to their self. My chapter shows that these two boundary-creating forces combine with other forces that attempt to disassemble such boundaries.

Five different forces shape the symbolic boundaries between the subculture and the mainstream, as the subculture participants must both attempt to create their own boundaries vis-a-vis the mainstream culture and simultaneously deal with how the mainstream culture defines them. First, the subculture attempts to separate itself from the mainstream to maintain its authenticity and its existence. Thus, the

BDSM bloggers attempt to show that Fifty Shades does not give an authentic portrayal of BDSM relationships. This supports Becker’s (1963) claim that those engaged in behavior that the mainstream defines as being “deviant” identify themselves with the behavior that society deems to be deviant. As 82 one respondent in Bauer’s study puts it, “Being into SM, it’s so much more exciting and so much more sexually arousing because it’s actually sort of a forbidden fruit you’re touching” (2014: 40). Plante

(2006) shows that the need for a group to differentiate itself from the mainstream works also inside the

BDSM subculture with its subparts of specific groups, such as the spanking community differing itself from other types of BDSM communities.

Second, the subculture attempts to support a broader appeal of itself to the mainstream to render it legally and sociably accepted; consequently, the bloggers argue that they are normal people who are capable of accepting love. This builds on the history of BDSM as being considered pathological, which remains in the mainstream stereotypes about the subculture. Nevertheless, Weeks and Holland (1996) claim that the scientific discourses on pathological behavior have opened the debate about specific sexual interests and, consequently, have enabled greater agency in the sexual sphere. Plummer (1999) sees a solution to this dilemma of gaining more freedom while still being labeled “pathological” in the modern politics of lifestyle ethics. The discourses on lifestyle ethics could be used to talk through differences, seek out commonalities and lead to the establishment of limited sets of authoritative agreements that could enable people to make their own choices. These two forces support Langdridge and Butt’s (2004) claim that there are two different discourses within BDSM communities: one that is about transgressing norms and positioning BDSM as an oppositional identity to mainstream sexuality; and one that seeks inclusion within sexual citizenship. Bauer (2014) agrees regarding the desire to gain sexual citizenship, stating that the main focus of BDSM activism in the last decade has been the depathologisation of consensual sexual practices and the fight against the legal prosecution of BDSM practitioners. Nevertheless, Bauer (2014) also suggests that complete depathologisation could lower the appeal of BDSM for its practitioners, because part of the thrill might come from the fact that they act in a “forbidden” way. This might relate also to the depathologisation leading to deeper utter commodification and corporate exploitation of BDSM. However, respondents from Beckmann’s

London BDSM scene research (2009) state that society considers contemporary BDSM practices to be 83 less deviant than it did in the past. Nevertheless, they admit they still get a thrill from participating in the contemporary scene. The commodification of this subculture has impacted the ways in which the practitioners experience and interpret their BDSM bodily practices (Beckmann, 2009). According to

Sawicki (Sawicki, 1991 in Beckmann, 2009), in contrast to subcultural BDSM, the commodification of

BDSM has made it reductionistic and decontextualised. Saner (2008), however, sees positive effects of commodification in that it has led to greater access to tools, outfits and clubs.

Third, the subculture actively attempts to spread its values to protect its members from abuse.

Hence the bloggers emphasize the need for having the negotiations take place outside the BDSM relationship, when practitioners are in their everyday roles.

Fourth, mainstream culture pushes the subculture out by discursively labeling the subculture as deviant. In this context, the bloggers claim that Fifty Shades portrays BDSM in a manner that aims to repulse the readers rather than make them understand how BDSM is practiced in reality. As Fifty

Shades of Grey has become mainstream reading, it might be hard to see how mainstream society could still perceive BDSM practices as being partly deviant and “spicy”, rather than as a fully common practice. BDSM has been historically labeled as being deviant and this label has still not fully disappeared. BDSM practices are still on the border of mainstream society and not at the core of it.

Even though the commodified picture of BDSM is omnipresent in today’s western mainstream culture, the actual practice of BDSM with the subcultural meaning attached to it remains the privilege of small groups of people who actively participate in the BDSM subculture. Saner (2008) postulates, that the commodification of this subculture should not be interpreted as representing a greater understanding or openness for BDSM subcultural practices. She sees the commodified BDSM as being mostly genital focused, while subcultural BDSM is not necessarily genital focused (Saner, 2008). Finally, at the same time, the mainstream commodifies the subcultural values and symbols, which can be seen by the great commercial success of both the book and film.

84 5. Chapter Five – High Fear, High Stakes. How Was the BDSM Subculture

Formed after the Velvet Revolution?

Introduction In the previous chapter, I focused mostly on the self-imposed boundaries of BDSM subculture towards the commodified mainstream perception of BDSM. This chapter analyzes how each side perceives BDSM: the self-imposed view held by subculture members and the view of the subculture from outside powers. Here, I scrutinize the establishment of the BDSM subculture in the Czech

Republic during the last years of communist rule and the first years after the 1989 Velvet Revolution. I focus on a comprehensive perspective of the boundary-making forces that were present during the forming of the very first subcultural values and rules.

By describing the establishment of the BDSM subculture in the Czech Republic, I provide a unique insight into how the BDSM subculture was established after the collapse of a highly-repressive regime, how the previous dictatorship continued to influence society during the first period of democratic rule, and the ways in which these effects have been incorporated into BDSM practitioners’ self-perception. Most importantly, this chapter is the first such study conducted of a post-communist

BDSM subculture.

In this chapter, first I outline the international context of the repressive forces imposed on international BDSM subculture. I then continue with a brief historical overview of the Czech Republic,

I present my methodology and explain my theoretical approach. Finally, I offer a thorough analysis of how members of the BDSM subculture perceive the development of their subculture from the time around the Velvet Revolution and after.

The BDSM discourse has so far been studied from various perspectives. Barker and Langdridge

(2009) focused on the media image of BDSM practitioners, while Lindemann (2011) analyzed the therapeutic discourse of professional . Ridinger (2006) argues that BDSM practices are

85 legally restricted in most countries of the world and the persecution for BDSM practices is on the rise in the United States. A well-known case is the 1990 Spanner case, where 16 homosexual men were convicted of consensual sadomasochistic behavior, with sentences of up to four and a half years imprisonment. Not only were the dominants convicted of criminal offenses, but the submissives were also convicted of inciting criminal offenses. The verdict was upheld in the higher court with the assertion that the consent of all parties involved was not a legitimate defense (Barker et al., 2007).

However, the conceptualization of BDSM in the medical framing as a disorder is problematic as no empirical data have yet been found to confirm this concept (Gosselin & Wilson, 1980; Moser & Levitt,

1987; Barker, Antaffi & Gupta, 2007; Richters et al., 2008). Indeed, various different framings appear recently in the research field. Rubin (1984) compares BDSM practitioners to people who do sports, that take out stress in a safe, controlled environment, such as boxing or soccer. Other researchers build on this view and argue that BDSM leads to less serious injuries than sports (Moser, 2003).

Although the interest of the academic community in this topic has existed for many years, it has mostly been within the medical or psychotherapeutic sciences, dealing with the cause and treatment of

BDSM. A new interest in the phenomenon was given to the public and academic community by the work of Krafft-Ebing in 1886 (Psychopathia sexualis), which first included the terms sadism and masochism (Taylor, 1997). Because of the medical categorization, BDSM became a demonized practice, an object of public interest and state control through medical and legal interventions

(Langdridge & Butt, 2004; Taylor, 1997). This conception of BDSM continued with Freud in the early twentieth century, with the view of BDSM as a sexual pathology that is present in the individual as a result of psychological conflict (Freud, 1953b). This view of BDSM is still widely present in the medical discourse. As Reiersøl & Skeid (2006) argue, the current medical classification of sexual pathologies is still based on the assumption that heterosexual intercourse is an ideal form of sexual expression. According to Langdridge & Butt’s (2004) research on the “slavemaster” case in the US

(where the accused individual used S/M chat to encourage chat participants to commit suicide), this 86 case was widely used by the mainstream media to demonstrate BDSM as a problem and deliberately erased boundaries between consensual sexual acts of adults and non-consensual acts of violence against others. Kleinplatz & Moser (2006) consider this linguistic blending worthy of further analysis, in line with Rust (2000) and Sedgwick (1990).

Although BDSM subculture is also repressed in capitalist countries, as we can see from the context above, the repression of BDSM in capitalist countries was nowhere as strict as it was during the Czech communist regime. There are few ethnographical studies of communist Czechoslovakia and still no ethnographical studies of the BDSM subculture in a post-communist state. Indeed, very little research has been conducted on subcultures in post-communism in general. This chapter explores how a BDSM subculture became established in the post-communist environment. On the basis of existing subcultural and ethnographical BDSM research and a historical ethnography method, I show how a marginalized and persecuted subculture emerged and established itself in the new political system after the fall of communism and how it developed into a full and reputable international subculture with its events comparable to the BDSM subcultures in the surrounding countries, with either a capitalist or communist background.

In this chapter, I:

1) explore how people on the border of the society form a subculture (outsiders) and how the legal system participates in the subcultural identity,

2) scrutinize the ways in which a society deals with people on the border of the legal system, depending on the type of society, and map the different approaches to BDSM practitioners, and

3) map the beginning of the subculture as a basis for a subcultural identity.

The history of Czech BDSM subculture has never been studied, neither scientifically nor by the practitioners themselves. Except for a few tables showing data and events, BDSM practitioners themselves in the Czech Republic have no written documents about how they have created the subculture, how it was established and what pitfalls they needed to overcome. Studying how the 87 subculture was developed, based on the memories of the subcultural members, therefore comes in the last moments of the possibility to study first-hand experience, given that the Velvet Revolution was thirty years ago and the people who practiced BDSM in their adult life before the revolution are now approaching retirement.

In the next section, I present the historical overview of the Czech Republic, and, while providing insight into the methodology and theoretical section, I explain the importance of this chapter.

Subsequently, in the main part, I scrutinize the change of the view of subcultural boundaries in the eyes of the BDSM practitioners themselves.

Historical background To place the international reader in the local context of the last four decade’s events, which is important to fully understand the viewpoint of Czech BDSM practitioners, I provide a brief summary of those events. Czechoslovakia was established after the end of World War I in 1918. In 1938, Nazi

Germany occupied the country by first annexing part of the territory, and subsequently the entire territory, which it called “The Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia”. Czechoslovakia was restored after the Soviet and American liberation in 1945 as a democratic Czechoslovakia. In 1948, the

Communists took over and Czechoslovakia became part of the Eastern socialist bloc. There were no free elections and the brutal methods of Stalinism were applied on the citizens. People were imprisoned, placed in labor and concentration camps or murdered using artificial trials. According to

Zelinsky and Binder (2016), unlike in other neighboring countries during 1956 de-Stalinization, there was no major uprising in Czechoslovakia, but there were minor protests in which various social groups began to publicly voice their disillusionment with the political system of state socialism. In 1968, an attempt was made to democratize the regime, which ended with the intervention of Soviet troops. The attempt at liberalization took place through reforms leading to censorship abolition, greater press freedom, and more trade with the West (Long, 2005). The Warsaw Pact troops entered in August 1968, 88 and replaced the reformers with more hardline, repressive leaders, and ultimately a more repressive communist regime was restored (Long, 2005). As Long postulates, for many, the invasion was a life changing event that shattered the notion of socialist brotherhood and led to disillusionment, disappointment and the end of any hope for intellectual life free from government intervention (Long,

2005). In 1988, with the advent of Gorbachev came the liberalizing perestroika, which allowed open debate and criticism of the regime (Long, 2005).

The effects of communism are long-lasting and the heavy state intervention and indoctrination instilled the predominant view that the state is essential for individual well-being (Alesina & Fuchs-

Schündeln, 2005). In 1989, the “Velvet Revolution” took place, after which a democratic

Czechoslovakia was formed. The first months after the revolution were full of euphoria and high expectations. It was a time of re-establishing parliamentary democracy, introducing a market economy and incorporating the country into western structures (Vanek & Mucke, 2016). According to Diamond,

Jozifkova & Weiss (2011), the rates for reported rape and sex-related assault did not increase after the revolution, but there were indications that Czech society had become more sensitive to rape and sex- related crimes after the revolution. The independent Czech Republic was formed in 1993 following the division of Czechoslovakia into two states – the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Following a very liberated, almost all-permitting approach to everything including sexuality after the revolution, the new regime started slowly to establish laws affecting many areas of public life.

Above, I have presented the brief historical context of the Czech Republic over the last few decades to enable international readers to grasp the Czech cultural context. In the next sections, I present in detail the method used in this chapter, the theoretical approach, the research results and a discussion section.

Methodology In this chapter, I use the method of historical ethnography. According to Vaughan (2004), historical ethnography evokes the historical structure and culture to understand how people at a 89 different time and place made sense of things (Vaughan, 2004). Some authors base their historical ethnographical research mostly on archive materials (Vaughan, 2004; Kirch & Sahlins, 1994), while others more on interviews with first-hand witnesses and also partly on archive materials (Glaeser,

2011). As Zelinsky and Binder note in their study of Czech historical events, archive materials may be newspaper articles, photographs, banners, slogans (Zelinsky & Binder, 2016), or, as Lee and Guenther notes, it may be historical documents, accounts and travelogues (Lee & Guenther, 2014). According to

Geertz, the object of ethnography is a stratified hierarchy of meaningful structures and ethnography is the thick description of it. Culture is public because meaning is (Geertz, 1973). The attention of an ethnographic account rests on the degree to which the researcher is able to reduce the puzzlement and clarify what goes on in a particular field of interest (Geertz, 1973).

Regarding the nature of the research field, I work with interviews from first-hand witnesses and the historical materials I was able to find. Regarding historical documents, I rely on historical photographs, books, newspaper articles, newspaper advertisements, magazines and written charts, which were collected by some members of the subculture. Regarding first-hand experience, I conducted interviews about the practitioners’ memories of their engagement in the BDSM subculture, the nature of the subculture in these times, the events that happened during their membership in the subculture and the practitioners’ feelings about them. The interviews were designed as a narration of respondents’ about BDSM in three periods: during communism, after the revolution, and in the present.

The nature of the interviews inevitably leads me to the field of narratives and oral history, as well as to the ethnographical thick description (Geertz, 1973) by the nature of the data. Although I do not consider my work to contain deeper aspects of narrative analysis, I still consider it important to realize that in the interview, I am dealing with a special kind of narrative, with specific rules and a specific way of communicating information. The content of the interview is not a wholesome personal life story, but a practitioner’s part of a life story, which is related to BDSM. And, as Goodson (2012) puts it, life stories are dependent on collective circumstances and historical moments and they need to be 90 understood in relation to time and periodization. Narratives became popular with the development of structuralist theories in France in the 1960s (Herman, Jahn & Ryan, 2005). Becker (1963) argues that a narrative part of life experience history can be taken as a particular part of ethnographical research, in which it allows insight into the perspective of those who are acted upon in professional transactions

(Becker, 1963). Rather than focusing on the point of view of the powerful actors, it focuses on the view of the common people of a particular kind and therefore, according to Becker, life history asserts that power should listen to the people it claims to serve (Becker, 1963).

According to Goodson (2012), narrative analysis combines history (ascertaining what happened), anthropology (identifying what is in people’s minds) and oral history. Oral history can be seen, in this view, as a pure combination of ethnographical anthropological work and history. As Vanek and Mucke

(2016) state, oral history focuses mainly on retrieving individual memories, which are affected by collective memory, because of the continuous contact among persons who experienced that historical moment (Vanek & Mucke, 2016). There is a whole body of criticism of oral history as a subjective source, with events, names and sequences easily forgotten, confused and conflated. However, according to Herman, Jahn and Ryan (2005), individuals’ long term memory can remain surprisingly resilient even when short-term memories lapse, and the limits of memory are an essential component of oral history because they enable researchers to study changes in respondents’ values over time (Vanek

& Mucke, 2016). According to Herman, Jahn and Ryan oral history represents an interdisciplinary effort to record and preserve the narratives of individuals, groups and communities (Herman, Jahn &

Ryan, 2005), and over time it has shifted to interviewing from the bottom up, recovering voices of suppressed groups (Gluck & Patai, 1991; Herman, Jahn & Ryan, 2005). The researcher should tend to provide his/her own explanations and analysis, making sense of events in hindsight and drawing conclusions that might not have been as obvious when the events occurred (Herman, Jahn & Ryan,

2005). According to Herman, Jahn and Ryan (2005), methodologically, a single interview will record only a single perspective and cannot be comprehensive. Oral historians therefore should seek to 91 compile a range of interviews that will reflect differing points of view (Herman, Jahn & Ryan, 2005).

As Portelli puts it, an aspiration towards “reality,” “fact,” and “truth” is essential to the work of an oral historian (Portelli, 1991). Thus, creating an oral history needs to be undertaken with a deep methodological aspiration for these, but it does not contain the possibility to achieve them. As Portelli

(1991) puts it, subjectivity has its own “objective” laws, structures and maps, which may be less tangible and universal than those of hard facts, but they can be reconstructed by means of the appropriate scientific tools, which include an open mind and a willing imagination (Portelli, 1991).

I used the targeted snowball method for selecting interviewees. I began this part of my research on BDSM subculture by finding respondents on an online Facebook group, which contains around

2,000 members of the largest Czech private BDSM club. The club is also the oldest in the Czech

Republic and I expected that a significant number of older BDSM people would be part of this group or would guide me to their older friends. I started with a call for respondents who did BDSM during communism and shortly after the revolution. A whole discussion followed with people recommending respondents, but people also discussed “old times”. I used this and two other discussions as a triangulation for the data obtained by interviews and historical documents. People joined the discussions and were correcting each other’s dates, names and events.

I conducted the first round of personal interviews, email and messenger interviews and afterwards a second round of specific questions about particular information. In totally, I conducted 15 face-to-face interviews and more than 30 short email and messenger interviews in the first round.

Subsequently, in the second round of interviews I came back to the same people with more detailed follow-up questions. Eleven of the respondents lived in Prague, two lived in Brno (five of these respondents regularly attended events in both cities alternately), two were from villages far from these two cities. Seven of the respondents were male, eight were female. Eight of the respondents had a dominant BDSM identity. Three of the respondents had “submissive” identities, two classified themselves as “switch” and two preferred other names for their BDSM identity. Five of the respondents 92 were from the age category 18-30, five were from the category 31-45, and five were from the category

46-60.

During the interviews, I had only three questions, and even those were sometimes not needed to prompt the respondents to talk, as I had already told them before the interview that I would be interested in BDSM during communism and after the fall of communism. The questions were: “How was BDSM under communism?”, “How was BDSM after the revolution?”, and “How is BDSM now?”.

As Goodson describes it, this meant almost taking a vow of silence as an interviewer, as more questions and a structured interview leads respondents away from the life story that the person was working with and constructing himself in an ongoing manner (Goodson, 2012). This story is nevertheless quite well rehearsed and many people already have their story well worked out before the interviewer (Goodson,

2012). To analyze and structure the data, I performed Goodson’s (2012) data classification and manual procedure analysis, which he calls “bathing in the data”. This means reading through the transcripts in a slow, incremental manner, keeping a thematic notebook, marking out the main emergent themes in the notebook and on the transcript page, and over time some themes become saturated – they occur commonly and are clearly salient points in many life stories (Goodson, 2012).

Theoretical approach As Becker (1963) puts it, all social groups make rules and attempt to enforce them. Social rules define appropriate situations and behavior by specifying some actions as right and forbidding others as wrong. Particular social rules are highly dependent on class, ethnicity and culture (Becker, 1963).

According to Becker, rules may be of different kinds – they may be formally enacted into law and enforced by police power or they could be informal agreements and enforced by various informal sanctions either by some specialized body or by everyone in the group (Becker, 1963). In the Czech environment, there are both the rules of Czech society that apply to Czech BDSM subculture (which may be legal rules, enforced by the police and legal system and social rules, enforced by people in the society) and the rules of the BDSM community itself (enforced by the members of the community). 93 However, many rules are not enforced and, as Becker (1963) notes, both formal and informal rules may die from lack of enforcement.

According to Becker (1963), deviance can be defined in four ways: first, a plain statistical deviation; second, an inner pathology or product of mental disease in a medical discourse; third, a plain failure to obey particular group rules (however, by abiding by the rules of one group, you can break the rules of other group); and fourth, a successful act of labeling the people who break the rules as deviant and such behavior as deviant (Becker, 1963). A person who is supposed to have broken a rule may not accept the rule by which he is being judged or may not regard those who judge him as either competent or legitimately entitled to do so (Becker, 1963). According to Becker (1963), we can isolate four types of behavior: conforming behavior (where no rule is broken), pure deviant behavior (where a rule is broken and the person identified as a rule violator), falsely accused behavior (where no rule is broken, but a person is labeled as a rule violator), and secret deviant behavior (where a rule is broken, but the person is not labeled as a rule violator).

If I take the BDSM behavior as a way of breaking the cultural norm of a common sexual behavior of a broader society, we might visualize BDSM practitioners as oscillating between the acceptance of a society, and therefore being in the conforming mode, and non-acceptance of society, and therefore being in the pure deviant and secret deviant mode. The secret deviant behavior was a common behavior of the BDSM subculture members during communism in the Czech Republic and still remains in the palette of possible behavioral patterns today. Becker also talks about sadomasochism in the United States in the 1960s as an example of a secret deviant behavior:

I had occasion several years ago, however, to examine the catalog of a dealer in

pornographic pictures designed exclusively for devotees of this specialty. The catalog

contained no pictures of nudes, no pictures of any version of the sex act. Instead, it

contained page after page of pictures of girls in straitjackets, girls wearing boots with six-

inch heels, girls holding whips, girls in handcuffs, and girls spanking one another. Each 94 page served as a sample of as many as 120 pictures stocked by the dealer. A quick

calculation revealed that the catalog advertised for immediate sale somewhere between

fifteen and twenty thousand different photographs. The catalog itself was expensively

printed and this fact, taken together with the number of photographs for sale, indicated

clearly that the dealer did a land-office business and had a very sizable clientele. Yet one

does not run across sado-masochistic fetishists every day. Obviously, they are able to keep

the fact of their secret (‘All orders mailed in a plain envelope’). (Becker,

1963:21)

The path from persecution According to the BDSM practitioners, the period of communism was characterized by heavy persecution of practitioners and complete lack of sources of information about BDSM. People with a similar interest in BDSM met either completely randomly or through secret advertisements. Random encounters took place in everyday life as manifestations of mutual sympathy – and only after a long period of common acquaintance did people manifest their BDSM interests. Advertisements for acquaintance appeared in several printed media, such as Rude Pravo and Ahoj na sobotu. They had implicit wording, disguised as sales, collecting, or assistance, such as “Lady seeking a man to help in the household” or “I want to buy a cane”. The advertisements, as well as the answers, were anonymous, with an answer to the editorial office under a particular code. Regarding BDSM meetings, there were small groups of friends or sex partners who practiced and shared BDSM in closed and secret groups.

The post-revolutionary period was a period of exuberant freedom and omnipresent fear that persisted from communist times. The first years after the revolution were disorderly and no one knew what was allowed and what was not. People needed to become accustomed to another state system, rules and values.

Michaela: Those were wild times, they [the BDSM practitioners] were all afraid of

particularly those who had long tentacles [who had connections to people in power], 95 nobody knew when it was true and when it was not – so I think that we were far less likely

to be at risk than we thought we were. But we were all terribly afraid, because nobody

wanted to test on himself how it would be when it would be [i.e., what would happen if

they found out].

Crime grew staggeringly after the revolution, with rumors of businessmen being shot on the street appearing in the media and in the cinema.

Michaela: Bastards have always existed. After the revolution, it was when the apparatus

and cops changed; they worked differently; and they all cleaned house [fired people] and

they all started from the ground [fired a lot of people], so no one knew much about what to

imagine. Half of the people saw in it the wild west of desperado; that is, everything is

allowed what is not strictly forbidden; and half of the people were locked at home and

remembered that there were shootings at the students [at demonstrations] in November and

were afraid it would come back.

The fear that remained from communism substantially limited the physical encounters of the subculture (due to the loss of anonymity), and it took a long time for members of the BDSM subculture to overcome their fear of meeting in public places. The tolerance towards BDSM was higher among the more educated and the upper-class society.

Michaela: We were all afraid it would pop out on us [somebody would find out]. Who says

he was not afraid was twice as much afraid (…) and it didn’t matter if it [that somebody

would find out] was real or not; the fact is that the fear somehow paralyzed us, nearly all of

us (…). Before, you thought a lot about whether you wanted to meet someone. Not to

actually do something with him, but just to meet him. To let him know that you are

different.

People were still meeting mainly through printed advertisements in newspapers. There were many thematic newspapers, most of which disappeared after several issues because there were not 96 enough people to buy them – for example the magazines Pervers, Pervers sex, Markýz, Dark, Nei

Report, and Intim. Pervers magazine was an A6 monthly, with stories and pornographic texts, advertisements, and a selection of recorded tapes. The first two videotapes of Czech BDSM production were released there. No one cared about copyright during the period after the revolution – some of the tapes were pirated. Over time, however, the advertisements became more open and more directly formulated, such as “Strict lady looking for men to enter into re-education”. The replies went to the editor, no one had to publish their address. The writer then could pick up the answers under an advertisement number in the editorial office, or the answers were forwarded to the appropriate post office on poste-restante. People also met at public meetings via advertisements in print media.

Meetings became less private, more people started to meet, and newcomers were invited.

BDSM events were unique in the fact that people did not drink much alcohol or even soft drinks. People were engaged in talking or in acting out BDSM activities, and thus there was usually no time to drink. Therefore, BDSM events were not entirely welcomed by pub owners because of the special activities that took place in the meetings, as well as the small amounts of food and drinks consumed. As a result, restaurant lounges and enclosed spaces were mostly rented for a fixed rental amount. However, the BDSM community largely consisted of students who had little money. There were also restaurants and pubs where meetings could be held without the need to pay expensive rent fees, but this did not happen often and most of these places were in fact brothels. Members of the

BDSM subculture often gathered for smaller parties at someone’s home or a remote cottage because of finances and personal security.

Michaela: We were living in college dormitories, so the room was [a cubbyhole, the size of

the room was] next to nothing, so either we got in touch with someone older and held it at

his place, or once in a while, when he saved something, we went somewhere to camp or

some other area in the wilderness.

97 The meetings were usually for approximately ten people; larger meetings were organized every six months for approximately sixty participants. During the first meetings, people often wore a nickname tag as visible as possible. Sometimes the tags were cross-stitched, with boxes indicating the position they prefer (dominant/submissive) or the activities they wanted to do at the meeting (I want to do action x; I don’t want to do action y). The self-conception of subcultural members was relaxed.

Since the subculture was small, people were forced to cooperate with each other, work with individuals with whom they were not compatible, and there were no insignificant disputes. The meetings were, according to the subjective feelings of the members of the BDSM subculture, very rare, so the main effort was to use the space and time as much and as intensively as possible.

Michaela: [our goal was] to enjoy it! (...) As soon as the door closed behind us, we were

just crazy because it was ‘now’ [we need to enjoy it]. And next time [next event] in six

months.

According to BDSM subculture members, some BDSM practices and manifestations are considered a criminal act in the Czech Republic. According to the BDSM practitioners, no one can give away his or her self-responsibility because it is against the Charter of Fundamental Rights and

Freedoms, and dragging someone by the may be considered an act of renunciation of self- responsibility. In addition, according to the BDSM practitioners, allowing a person under 18 years old, or a person deprived of their legal capacity, to enter a BDSM event is a criminal act. Anyone can easily check the age of the attendees, but it is complicated to check the legal capacity. A number of BDSM practices are legally limited to professional staff (piercing, needles, catheterization, scarification, permanent physical damage), and some, according to the BDSM practitioners, cannot be legally performed even by professional staff (electro practices). There are several cases of recent BDSM subculture trials (bad, 2014; Bartosova, 2015; bck, 2014; CTK, 2014), in which the main criminal charge was the production of pornographic material (either for commercial or private purposes) as well

98 as the permanent consequences of bodily harm. Therefore, BDSM still oscillates on a very thin edge between complete legality and the possible criminal act of bodily harm or pimping.

Samuel: (…) every organizer [of the BDSM events] today counts on having at least one

secret cop for every major event. We all know that they [the police authorities] know about

us. (…) Hypothetically, if they had something on us [they could prosecute us], but we know

that the supervisory authorities know about us, we know that some of them drop by [at the

events] sometimes, and we know that when nothing happens, they drink their tea and go

away. It’s just this passing feeling. So, from this point of view, I don’t feel any threat, even

though I know if there was the will, there are things to prosecute me for, but there is no

will. By strictly insisting on adulthood here, we are harmless.

During the first years after the revolution, organizing events was very exhausting for the organizers and most reached the burn-out point after a short time. Meetings were organized in a non- commercial way, and thus the organizer did not earn any money from them. On the contrary, the organizer had to pay money himself/herself to enable the event to be held. Moreover, he/she frequently received criticism from the participants. One of the first organizers was Hana, who wrote articles about

BDSM in some magazines. She was approached by a Dutch production team to be an actor in their

BDSM films and they built her an SM studio at Zvonicka. Hana worked in it from Monday to Thursday as a professional . She held her first public BDSM event around 1993 in this studio, and then a number of home parties in Dobra Voda. Subsequently, more professional dominatrixes appeared and held parties for their clients. Hana also started organizing meetings in Batul, which was a homosexual guesthouse on the outskirts of Prague. Members of the BDSM subculture built a torture chamber there in the basement and met once a month for dating parties with an occasional program. Meetings were advertised in erotic magazines, such as Pervers and the capacity was about fifty people. In addition, there were private parties with a name list of selected invitees. Professional dominatrixes also held meetings on Sporilovska Street. These were not wild parties; they mostly consisted of sitting at the 99 table and drinking tea and coffee – perhaps only when someone became drunk might they start some kind of BDSM action. Another professional dominatrix was Madame Anna, who held a meeting every second Friday in the Kavak club, where a large table was reserved for the BDSM subculture during normal public restaurant opening hours. As Jakub puts it: “And sometimes a cane swished, the waiter didn’t care, he did not spoil any fun.”

Eventually, some of the meetings started to be held outside of Prague, in other places around the

Czech Republic. At the pub U Vycesy at Stara nemocnice in Frydek-Mistek there were several BDSM meetings around the years 1994 and 1995. People used advertisements in printed newspapers for the promotion of the events. About 50 people met at one of the meetings and someone reported the meeting to the police.

Jarmila: (…) a lot of couples were just lovers, and it obviously bothered one of the

legitimate partners. Lo and behold, [he/she] reported this meeting to PCR [the Czech police]

as the suppressing of the freedom of citizens and a moral offense in the sense of deviance,

and about three hours after the meeting took place and the fun had already started, suddenly

‘boom’ and the police task force was surrounding the whole pub, everyone had to pull out

their ID and explain why they were there. [The police] targeted ‘Marta’ who had to undergo

an interrogation at the bar about why she was there and what others wanted from her, (…)

Marta did not lose grace and she was very surprised why she had to report home [to her

husband, who she thought had sent the police] that she found information in the newspaper

that there was a meeting of whip collectors and other replicas and because it seemed

interesting to her, she went (…) PCR ransacked all of us, trying to get information from us

as to why we were there, and when almost everyone showed them the advertisement and

about 2,000 whips and canes, they gave up, (...) there was a police patrol behind the pub and

whoever left [the building, had to] undergo an alcohol test.

100 At this time in the Czech Republic, the basic rules, values and symbols of the BDSM subculture were established. This included such terms and practices as SSC (the slogan: safe-sane-consensual), consensus, 24/7 (a nonstop BDSM relationship), collars, addressing the dominatrixes, the written rules of subculture and efforts to define BDSM relationships. The BDSM practitioners often sought inspiration from abroad via the internet and they created new Czech names for BDSM practices and

BDSM tools. Usually it was simply a literal translation from the English expressions, although there were some unique names that originated from the Czech language. They produced home-made accessories, canes and handcuffs to look like foreign designs, and, for the first time, the BDSM practitioners started a subcultural debate about authenticity: who does truly belong to the subculture and who does not. At the same time, the BDSM practitioners tried to be as subcultural as possible.

They sought to internalize and represent as much as possible of the subcultural values, rules, symbols and behaviors, sometimes to very extreme limits. Terms like “VDD” (in Czech: Vé-Dé-Dé) emerged, which stands for “Big Rough Dominant” (in Czech: Velký Drsný Dominant). This term is gender specific and is used for a male person who attempts to be a hardcore dominant, but because of his temperament, taste or personal property, this role-play fails in the eyes of others.

Martin: [VDD is] a clown who has the idea that he has to be a movie hero [dominant], he

doesn’t have what it takes, and the most horrible ones are those who don’t realize they do

not have what it takes (…) Filip, I take him here as an example, who can really afford to

buy his [female] lovers hotels [buildings] as gifts and he also does it, arrives without any

problem wearing shattered jeans and a flannel shirt. The Big Rough Dominant has a

Vietnamese suit and a cut white paper here in the pocket [instead of a starched

handkerchief]. That’s hell.

In the Czech Republic, the first virtual BDSM subculture was created online around 1995–96.

One of the first platforms was an email conference of fencing fans and a “university chat page” at the

University of Pardubice. Then the Mihavka emailer appeared, which worked by joining a specific 101 thematic mailing group and then receiving all the answers that were sent to that email address – in the case of BDSM subculture, it was the email address “[email protected]”. Meetings were held in

Dukat at Karosarna. The large Prague floods in 2002 destroyed the Dukat club and meetings were canceled. General discussion forums were created later, with specific threads for BDSM.

The Kvetka and Bika servers were created around 1995 and 1996 and formed relatively large virtual groups of BDSM people. Bika was a general discussion server on all topics, which was run by a

BDSM subcultural member. The section dedicated to BDSM went under ambiguous names and it was mostly about spanking. At the very beginning of the discussion forums, the dominants wrote their nicknames starting with a capital letter and submissives with a lowercase letter, but this habit has gradually disappeared. The server ended up being bought by a large media company, which canceled it.

People then moved to Kvetka (Spicka), Krzatka, then to Plamenka, and subsequently to Voskovka, which was founded in 2001. Later it split into Voskovka and Iberka. Afterwards, other chat rooms and discussion forums emerged, such as Kyj, Bracko, BrackaChat, Losak.cz or Kacovka.cz (later

Losacek.cz, founded 1999). All of them subsequently collapsed with the arrival of Facebook – Krzatka remained to a very limited extent.

In the beginnings of the BDSM online subculture, there was considerable animosity among the people who met through the internet chat rooms and those who met through discussion forums. Chat people had a reputation for being more active and more eccentric than those in the discussion forums.

There were also many men pretending to be women, and also numerous professional dominatrixes among the chatters. Face-to-face meetings were generally all very similar and differed only by the server from which the meeting was organized. There were different meetings of different servers with different people, because few people belonged to multiple servers simultaneously. Outside of the server, it was impossible to become informed about most of the planned meetings.

The number of people gradually increased on the discussion forums. People who wanted to try

BDSM out of curiosity, were invited. The more people there were in the discussion forums, the less 102 consistency there was among the BDSM community, and discrepancies between the leaders of the

BDSM community started to appear. The subculture began to branch out according to members’ other interests. For example, members of fencing groups joined BDSM events of fencing BDSM swordsmen, while radio amateurs had their own BDSM electro events. The professional sector of the BDSM subculture began to develop widely, and with the first producers of BDSM pornography, clothing manufacturers appeared, as did many professional dominatrixes. They started organizing promo events to present their businesses. BDSM subcultural responses to this commercialization were inconsistent.

Some members of the subculture welcomed it, while others were disgusted by the rapid development of the professional sector.

Jaroslav: These [professionals] are mostly people who have a problem to get involved in

another segment [of the labor market]. A lot of, let’s say, losers got involved. People who

need anything, just to have something.

The first BDSM film made by Czech production was a cassette called Aron Plamaty. Wider distribution of this film was blocked by one of the actors. The script was written by Martin, the camera was by Jaromir and Vladimir. Vladimir was not a filmmaker – he was a spanker – and was bothered by the poor quality of BDSM movies at that time. Instead, he decided to shoot the films himself, invested his own money in equipment and began filming spank films. The distribution took place abroad to protect the actors, but the films nevertheless came to Czech audiences through the internet, which resulted in several scandals. For example, the headmaster of Dvorska school was fired.

Ladislav: (…) it has become known that the headmaster of Dvorska school is also an actor

in that film. He did it because he was an amateur actor. They convicted him on a small

detail. [They] pulled out this movie, a kid found it on the internet. The important thing was

that they asked him why he was involved in a sadomasochistic film, where he was a

[movie] narrator in the studio while the whole [film] story was at a different location, and

he said they [the directors] cut him into it [e.g. they added him without his knowledge]. If 103 he didn’t lie, it would be interesting, but they pulled out all the other movies [BDSM

movies, where he was also an actor]. It cost him his job, it hurt him psychologically (…).

The same group of people several years later (around 1996) established Ber Coast, later Chmerek

Production, which became known worldwide after 1998 because they were innovators in BDSM films by including a storyline in the film. In addition, they wrote their own music for the movies and had the hardest spanking that was available on the market. They premiered their films for an invited audience of around 300 people in Czech clubs. The actresses were chosen mostly from pornographic agencies – less often from the BDSM community – and received a payout of around four hundred dollars, a stuntman contract, and had contractual penalties if they withdrew from the contract.

Simon: Nevertheless, we never treated them badly. Even when they didn’t seem to be able

to it, there was always an alternative scenario to avoid getting a full dose [of beating].

(…) And since the girls were filming with us repeatedly, it is proof that it was possible. (…)

In the beginning, it was quite a harsh beating. Then it [the situation] started to sharpen a

little [legally], that it was actually [considered to be] bodily harm and that there could be

trouble [we could be in trouble for this legally] and so at the end of the Chmerek

production, the beating started getting softer and softer.

Chmerek Production ended with the arrival of cumulative servers, such as Megaupload. Movies began to be downloaded worldwide and it reduced sales. Meanwhile, BDSM became commonplace, with articles on BDSM in mainstream magazines such as Penthouse and Harper’s Bazaar. However, regarding personal meetings, not all of the attitudes of BDSM practitioners changed. Around 1996 or

1997, people from the Bika server met in a pub lounge and were still afraid of the consequences of revealing their civil identity. Thus, they protected it in every possible way.

Martin: (…) everyone sneaked in there ‘through the canals’. Almost everyone wore a mask,

didn’t want to reveal their name or where they came from. Someone brought a few German

and English BDSM magazines. It was there on the table and when the waiter came, 104 someone quickly threw a newspaper over it. Even the most frivolous and most self-

confident had, at least if not fear, then certainly respect for the trouble it would have caused

had it been revealed. Even the people who were very open on the internet were still under a

nickname – they knew some other people by their civil name, but they still did not want it

to be revealed in other like-minded groups they belong to.

Other meetings were held around 1997 and 1998 at the Hetlina hotel. Again, Hana was the organizer, and these were some of the largest meetings so far, with over one hundred people at some events. In addition, there were meetings at the U Cedron and the U Prumyslovky pubs in 1997-1999, which were purely discussion meetings and the invitations were sent to selected people by handwritten letters – the right table was indicated by handcuffs laid on the table. In these years, meetings also took place at the Antonovka pub under the organization of Zdenek. In addition, there were meetings at the

Spidlak pub between 1998 and 2001 with various organizers; sometimes the meetings were organized by Premysl and sometimes Hana. Later, these events also contained a compulsory dress code and program.

There were no platforms to create one’s own web pages on one’s own domain in the Czech

Republic, and people started creating their web pages on free webs under free web domains. However, free webs had one major disadvantage – they blocked erotic content. Therefore, BDSM-themed pages constantly faced cancellation. If anyone wanted to have their own domain, they had to program it from the very beginning. Managing one’s own server was very costly in the late 1990s. Moreover, there were few people with such programing abilities in the Czech Republic. The first person to program his own

BDSM page was Premysl, who launched Modralka.cz (which was the first BDSM-themed website) in

May 1999. Modralka.cz was informally organized, with ten people on the team. They put on the site events, texts and pictures without any risk of deletion. Over time, when the internet was still too slow to download videos, Modralka.cz gradually grew into the largest database of BDSM photos on the global internet at that time. 105 Premysl: People were collecting [BDSM] pictures and photos because these were difficult

to access, [Czech] banks did not issue credit cards that would work on the [paid BDSM

sites of the] internet, lots of sites were blocked for Eastern Europe, and prices were too high

for us. So, people put together their collections and I published it and it was one of the ten

most visited websites of the Czech internet. Lots of visits were from abroad – nobody [in

the post-communist Czech Republic] cared about copyrights – even when it [the website]

was in Czech, the images are [understandable] without text.

However, the enormous collection of pictures required a large amount of data space and its maintenance was prohibitively expensive. Therefore, the Modralka.cz server was later transformed into mostly a short stories server where they published a BDSM story from anyone who sent his/her text and edited it according to the editors’ comments on the final publication. However, this project largely disappeared due to the increasing demands of editors on the quality of contributions and the decreasing number of published texts. This server was the first BDSM internet site maintained under real civil names in Czech Republic.

Premysl: It was the first such manifestation ever. (…) Under its name [Modralka.cz],

people began to meet and communicate also because they saw that we started the site and

nobody jailed us and we all still alive (…).

The Modralka.cz server also started experimenting with organizing meetings that were first closed and later open to the public. However, not all members of the subculture agreed to open meetings, and several attempts were rather unsuccessful. Probably the first of them was a meeting at

Openka in 2000, which was a disco where a waitress inclined to BDSM walked herself in a harness at the end of the meeting.

Premysl: There was no such thing [as an open meeting] at the time, and many weirdos did

not feel comfortable doing something in public and [about the fact] that the public would

watch us because not every weirdo is an exhibitionist. (…) At least [back] then it wasn’t 106 successful, many people [from the BDSM subculture] said it was terrible, they would not

attend such event and that it is an insult to every decent weirdo and like that.

The first purely “action event” with a program was held in 2000 in Lecar in Prague, co-organized by Hana, Pavel and Premysl. There was a latex clothes show and it was possible to buy BDSM tools there. Around the year 2000, the first BDSM club called Kalvil was established, which was originally an unused cellar that was rented as a torture chamber for professional dominatrixes. Later, it was rented by Jitka and Matej, who founded Kalvil in it. Over time, Kalvil began to advertise almost freely that it was a BDSM club, although it still kept the address private. Matej and Jitka reconstructed the floor there and built a kitchen, but they were forced to leave the place due to the broken waterpipes. They moved to a Velkopopovicka cellar, where they remained until approximately 2015, at which point they were evicted. Thus, around March 2015 they moved to Hajecek, where they had the BDSM club until

2019.

The first thematic foot-fetish events began around 2000 after the foot-fetish site was launched.

The first meetings were accompanied by the shame and shyness of the participants, and later the meetings moved towards sovereignty. Around the year 2000, Hana was still organizing her events at her home in Dobra Voda. The first meeting in Brno was a meeting organized by Radek at Palach Square on

Feronian street in a pub cellar around 1998 (dating varies from source to source). It was a common pub in which a loud conversation about BDSM took place, and the meeting had a number of provocative elements. The second Brno BDSM meeting took place at the Citronka pub, organized by Vaclav.

At that time, the idea of a large BDSM event began to be formed, where it would be possible to come in fetish clothing and be in a BDSM role throughout the entire event. In 2001, there were meetings at Hetlina, the so-called Hetka, which was a large inn outside of Prague, organized by Pavel,

Bretislav and Modralka.cz. At the second meeting, the premiere of Chmerek’s production “Kohoutek

1” and “Kohoutek 2” took place. Their films were considered too hard for most of the BDSM subculture members. 107 Martin: When the first [movie premiere] ended, three-quarters of the people left with the

words: I don’t have a stomach for this.

Over time, a torture chamber was built in the cellar on Hetlina, and it has been available for meetings since around 2002. There were meetings with programs, including food. They were organized by Jitka with Matej and Zdenek. Another popular meeting place was Kubik’s Rubin, which ran from

August 2001 to 2007 and was organized by Ondrej in cooperation with Jaroslava. This was the first real action meeting, even though the opportunity just to talk and discuss was also welcomed. The Rubin has had an SM, fist and leather gay club since the nineties with BDSM equipment. Meetings took place on

Thursdays. BDSM females and hetero males were upstairs and a gay BDSM meeting downstairs.

According to some interviewees, the gay BDSM scene was more closed than the heterosexual BDSM scene.

Premysl: The gay scene has always worked better here, I think [it is] because you could

earn [money] on it, you need something that will allow you to hold the events even if you

don’t have the mood and the money.

Other public events were the meetings at the Kosik club at Pricna, which was a club completely reserved for the BDSM community. They took place from around 2003 until 2005 with about ten meetings. These were organized by Vera and Pavel. Pavel is a biker and owner of an e-shop kovar.cz, which also openly sold BDSM tools. The topic of the first meeting was bondage and latex. There were demonstrations of bondage, the possibility of testing BDSM tools and a performance of liquid latex.

The original estimate was that twenty people would attend; Vera wanted to organize it for her friends, but so many people signed up for it, they had to change the place, so Pavel found Kosik. Then the estimate changed to fifty people, and later about 170 paying attendees actually arrived. The first meeting only took place in the cellar, but from the second meeting, they also reserved the upper floor called Parmena. 270 participants attended the fourth meeting with the theme of ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome. Other topics included a “school event” and “Chicago in the 1930s”. 108 Around 2003, Samonie server events were also held, focusing on electro BDSM tools and discussing home-made tools and their use. Meetings in 2003 and 2004 continued in Brno, but moved to

Capak with Klara and Jiri as organizers. There was also Ales, who wanted to attend BDSM events in

Brno. However, since none of the BDSM community knew him and nobody invited him anywhere, he decided in 2003 to organize his own event, which then took place in the Pogac guesthouse annually for the next three years. Ales then stopped the organization, but the guesthouse was then used for another event called Fetis Pogac. Meetings also took place in villages; in 2004 a large weekend meeting took place in the former communist recreation center at Masarykova called Na Ruzence. The event was in the style of a weekend western and anthropomorphic horse races were held in outdoor areas.

In 2004, a meeting was held to celebrate the fifth birthday of the Modralka.cz server at the Rubin club, where the members of the newly established tattoo, piercing and body modification studio

Kornatec.cz performed for the first time and got into the center of the BDSM subculture. The meeting was open to the public and massively promoted via the Modralka.cz server. Kornatec.cz had a performance with fire and hook stabbing in the shape of a pentagram and was preparing for future hook suspension performances. However, misunderstanding and disgust not only took place between the mainstream and the subculture, but it also arose within the subculture itself. This story of a hardcore spankers meeting with hook suspension lovers demonstrates this division.

Martin: Libuska wanted to provoke me, she mentioned it so many times until we agreed on

some kind of bet on how many hits she would last – [then] the same amount of time I will

[match her one to one, I will] be [dressed] in some kind of a mask (…) and it was on the

stage (...). Well, she lasted her twenty-five [hits], then stood up, and those five hundred, six

hundred [people] said ‘WOOOW’. It truly poured, the blood, to her shoes (…). [Then] I

brought her to the backstage to Kornatec guys, [to ask] if they have any disinfection, [they]

looked at that ass and Bretislav said: ‘dude, with those hooks [hardcore practice of hook

suspension], we [are so soft that we] will only tour the kindergartens.’ 109 The Kornatec studio was established outside of the BDSM community by Tomas, Ladislav and

Sofia. Tomas was not a member of the BDSM subculture. For him the hook suspension was more about overcoming pain and doing a ritual. Ladislav was a member of body modification as well as BDSM subculture. Kornatec.cz started organizing their own parties to advertise their studio. From the third

Kornatec party, there was a fetish scene, organized by Jaroslava, because people wanted a public event with a BDSM dress code, but at the same time they were afraid that friends could find them there.

Thus, there was a hybrid event with body modification performances and a smaller fetish scene so that people could enjoy the evening without being accused of belonging to a BDSM subculture – they could say they simply came to see the show. Subsequently, Kornatec.cz split into two branches; Kornatec.cz remained led by Ladislav, while Tomas and Sofia established their own studios Houzovec, Jazourek and Bolinka. The Kornatec party then took place only once as a Kornatec show in Lobo as a sitting theatrical performance and then transformed into Fetiš Festival and later in Fetiš Fest. Until 2019,

Ladislav remains one of the most active organizers of BDSM events, with many people in the organization team and newly established sex toys e-shop.

In 2004, several larger fetish events took place at Titovka in Prague for around fifty to one hundred people, with a strict dress code organized by Jaroslava and Frantisek. It was the first Czech purely fetish party. Many new people attended and the event brought a large number of new members also to the Brno community. In the same year, an event was held in Kosik, organized by Pavel, which by some people was considered to be the first public meeting without guarantors. About 100 people arrived and many BDSM subculture members deliberately did not come to the public event.

Jakub: When one of the events was supposed to be open [to the public] in Kosik – that it

would be a wide audience – there were just a few people from the weirdos [BDSM people],

I wasn’t there either, I didn’t want to be watched.

The first BDSM club in Brno was founded in 2004 by Jiri and it ended very soon. After the end of the Kosik meetings in 2004, Katerina started to hold events at the Hibernal, which was a historic 110 stagecoach station, and every Thursday there was a discussion meeting; previously there had been larger parties. It worked for about two years. In 2005, the first year of Fetish Pogac (nicknamed Rubber

Pogac) took place in Brno, which was a fetish event with a compulsory dress code.

In 2006, there were also meetings at the Domasov chateau, as well as meetings called

Cibulinka. In 2007, the Konik club was founded when several profi dominatrixes rented cellar space and built a torture chamber there. In 2010 or 2011, it was taken over by a moderator and car mechanic,

Stanislav, and it remained a private space only for invited people, continuing to function until 2019. In

2008, the first year of the Fetish Enterprise event was organized by Marek and Anna near Brno, which took place every year until 2019. At that time, the internet virtual BDSM scene continued to develop.

The website Belozub.cz was created around 2007 and there was an interesting, but not very functional, idea of community moral police, which was supposed to prevent abuse or injury of subcultural members. Similarly, the websites Ohnovec.cz, Hvezdovka.cz and later also Palecka.net were established.

It is common in the BDSM community that a rather asocial person creates his or her own events or server in the hope of gaining contacts and relationships with other BDSM practitioners through it.

One of these cases could be the website Cihovitka.cz established around 2013, which has a strict banning system and prospered on paid VIP membership until 2019. Since 2012, Ludmila has held a recruiting event for beginners called the Opat party, whose task is to catch new people on chats and teach these people to work with BDSM tools, to understand BDSM thinking and behavior and the subcultural rules.

The path towards acceptance

While chapters Two and Three discussed how society sets the boundaries between the subculture and the mainstream, I demonstrated in the previous part of this chapter that some BDSM acts were originally strictly criminalized in the Czech Republic. However, as the climate has changed

111 internationally and BDSM has become more mainstream, the same happened later in the Czech

Republic. The BDSM subculture members reflect on this slow and steady change from its beginning after the revolution to its contemporary state.

Jakub: In the 1990s, I worked in a hospital and nobody knew my [BDSM] inclinations

except my girlfriend, and I met an absolutely amazing response, and it was great when the

nurses in the department talked about some colleague: ‘How is she? And is she still fucking

tied to the bed?’ ‘Yeah, still.’ So I completely stiffened and thought to myself: this is the

reaction it should be. They don’t make any affairs of it. (…) So, this kind of reaction is

more common today as it [BDSM] got into pop culture, so shiny clothes don’t make

anybody disturbed, mention of ropes does not frighten people, and I think that this

openness, medialization is mainly for the benefit that it did not harm us.

Michaela: There’s no problem now when someone writes on Facebook that he is going to a

weirdo club to do some nasty things, he is a boss, and this just couldn’t have happened

before.

Premysl: Today, I think sadomasochism is generally accepted without any major problems,

sexshops are full of all sorts of clothes and tools; it’s basically a matter of fashion, latex

outfits, lack, it’s part of the club’s fashion.

Jakub: This is probably the main thing; today it is not impossible to meet someone in latex,

he does not need to dress up secretly at the event, it is more open (…) BDSM and fetish are

discussed in the media that it is normal (…).

112 Josef: BDSM has become a fashionable feature, with a break in the television screens and

lifestyle magazines, and especially the mass hysteria after 50 Shades.

With the massive entry of BDSM symbols into the broad mainstream culture, BDSM symbols underwent a serious banalization, becoming so common in the mainstream that they have lost the ability to shock or offend. At the same time, they have lost the ability to attract attention and, consequently also an ability to draw attention to subcultural values.

Michaela: As time went on, it became more and more public. Today, it’s nearly a public

event on Facebook and no one cares. [pause] Exactly, no one cares.

Jakub: The whole approach of society [to BDSM] is such that it does not shock anyone

anymore. The media coverage of BDSM has contributed to this.

Members of the subculture emphasize the importance of Fifty Shades of Grey in the normalization of the BDSM subculture in mainstream society.

Michaela: Not that it was not shit – it was terrible shit. But it has done a tremendous service

to us in one thing: since every social worker has become a fan of mister Grey, the kids are

no longer taken away from their fathers because the father is a sadist. And this has done a

tremendous service not only in the care of children, but also in the careers and from that

time, it has shifted from the category ‘with the candy bag he will kill an eight-year-old

nephew in a coal cellar’, to a somehow unrealistic romance of two people – and therefore it

shifted from the label ‘dangerous freak’ to the label ‘I don’t care about it’. And releasing

this, basically, the path to organize open meetings has opened, to do exhibition events,

combine it with fashion and not it in a fashion. Not to be afraid of what the boss,

colleague or auntie would say.

BDSM subculture members mostly welcome the current development of the subculture – the opening of BDSM to the mainstream. 113 Premysl: It has been normalized, so the people who are not hardcore sadomasochists also

come [to the events], which is good, so the different (…) events for a large number of

people can be organized. It has become professionalized, I perceive it very positively, I

perceive the disappearance of the old type of events as a very positive thing, even though

many people cry for it, because it shows me that sadomasochism is something normal.

As for the possible negative consequences of the expansion of BDSM practices and values, two can be identified. One of them may be the random testing of BDSM practices without realizing possible psychological consequences. The second can be finding a way out of mental problems with

BDSM.

Michaela: It is all faster now – earlier, you had time to think about whether you really want

to [do BDSM]. Nowadays, those people sometimes go into some things without thinking,

under the influence of some momentary pressure or over-pressure, that they would have

thought over before. So it happens that, from this, some bad experiences also come.

Michaela: It’s really hard to make a boundary between the individuals [who are sincere to

organizers and those people] who do not want (...) what they say they came for, but they’re

looking for a solution to another problem [and attended under false pretenses]. A lot of it

goes to different psychologically disturbed people, we’ve dealt a lot with people who are

dealing with some psychological, psychiatric problems. To put it short – ‘no, I’m not going

to cut myself, but I’m letting someone [cut me instead].’ [pause] That’s so dangerous in two

ways. [pause] First, it hurts him [the person with problems]. It is wrong to shorten that

[curing] path by finding other solutions. (…) And secondly, unfortunately, there is some

space for abusing these people. And I know that this is truly happening. That these people

are capable of doing anything to have at least some life.

114 Subcultural division among members and non-members is important, but, according to some members of the BDSM community, the decriminalization of practices and the end of the persecution of members are more important than the feeling of subcultural uniqueness.

Jakub: The closure [of the BDSM community] wouldn’t bother me. In general, I would like

to belong to a secret order, which nobody knows. I like it. I would not need it completely

open, but it is safer, this situation [today, when it is accepted], than if you are at risk [for

your BDSM activity].

However, the Czech BDSM practitioners feel ambivalent about the future. On the one hand, there is a tendency towards liberalization of society in the Czech Republic; on the other hand, there are visible political pressures on censorship and persecution of other than regular sexuality and sexuality on the internet. Members of the BDSM subculture express their concern about the situation, so that the general gradual acceptance of BDSM will not return to persecution.

Jakub: How long it will last I don’t know. It is definitely not a worldwide trend. Those who

will want to approach Muslims or Christians will again hypocritically persecute eroticism.

(…) I’m not pleased with the development. (…) God bless for how it is working here and I

hope it won’t go wrong.

In connection with a new paragraph in US legislation, there was a relatively extensive erasure of

Czech Facebook profiles and sites dealing with BDSM between January and March of 2019. This erasure is clearly related to the new FOSTA (Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act) or SESTA (Stop

Enabling Sex Traffickers Act) laws, which carve an exception to Section 230 of the Communications

Decency Act in the US law. Section 230 states that a computer service cannot be treated as a publisher of third-party content. That relieves the web provider of responsibility for the content that users upload to them. On the other hand, the new FOSTA states that this lack of responsibility of the provider cannot be applied when the content is related to sex trafficking. Therefore, the provider is fully legally responsible for any sex trafficking content that users upload on his/her online service. This has led 115 internationally to the massive deleting of sex-related content of many interactive online providers. It has gone to such an extreme that some people have proposed banning the “sex related” emoticon of a banana on some platforms. The appearance of FOSTA has been a major topic in the Czech BDSM sphere.

Jakub: With this [FOSTA in US law], they will put this area into the black sphere and if we

want to talk about normal eroticism, we will have to go to porn channels. There will always

be porn channels. Even if it would be criminal, there is a dark-web. They will always be.

So, in the future I’m not completely optimistic about this.

According to some BDSM practitioners, the mainstreamization of BDSM in the Czech Republic has reached the point to where the BDSM subculture welcomes nearly every member. It does not make a significant difference between the longtime members and the drifting members of the subculture, and it appreciates diversity not only in the BDSM practices, but also in the approaches to BDSM and in the meanings different members attach to their personal concept of BDSM. As one of the members puts it, being a member of the BDSM community in the Czech Republic has become an ordinary thing.

Martin: Previously, subcultural leaders were people who were intellectuals. Today, it’s like

an ordinary roll [a typical Czech pastry] in the shop. Anyone can be a sadomasochist, it’s no

longer a guarantee of a higher class or exceptionality. (…) I am not crying yet, but the

period when one was almost certain that anyone who likes it [BDSM] is a person with

whom it is worth chatting, even if you vigorously disagree with him, is simply long gone.

We’ll have to find another hobby in which we can enrich ourselves intellectually.

Conclusion & Discussion This chapter explores the ways in which people on the edge of society form a subculture, the role of the state legal system in subcultural identity, how different societies deal with members of the BDSM subculture and the base of subcultural history for collective identity. The Czech Republic underwent a deep societal shift from communism to democracy. The effects of communism are still deeply rooted in 116 the preferences and attitudes of people long after the Velvet Revolution of 1989. During the communist regime, the laws and customs were extremely puritanical. There were no sources about BDSM except for newspaper articles about non-consensual sexual offenders, and even consensual BDSM people sometimes underwent forced treatment or imprisonment.

From the heavy persecution of the BDSM practitioners during communism, after the revolution the regime enabled the freedom to assemble and practice BDSM without any major punishments against BDSM practitioners from the state apparatus. However, fear from the long-time victimization remained internalized in practitioners’ behavior and thoughts for many more years after the fall of communism. They are constantly reminded of this past by the presence of secret police officers at

BDSM events. However, the inactivity of the secret police is a reassurance for BDSM practitioners that they do not face serious persecution. Even in cases in which the police were directly called to a BDSM event, because somebody reported the particular event to them, the practitioners ended up only being searched and questioned, while the drivers had to undergo an alcohol test. None of them were prosecuted.

From anonymous implicit advertisements in printed newspapers, practitioners slowly learned that the advertisements can be explicit and subsequently started to meet each other mainly through an internet virtual subculture. The subcultural meetings started to appear after the revolution and gradually became larger and larger. First, access to the meetings was strictly guarded by a system of guarantors, but this system eventually disappeared at most events and some events became open to the public. The subcultural identity started to strengthen during the first years of the meetings as practitioners attempted to internalize as many subcultural values as possible. On the other hand, BDSM started to become commercialized via the growing professional BDSM sector, which included pornography, clothing manufacture and professional dominatrixes. Some members of the subculture welcome this, while others are disgusted by the rapid development of the professional sector.

117 The collapse of communism created new opportunities and dangers at the same time. The

BDSM practitioners were suddenly free to meet each other. Meanwhile, the internet and BDSM market provided Czech BDSM practitioners with access to a great deal of information about the topic of

BDSM and also access to new technologies, which can be used in producing BDSM objects. However, this was the same market that led to the commercialization of the BDSM scene and exploitation of its subculture.

There are some Czech innovations in the area of BDSM, which are connected mostly to the unique Czech names of BDSM objects (e.g. in Czech bacátko) and also to the home-made BDSM objects. In the initial stages of international connection, most of the subculture could find some inspiration on the internet or abroad, but they could not order anything from abroad or via the internet.

Most objects were therefore home-made; BDSM handymen consulted on the appropriate procedures for home construction of various BDSM tools. In addition, today in the Czech Republic (as I show in the next chapter), it seems there is greater focus on the sadist and masochist aspect of BDSM

(compared to the dominant/submissive aspect) and the amount of Czech dominant men is higher (and the amount of dominant women lower) than in international communities.

As the mainstreamization and commodification of BDSM has spread, the practitioners report a banalization of the subcultural symbols, which have lost the ability to shock, offend or draw attention to subcultural values. On the other hand, the opening of the subculture has offered BDSM subcultural members the possibility of not feeling persecuted. This opening can also bring negative consequences: namely, the random testing of BDSM by people who are not psychically prepared for it and also trying

BDSM as a possible way out of mental problems. However, according to the BDSM subcultural members, recently in the Czech Republic, becoming a BDSM practitioner has become such a common everyday practice as “buying a pastry in the shop”.

118 6. Chapter Six – The Elimination of Roles in Role Playing: What Was the

Generational Development of the BDSM Subculture? Symbolic Boundaries between the Old Generation and the New Generation

Introduction

Recently, there has been a “research boom” on the topic of BDSM (bondage, discipline, dominance, submission, sadism and masochism). Studies have covered a wide range of countries including the UK (Beckmann, 2001a; Beckmann, 2009), USA (Brown, 2010; Luminais, 2012;

Newmahr, 2008; Newmahr, 2011; Weiss, M.D., 2006c), Brazil (Facchini & Machado, 2013; de Melo,

2010) and western Germany (Martin, 2011). Nevertheless, ethnographic research of the BDSM subculture in a post-communist state has been extremely rare. In fact, there have not been many studies on post-communist subcultures in general. This study explores how the BDSM subculture has been evolving in the Czech Republic since the fall of communism.

The focus is on the inter-generational conflict that has arisen between the first and second generations of the Czech BDSM scene. The history of Czech BDSM subculture has never been studied.

Except for several tables showing data and events, BDSM practitioners themselves in the Czech

Republic have no written documents about how they have created the subculture, how it was established and what pitfalls they needed to overcome. In contrast to studies of the BDSM scene in countries such as the UK, which have had long-standing democracies, the Czech scene could only emerge after the overthrow of the communist-ruled dictatorship in 1989. Consequently, the scene is newer and it developed in a situation in which the first generation was culturally much more tied to the communist-past than the second generation. This makes it interesting to see how the scene might have developed differently when taking place in the post-communist context.

119 Alesina and Fuchs-Schündeln (2005) claim that it takes about two generations to erase the effect of communism on the attitudes of the population. Heavy state intervention and indoctrination instill the view that the state is essential for individual well-being (Alesina & Fuchs-Schündeln, 2005). As

Diamond, Jozifkova and Weiss (2011) note, during the communist regime, the laws and customs were extremely puritanical. Pornography, depiction of naked bodies and descriptions of sexual activities were forbidden in the public discourse. After the overthrow of the communist regime in 1989, a period of sexual permissiveness began. The breakup of Czechoslovakia in 1993 led to the creation of an independent Czech Republic. Although the first post-communist government displayed a very liberal, permissive attitude toward sexuality, future governments started slowly to pass laws regulating sexuality. Today, the law prohibits the production, dissemination, trafficking, or sale of sex-related materials in any form that might be considered socially damaging.

This chapter proceeds by outlining the theoretical approach, combining theories about generational schisms within subcultures. It then presents this chapter’s conceptualization of generations and a possibility of generational revolt in the existing theories. The next section deals with modern ethnographic research and virtual ethnography in a fluid subcultural environment. Subsequently, the findings are presented along with a discussion at the end of the chapter.

Theoretical approach The concept of generation has experienced a renaissance in the last thirty years (e.g. Corsten,

1999; White, 2013). Corsten (1999) argues that generational schisms develop in the postmodern society because of the crisis of collective identities. Generational change helps explain historical change

(White, 2013). This chapter analyzes generational shifts, although the term “generation” has various meanings (Edmunds & Turner, 2002; Kertzer, 1983). One is a biological generation and the other is a generation without biological bound, based on having a similar age (Spitzer, 1973; Alwin and

McCammon, 2003; Lamb, 2015).

120 It is common to define generation as a cohort of people born in the same time period (Ryder,

1964; Ryder, 1965) and sharing a structure of customs, collective usages, traditions and beliefs that define their life experience (Marias, 1970; Ortega, 1958). According to Mannheim (1952), the location and shared experience of youth develops the shared meanings of events; there is an identity attached to the cohort to create a generation. The difference between cohort and generation is that cohort is birth in a particular time period, but generation is a style applied to a cohort and easily recognized from within and from outside (White 1992 in Alwin and McCammon, 2003). Edmunds and Turner (2002) state that a cohort is not homogeneous and is divided into generational units. According to Mannheim (1952), these generational units are constituted by a cluster of life chances, a set of historical responses to its particular location and collectively-shared common life experience and time frame assumptions.

This chapter uses Mannheim’s conceptualization of generation as a unit of people who reach maturity under particular circumstances, which shapes their view of a social order (Mannheim, 1952).

Ben-Ze’ev uses the term “canonical generation” for a generational unit that identifies itself and is identified with the national canon (Ben-Ze’ev, 2009). He also illustrates how generations are distinguishable in terms of the freedom they have to express their critical and personal voices (Ben-

Ze’ev, 2009).

The private experiences are in fact shaped by the different patterns of remembrance available to each generation. As a category, generation therefore mediates between personal and social memory

(Ben-Ze’ev, 2009). The personal narratives fashion the macro-biography of a generation (Ryder, 1965) as well as vice-versa; the generational macro biography produces a shared consciousness that shapes the personal narratives (Ben-Ze’ev, 2009). As Ben-Ze’ev (2009) puts it, the dialogue between generations is a central layer in constructing a national memory rooted in everyday life. Subsequent generations cannot avoid relating to the canonical generation, either by identifying with it or by opposing it. During their adolescence, individuals construct a generationally comparable definition of problems for different contexts of life and apply them in relationships that are in competition with other 121 age-groups (Corsten, 1999). The younger generations want to oppose the authoritarian guidance of the older generations and make their own contribution (Ahluwalia, 1972). Some authors consider the rebelliousness of a new generation an unsuccessful transmission of culture and maintaining institutions

(Berger & Luckmann, 1966), while others consider the inter-generational misunderstanding and conflict inevitable in a society with rapid social change in a technological civilization (Turner, 1998).

The dialogue between generations could be also formative for a subcultural identity as the younger generation can develop its identity partially in opposition to the older generation. Some scholars consider young people the foundation of change in the society (Ahluwalia, 1972), whereas others highlight the contribution of the older individuals as well (Lamb, 2009; Siegfried, 2005).

Siegfried (2005) finds that the younger and more educated the individuals are, the more they think the younger generation is a motor of the change. The younger generation has different values, ideas and ideals than the older generation (Ahluwalia, 1972; Waldinger & Perlmann, 1997; Eisenstadt, 2002).

According to Fraser (1988), the economic stability and student status of the youth is what enables them to bring about change. Spitzer (1973) calls the youth generation a decisive generation. These are the people who are able to produce new thoughts with full clarity and with complete possession of their meaning (Spitzer, 1973). The youth movements are vague, have exaggerated self-esteem and lack experience, but they have enthusiasm and consistency of ideals and action (Ahluwalia, 1972).

According to generational theorists, there is an “age of dominance” that normally includes those from forty-five to sixty-years old (Spitzer, 1973). The young generation usually includes those from fifteen to thirty-five (Ahluwalia, 1972). For this case, as BDSM is legal only over 18 years in the Czech

Republic, the youth are those from 18 to around 40.

Previous research shows that in western countries there has also been a generational shift within the BDSM subculture. Thus, Beckmann (2009) notes, there is a generational division in the London

BDSM subculture between the “old scene” and “new scene”. The old scene is characterized by rigid roles in both subcultural gatherings and in one’s private life. The BDSM meetings are very formal and 122 relationships restrained. It is a small scene and provides a limited choice of subcultural behavioral patterns. Furthermore, the roles are rigidly set along a reversed gender axis: females are expected to be dominant and males are expected to be submissive (Beckmann, 2009). The new scene in London, by contrast, entails a fluid switching of roles. It comprises both full members (“the real dedicated members”) and “drifting members”, i.e. people who temporarily join the BDSM subculture and then leave it. Beckmann (2009) interprets the drifting members in the new scene using Maffesoli’s (1996) notion of the emergence of the fluid tribes in postmodern western societies, which are closely linked to the subcultural subversive potential as well as to the mainstream consumer culture.

Beckmann (2009) argues that the new generations’ scene has become commercialized: there are fashion shows, groups seek to make money from the scene, and some people attend events simply to observe rather than participate.

Leos (from a discussion forum): Once, some time ago, I created a nice scenario and behold,

a novice – observing it was pulling out his camera. I … began to explain it to him

extensively... and he obviously did not listen to me; it was too much extra-philosophical

bullshit, and I would not listen to myself either.

The new scene also contains a substantial amount of new technological innovations in bodily practices.

Furthermore, the new scene suffers from a lack of security and orientation, which the old structure provided since, previously, everyone knew the rules and limits and abided by them. Beckmann connects this with deeper shifts in mainstream society – the defining limits of sexuality have become more elastic.

This chapter investigates the generational difference in the Czech BDSM subculture by comparing Beckmann’s (2009) view of the development of the old and new BDSM scene in London with the development of the BDSM scenes in the Czech Republic. The “canonical generation” in this case was the group of people who created the Czech BDSM scene when the communist regime collapsed. Since some scholars claim that it takes two generations for the communist cultural legacy to 123 evaporate, I would expect the younger generation to be less influenced by the more conservative gender roles that dominated the communist era and more influenced by the international post-modernist trend of having multiple identities that are less structured and more fluid.

Method This chapter applies ethnographic methodology in studying the Czech BDSM subculture

(Goodall, 2000; Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007). This includes participant observation and analyzing messages and discussion posts in the virtual space, participatory observation, interviews with selected respondents and short informal questions in the physical space.

The goal of traditional ethnography was to comprehend the native’s point of view of life and to recreate his vision of his world (Malinowski, 2014). Whereas traditional ethnography (Malinowski,

2014; Boas, 1938; Radcliffe-Brown, 1965; Evans-Pritchard, 1968) mostly studied settings anchored in a particular physical place, ethnography in a postmodern world should be able to study a fluctuating environment with a substantial use of communication technologies between the members of the studied setting.

During the participatory observations, the researcher should be known and recognized by the participants, and the researcher’s aim is to play a neutral role (Spradley, 1980). In this case, the meetings included six BDSM events in two Czech cities in 2018 and 2019. To increase the validity of the data, I used the triangulation method, in which several sources of data were used to answer the same questions. In addition to interviews and participatory observation, this entailed following numerous discussions in BDSM Facebook groups and discussion forums, monitoring personal

Facebook pages and conducting a number of informal online conversations. The first step was to read the forums/discussions and attend events, as the information could be used to help formulate questions for the interviews. Thus, I only used interview quotes that have confirmed observations from attending events and/or reading the groups’ internet pages.

124 In all chapters, the names and all possible identifying signs of the respondents have been anonymized. The forty-six most common Czech names were chosen for the anonymization of names.

For anonymization of the locations, sixty-six Czech names of infrequent fungi were chosen, while for the names of different things, twenty-eight Czech names of infrequent plants were used. Lots were drawn to choose the exact names to avoid any pattern in assigned names.

The interviews were semi-structured: there was a manual listing interview topics, but the respondents were expected to speak freely about the given topic. Therefore, the interview became a free narration of the subject to reveal one’s subjective views and opinions that allows interviewees to propose possible relationships and connections (Spradley, 1979). I used the targeted snowball method for selecting interviewees. This included asking older subcultural members face-to-face and also asking participants in the Facebook discussion groups to recommend contacts to the founders of the Czech

BDSM community. I interviewed 10 members of the older generation. The scene members agreed these were the first organizers of BDSM meetings in the Czech Republic. The respondents from the

“younger” generation were suggested as the most visible ambassadors of each “youngster” BDSM subgroup. I conducted five interviews with the younger generation, but additional information came from participatory observation of their events as well as by monitoring their social network websites.

Following Westbrook (2008), I synthesized the materials from various sources in a personal conceptualization of the space. The data analysis is therefore emergent and contextual (Bernard, 1998).

As Westbrook (2008) notes, the ethnographic text is not a mechanical reproduction or a mirror of the real situation; it is a product of negotiation and conversation undertaken by the ethnographer.

Therefore, the expressions of ethnographer are, in principle, unique and the data cannot be reproduced.

What ethnography can offer is a deep, but also inescapably personal, understanding of a situation.

Thus, this study is based on a personal understanding of the inter-generational change in the Czech

BDSM scene based on participatory observations, interviews and analysis of the groups’ web pages.

125 Results Members of the Czech BDSM subculture themselves distinguish between two generations who have been active since the fall of communism. This division manifests itself most clearly in that some participants are invited to events listed for the new “younger” community, while others are invited to events run by the “older” (canonical) community. The division began as a generational rebellion, as the younger generation began organizing its own events in 2012 and banned members of the older generation from entering its events. This step led to heated discussions on the internet, with the older generation accusing the younger one of violating subcultural rules. The subculture was never purely monolithic, yet it was still rather cohesive. However, this cohesiveness disintegrated with the appearance of the new generation. With the gradual separation of the two groups, the older generation began to move from active resistance to resigned disinterest.

The younger generation began rebelling in Brno, and subsequently the rebellion expanded to

Prague. Members of the older, canonical generation give two reasons for this generational split, while members of the younger generation give three additional reasons. The first reason the older generation gives is that members of the younger generation want to discover BDSM by themselves, and thus it is an adolescent rebellion. The second reason is that older male-dominant elites constitute competitors with the younger male-dominants for the younger submissive women, as such women often are attracted to older men, who become father figures.

The younger generation adds that the events of the older generation do not fulfill the erotic dreams of the younger generation. The second additional reason they give is that older men often harass younger submissives against their will or peek at them (without participating). Additionally, besides increasing competition for female subs, the behavior of the older male-dominants also bothers the younger women.

Irena (young generation): (…) when a new girl came, she immediately became an object of

interest for the elders – in some kind of unpleasant spirit, because they were applying to them

126 their old ‘I’m the rough dominant’ role and a lot of girls didn’t like it, so they just stopped going

to those events and actually wanted to make their own environment in which they would feel

safe and understood by their own group.

This quote provides a good example of Alesina and Fuchs-Schündeln’s (2005) claim that it takes two generations for the communist influence on attitudes to wear off. Even though the communist regimes claimed to support gender equality, in reality they espoused conservative gender roles.

Although almost all women worked, women still were mainly responsible for the household and child- rearing, while men were more career oriented. As the communist regimes prevented an independent, feminist discourse from emerging, those growing up under the previous regime were not exposed to the international discourse about eliminating gender roles, sexual harassment, etc. (see Saxonberg &

Szelewa, 2007 for a literature review). Members of the younger generation, by contrast, have been exposed to these discourses, which make them less willing to blindly accept pre-ordained roles, while making them more sensitive to issues of sexual harassment.

The young generation also points out the differences in the roles of fetish materials as well as the different attitudes towards one’s body.

Irena (young generation): (...) today there is much greater appeal to [adhere] to some dresscode

(....) and actually the older generation does not know and does not understand why they should

invest [money] in this, if it does not belong to the BDSM (...). And I think the new generation is

much more focused on appearance (…) and in the older generation, let’s say that many of those

people don’t look completely representative, and I understand that maybe they [the new

generation] didn’t want to look at them. (...) [but] we’re also getting old, and then some kids

will come up saying ‘yeah, we won’t look at your puckered bodies and we will just make our

own party.’

This desire among the younger generation to dress up also indicates that the communist cultural legacy is indeed dying out, as the “modernist” values espoused by the communist regime are being 127 replaced by the “post-modernist” values that dominate international cultural trends, which emphasize more self-expression and individuality.

In the mind of the younger generation, the old, (canonical) generation has become “the dinosaurs”. These dinosaurs became the elites, against whom the younger generation rebelled. Most of the old generation members are male-dominants, although there are occasionally female dominatrixes, submissive males and females. The gender division between the BDSM roles is unequal in both of the generations. The older generation has a significant lack of dominant females, as does the new generation. However, the new generation has more “switching” females who, depending on the context, can sometimes also be dominant. This contradicts the London case, in which the majority of dominants among the old generation were women, but it fits well with the modern-postmodern split in the Czech

Republic. Since the old generation grew up during communist rule, which encouraged traditional gender roles, while the younger generation grew up in an era in which they were exposed to post- modern values and discourses on abandoning gender roles, it is not surprising that most dominants among the old generation were males and this dominance is decreasing among the new generation.

Erik, from the younger generation, explains that the lack of dominant females in the older generation leads to high demand for them. Meanwhile, Irena (younger generation) notes that there are more switches in [the new generation] community, and thus it depends on the thematic setting whether there will be a dominant female or not. Thus, ironically, even though there is a tendency to associate BDSM with role-playing, the young generation is less tied to pre-ordained roles and is more willing to switch roles. This also goes along with the post-modern cultural influence of post- communism that emphasizes the possibility of multiple identities. It also reflects the post-modern feminist discourse against pre-conceived gender roles.

To give another example, the older generation does not understand the current rapid growth of shibari (Japanese-style bondage) among the younger generation. For the older generation, bondage was more of a marginal practice and carried out in other ways than the shibari tradition. 128 Jakub (older generation): The bondage [shibari] events are being held by several different

groups, because it is fashionable now; I find it about as exciting as watching lacquer dry.

Andrea (younger generation): (…) the shibari and BDSM communities are actually more or

less separate. (…) For a lot of people who do shibari, it is more like a kind of spiritual or

work with their own mind and body. But I think BDSM is more focused on a physical

experience [instead of a spiritual experience] as pleasure and sex as such.

Thus, the newer generation has become more westernized and accepting of a diversity of tastes and multiple identities (Muggleton, 2000; Muggleton & Wienzierl, 2004). Consequently, it no longer sees certain BDSM practices as an essential element.

Martin (older generation): The new generation protests against the old guard’s

emancipation by the [emancipating] label ‘weirdo’ [in Czech: ouchyl, label of the old

generation], they [the new generation] ‘have a wide range of sexual activities.’

Irena (older generation): I think [BDSM] is just one part [of the identity of the new

generation] so it is not so essential. Actually, I think it is often said that sexuality is not as

important (…) [for the new generation], like it’s a more marginal part of their lives. (…)

Perhaps it is also the effort not to fall into a stereotype, and BDSM for them is not the

primary focus [of their lives].

Once again, the younger generation has more post-modern values, is more individualistic, and therefore does not feel as bound to certain pre-conceived BDSM roles and wants to avoid falling into stereotypes. This generational shift also ties into the changing discourse on gender roles, as the new generation is exposed to international feminist discourse. As Andrea describes it from the view of the new generation:

(…) during an event, the guy may be dominant and the girl submissive and they both enjoy

it, but then they come home and are just quite normal, simply gender-equal. (...) [In the new 129 generation] the man is on maternity leave and cares for a baby. I think, in the older

generation, by contrast, the dominant [man] would actually lose the respect of the

submissive [girl], if he entered that sort of role. And I think that [people] in today’s

generation do not really care about it [the role division], as it [BDSM] is more a thing

directly associated with the erotism, rather than as a lifestyle in general.

In contrast to the fluidity of the new generation, members of the old generation identify themselves usually as only being dominant or submissive. While the sadistic and masochistic aspects of

BDSM do not carry any given ritual subcultural behavior, the dominant and submissive aspects do. The ritual behavior of the dominant and the submissive was expected and required among the older generation – including the fulfillment of stereotypical ideas about how such a dominant and submissive should look and behave.

Martin (older generation): The dominant is bulletproof, stainless, terribly rich and never

fails. The submissive is quiet, obedient and tenderly loving, and this has plenty of tasks

[symbolic expressions] from [the submissive] lying in the corner [of the room] through [the

submissive wearing] the collars, [to proper] addressing [of their BDSM partner] (…).

Erik (younger generation): Previously (...) the older generation assumed (...) that the

dominant must also be a sadist (…) and the sub to be a masochist. Over time it [changed]

more and more because it is more talked about; it is in the professional publications,

lectures and so on, so it separated as the dominant one does not necessarily have to be a

sadist and the sub does not necessarily have to be a masochist.

Thus, members of the younger generation now can choose various aspects of sadism and masochism, without needing to adhere to ritual behavior. While dominance and submissiveness do not necessarily require expressions to be explicitly sexual, sadism and masochism usually do. According to the older generation, sadism and masochism are primarily sexual techniques used to provoke erotic 130 feelings. Thus, the older generation considers sadism-masochism simply one of the many possible sexual techniques that can be performed within a relationship. Within the dominant-submissive field, sadism-masochism is the primary form of the relationship between two people. It is not usually about erotic feelings, but rather about training the sub to become a good slave. Thus, erotic feelings have little space.

Martin (older generation): The technique itself does not excite me, but it excites me that it

is my partner who is using it against me, who makes me return to the right place, where I

want to be, and where I want to be pushed even by violence.

For the younger generation, by contrast, such activities as spanking and bondage are openly erotic endeavors that are not necessarily tied to pre-determined dominant and submissive roles. The older generation considers the younger generation to be apocryphal and promiscuous and calls the young generation “folk-costumed swingers”.

While the older generation considers BDSM to be an inner, unchanging part of one’s personality and lifestyle, it claims the younger generation only sees BDSM as a role-playing game. Martin (older generation) complains that members of the new generation “act as if it were a play, (...) and take it much more like a game”, while the old generation sees “BDSM as part of a lifestyle.” Irena of the younger generation basically agrees and notes that for her generation “it’s not like 24/7 but it’s just like

‘hey we’ll go to the party, we’ll do some things there and then we’ll go back to our normal life’.”

Seeing BDSM as a game has also been influenced by the arrival of LARP (live-action-role-play, a role- playing game in which the participants physically portray their characters). LARP fits in well with the post-modern view in which people have multiple identities rather than one stable role.

The older generation claims that BDSM is coming closer to LARP games, because BDSM itself is no longer enough for the younger generation, and that they are looking for extra things that make the usual BDSM practices special. The younger generation confirms this view and explains it with a need for experience and exploring. 131 Andrea (younger generation): [the new generation is] much more focused on experience, on

experiencing. Like they need to have something new all the time – a new supply of

emotions, experiences, whether positive or negative, and I think role-playing is related to

that a lot; they don’t really want to do it every time the same way; they don’t want to stay

on the same tracks (....)

Since identities are more fluid among the new generation and BDSM does not play such a central role in their lives as it did for the old generation, practitioners often come and leave the subculture at will.

Erik (younger generation): (…) people disappeared [from the BDSM community],

and then they came back because they found out they were ‘weirdos’.

Fashion also influences the composition of BDSM practices in the subculture. In the participatory observation, it is clearly visible that some subgroups are shrinking and some are becoming larger, while new ones appear.

Bozena (from a discussion forum): I don’t like it and I find it nonsense. Years ago, this term

[switch] did not exist at all. It’s just a strange fashion lately.

The current fashionable subgroups include shibari and LARP role play. It is also becoming trendy to organize events limited to one theme.

Vratislav (from a discussion forum): today; among young people [BDSM] is the same

fashion as Facebook, mobiles, pub hopping and dudhism. So today, according to their

profile status, almost every girl is positive to BDSM, just as every [girl] does some sport,

although you will come across real submissives and sports-based women about zero times

in your lifetime.

Martin (older generation): Today, it is also driven by fashion. Shibari is fashionable today,

so everyone goes to bondage events. In the past, the bondage theme was very marginal (....) 132 Andrea (younger generation): I think that also in BDSM there are fashion trends, that it

[shibari] is simply a matter of fashion, (…) just a trend. Like anything else.

Discussion Beckmann (2009) found that in London, the old scene had more rigid roles than the new scene.

This study of the Czech BDSM scene shows that a similar division exists. However, in London, females were expected to be dominant and males were expected to be submissive (Beckmann, 2009).

In the Czech Republic, by contrast, roles were reversed as men were usually the dominant ones (except for the professional sphere of professional dominatrixes, which is only partly connected to the BDSM subculture).

Beckmann (2009) also concludes that the new scene in London has become commercialized and characterized by a fluid switching of roles. It contains numerous new technological innovations in bodily practices and lacks the integrity and security that the old scene’s structure provided. This is partly true for the Czech “new scene” as well. It too is highly commercialized and role-switching has become far more common than rigid BDSM roles. Sometimes Czech practitioners even change roles in the middle of a scene.

Denis (from a discussion forum): I am still thinking about my classification and I feel that it

changes according to the position of the stars.

Alexandr (from a discussion forum): When I was 30, for the first time I admitted (after 10 years

of giving) that I could get beaten from a woman. And shortly thereafter, I thought it would be

interesting to give and receive at the same time. I started to call it parallel spank – and during it,

the woman and I stood side by side and from beating with hands we moved to tools... If you are

amphibians and haven’t tried it yet, test what it is like. 133 Dana (from discussion forum): So, I’m a switch and I have a switch partner. With us sometimes,

(...) we change and switch roles in one scene. (…) I cannot, very honestly, imagine my partner

just a dom or just a sub, because sooner or later I would be missing one side of the coin and I

would like to find the enjoyment elsewhere, which is a bit unpleasant.

According to Beckmann (2009), the old scene was more into role-play, but the new scene is more into “just doing” BDSM. Similarly, in the Czech Republic there was more focus on the dominant and submissive aspect of BDSM among the older Czech generation, while the younger generation focuses more on various techniques of sadism and masochism, which does not necessarily involve traditional BDSM role-play. Instead, the younger Czech generation has substituted traditional role-play based on dominant and submissive persons with a more “LARP” (live-active-role-play-game) type role-play. LARP enables participants in events either to switch between BDSM identities or also between other identities, depending on the theme of the event and preferable character for the time of the event.

How can we explain this development and the differences from the London scene? In the Czech

Republic, the “canonical generation” (Ben-Ze’ev, 2009) that initiated the BDSM scene grew up and was socialized under communist rule. In this period, gender roles were rather conservative in that women were expected to be responsible for the household and men would concentrate on their careers.

Although most women worked, they had long maternity leaves and were not expected to be career oriented (Saxonberg & Szelewa, 2007). Thus, for this generation it was more “natural” for men to take on the dominant role as a continuation of traditional gender roles.

Moreover, during communist rule, the economy was based on heavy industry, which supports

“modern” rather than post-modern values. Because of censorship, the population was cut off from the postmodern debates about such topics as feminism and eliminating gender roles, environmentalism, etc. Thus, even in the 1990s the country scored high on scales of modern values, but low on scales of post-modern values (e.g. Inglehart, 1997). This old generation of BDSM practitioners was therefore 134 highly influenced by modern values, which were more rigid. Consequently, it encouraged a more rigid view toward “traditional” BDSM roles. Those with modernist values were also more likely to adhere to some core identity; therefore, BDSM comprised a major focus of their self-identity.

If Alesina and Fuchs-Schündeln (2005) are correct that it takes about two generations to erase the influence of communism on popular attitudes, then it would mean that the younger generation is still influenced somewhat by the communist regime, but much less so than the older generation. In an open society, it is common for the “decisive generation” (Spitzer, 1973) to rebel against the old generation and attempt to go their own way and produce new thoughts. The younger generation perceives the “dinosaurs” as part of an authoritarian elite that attempts to prescribe its values on the

“bunnies.”

These bunnies grew up in a country that was no longer repressed by a dictatorship. They have been exposed to postmodern ideas against traditional gender roles, ideas supporting personal autonomy and the acceptance of multiple, simplified identities. People with postmodern values are less likely to feel they have to shape their lives around one, all-encompassing identity. They are more likely to want to have a fluid life in which they can go between different identities. Since they are aware of the discourse against traditional gender roles, they are less likely to think that men should behave in a more

“traditional,” macho, dominant manner and women in a submissive manner.

BDSM subculture members are against rigid roles, but they like role-playing. Enjoying role- playing while disliking roles might sound like a contradiction, but it is not if one emphasizes the word

“playing” in role-playing. For the bunnies, different types of BDSM practices are fun, erotic games that one can play. One can switch roles and move around between roles. They do not have to be confined to one particular role. Their roles encompass whatever they choose to play, not what they are expected to play. Ironically, even though one might associate BDSM with authoritarian personalities, as one might think of masters/mistresses and slaves as people conforming to authoritarian roles as leaders or followers, by rebelling against the dinosaurs’ insistence on adhering to rigid, pre-determined roles, the 135 bunnies could be seen as anti-authoritarian rebels, who fight for the right to interpret BDSM any way they want.

For the old generation, a downside of this new trend is that it seems as if BDSM has become a smorgasbord where people can pick and choose what they want. They can come to the scene and leave it whenever they want. They are more like tourists looking for nice souvenirs, seeking nice experiences, rather than “true” members of a community. In their view, what the movement has gained in social acceptance, it has lost in authenticity.

This trend is somewhat similar to the London scene, with the notable exception that gender roles have been more conservative in the Czech scene as men are more likely to be dominant in the

Czech Republic, while women are more likely to be the dominant ones in London. However, this prolongation of traditional gender roles has weakened among the more post-modern new generation of

Czech BDSM practitioners. In addition, it appears that the young generation in the Czech Republic has been more greatly influenced by LARP than their English counterparts, which probably strengthens their tendency to see BDSM as playing roles rather than having a role.

136 7. Chapter Seven – How Does the BDSM Subculture Frame Its Identity in the Context of Institutions? Symbolic Boundaries between BDSM Identity and Non-BDSM Identity

Introduction Recently, much has been written about BDSM in the mainstream media and in academic research. As Chancer (1992) states, public awareness of sadomasochism is increasing. Narratives of

BDSM are reaching the point where they can be heard in public, with the onset of BDSM topics appearing in popular television programs and American films distributed around the world (Langdridge

& Butt, 2004; Plummer, 1995). BDSM has been commodified in particular ways to sell almost everything, for example, even yogurts in supermarkets (e.g. Beckmann, 2001a; Sisson, 2005). Although the topic of BDSM is present nearly everywhere in postmodern everyday life, we still may assume that it is not BDSM practitioners themselves who are more visible, but only the images associated with

BDSM. Moreover, the ways in which BDSM is presented on the body (clothing, piercings) are becoming more visible and more acceptable in the mainstream context (Barker, Antaffi & Gupta,

2007). Sex shops and popular magazines often encourage heterosexual women to adopt BDSM practices to spice up their sex life and maintain their partner’s interest (e.g. Scarlet magazine, 2006), while strictly delimiting these “spiced up” BDSM practices against the “true” BDSM (Storr, 2003). In this chapter, I analyze how the process of the self-identification of Czech BDSM practitioners with the broader BDSM subculture has evolved since the Velvet Revolution (1989) to the present. I start this chapter with a short introduction, continue with the outline of the theoretical approach to identities and identity theory, and subsequently present the chapter’s approach to ethnographical methodology. I then present the results and end the chapter with a conclusion and discussion section.

Gebhard (1969) and Weinberg & Kamel (1983) suggest that the BDSM subculture possess its foundation in the culture of the wider society, and as such it is worth exploring it to understand the 137 culture of the whole society. Other authors focus more on the important role of sadomasochism in facilitating the understanding of the sexual shift in late modernity (Giddens, 1992; Plummer, 1995;

Weeks, 1998). For Giddens (1992), the discovery of new sexuality was made possible by new technologies that released sexuality from its traditional bonds with reproduction and, consequently

(with multiple pregnancies and related illnesses) from its ties to death. This resulted in the transformation of intimacy in late modernity – one of the consequences was the discovery of plastic sexuality, sexuality focusing on pleasure rather than reproduction or romantic love. Giddens (1992) associates this with the advent of a new type of relationship, which is based rather on negotiation and open and explicit knowledge of each individual’s desires instead of being based on the traditional ties of patriarchal power and inequality. He sees this ideal type in some of its characteristics in homosexual relationships. According to Barker (2005), a sadomasochistic relationship could also be conceived in some way as a prototype of a pure relationship in Giddens’s perception of relationships. Some feminist movements (such as the Movement in the 1980s, P. Califia, S. Bright or C. Paglia) promoted

BDSM identities and used them as a key space for negotiation within the feminist movement.

According to Califia (1980), BDSM can also be considered a form of queer identity because it occupies a place in this discourse as one of the transgressive forms of behavior against which the dominant form of identity can be defined.

More recently, Ritchie and Barker (2005) have used BDSM scenes to portray parallels between

BDSM perception and a queer perception of traditional gender roles in sex and relationships. They use

BDSM scenes as material for parodying sexual relationships, which are traditionally considered gender-subduing and oppressive, and present them as mocking scenes, undermining traditional hetero- normative power relationships (Ritchie & Barker, 2005). Moreover, BDSM can potentially provide an alternative to the strong imperatives of the perception of sex as genital-centered, as well as disrupt the perception of reproduction in heterosexual sexuality (Califia, 1980).

138 Rust (2000) and Sedgwick (1990) argue that people tend to focus on gender as on the only characteristic relevant to the topic of sexuality. In this view, BDSM represents the need for a broader understanding of sexuality and the inclusion of factors such as the relative power of the actors involved, the way in which the physical act is performed and the number of people involved in the activities (Barker, 2005). Weiss (Weiss, M.D., 2006c) adds that the mainstream media give more and more space to BDSM, although they tend to either normalize or pathologize this behavior. Weiss also shows how the pathologization of BDSM behavior occurs primarily in connection with non- heterosexual or non-monogamous relationships.

Not only do psychotherapists and psychiatrists treat this behavior and human identities as deviant, but also the state intervenes directly to prevent such activities, even if they take place in private (Weiss, M.D., 2006c). Thus, BDSM practitioners may find themselves under close scrutiny or possibly also under the medical imperative of mental health or the legal system, even if they are involved in consensual sexual activities (Langdridge & Butt, 2004). The National Coalition for Sexual

Freedom survey Violence & Discrimination outlined the possibilities of discrimination and persecution that might exist against BDSM minorities. The results of this research suggest that 30 percent of

BDSM practitioners have felt discriminated, predominantly by loss of employment, loss of support and loss of childcare, and 36 percent of BDSM practitioners have been the victims of sexual harassment

(NCSF, 1998).

The mainstream can use many discursive strategies against or towards the discrimination of certain minorities. Using the concept of social construction of reality by Berger and Luckmann (1966),

I can assume that through the use of language and the repetition of discursive practices, this predominant way of describing a reality becomes an individual’s way of interpreting his lived reality.

Presenting some kinds of thinking, practices or people as deviant or abnormal or reducing their wholeness only to their non-majority sexuality is an easy means of discursively constructing oppression. On the other hand, presenting the same people in their entirety as persons with their own 139 goals, plans, occupations, emotions, family and children goes against this discursive practice. Some activist groups therefore also base their activism on the discursive practices. For example Weiss (Weiss,

M.D., 2008) shows how particularly the NCSF group seeks to move the media representation of BDSM away from depicting the practitioners in terms of waste, deviation, perversion and torture towards portraying them as parents, friends, co-workers and married couples.

Theoretical section This chapter scrutinizes what a BDSM identity is and how it has developed in the Czech

Republic. I explore what it has meant over time to have a BDSM identity in the Czech Republic and describe the development of the self-identifications of Czech BDSM practitioners with BDSM. I link this individual and collective identity development to the approach of Czech society towards BDSM.

The notion of identity is used in sociological texts in two relatively different meanings. The first is based on a biological premise and focuses on the permanence and immutability of an individual’s identity (Callahan, 2011); the second on its randomness and negotiation (Brubaker & Cooper, 2000;

Eisenstadt, 2003; Goffman, 1967, 1971). I use the concept of identity in the second meaning, which is connected to Goffman’s (1967) theory of interactive rituals. Its main assumptions are that human identity is socially constructed, negotiated by interactions, present to people even if they are not themselves aware of it, and it considers identity something individuals establish over time (Brubaker &

Cooper, 2000).

As Burke suggests, identity has its base either in group membership, in having certain roles, or in personal identities (Burke, 2003; Settles, 2004). It can be defined as a set of meanings attached to the self (Stets & Harrod, 2004), or precisely, the meanings that individuals hold for themselves – what it means to be who they are (Burke, 2003). The culture of identity then can be defined as the set of normative beliefs, values or ideologies (House, 1981).

140 Identity as such can be viewed from two perspectives (Stets & Harrod, 2004): the perspective of the individual and the perspective of significant others (Mead, 1934). This corresponds to identity theory (Burke, 1980; McCall & Simmons, 1978; Stryker, 1968; Turner, 1978), which operates with multiple identities (Stets & Harrod, 2004; Stryker & Burke, 2000) and defines these perspectives as two types of focuses – the internal focus and the external focus (Stryker & Burke, 2000). In the internal focus, the emphasis is on how the multiple identities function within the self, on self-verification, and on the implications of identities for self-verification (Burke, 2003). In the external focus, the identity of an individual is tied to the social structure. It depends highly on the salience (the probability of being activated) of the identity (Stryker, 1980), on how much the particular identity is tied to self-verification

(Burke, 2003) and also on the commitment (the strength of the individuals’ tie to the identity) of the individual to it (Stryker & Serpe, 1982). Commitment can be either extensive, where the focus is on the number of the people with the same identity, or emotional, where the focus is on the emotional attachment to others with the same identity (Stryker & Serpe, 1982).

According to identity theory (Burke, 1980; McCall & Simmons, 1978; Stryker, 1968; Turner,

1978), social behavior is defined as a reciprocal relation between the self and society. Society in this perspective is complex and differentiated but organized, and also the self is a multifaceted and organized construct (Hogg, Terry & White, 1995). The concept of roles is important for identities (Stets

& Burke, 2000; Settles, 2004). McCall & Simmons (1978) define identification as the naming and classifying of the self in relation to other social categories (McCall & Simmons, 1978).

Identity theory has much in common with social identity theory (Hogg, Terry & White, 1995).

They both consider the self as constituted by society and they also consider the existence of the self in multiple identities (Hogg, Terry & White, 1995). Nevertheless, social identity theory (Hogg, 1992,

1993; Hogg & Abrams, 1988; Tajfel & Turner, 1979; Turner, 1982) takes as a base for identity social categories or groups (Stets & Burke, 2000) as they provide a definition of the self (Hogg, Terry &

141 White, 1995). The process of self-categorization in this view consists of naming and classifying the self in relation to other social categories (Turner, et al., 1987).

The identity control theory (Stets & Harrod, 2004) describes the model of identity formation in social interactions. A particular social situation activates a particular identity and the individual interacts with others with this identity. After an interaction, the individual receives feedback from others and compares their view with his own identity standard. If a discrepancy occurs between the two, it leads to modification of the individual’s behavior. The whole process then repeats. If an individual receives a reaction from others that is congruent with his or her identity standard, then identity verification occurs (Stets & Harrod, 2004).

Every individual has multiple identities (Stets & Harrod, 2004; Burke, 2003; Stets, 1995;

Settles, 2004; Orbe, 2004; Burke, 2003; Stryker & Burke, 2000; Hogg, Terry & White, 1995), which depend on multiple positions in the social structure (Stets & Harrod, 2004) or the multiple group membership of the individual (Settles, 2004; Orbe, 2004; Hecht, Jackson & Ribeau, 2003; Burke,

2003). These multiple identities are arranged hierarchically (McCall & Simmons, 1978; Stryker, 1980) and, according to Stets & Harrod (2004), the individual uses only one identity in a situation, though the individual is able to use multiple frameworks in a situation (Goffman, 1974), which can sometimes even be intersecting (Vliegenthart & van Zoonen, 2011). The relationship between multiple identities provides a clear link between the social structure and the individual (Burke, 2003).

The communication theory of identity (Orbe, 2004) describes identity as a communication process (Hecht, Jackson & Ribeau, 2003; Orbe, 2004). Identity is located in four frames: it is either in individuals, in relationships, in groups (Orbe, 2004), or between partners and group members (Golden,

Niles & Hecht, 2002). These frames of reference are either competing or complementary (Golden,

Niles & Hecht, 2002) and they interpenetrate occasionally (Hecht, 1993). The personal frame views identity as a result of self-conception (Hogg, Terry & White, 1995; Orbe, 2004), self-cognitions, and sense of well-being (Golden, Niles & Hecht, 2002). The expression frame views identity as an 142 enactment of individual identity to others (Orbe, 2004) – it contains a message (direct or indirect) that a person sends, which expresses his identity (Orbe, 2004). The relationship frame states that identity emerges through relationship with others, through which individuals construct their own identities

(Golden, Niles & Hecht, 2002; Hecht, Jackson & Ribeau, 2003). The communal frame locates identity in the collective or public memory of a group, which bonds the group together (Hecht, Jackson &

Ribeau, 2003).

According to some authors (Settles, 2004), group identity is beneficial because it provides social validation, a framework for interpreting the world (Settles, 2004), and also scripts how to behave

(Thoits, 1987). Multiple and group identities can lead to benefits but also to interference of the identities (Van Sell, Brief & Schuler, 1981; Settles, 2004). Interference then leads to higher stress and lower self-esteem of the individual (Settles, Sellers & Damas, 2002) due to either the threat to the sense of self (Thoits, 1991) or pressure that diminishes the coping strategies of the individual (Cooke &

Rousseau, 1984) or the individual’s overtax of cognitive resources (Fried et al., 1998).

BDSM subculture has to fight for recognition, engages in vocal militancy and also attempts to remove the stereotypes of being perceived as mentally ill or generally abnormal. Therefore, it shows some clear links between the US gay social movement as described by Koehler (1998). Although

BDSM is not as visible or militant as the gay movement was, it apparently has numerous similar features. Gays were “outed”, they wanted equality in civil rights and they fought against discrimination in the family and workplace (Koehler, 1998). They also stood up against poor police treatment, against negative labeling of their erotica, and against denial of their authenticity (Koehler, 1998). These are all themes that resonate in the contemporary and historical BDSM subculture in the Czech Republic.

Therefore, in a broad link with the gay movement of the late 1960s (as Koehler 1998 describes it), I perceive the BDSM subculture here as a type of a social movement. For my analysis of the development of BDSM identity in the Czech Republic, I also need to consider influences on identity from the outside, such as state repression and state control. Therefore, to fully understand the processes 143 involved in forming the personal and collective identity of BDSM practitioners in Czech Republic over time, I also need to include an explanation of the state’s approach towards BDSM practitioners and their interrelated viewpoints.

For the emergence and success of a social movement, two elements are important – the mobilization of resources and collective frames (Swaminathan & Wade, 1999). Regarding mobilization of resources, social movements must adopt strategies that link them to supporters (Swaminathan &

Wade, 1999). The emergence of a social movement is facilitated by changes in the sociopolitical environment (Swaminathan & Wade, 1999), and the opportunity for new social movements appears when the political system becomes more open, when elites become unstable, when there is a possibility of an alliance with elites (Jenkins & Perrow, 1977; Tarrow, 1983), and also when the state’s ability to repress social movements weakens (McAdam, 1996 in Swaminathan & Wade, 1999). The theory of social movements defines two types of actors in the movements: first, R-strategy actors (regal, the letter “r” represents exponential growth), who appear first in a newly open field; and then K-strategy actors (kalyptic, the letter “k” represents the carrying capacity of a habitat), who appear later in the field (Brittain & Freeman, 1980 in Swaminathan & Wade, 1999). In addition, the theory defines either specialist actors, who have only one or a very limited range of resources, and generalist actors, who have a broad range of resources (Swaminathan & Wade, 1999).

Method In this chapter, I use the method of historical ethnography, defined by Vaughan (2004) as a deep analysis of how people in particular time and space perceive things and make meaning of everything.

My research questions are: “What does the BDSM identity in the Czech Republic mean?” and “How has the process of the self-identification of Czech BDSM practitioners evolved over time?”. Historical ethnography is highly suitable for analyzing the development of subcultures and underground social movements over time as it enables the researcher to recover the voices of suppressed groups (Gluck &

Patai, 1991; Herman, Jahn & Ryan, 2005). I follow Glaeser’s (2011) approach by relying mostly on 144 interviews with first-hand witnesses and secondly (partly) on archive materials such as period photographs, books, newspapers and magazines.

Due to the form of the interviews, in this chapter I primarily analyze the narratives. Although the long-term memory can be considered unreliable, according to some researchers, such as Herman,

Jahn and Ryan (2005), the long-term memory is surprisingly resilient. In addition, Vanek and Mucke

(2016) state that, thanks to the limits of long-term memory, we can efficiently research changes in respondents’ values over time. Further, subjectivity has its own “objective” laws, structures and maps, which can be reconstructed (Portelli, 1991).

To find the respondents, I used the targeted snowball method. I made a call for respondents on

Facebook, requesting a recommendation of people who practiced BDSM during communism and shortly after the Velvet Revolution. Similarly to the previous chapters, the names and all possible identifying signs of the respondents have been changed in this chapter.

As Herman, Jahn & Ryan (2005) put it, it is necessary to compile a range of interviews that will reflect differing points of view. I conducted fifteen face-to-face ethnographical interviews with a manual and six participant observations on the subcultural events, as well as numerous short informal interviews via email, messenger or phone and participant observation on virtual discussion forums and private Facebook discussion groups. During the interviews I had only three questions: “How was

BDSM under communism?”, “How was BDSM after the Revolution?”, and “How is BDSM now?”.

During the analysis of the data, the researcher should draw conclusions from the data that might not have been obvious when the situation occurred (Herman, Jahn & Ryan, 2005). Although it is not possible to acquire those through the method of historical ethnography, the researcher should always aspire, according to Portelli (1991), towards “reality”, “fact” and “truth”. I conducted the data analysis according to Goodson’s method (2012), called “bathing in the data”, which involves carefully reading the data while taking notes, isolating the themes inside the data and connecting these themes into meaningful structures until the data saturation appears. I synthesized the materials from various sources 145 in accordance with Westbrook (2008) in a personal conceptualization of the space. The ethnographic text is therefore a deep, but also inescapably personal understanding of a situation (Westbrook, 2008).

The BDSM identity During the communist regime in the Czech Republic, sadomasochistic practitioners would usually not go to jail for performing their sexual practices. Dominant individuals could be accused of causing harm to the health of others, because there was criminalization of BDSM practices by law, but this was not widely used in everyday practice. Rather, according to the subcultural members, allegedly secret child agents were used to put BDSM members into prison. As Michaela puts it:

Michaela: It often worked that they accused them of [doing BDSM activities with] an

under-age [person], it means they deployed a teen-like looking girl on a guy and he got a

penalty, not for being a sadist (…), but rather they bet on making him a pedophile and done.

Members of the BDSM subculture also feared the forced treatment of the diagnosis of sadomasochism. Parents sometimes put submissive and masochistic children into psychiatric facilities mostly under the diagnosis of psychic lability, depression, low self-esteem or suicidal tendencies. There were very few mentions of BDSM and sadomasochism in Communist Czechoslovakia in the available sources. The only known (and collected by the BDSM practitioners) were (non-BDSM) books by

Svandrlik, which were illustrated with (BDSM) pictures from Neprakta. Neprakta depicted mostly the spanking of women – the most known picture is the illustration of a hangman in a red hood whipping the bottom of a naked woman. Mentions were also in some scientific books, and there were also tabloid news articles on crimes committed by sex offenders. These articles were often the only commonly available source of information on sadomasochism for its practitioners, causing them to feel confused because they were unsure as to whether there were differences between their BDSM interest and violent sadism or not.

Premysl: When you were looking for sadomasochism, you ended up with a cut-into-pieces

Otylie Vranska [the most famous Czech murdered prostitute, quartered by a 146 sadomasochistic killer in 1933] and the knives that were in the police record. So, when you

found such appetites inside you, you thought: ‘And this is what will grow from me, right?’

Therefore, from this identity confusion emerged a motto of the post-revolutionary BDSM subculture. It was the sentence: “We are the people your parents warned you about” and it was related to the new self-awareness of sadomasochistic desires and their supposed unity with the desires of sexual offenders. Instead of rejecting any connection between consensual and non-consensual sadomasochism, a wave of all-encompassing self-identification of BDSM subculture members with their deviation appeared. In other words, members of the BDSM subculture began to assume that the sexual desires of consensual sadomasochists were the same as the sexual desires of non-consensual sex offenders. However, in a completely new way, they began to present this not with fear or disgust, but with pride.

From that position appeared the discursive re-designation of the term sadomasochist from a term with a negative connotation to a term with a positive connotation. This redesign act did not bring with it the desire to legitimize non-consensual sadomasochism. It was a proud manifestation of subcultural members who, although they had this particular deviance, were able to live in harmony with the society and the people around them (for example not hurting other people around them). This concept of self- identification (with the similarity of consensual and non-consensual sadomasochism) is very specific and limited to the Czech post-communist period. The concept of BDSM as similar, but separate from non-consensual deviant desire, was beginning to develop in the Czech Republic between 2010 and

2015, and this approach developed into the contemporary Czech view that BDSM is completely different from deviations, because the consensuality itself is the basic definition of BDSM.

General fear persisted from communist times to post-revolutionary times. It was largely the fear of some unspecified vague form of persecution, which could include bodily harm, destroyed careers, fear of the reaction of significant others (Berger & Luckmann, 1966) and fear of the collapse of non-

BDSM relationships, marriage or family. People were gathering by subtle hints in print ads. After the 147 revolution, many magazines began to emerge on various topics, including erotic magazines with articles on BDSM, porn magazines, and even specialized SM porn magazines. To visit a meeting, considerable effort was necessary: buy a magazine, find out when the meeting was and where, call the landline phone number and confirm attendance and navigate to the meeting point with a paper map.

The meetings were designed to enable the people with BDSM interests to discover that there were other people with BDSM interests in the real world and also to find a suitable BDSM partner. The meetings were important because the BDSM person appeared like any other ordinary person and the

Czech BDSM community did not have any special secret identifying signs by which they could be recognized at first sight on the street. Recognizing the BDSM interests of other people was limited to recognizing the “interest reactions” to subtle verbal and non-verbal references to BDSM and during the face-to-face contact.

Most members of the BDSM subculture were very keen on privacy and did not share names, addresses, or phone numbers with anyone. Most also had two different identities, one for everyday life

(official first and last name) and the second (a mostly completely anonymous nickname) for BDSM activities. Because of the ubiquitous fear, these identities were almost entirely separated at the beginning of the post-revolutionary period. The gradual blending of both identities began only after

2004 with the advent of Facebook (which, although this rule is not necessarily followed, required the real name and surname for the registration) and ultimately led to a significant reduction in the number of separate BDSM “weirdo” identities and the subsequent use of civil identities for BDSM purposes.

Michaela: Calling someone their first name was a crime against humanity (…). It was

perfectly normal to know someone for three, four years and not know his name.

Meetings were non-public, only for invited people and if someone wanted to come to a meeting, he had to go through a system of guarantors. This system consisted of finding usually two widely known members of the subculture who would “guarantee” a newcomer – accompanying him/her to the event, guarding her/him during the whole event, correcting her/his behavior and teaching him/her the 148 subcultural habits. If the newcomer causes any physical, mental or material harm to anyone, usually the two guarantors could be excluded from the subculture for life. Every newcomer needed to go through four events, each time with usually two guarantors. Only then was it possible for him/her to be admitted as a true member of the subculture, giving the opportunity to attend events alone, receive news about the subculture, and finally to become a guarantor himself/herself and bring new people to the subculture.

Michaela: It was a necessity at the time; we were all investigating whether this new one

was someone we didn’t want. Of course, it was terribly naive, because when you look at the

rules, if someone really wanted [to break them], he would break them through. But we were

stupid, well, young and stupid.

The mainstream society was not very tolerant towards BDSM, and often because of subcultural manifestations, members of the BDSM subculture had no access to various cultural spaces.

Michaela: We were kicked out of the pub. That we are weird. Yeah, not that we committed

something, like stripping, not at all. All we did was just sit at one table and pass a whip

under the table. (…) And then the bartender came saying that the usual regulars didn’t want

us there.

Restaurant customers were not the only ones who were relatively intolerant of BDSM manifestations. Prejudices about members of the BDSM subculture were widespread. The general public associated subcultural members with sex offenders, including all negative connotations and stereotypes of predicted behavior. One dominatrix was fired from her job as a high school teacher; one presenter was nearly fired from his job at a TV station.

Michaela: When something [about particular person and his/her connection to BDSM]

emerged somewhere, it was a terrible disaster. Immediately, he was identified as one who

simply lures a young child with a sack of candy and cuts him into servings of meat

somewhere in a cellar. 149 Due to the limited access to information, members of the BDSM subculture were less likely to find their affection for sadomasochistic practices early in life, and their self-identification with an existing subculture took a considerably long amount of time. Some members of the BDSM subculture speak about six months between the self-awareness of their desires and deciding whether or not to join the subculture.

Michaela: (...) we were finding out [that we like BDSM] for months, and you never find

[somewhere] any mention [of BDSM] and then it took two months to dexterously check if

it’s a scam or if it was like yeeees [it is real] and then for the next two months fumbling and

thinking about how to contact somebody, so at the same time it would not burst on him

[nobody would find out our identity and connect it to BDSM].

Subculture members claim there was a significant shift in the approach of police authorities to

BDSM. The police authorities have moved from a strict approach to BDSM with active criminalization of BDSM practitioners using secret agents through the confused post-revolutionary period, to the contemporary period of silently monitoring the subculture. Given the different approaches of the police, the attitude of BDSM practitioners towards the police has also changed over time. They have shifted from almost paranoid fear of the police towards a short-lived feeling of ephemeral uncertainty.

A breakthrough event in the BDSM subculture was the appearance of Madame Hana in the TV show Tabu in 1995, in which an anonymous guest discusses marginal hot topics and is hidden behind an opaque screen, in a kind of large black box, and answers the audience’s questions from there.

Madame Hana decided unexpectedly at the end of the show to come out of the opaque screen and introduce herself to the camera with her full name, surname and place of residence. She was a teacher at a secondary school and the next morning she was dismissed. Subsequently, she became the most famous professional dominatrix in the Czech Republic. It was the beginning of the tendency of BDSM subculture members to come out of the closet publicly and unify the previously two separated identities

– the identity of BDSM life and the identity of everyday life. 150 Jan: Hana started it [the trend of coming out of the closet] when she appeared on Tabu,

which led to her dismissal, so she was fired immediately, and she did the most for the

BDSM community, she came out of the closet without any excuses.

Hana: My intention [in the appearance in Tabu or in coming out of the closet] was to reach

people and to break a taboo (…).

The internet came to the Czech Republic around 1990 and was first expanded primarily at universities around 1994, then spreading to public internet cafes and other schools. Only around 1998 did it reach households for normal home use. The advent of the internet was a turning point in the possibility of communicating about BDSM anonymously and independently of city and state borders.

At the same time, everyone did not have access to the internet, so at the beginning a virtual BDSM subculture was created mainly among students and the middle and upper class. With the internet,

BDSM ideas began to spread to the wider public, increasing the ability to communicate openly and to educate people about BDSM. With an increasing number of people it was easier to pay for the organization of events. At this time, BDSM was seen as a deep understanding of the human soul. Many people had just discovered BDSM and were recruited to the subculture from the general population through stories written by BDSM practitioners.

In the mid-1990s, the subculture gradually became emancipated and, in stark contrast to the past’s caution, it started to advocate that self-identification with BDSM subculture involves deliberate provocation of the mainstream culture. Members of the BDSM subculture began to call themselves

“weirdos” (in Czech: ouchylové) and identify themselves publicly with the BDSM subculture. At the same time, planned provocative events began. The basis of the subculture was around 200 or 300 people on the Bika internet server, and the main emancipators of the BDSM subculture were mostly people who significantly differed from the mainstream culture.

151 Martin: [The main persons were] exots, extroverts, exhibitionists and intellectuals. A jerk

can beat a wife, but he will not develop any theories and [he will not] demonstrate to

society that he has the right to live.

The first BDSM pages and discussion forums started on the Czech internet around 1995 and

1996. At that time, there were only chats and pictures, which, due to the very slow internet speed, took a long time to load. The first internet communication platform for BDSM was the Bulletin Board system, which was mainly for foreign erotic stories. Virtual BDSM communities in the Czech Republic were created on discussion servers at the beginning. Usual clubs also functioned as deliberate provocation meetings in public places where members of the BDSM subculture exhibited during normal pub opening hours.

Martin: The disco club, quite ordinary, was invaded by ‘weirdos’, Tereza, naked, only in a

leather harness, handed out bouquets of nettles to the unsuspecting vanillas [non-BDSM

people] to try it [the bouquet of nettles] that it [the bouquet of nettles] is great, then Premysl

tied Tereza up on some scaffolding (…). Great fun, people’s eyes nearly fell out of their

sockets (...) and basically it was, despite the provocation, it was also emancipation. We

came out [of the closet] among people. Nobody named it that way, [nobody] realized it,

but... just the fact that a lot of people went for it with their face was huge progress.

The Modralka.cz server was also the first BDSM website in the Czech Republic, where the authors used their true civic names. After the performance by Hana on Tabu, it was the second public act of voluntarily coming out of the closet by the Czech BDSM subculture – the first in the virtual world of the Internet. The provocative meetings in public continued, became ever-increasing in size and gradually exceeded the city limits of Prague.

Martin: I remember the Brno meeting, like in 98, 99, when fifty people toured with canes like

waving [things] through the night [of city] Brno and when we occupied the pub, which was

open until morning, the ‘weirdos’ were the vanillas [the non-BDSM people appeared like the 152 weird], because there were fewer of them. And everyone acted whatever we felt like – not that

we would beat up each other in pubs, but like no one was hiding anymore, on the contrary, like

we intensified our voice when we were sharing the experience of what is best to beat your ass,

that was one line of emancipation (…).

Between 2006 and 2009, the persecution of BDSM practitioners was no longer so common.

However, the public view of BDSM was far from mainstream. In one village pub, BDSM events were organized for several years until they somehow appeared on the main page of a Czech tabloid and the pub experienced a devastating loss of visitors. BDSM practices at this time were still regarded as something unacceptable that no one wanted to be associated with.

Jakub: Then a reporter from Hlinak got inside [the BDSM event], published it [the story

and photographs from the event] in Hlinak. It was a terrible mess. One friend – how those

photos got into the hands [of the reporter] nobody knows – he was there without a blurred

face tied to a cross, after [this] he didn’t have a good reputation in the [his] family, it didn’t

ruin his work, his career. But it ruined the pub, not many [non-BDSM] people went there

anyway, and more or less they stopped going there. [A non-BDSM person would say to

me]: ‘Well, I would go there, I like it there. Well, you’re a little more out-there [than I am].

But I can’t go there; they would consider me a pervert.’ So, as he [the non-BDSM person]

did not want them [other non-BDSM people] to say he is bad, he didn’t go there.

The major change in the subculture came with the arrival of Facebook on the Czech internet and its subsequent massive expansion during 2006 and 2008. At the beginning, most people had two different identities on Facebook in the form of two separate profiles – one for BDSM and the other for non-BDSM life. However, as Facebook has increasingly demanded the use of a real name and surname over time, the vast majority of BDSM subcultural members have combined the two profiles or integrated BDSM into their civil Facebook profile. Those who first merged the BDSM and the civil

153 Facebook profiles were the test cases of what happens when a subcultural member comes out of the closet. The members of the BDSM subculture found that there was no large-scale persecution.

Michaela: These people have shown that it is no big deal. That we have nothing to worry

about, that the only thing that can happen to us is that our closest [family, relatives, friends]

will find out and might not be able to cope with it.

Some members of the BDSM subculture explained that they deliberately disclosed their BDSM identity to the widest possible audience. They thought this would be an advantage both in their career and in their personal life. Regarding career, they did not have to worry about someone using their

BDSM identity against their career, which often occurred in various positional or opinion disagreements in the professional sphere.

Norbert: So when I sometimes write an article that somebody doesn’t like, he would

comment on it, with great flame, that Norbert is a pervert, and then everyone hammers him

into the ground [online, in the comments] because everyone knows that everyone in the

industry knows that Norbert is a pervert.

On the other hand, they followed some form of personal and subcultural emancipation. At a time when subcultural members could still encounter a great deal of persecution from society for their unusual interests, some were thinking pragmatically and considering the benefits and possible negatives that their public coming out might bring them. Negatives include, for example, the possible loss of significant others or loss of employment, while the positives include, for example, personal peace and unification with one’s own identity, setting a good example for other members of the subculture, and also the ease of finding a serious relationship within the wider BDSM subculture.

Premysl: I did it deliberately. I was 18 and thought, if not me, then who [should do it]? I

had nothing to risk; I left my hometown for college in Ostrava, which means I left at the

other end of the republic all the friends and contacts I ever had. I had no relationship, I had

no job, I was totally free, single and I thought to myself: So, who else should do it than me? 154 I was in an ideal situation, I had nothing to lose, I could only benefit, which is another

aspect: when nobody knows you are a weirdo, it is quite difficult to start dating [with

another BDSM practitioner, because it is difficult to find him/her].

Before the Velvet Revolution of 1989, BDSM practitioners usually had a hidden BDSM identity, which they revealed only to their closest friends. For most people around, the BDSM identity of the practitioner was inaccessible. In addition, the state had very powerful means to prevent BDSM practitioners from establishing a social movement, as the punishment ranged from jail to being committed to a psychiatric facility. The state also repressed the media and all available sources about

BDSM. Consequently, practitioners were unable to possess a collective identity frame of a BDSM practitioner, as the terminology and definition of BDSM remained strictly closed outside of the borders of the Czech communist regime.

The only thing that could serve as a collective identity frame of BDSM practitioners were tabloid articles about crimes committed by violent sex offenders. Therefore, when the BDSM subculture started to establish after the Velvet Revolution, the identity motto of the practitioners reflected this connection. The blending of the consensual BDSM subculture and non-consensual sexual offenders remained for around fifteen years among subcultural members in the Czech Republic, and the fact of consensuality was presented by BDSM practitioners with pride. The police shifted from active persecution to the silent monitoring of the BDSM subculture. With this new sense of collective identity pride came the desire to legitimize BDSM practices. This was manifested by subcultural “provocative” meetings, where the BDSM subcultural identity was publicly performed with the aim of re-labeling the previous fear to new courage and pride.

In approximately 2015, the subcultural discourse about BDSM shifted from identification with sexual offenders to a view of both as similar, but strictly separate. The discourse developed into the view of BDSM as completely different than non-consensual deviants. Subcultural members mostly used the internet as a means for gathering subcultural unity and identity. People shifted their BDSM 155 identities from completely hidden (before the revolution) to two divided identities – one for everyday life, one for BDSM practices. This shift of personal identities enabled the everyday subcultural life without the danger of persecution from broader mainstream society.

Conclusion During communism in the Czech Republic, there was considerable repression of BDSM.

Therefore, it was difficult for practitioners to balance the multiple identities (defined by Burke, 2003;

Hogg, Terry & White, 1995) in their lives, as the BDSM identity needed to be completely separated from usual everyday identities. In accordance with Settles, Sellers and Damas (2002), this interference of identities definitely led to higher stress and lower self-esteem of BDSM practitioners during Czech communism as the multiple identity frameworks (Vliegenthart & van Zoonen, 2011) were often intersecting.

The BDSM identity was situated mostly in individuals and relationships – there was no true

“BDSM group identity” during Czech communism. As the state was quite effective in repressing

BDSM activities, there was no public fight for the recognition of BDSM, no activism to remove the stereotypes or to fight against discrimination as described by Koehler in the case of the gay movement

(1998). BDSM practitioners were entirely “in the closet”, they did not publicly speak about their

BDSM practices nor did they publicly identify themselves with BDSM. There was no possibility to obtain feedback on one’s individual BDSM identity (as described in Stets & Harrod, 2004) other than from a partner, and thus we can assume that the variety of BDSM identities was highly differentiated.

However, there was also very little information about the possibilities of BDSM identities, which meant BDSM practitioners could not simply choose an identity from a palette – they needed to invent it from the very beginning.

The salience (Stryker, 1980) of the identity in everyday life was low, there was little BDSM stimulus present in everyday life, and also the extensive commitment (Stryker & Serpe, 1982) to the

156 BDSM identity was low, as the number of people with the identity was small. However, we can infer from the interviews with the respondents that the emotional commitment (Stryker & Serpe, 1982) – the attachment of the BDSM practitioners to BDSM identity – was significantly high, as they were willing to remain in their BDSM identity even though doing so put them at risk of experiencing severe social punishment.

Shortly after the revolution, the BDSM identity started to slowly change. At that time, the BDSM identity was, for the first time, heading towards being related to a group of people – in this case violent sexual offenders. With this shift towards an uncompleted group identity came also the possibility to have self-verification in the BDSM identity. Therefore, for the first time, a strong personal self-esteem and pride in the identity also occurred. With it, hand in hand, came the re-labeling of BDSM terminology. In a similar way with the gay community (Koehler, 1998), this re-labeling was the first step in the fight against discrimination.

After the revolution, many conditions (Jenkins & Perrow, 1977; Tarrow, 1983) were fulfilled for the potential rise of a BDSM social movement: the elites became unstable and there was a high chance for an alliance with them. However, BDSM practitioners were still not fully convinced of the state’s inability to repress a BDSM social movement (McAdam, 1996 in Swaminathan & Wade, 1999).

Therefore, the appearance of a public BDSM manifestation was highly limited.

In broad contrast to the gay community, the BDSM community in the Czech Republic after the revolution did not develop any clear signs of recognizing other members of the community.

Recognizing the membership of another person was therefore limited to verbal cues, hints, and non- verbal communication alone. BDSM practitioners still kept two separate identities, keeping them strictly differentiated and experiencing high stress from their interfering. The salience of the identity was still very low, though the number of people with the same identity was gradually growing.

157 However, with the advent of Facebook came pressure for BDSM practitioners to merge all identities into one. According to the respondents, this was done gradually over a long period. BDSM practitioners started to realize that the state was unable to actively repress BDSM practices, and therefore members started to expose the subculture to the public, as well as the fact that they personally belonged to it. With the internet expansion in the Czech Republic, BDSM practitioners started to build a true community, with possibilities for extensive communication between members and obtaining information from the BDSM community abroad. It was then when the radical fight for recognition started, with deliberate provocation events in the fight for equality and vocal militancy. There was a highly developed mechanism of identity control; every member of the subculture had the opportunity to obtain feedback on his identity in various situations from other members of the subculture and to adjust his behavior according to the reaction of subcultural elites. The salience of the identity became more pronounced with the increasing presence of BDSM in everyday culture. As the BDSM identity gradually merged with the everyday identity, it became integrated into the common everyday life of contemporary Czech BDSM subculture members.

158 8. Discussion and Conclusion

BDSM is a trendy topic in postmodern society. In this dissertation, I have focused on one of the most crucial aspects of this contemporary phenomena in postmodern society. I analyzed the symbolic boundaries between BDSM practitioners and people who do not practice BDSM, referring to six different dimensions. First, I analyzed the symbolic boundaries between BDSM and non-BDSM in the medical context. Second, I examined the symbolic boundaries between BDSM and non-BDSM in the contemporary Czech legal system. Third, I studied the symbolic boundaries between the BDSM subculture and the mainstream representation of BDSM. Fourth, I analyzed the symbolic boundaries between individual BDSM practitioners and the BDSM subculture. Fifth, I investigated the symbolic boundaries between the “old” generation of BDSM subculture and the “new” generation of BDSM subculture. Finally, sixth, I scrutinized the symbolic boundaries between the BDSM identity and non-

BDSM identity.

Although this enumeration of the various boundaries may not appear to be a complete list of the emerging symbolic boundaries between BDSM and non-BDSM in the research field, I have described and analyzed all of the aspects that emerged in the ethnographical interviews and participant observation as an autonomous and valid domain (Spradley, 1989). Based on my analysis, I find that further research is needed in the following areas: the stability of BDSM identities, the phenomena of the endless amplification of stimuli in BDSM, the Czech legal state apparatus and its perspective on

BDSM, the Czech BDSM pornography industry, the professional BDSM scene, the gay BDSM scene in the Czech Republic, the changing discourse about BDSM in the mainstream media, and last but not least, statistical research on the number of participants and demographic composition of the Czech

BDSM subculture.

Postmodern subcultures differ from traditional subcultures in many aspects, one of which is an overlap into the virtual sphere, where part of the subcultural communication takes place. In addition,

159 one of the central themes regarding BDSM is its consensuality as it plays a central role in the definition of BDSM either in the medical discourse or in the contemporary self-definition of BDSM practitioners.

In other words, “if it is not consensual, it is not BDSM”. This perspective, which started in the international BDSM subculture, began to seep into the Czech subcultural discourse around the year

2000, following the heavy influence from the international BDSM subculture via the internet and international events. This discourse also shifted into the international medical discourse with the revision of diagnostic manual ICD-11 in 2019. Nonetheless, this discourse is not present in the Czech legal context, as consensuality is not a valid reason for rendering the BDSM activities legal.

Authenticity is something that separates people who “sometimes just do” BDSM from people who are BDSM subculture members. Identity is also detached from personal values; it is not stable – it shifts from strict to fluid and is connected with sexual identity. Although subculture members in the

Czech Republic consider their subcultural identity to be central to their personal identities, and in many cases also central to determining their lifestyle, they consider it only part of, or even detached from, their personal character traits. BDSM identity in the subcultural view is taken as stable and lifelong, but also as merely partial to humans’ lives in the meaning of activities and interests. However, even though subculture members consider their BDSM identity to be stable and lifelong, my extensive meetings with the respondents show that more than half of them, during my period of observation, spent periods outside of the subculture. During their time outside the subculture, they either had non-BDSM relationships or were single with a desire for a non-BDSM relationship, were overwhelmed with work or school, filled their free time with a new sport or leisure activity, experienced health problems, or were involved in a BDSM relationship at home and no longer sought information about what was happening in the subculture. The complexity goes further given that not only people in BDSM relationships are involved in the BDSM subculture. Some of those in a non-BDSM relationship are long-time active members of the subculture, either with the knowledge and consent of the non-BDSM

160 partner or, less commonly, without their knowledge. That is, they continue to take part in the subculture although their partner does not.

In this dissertation, I have outlined the boundaries between BDSM and non-BDSM from two perspectives. The first perspective follows Becker’s (1963) view and focuses on the boundaries that are imposed on the BDSM subculture from outside. Here, I mostly focused on the boundaries imposed on

BDSM practitioners by the state repressive power through the judicial system and psychiatric diagnosis system. The second perspective follows Gelder and Thornton’s (1997) view and focuses on the boundaries that are created from inside the subculture by BDSM subculture members. This unique use of two theoretical frameworks, which I found complementary, offers an in-depth depiction of the research field and of all the forces that operate between the subculture and the mainstream culture.

I described five forces that shape the symbolic boundaries between the subculture and the mainstream culture: 1) the subculture attempts to actively separate from the mainstream to maintain authenticity and existence; 2) the subculture attempts to make itself legally and sociably accepted by the mainstream culture; 3) the subculture attempts to promote its values to protect their members from abuse; 4) the mainstream culture actively pushes the subculture out labelling it “deviant”; and 5) the mainstream culture widely commodifies the subcultural symbols and values.

In this dissertation, I focus mainly on the Czech BDSM subculture and present the first thorough analysis of the BDSM subculture in the Czech Republic. Moreover, it is the first ethnographic analysis of a BDSM subculture in a country with a communist history. Thus, this work provides a unique opportunity to explore the covert development of BDSM subculture during the period of communist persecution and its development after the fall of communism. It also provides the opportunity to compare the development of the BDSM subculture in a post-communist country with existing research on the development of the BDSM subculture in many countries that do not have a communist past.

161 BDSM was strictly persecuted during the communist era and practitioners did not have access to any resources for information or group gatherings. Therefore, the first BDSM identity that some

Czech practitioners developed was an identity similar to that of violent sex offenders depicted in the mainstream media. Fear of persecution persisted long after the Velvet Revolution that overthrew the communist regime in 1989. In the post-communist era, BDSM dating advertisements slowly shifted from the implicit to the explicit mentioning of BDSM, but ad-placers have mostly remained anonymous until today. The first BDSM meetings developed a complicated system of guarantors, who guarded access to the subculture. Without a guarantor, it was impossible for new people to attend any

BDSM meetings. This system of guarantors has partly remained in the Czech BDSM subculture until now, although at some particular meetings or commercial events, it has already disappeared. The sudden possibility to hold BDSM meetings made it possible to develop a BDSM group identity and a

BDSM community hierarchy. The rule was simple: those who did the most extreme practices were subculturally adored, as they were proving a strong commitment to the subcultural identity.

Czech BDSM subcultural members show pride in the fact, that the subcultural members conduct their BDSM practices exclusively consensually. Once the subculture developed, a period of deliberate

“provocative” meetings arose, where the mainstream culture was radically confronted with BDSM practices and tools in public. This period of provocative BDSM protests resulted in the consensual

BDSM identity becoming detached from the identity of non-consensual sexual offenders. The BDSM identity of practitioners was therefore no longer anonymous and also stopped being detached from the practitioners’ everyday identity. The BDSM identity and everyday identity mostly blended together, with the BDSM identity becoming integrated into the everyday life of the BDSM subcultural member.

The Czech BDSM subculture developed two distinctive generations of BDSM practitioners.

The “old” generation was one whose members experienced puberty and part of their sexually active age during communism. Conversely, the “younger” generation did not experience communism at all or experienced it in early childhood. These two generations separated from each other partly due to the 162 different perception of BDSM itself. The older generation focused more on the dominant and submissive aspect of BDSM, whereas members of the younger generation focused more on sadist and masochist aspects of BDSM with a profound shift in their understanding of “role play” in BDSM scenes. This role play shifted from a fixed, particular role – assigned and scripted – towards a more

“live-active-role-play-game”, which enables the players to develop their own role and to switch between their multiple identities.

The contemporary Czech BDSM subculture is unique in several ways: it includes a large number of new Czech terms for homemade BDSM tools; there is a significant focus on the sadistic and masochistic aspect of BDSM, but less focus on the dominant and submissive aspect; the body modification subculture is widely mingled with the BDSM subculture. Part of the younger BDSM subculture is mutually connected through playing live-active-role-play-games, and the amount of

Czech dominant men is surprisingly high, while the amount of Czech dominant women is surprisingly low.

Following the partial opening-up of the subculture, it was not only the outer commercialization of the BDSM subculture by the mainstream culture that appeared. With the expansion of the BDSM community came also the inner commercialization of the BDSM subculture through a special subcultural professional sector, including BDSM pornography, clothing, tool manufacture, and professional dominatrixes. Because of its popularity, BDSM has become highly commercialized, with

BDSM tools widely available to the broader public. This has had several consequences: BDSM practitioners are perceived more tolerantly by the mainstream culture and the subculture itself has grown significantly, while the subcultural values and rules have become fragmented. Now, there are more subtle meanings for every subcultural subgroup, depending on part of the subculture. In essence, we witnessing the Babylonian confusion of languages in the contemporary Czech BDSM subculture

163 that leads to subcultural misunderstandings and subcultural division into smaller subgroups, according to their favorite style of BDSM.

I started this dissertation with a quotation and would like to end it with a quotation. Patrick

Califia-Rice once stated: “If I had a choice between being shipwrecked on a desert island with a vanilla

[non-BDSM] and a hot male masochist, I’d pick the boy” (Califia-Rice, 1994:158). The surprising fact of this statement is the way Califia-Rice (at that time a self-identified leather-dyke) unexpectedly privileges BDSM desire (sadism) over sexual identity (lesbianism), emphasizing the

BDSM practice or power relationship over sexuality. In opposition to the perception of based on binary gender identities, the BDSM subculture can surely offer an entirely distinctive interpretation of human sexuality.

164 9. References

1. Ahluwalia, S. (1972). Youth in revolt. New Delhi: Young Asia Publications.

2. Akerlof, G. A. (1980). “A theory of social custom, of which unemployment may be one

consequence”. In: Quarterly Journal of Economics, 94, 749-775.

3. Akerlof, G. A., & Kranton, R. E. (2000). Economics and identity. The Quarterly Journal of

Economics, 115(3), 715-753.

4. Alesina, N. & Fuchs-Schundeln, N. (2005). Good Bye Lenin (or Not?): The Effect of

Communism on People’s Preferences. Harvard University Press.

5. Alwin, D. F. & McCammon, R. J. (2003). Generations, Cohorts, and Social Change. In:

Mortimer J.T., Shanahan M.J. (eds) Handbook of the Life Course. Handbooks of Sociology and

Social Research. Boston: Springer.

6. American Psychiatric Association. (1952). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

(1st ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

7. American Psychiatric Association. (1968). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

(2nd ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

8. American Psychiatric Association. (1980). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

(3rd ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

9. American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

(4th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

10. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

(5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

165 11. Athanassoulis, N. (2002). The role of consent in sadomasochistic practices. Res Publica 8:141–

155. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016069407235.

12. Attwood, F. and Walters, C. (2013). Fifty shades and the law: Regulating sex and sex media in

the UK. Sexualities 16(8): 974–979.

13. bad. (2014). Muceni hercu a dalsi bizarni praktiky nataceni sadistickych filmu projednaval

soud. Accessed online: https://www.novinky.cz/krimi/clanek/muceni-hercu-a-dalsi-bizarni-

praktiky-nataceni-sadistickych-filmu-projednaval-soud-224959.

14. Bardon, Zach. 2005. Don’t Say That!: Verbal Taboos in Society. Accessible from:

15. Bardzell, S. (2006). The submissive speaks: The semiotics of visuality in virtual BDSM fantasy

play. In: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Videogames, pp. 99–102.

ACM.

16. Barker, M. (2013). Consent is a grey area? A comparison of understandings of consent in Fifty

Shades of Grey and on the BDSM blogosphere. Sexualities 16(8): 896–914.

17. Barker, M., Antaffi, A. & Gupta, C. (2007). Kinky clients, kinky counseling? The challenges

and potentials of BDSM. In: Moon, L. (ed.) Feeling Queer or Queer Feelings: Radical

Approaches to Counseling Sex, Sexualities and Genders. London: Routledge, pp. 106–124.

18. Barker, M (2005). On tops, bottoms and ethical sluts: The place of BDSM and in

lesbian and gay psychology. Lesbian and Gay Psychology Review, 6(2), pp. 124–129.

19. Barker, M. & Langdridge, D. (2009). Silencing accounts of silenced sexualities. In: Ryan-Flood,

R., Gill, Rosalind eds. Secrecy and Silence in the Research Process: Feminist Reflections.

Transformations. Abingdon, UK: Routledge

20. Barnard, I. (1994). Macho Sluts: Genre-Fuck, S/M Fantasy, and the Reconfiguration of Political

Action. In Kibbey, A., Short, K., Farman-farmaia, A. Sexual Artifice: Persons, Images, Politics.

Genders, 19, 265-91. 166 21. Barrett, J. (2007). You’ve made mistress very, very angry: Displeasure and pleasure in media

representations of BDSM’. Particip@tions 4(1). Available at: http://www.participations.

org/Volume%204/Issue%201/4_01_barrett.htm (accessed 03.12.2017).

22. Bartosova, V. (2015). Exkluzivne: Lubomir Pisa, odsouzeny za rezirovani gay porna s bdsm

tematikou: ceska legislativa diskriminuje sexualni mensiny! Accessed online:

https://www.lui.cz/co-se-deje/item/5191-exkluzivne-lubomir-pisa-odsouzeny-za-rezirovani-gay-

porna-s-bdsm-tematikou-ceska-legislativa-diskriminuje-sexualni-mensiny

23. Bauer, R. (2014). Queer BDSM Intimacies. Critical Consent and Pushing Boundaries.

Basingstoke: Palgrave.

24. Baumeister, R. F. (1988). Masochism as escape from self. Journal of Sex Research 25(1): 28–

59.

25. Baumeister, R. F. (1989). Masochism and the self. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

26. Baumeister, R. F., Butler J. L. (1997). Sexual masochism: Deviance without pathology. In D. R.

Laws, W. O’Donohue (Eds.). Sexual deviance: Theory, assessment, and treatment. New York:

Guilford Press.

27. bck. (2014). Za sireni sadistickych erotickych filmu dostali reziseri podminku. Accessed online:

https://www.novinky.cz/krimi/clanek/za-sireni-sadistickych-erotickych-filmu-dostali-reziseri-

podminku-237897

28. Becker, H. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: Free Press.

29. Beckmann, A. (2001a). Deconstructing myths: The social construction of ‘Sadomasochism’

versus ‘subjugated knowledges’ of practitioners of consensual ‘SM’. Journal of Criminal Justice

and Popular Culture 8(2): 66–95.

167 30. Beckmann, A. (2001b). Researching consensual ‘sadomasochism’: perspectives on power,

rights and responsibilities – the case of ‘disability’. In: Sykes R, Bochel C and Ellison N (eds)

Social Policy Review 13, Developments and Debates: 2000–2001. Bristol: The Policy Press.

31. Beckmann, A. (2009). The social construction of sexuality and perversion: Deconstructing

Sadomasochism. Palgrave Macmillan.

32. Beginners guide to 50 Shades Style Sex (online magazine article). Available at: http://www.

cosmopolitan.com.au/sex/sex-advice/2013/8/a-beginners-guide-to-50-shades-style-sex/

(accessed 30 January 2015).

33. Ben-Ze’ev, E. (2009). The Canonical Generation: Trapped between Personal and National

Memories. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

34. Bennett, T. (2013). Sadomasochism under the human rights (sexual conduct) Act 1994.

Law Review 35(3): 541.

35. Berger, P. L. & Luckmann, T. (1966). The Social Construction of Reality. A Treatise in the

Sociology of Knowledge. London: Allen Lane.

36. Bernard, H. R. (1998). Handbook of Methods in Cultural Anthropology. Walnut Creek, CA:

AltaMira Press.

37. Binkley, S. (2008). Liquid consumption: Anti-consumerism and the fetishized de-fetishization

of commodities. Cultural Studies, 22(5), 599–623.

38. BizzyBiz (2012). The 50 Shades of Grey Reviews. Retrieved (8 June 2012–14 November 2013)

from http://bizzybiz.blogspot.cz/p/the-50-shades-reviews.html .

39. Blackstone, A. (2012). Principles of Sociological Inquiry – Qualitative and Quantitative

Methods. London: Saylor Foundation, ISBN 13: 9781453328897.

40. Boas, F. (1938). The Mind of Primitive Man. Toronto: MacMillan Company of Canada.

41. Bohnsack, R. (2014). Documentary method. In: Flick U (ed) The SAGE Handbook of

Qualitative Data Analysis. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 217–233. 168 42. Bourdieu, P. (1973). Cultural Reproduction and Social Reproduction. In R. Brown (Ed.),

Knowledge, Education, and Cultural Change. London: Tavistock Publications.

43. Bowler, G. M. Jr. (2010). Nethnography: A method specifically designed to study cultures and

communities online. The Qualitative Report 15(5): 1270–1275.

44. Brittain, J. W., & Freeman, J. H. (1980). Organizational proliferation and density dependent

selection. In: Kimberly, J. & Miles, R. (1980). Organizational Life Cycles. :

Jossey-Bass.

45. Brown, T. O. (2010). ‘If someone finds out you’re a perv’: The experience and management of

stigma in the BDSM subculture. Doctoral dissertation, Ohio University, USA.

46. Brubaker, R., & Cooper, F. (2000). Beyond “identity”. Theory and society, 29(1), 1-47.

47. Burke, P. (1980). The Self: Measurement Requirements from an Interactionist Perspective.

Social Psychology Quarterly 43:18-29.

48. Burke, P. (2003). Relationships Among Multiple Identities. In: Burke, J. P., Owens, T. J., Serpe,

R. T., Thoits, P. A. (2003). Advances in Identity Theory and Research, 195-216. New York:

Kluwer.

49. Califia, P. & Sweeney, R. (1996). The Second Coming: A Leather Dyke Reader. New York:

Alyson Books.

50. Califia, P. (1980). Feminism and sadomasochism. In P. Califia (2000). Public sex. (pp.168-180)

San Fancisco, CA: Cleis Press.

51. Califia, P. (1988). Macho sluts. Boston: Alyson.

52. Califia, P. & Corinne, T. (1983). Sapphistry: the book of lesbian sexuality (2nd ed.).

Tallahassee, Florida: Naiad Press. ISBN 9780930044473.

53. Califia-Rice, P. (1994). Public Sex: The Culture of Radical Sex. Pittsburgh, PA: Cleis Press

169 54. Callahan, C. (2011). Kin of Another Kind: Transracial Adoption in American Literature.

University of Michigan Press.

55. Case Law. Gross v. Switzerland, judgment ECtHR from 30th September 2014, complaint no.

67810/10.

56. Case Law. Haas v. Switzerland, judgment ECtHR from 20th January 2011, complaint no.

31322/07.

57. Case Law. K.A. a A.D. v. Belgium, judgment ECtHR from 17th December 2005, complaint no.

42758/98 and 45558/99.

58. Case Law. Lambert and others v. France, judgment ECtHR from 5th June 2015, complaint no.

46043/14.

59. Case Law. Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v. United Kingdom, decision ECtHR from 19th February

1997, complaint no. 21627/93.

60. Case Law. Pretty v. United Kingdom, decision ECtHR from 29th April 2002, complaint no.

2346/02.

61. Clair, R. P. (2003). Expressions of Ethnography. Novel Approaches to Qualitative Methods.

New York: State University of New York Press.

62. Cohen, S. (1972). Folk Devils and Moral Panics, London: MacGibbon and Kee

63. Comella, L. (2013). Fifty shades of erotic stimulus. Feminist Media Studies 13(3): 563–566.

64. Connolly, P. H. (2006). Psychological Functioning of Bondage / Domination / SadoMasochism

(BDSM) Practitioners. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality 18(1): 79–120.

65. Cooke, R. A., & Rousseau, D. M. (1984). Stress and strain from family roles and work-role

expectations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(2), 252-260.

170 66. Corsten, M. (1999). The Time of Generations. In: Time & Society. Volume: 8 issue: 2-3,

page(s): 249-272.

67. Cowan, S. (2012). To buy or not to buy? Vulnerability and the criminalization of commercial

BDSM. Feminist Legal Studies 20(3): 263–279.

68. Cross, P. A. & Matheson, K. (2006). Understanding sadomasochism: an empirical examination

of four perspectives. Journal of Homosexuality, 50(2-3), 133-66.

69. CTK. (2014). Udajne muceni herci pred soudem branili tvurce sadistickeho porna. Accessed

online: https://www.denik.cz/z_domova/udajne-muceni-herci-pred-soudem-branili-tvurce-

sadistickeho-porna-20140409.html

70. Cuthbert, B. N., & Insel, T. R. (2013). Toward the future of psychiatric diagnosis: the seven

pillars of RDoC. BMC Medicine, May 14(11), 126.

71. Cutler, B. (2003). Partner selection, power dynamics, and sexual bargaining in self-defined

BDSM couples. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The Institute for Advanced Study of Human

Sexuality, San Francisco, USA.

72. De Melo, M. L. (2010). Atribuicao e negociacao de identidades em festas BDSM no Rio de

Janeiro. Revista Intratextos 1: 65–84.

73. Decker, H. (2013). The Making of DSM-III: A Diagnostic Manual’s Conquest of American

Psychiatry. Oxford University Press.

74. Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. London:

SAGE.

75. Diamond, M., Jozifkova, E., & Weiss, P. (2011). Pornography and Sex Crimes in the Czech

Republic. In Arch Sex Behav. 2011 Dec;40(6):1349.

76. Dlouha, M. (2012). Nova etnografie? ‘Virtualni etnograficka prochazka’ jako priklad vedeni

etnografickeho vyzkumu v dobe internetu. AntropoWebzin 2012(3): 169–176.

171 77. Durkheim, E. (1963). Incest: The Nature and Origin of the Taboo. Lyle Stuart.

78. Durrell, L. (1962). The Alexandria Quartet. London: Faber and Faber Limited. ISBN:

9781453262092s

79. Dymock, A. (2013). Flogging sexual transgression: Interrogating the costs of the ‘Fifty Shades

effect’. Sexualities 16(8): 880–895.

80. Edmunds, J. & Turner, B. S. (2002). Generational Consciousness, Narrative and Politics.

Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

81. Eisenstadt, S. N. (2002). From Generation to Generation. Transaction Publishers.

82. Eisenstadt, S. N. (Ed.). (2003). Comparative civilizations and multiple modernities. 2003:1,Vol.

1. Brill.

83. Ellen, R. F. (1984). Ethnographic Research: A Guide to General Conduct. London: Academic

Press.

84. Evans, C. (1997). Dreams that only money can buy... or, the shy tribe in flight from discourse.

Fashion Theory: The Journal of Dress, Body & Culture 1(2): 169–188.

85. Evans-Pritchard, E. E. (1968). Theories of Primitive Religion. Oxford University Press.

86. Faccio, E., Casini, C. & Cipolletta, S. (2014). Forbidden games: The construction of sexuality

and sexual pleasure by BDSM ‘players’. Culture, Health & Sexuality 16(7): 752–764.

87. Facchini, R., & Machado, S. R. (2013). ‘Praticamos SM, repudiamos agressão’: classificações,

redes e organização comunitária em torno do BDSM no contexto brasileiro. Sexualidad, Salud y

Sociedad-Revista Latinoamericana, (14), 195-228.

88. Feighner, J. P., Robins, E., Guze, S. B., Woodruff, R. A. Jr., Winokur, G., & Munoz, R. (1972).

Diagnostic criteria for use in psychiatric research. Archives of General Psychiatry, Jan 26(1),

57-63.

172 89. Fershtman, Ch., Gneezy, U. & Hoffman, M. (2011). Taboos and Identity: Considering the

Unthinkable. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 3 (2): 139-64.

90. Fessler, D. M. T. & Navarrete, C. C. (2003). “Meat is Good to Taboo: Dietary Proscriptions as a

Product of the Interaction of Psychological Mechanisms and Social Processes”, Journal of

Cognition and Culture, 3(1):1-40

91. Fifty Shades of Gray (online magazine article). Available at:

http://www.pastemagazine. com/articles/2015/02/fifty-shades-of-gray.html (accessed 11 April

2015).

92. Fifty Shades of Grey Sex Tips (online magazine article). Available at: http://www.glamour-

magazine.co.uk/features/relationships/2012/07/fifty-shades-of-grey-sex-tips (accessed 17

October 2015).

93. First, M. B. (2015). What You Need to Know About DSM-5 and ICD-10-CM. Psychiatrictimes,

32(8).

94. Fiske, A. P. & Tetlock, P. E. (1997). “Taboo trade-offs: Reaction to Transaction that Transgress

the Spheres of Justice”. In: Political Psychology, Vol. 18. No. 2.

95. Forel, A. A., (1923). Pohlavní otázka. Sfinx.

96. Foucault, M. (1990). The History of Sexuality, Volume 1: An Introduction. New York: Vintage.

97. Foucault, M. (1999). Vůle k vědění. Praha: Herrmann & synové.

98. Four Things You Must Do Before Trying 50 Shades of Grey Sex (online magazine article).

Available at: http://www.glamour.com/sex-love-life/blogs/smitten/2015/02/4-things-you- must-

do-before-tr (accessed 15 April 2015).

99. Fourth Fifty Shades book whips up unprecedented pre-ordering frenzy (online magazine

article). Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jun/12/fourth-fifty- shades-

book-whips-up-unprecedented-pre-ordering-frenzy (accessed 20 April 2015).

173 100. Fraser, R. (1988). 1968. A Student Generation in Revolt. Pantheon Books. New York.

101. Freud, S. (1933). New Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis. Oxford: Norton & Co.

102. Freud, S. (1953a). My views on the part played by sexuality in the etiology of the

neuroses. In: Strachey, J. The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund

Freud. London: Hogarth.

103. Freud, S. (1953b). Three essays on the theory of sexuality. In: Strachey, J. The standard

edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud. London: Hogarth Press.

104. Freud, S. (1961). The economic problem of masochism. In: Strachey, J. The standard

edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud. London: Hogarth.

105. Freud, S. (1997). Nová řada přednášek k úvodu do psychoanalýzy: Strukturální rozbor

psychické osobnosti. Praha: Psychoanalytické nakladatelství J. Kocourek.

106. Freund, K. (1962). Homosexualita u muže. Praha: Státní zdravotnické nakladatelství.

107. Fried, Y., Ben-David, H. A., Tiegs, R. B., Avital, N., & Yeverechyahu, U. (1998). The

interactive effect of role conflict and role ambiguity on job performance. Journal of

Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 71, 19-27.

108. Fulkerson, A. (2010). Bound by consent: Concepts of consent within the leather and

bondage, domination, sadomasochism (BDSM) communities. Doctoral dissertation, Wichita

State University, USA.

109. Garcia, A. C., Standlee, A. I., Bechkoff, J., et al. (2009). Ethnographic approaches to the

internet and computer mediated communication. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 38(1):

52–84.

174 110. Gebhard, P. H. (1969). Fetishism and Sadomasochism. In Masserman. Jules. D.D. (Ed.),

Dynamics of Deviant Sexuality: Scientific Proceedings of the American Academy of

Psychoanalysis (71-80). New York: Grune & Statton.

111. Geertz, C. (1973). Interpretation of Cultures. Basic Books.

112. Gelder, K., & Thornton, S. (1997). The Subcultures Reader. New York: Routledge.

113. Giddens, A. (1992). The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in

Modern Societies. Cambridge: Polity Press

114. Glaeser, A. (2011). Political Epistemics: The Secret Police, the Opposition, and the End

of East German Socialism. Chicago press.

115. Gluck, S. B., Patai, D. (1991). Women’s Words. The feminist practice of oral history.

Routledge.

116. Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction Ritual: Essay on Face-to-Face Behavior. New York:

Doubleday.

117. Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in Public: Micro-Studies of the Public Order. New York:

Basic Books.

118. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis: An Essay of the Organization of Experience. New

York: Harper & Row.

119. Golden, D. R., Niles, T. A., & Hecht, M. L. (2002). Jewish American identity. In:

Martin, J. N. Nakayama, T. K. & Flores, L. A. (Eds.). (2002). Readings in intercultural

communication: Experiences and contexts, 44–52. New York: McGraw-Hill.

120. Goodall, H. L. Jr. (2000). Writing the new ethnography. (Ethnographic Alternatives)

AltaMira Press.

121. Goodson, I. F. (2012). Developing Narrative Theory Life histories and personal

representation. Routledge.

175 122. Gosselin, C. & Wilson, G. (1980). Sexual Variations: Fetishism, Sadomasochism and

Transvestism. London: Faber and Faber.

123. Haidt J., Rozin, P., McCauley, C., & Imada, S. (1997). “Body, Psyche, and Culture: The

Relationship between Disgust and Morality”. In: Psychology and Development Societies,

9:107-131.

124. Hall, S., & Jefferson, T. (1993). Resistance Through Rituals: Youth Subcultures in Post-

War Britain. London: Routledge.

125. Hammersley, M. & Atkinson, P. (2007) Ethnography. Principles in Practice. London:

Routledge.

126. Havelková, H. & Oates-Indruchová, L. (2015). Vyvlastněný hlas: Proměny genderové

kultury české společnosti 1948 – 1989. Praha: Sociologické nakladatelství.

127. Hebdige, D. (1979). Subculture: The Meaning of Style. London: Methuen.

128. Hecht, M. L. (1993). 2002 – A research odyssey: Toward the development of a

communication theory of identity. Communication Monographs, 60, 76–81.

129. Hecht, M. L., Jackson, R. L., & Ribeau, S. A. (2003). African American communication:

Exploring identity and culture. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

130. Hegel, G. W. F., Miller, A. V., & Findlay, J. N. (1977). Phenomenology of spirit. Oxford:

Clarendon Press.

131. Herman, D., Jahn, M., & Ryan, M. L. (2005). Routledge Encyclopedia of Narrative

Theory. Routledge.

132. Herrová, Ž. (2019). Personal interview, 8. 2. 2019.

133. Hine, Ch. (2000). Virtual Ethnography. London: Sage.

134. Hodkinson, P. (2002). Goth: Identity, Style and Subculture. Berg.

135. Hoff, G. & Sprott, R. (2009). Therapy experiences of clients with BDSM sexualities:

Listening to a stigmatized sexuality. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality 12(9): 30–54. 176 136. Hogg, M. A. (1992). The Social Psychology of Group Cohesiveness: From Attraction to

Social Identity. London: Harvester/Wheatsheaf.

137. Hogg, M. A. (1993). Group Cohesiveness: A Critical Review and Some New Directions.

European Review of Social Psychology 4:85-111.

138. Hogg, M. A. & Abrams, D. (1988). Social Identifications: A Social Psychology of

Intergroup Relations and Group Processes. London: Routledge.

139. Hogg, M. A., Terry, D. J., & White, K. M. (1995). A tale of two theories: A critical

comparison of identity theory with social identity theory. Social psychology quarterly. 255-269.

140. House, J. S. (1981). Social structure and personality. In: Rosenberg, M. & Turner, R. H.

(eds.). (1981). Social psychology: Sociological perspectives. 525-561. New York: Basic Books.

141. Huq, R. (2006). Beyond Subculture. Pop, youth and identity in a postcolonial world.

London: Routledge.

142. Hynie, J. (1940). Úvod do lékařské sexuologie. Praha: Nakladatelství Josef Svoboda.

143. Hynie, J. (1980a). Základy sexuologie I. Praha: Univerzita Karlova.

144. Hynie, J. (1980b). Základy sexuologie II. Praha: Univerzita Karlova.

145. Hynie, J. (1992). Historie sexuologického výzkumu v Československu. Česká a

slovenská psychiatrie, 108(3), 148–164.

146. Chancer, L. S. (1992). Sadomasochism in Everyday Life. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers

University Press.

147. Chu, M. P. (No date). Do We Share the Same Taboos? Cultural Influence on Language

Choice. Accessible from:

148. Inglehart, R. (1997) Modernization and Postmodernization. Princeton: Princeton

University Press.

177 149. International Statistical Institute. (1900). International List of Causes of Death. 1st

revision. Manual of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes

of Death. Geneva: World Health Organization.

150. International Statistical Institute. (1909). International List of Causes of Death. 2nd

revision. Manual of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes

of Death. Geneva: World Health Organization.

151. International Statistical Institute. (1920). International List of Causes of Death. 3rd

revision. Manual of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes

of Death. Geneva: World Health Organization.

152. International Statistical Institute. (1929). International List of Causes of Death. 4th

revision. Manual of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes

of Death. Geneva: World Health Organization.

153. International Statistical Institute. (1938). International List of Causes of Death. 5th

revision. Manual of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes

of Death. Geneva: World Health Organization.

154. James, E. L. (2012). Fifty Shades of Grey. New York: Vintage Books.

155. Jamie Dornan and Dakota Johnson talk about uncomfortable 50 Shades Sex Scenes

(online magazine article). Available at: http://www.usmagazine.com/entertainment/news/jamie-

dornan-dakota-johnson-talk-uncomfortable-50-shades-sex-scenes-2015301 (accessed 25 March

2015. Access limited to IP addresses from USA only).

156. Jenkins, J. C., & Perrow, C. (1977). Insurgency of the powerless: Farm worker

movements (1946-1972). American sociological review, 249-268.

157. Jenkins, R. (1996). Social Identity. London: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-44849-9.

178 158. Jozifkova, E. (2007). Sadomasochisticky sex: jak pracovat s BDSM pacienty.

Sexuologia 7(2): 23–27.

159. Kernberg, O. F. (1991). Sadomasochism, sexual excitement, and perversion. Journal of

the American Psychoanalytic Association, 39(2).

160. Kertzer, D. I. (1983). Generation as a Sociological Problem. Annual Review of

Sociology 9: 125–49.

161. Khan, U. (2009). Woman’s right to be spanked: Testing the limits of tolerance of SM in

the Socio-Legal Imaginary. Law & Sexuality: Review of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender

Legal Issues 18: 79–119.

162. Kinkcurious Sex Tips for 50 Shades of Grey Fans [online magazine article]. Retrieved

from http://thestir.cafemom.com/love_sex/183051/5_kinkcurious_sex_tips_for (accessed 13

April 2015).

163. Kirch, P. V. & Sahlins, M. (1994). Anahulu: The Anthropology of History in the

Kingdom of Hawaii, Volume 1: Historical Ethnography. University of Chicago Press.

164. Kleinplatz P. J. & Moser, Ch. (eds.) (2006). Sadomasochism. Powerful Pleasures. New

York: Harrington Park Press.

165. Kmec, J., Kosař, D., Kratochvil, J., & Bobek, M. (2012). Evropská Úmluva o Lidských

Právech. Komentář. 1. Vydání. Praha: C.h. Beck. ISBN: 978-80-7400-460-5.

166. Koehler, E. M. (1998). Healy v. James and Campus Gay Groups: The Expansion of

Associational Freedoms on Campus. Free Speech Yearbook, 36(1), 72-85.

167. Kolářský, A. (2008). Jak porozumět sexuálním deviacím? Teoretická východiska

sexodiagnostiky – cesta k tvorbě náhledu a k realizaci sexuality v mezích zákona. Galén. ISBN

9788072625048

179 168. Kozinets, R. (2006). Netnography. In: Jupp V (ed.). The SAGE Dictionary of Social

Research Methods. London: SAGE.

169. Kozinets, R. (2009) Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online. London:

SAGE.

170. Kozinets, R. (2010). Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online. Canada: Sage.

171. Kraepelin, E. (1883). Compendium der Psychiatrie. Leipzig.

172. Krafft-Ebing, R. (1886). Psychopathia sexualis: A medico-forensic study. Butterworth-

Heinemann (ed. 2013).

173. Kratochvil, V. et al., (2012). Trestní Právo Hmotné. Obecná Část. 2. Vydání. Praha: C. H.

Beck. ISBN 978-80-7179-082-2.

174. Lamb, S. (2009). Aging and the Indian Diaspora: Cosmopolitan Families in India and

Abroad. Indiana University Press.

175. Lamb, S. (2015). Generation in Anthropology. In: Wright. J. D. International

Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edition, Vol 9. Oxford: Elsevier. pp.

853–856.

176. Langdridge, D. (2006). Voices from the margins. Sadomasochism and sexual citizenship.

Citizenship Studies 10(4): 373–389.

177. Langdridge, D. & Butt, T. (2004). A hermeneutic phenomenological investigation of the

construction of sadomasochistic identities. Sexualities 7(1): 31–53.

178. Langevin, R. (1990). Sexual anomalies and the brain. In W. L. Marshall, D. R. Laws, H.

E. Barbaree (Eds.). Handbook of sexual assault: Issues, theories, and Treatment of the Offender.

Springer

179. Laws, R. & O’Donohue, W. T. (2008). Psychology, Sexual Deviance: Theory,

Assessment, and Treatment. 180 180. Lee, R. B. & Guenther, M. (2014). Problems in Kalahari Historical Ethnography and the

Tolerance of Error in History in Africa Vol. 20 (1993), pp. 185-235. Cambridge University

Press.

181. Lindemann, D. J. (2011). “BDSM as therapy?” Sexualities, 14:151.

182. Lindemann, D. J. (2013) Health discourse and within-group stigma in professional

BDSM. Social Science & Medicine 99: 169–175.

183. Lišková, K. (2009). Defining Pornography, Defining Gender: Sexual Citizenship in the

Discourse of Czech Sexology and Criminology. In: Oleksy, E. H., (2009). Intimate Citizenships:

Gender, Sexualities, Politics. New York: Routledge, 147-156.

184. Lišková, K. (2016a). ‘Now you see them, now you don’t’. Sexual deviants and

sexological expertise in communist Czechoslovakia. History of the Human Sciences, 29(1), 49–

74.

185. Lišková, K. (2016b). Sex under socialism: From emancipation of women to normalized

families in Czechoslovakia. Sexualities, 19(1/2), 211–235.

186. Lišková, K. & Bělehradová, A. (2019). ‘We Won’t Ban Castrating Pervs Despite What

Europe Might Think!’: Czech Medical Sexology and the Practice of Therapeutic Castration.

Med. Hist. (2019), vol. 63(3), pp. 330–351.

187. Long, M. (2005). Making History: Czech Voices of Dissent and the Revolution of 1989.

Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

188. Luminais, M. N. (2012). In the habit of being kinky: Practice and resistance in a BDSM

community, Texas, USA. Doctoral dissertation, Washington State University, USA.

189. Maffesoli, M. (1996). The Time of the Tribes: The Decline of Individualism in Mass

Society. London: SAGE.

181 190. Maleson, F. G. (1984). The Multiple Meanings of Masochism in Psychoanalytic

Discourse. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 32(2), 325-356.

191. Malinowski, B. (2014). Argonauts of the Western Pacific: An Account of Native

Enterprise and Adventure in the Archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea. London:

Benedicton Classics.

192. Mannheim, K. (1952). The problem of generations. In: Kecskemeti, P. Essays on the

Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Oxford University Press.

193. Marias, J. (1970). Generations. A historical method. Alabama: University Press.

194. Marshall, W. L. & Barbaree, H. E. (1990). An integrated theory of the etiology of sexual

offending. In W. L. Marshall, D. R. Laws and H. E. Barbaree (Eds.) Handbook of sexual

assault: Issues, theories, and Treatment of the Offender. Springer.

195. Martin, A. (2013). Fifty Shades of sex shop: Sexual fantasy for sale. Sexualities 16(8):

980–984.

196. Martin, R. J. (2011). Powerful exchanges: Ritual and subjectivity in Berlin’s BDSM

scene. Dissertation thesis. Princeton University, USA.

197. Marvanova-Vargova, B., Pokorna, D., & Toufarova, M. (2008). Partnerské Násilí. Praha:

Linde Nakladatelství, s.r.o. ISBN 978-80-86131-76-4.

198. Mayes, R. & Horwitz, A. (2005). DSM-III and the revolution in the classification of

mental illness. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 41(3), 249-67.

199. McCall, G. J. & Simmons, J. L. (1978). Identities and Interactions. New York: Free

Press.

200. McRobbie, A. (2006). Vulnerability, violence and (cosmopolitan) ethics: Butler’s

Precarious Life. The British Journal of Sociology, 57(1), 69-86.

182 201. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, Self and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

202. Meeker, C. (2013). ‘Learning the ropes’: An exploration of BDSM stigma, identity

disclosure, and workplace socialization. In: Plakhotnik MS and Nielsen SM (eds) Proceedings

of the 12th Annual South Florida Education Research Conference. Miami: Florida International

University, pp. 134–141. Available at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/cgi/viewcontent. cgi?

article¼1319&context¼sferc (accessed 23 October 2017).

203. Mizrach, S. (no date). Technology and the Transformation of Identity. Accessible from:

204. Mohr, P. (2019). Personal communication 30. 10. 2019

205. Money, J. (1996). Lovemaps: Clinical concept of sexuo-erotic health and pathology,

paraphilia and gender transposition in childhood, adolescence and maturity. New York,

Irvington.

206. Money, J. & Lamacz, M. (1989). Vandalized lovemaps: Paraphiliac outcome in seven

cases in pediatric sexology. Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus.

207. Monteiro, P., Cardoso, P. D. & Henriques, R. (2015). Sexual satisfaction and distress in

sexual functioning in a sample of the BDSM community: A comparison study between BDSM

and non-BDSM contexts. The Journal of Sexual Medicine 12(4): 1052–1061.

208. Moore, R. (2004). Postmodernism and Punk Subculture: Cultures of Authenticity and

Deconstruction. in The Communication Review, 7:305–327, 2004.

209. Moser, Ch. (2003). DSM-IV-TR and the paraphilias: An argument for removal. In:

Sexuality and Disability, 21(3):211-211. New York: Kluwer Academic-human Sciences Press.

210. Moser, Ch. (2018). Paraphilias and the ICD-11: Progress but Still Logically Inconsistent.

Archives of Sexual Behavior. 47. 10.1007/s10508-017-1141-z.

183 211. Moser, Ch. & Levitt, E. (1987). An exploratory-descriptive study of a

sadomasochistically oriented sample. The Journal of Sex Research, 23(3), 322-337.

212. Muggleton, D. (2000). Inside Subculture: The Postmodern Meaning of Style. Oxford:

Berg.

213. Muggleton, D. & Wienzierl, R. (2004). The Post-Subcultures Reader. Oxford: Berg, pp.

3–23.

214. Mysliveček, Z. (1959). Speciální psychiatrie. Praha: SzdN.

215. NCSF (1998). ‘Welcome page’, https://ncsfreedom.org (accessed 26/11/2012).

216. Newmahr, S. (2008). Becoming a sadomasochist. Integrating self and other in

ethnographic analysis. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 37(5): 619–643.

217. Newmahr, S. (2011). Playing on the Edge. Sadomasochism, Risk, and Intimacy.

Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

218. Newton, F. (1912). “Verbal Taboos”. In: The School Review, Vol. 20, No. 6, pp. 361-

378. University of Chicago Press

219. Nielsen, M. E. J. (2010). Safe, sane, and consensual – consent and the ethics of BDSM.

International Journal of Applied Philosophy 24(2): 265–288.

220. Noessel, C. (2006). Master John: Peripheral safety and feedback system for practitioners

of BDSM. In: CHI 2006: Conference for Sexual Interactions workshop paper. Available at:

https://www.ics.uci.edu/ johannab/sexual.interactions.2006/papers/ChrisNoessel-

SexualInteractions2006.pdf (accessed 19 October 2017).

221. Nordling, N., Sandnabba, N. K. & Santtila, P. (2000). The prevalence and effects of self-

reported childhood sexual abuse among sadomasochistically oriented males and females.

Journal of Child Sex Abuse 9(1): 53–63.

184 222. Novotny, O., Vanduchova, M., Samal, P. et al. (2010). Trestní Právo Hmotné. Zvláštní

Část. 6. Přepracované Vydání. Praha: Wolters Kluwer, a.s. ISBN 978-80-7357-509-0.

223. Orbe, M. P. (2004). Negotiating multiple identities within multiple frames: an analysis of

first‐generation college students. Communication Education, 53(2), 131-149.

224. Ortega, J. G. (1958). Man and Crisis. New York.

225. Páv, M. M. & Brichcín, M. S. (2019). Sexuální násilí a parafilie, existuje patologická

sexuální agresivita či nikoliv?. Psychiatrie pro praxi, 20(1), 17-20.

226. Pavlovsky, P. (2012). Soudní psychiatrie a psychologie. Praha: Grada.

227. Pavlovský, P. (2019). Email interview 19. 11. 2019

228. Pervocracy (2013). Let’s Read 50 Shades of Grey! Retrieved (12 September 2013–14

December 2013) from http://pervocracy.blogspot.cz.

229. Plante, R. F. (2006). Sexual spanking, the self, and the construction of deviance. In:

Kleinplatz, P.J. and Moser, Ch. (eds.) Sadomasochism. Powerful Pleasures. New York:

Harrington Park Press, pp. 59–80.

230. Plummer, K. (1999). Intimate choices. In: Browning, G., Halcli, A. and Webster, F.

(eds.) Understanding Contemporary Society: Theories of the Present. London: SAGE.

231. Plummer, K. (1995). Telling Sexual Stories: Power, Change and Social Worlds. London:

Routledge.

232. Portelli, A. (1991). The Death of Luigi Trastulli, and Other Stories : Form and Meaning

in Oral History SUNY Series in Oral and Public History. Suny Press.

233. Powell, R. D. (2010). Bondage and Discipline, Domination and Submission, Sado-

Masochism (BDSM): Partnerships, Couples, and Health Outcomes. : University of

Southern California.

185 234. Prior, E. E. & Williams, D. J. (2015). Does BDSM power exchange among women

reflect casual leisure? An exploratory qualitative study. Journal of Positive Sexuality 1(1): 12–

15.

235. Radcliffe-Brown, A. R. (1965). Structure and Function in Primitive Society. New York:

The Free Press.

236. Read, A. W. (2003). “The Geolinguistics of Verbal Taboo”. In: Finke, Wayne H.,

Leonard R.N. Ashley. Geolinguistics 29. Cummings & Hathaway.

237. Reiersøl, O. & Skeid, S. (2006). The ICD diagnoses of fetishism and SM. In P.

Kleinplatz, & C. Moser, (Eds.) SM: Powerful Pleasures. (pp.243-262) Binghamton, NY:

Haworth Press.

238. Ridinger, R. (2006). Negotiating limits. In: Kleinplatz PJ and Moser Ch (eds)

Sadomasochism. Powerful Pleasures. New York: Harrington Park Press, pp. 158–180.

239. Richters, J., De Visser, R. O., Rissel, C. E., et al. (2008). Demographic and psychosocial

features of participants in bondage and discipline, ‘sadomasochism’ or dominance and

submission (BDSM): Data from a national survey. Journal of Sexual Medicine 5: 1660–1668.

240. Ritchie, A. & Barker, M. (2005). Feminist SM: A. contradiction in terms or a way of

challenging traditional gendered dynamics through sexual practice?, Lesbian & Gay

Psychology Review, 6(3), pp. 227–239.

241. Rosner, R. & Scott, Ch. (2017). Principles and Practice of Forensic Psychiatry. London:

Taylor Francis.

242. Rubin, G. (1984). Thinking sex: Notes for a radical theory on the politics of sexuality. In

C. Vance (Ed.), Pleasure and danger: Exploring female sexuality. (pp. 267-318) London:

Routledge.

186 243. Rust, P. C. (2000). Bisexuality: A contemporary paradox for women. Journal of Social

Issues, 56(2). 205-221.

244. Ryder, N. (1964). Notes on the Concept of Population. In: American Journal of

Sociology 69: 447-63.

245. Ryder, N. (1965). The Cohort as a Concept in the Study of Social Change. American

Sociological Review 30: 843-61.

246. Sade, D. A. F. (2006). 120 dní Sodomy. Praha: Levné knihy.

247. Sacher-Masoch, L. R. (1932). Venus in Furs. New York.

248. Saner, E. (2008). Crime and Punishment. The Guardian, 9 July, pp. 5–7.

249. Saxonberg, S. & Szelewa, D. (2007). The Continuing Legacy of the Communist Legacy.

In: Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society 14(3): 351-379.

250. Scarlet Magazine (2006). Should you make your fantasies come true? Scarlet, July,

2005, 30-34

251. Scott, G. G. (1983). Dominant women submissive men: An exploration in erotic

dominance and submission. New York: Praeger.

252. Sedgwick, E. K. (1990). Epistemology of the closet. Berkeley: University of California

Press.

253. Settles, I. H. (2004). When multiple identities interfere: The role of identity centrality.

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(4), 487-500.

254. Settles, I. H., Sellers, R. M., & Damas, A., Jr. (2002). One role or two? The function of

psychological separation in role conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 574-582.

187 255. Siegfried, D. (2005). Understanding 1968: Youth Rebellion, Generational Change, and

Postindustrial Society. In Between Marx and Coca Cola. Youth Cultures in Changing European

Societies, 1960-1980 (pp. 58-80). Oxford, New York: Berghahn Books.

256. Sisson, K. (2005). The cultural formation of S/M: history and analysis. In M. Barker and

D. Langdridge (Eds.) Contemporary perspectives on sadomasochism (S/M). Special Issue of

Lesbian & Gay Psychology Review. 6(3), 147-162.

257. Sloan, L. J. (2015). Ace of (BDSM) clubs: Building asexual relationships through

BDSM practice. Sexualities 18(5–6): 548–563.

258. Sokolová, V. (2014). State approaches to homosexuality and non-heterosexual lives in

Czechoslovakia during state socialism. In: Havelková, H., Oates-Indruchová, L. (2014). The

Politics of Gender Culture under State Socialism. An Expropriated Voice. London: Routledge.

259. Solomon, R. L., Corbit, J. D. (1974). An opponent-process theory of motivation: I.

Temporal dynamics of affect. Psychological Review, 81(2), 119-145.

260. Spitzer, A. B. (1973). The Historical Problem of Generations. The American Historical

Review Vol. 78, No. 5, pp. 1353-1385.

261. Spradley J. P. (1989). The Ethnographic Interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart &

Winston.

262. Spradley, J. P. (1979). The Ethnographic Interview. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College

Publishers.

263. Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant Observation. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College

Publishers.

264. Stankova L, Scerba F, & Vichlenda, M. (2014). Násilná Kriminalita. Praha: Leges. ISBN

978-80-7502-069-7.

265. Stear, N. (2009). Sadomasochism as make-believe. Hypatia 24(2): 21–38. 188 266. Stets, J. E. (1995). Role Identities and Person Identities: Gender Identity, Mastery

Identity, and Controlling One’s Partner. Sociological Perspectives 38:129-50.

267. Stets, J. E., & Burke P. J. (2000). Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory. Social

Psychology Quarterly, 63(3):224-237. American Sociological Association.

268. Stets, J. E., & Harrod, M. M. (2004). Verification across multiple identities: The role of

status. Social Psychology Quarterly, 67(2), 155-171.

269. Stiles, B. L. & Clark, R. E. (2011). BDSM: A subcultural analysis of sacrifices and

delights. Deviant Behaviour 32(2): 158–189. DOI: 10.1080/01639621003748605.

270. Stockwell, F. M. J., Walker, D. J. & Eshleman, J. V. (2010). Measures of implicit and

explicit attitudes toward mainstream and BDSM sexual terms using the IRAP and questionnaire

with BDSM/fetish and student participants. The Psychological Record 60(2): 307.

271. Stoller, R. F. (1975). Perversion: The erotic form of hatred. New York: Pantheon Books.

272. Stolorow, R. D., Atwood, G. E., & Brandschaft, B. (1988). Masochism and its treatment.

Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 52(6), 504-9.

273. Stolorow, R. D. & Lachmann, F. (1980). Psychoanalysis of developmental arrests:

Theory and treatment. New York: International Universities Press.

274. Storr, M. (2003). Latex and Lingerie: Shopping for Pleasure at Ann Summers. Oxford:

Berg.

275. Stryker, S. (1968). Identity Salience and Role Performance: The Importance of Symbolic

Interaction Theory for Family Research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 30:558-64.

276. Stryker, S. (1980). Symbolic Interactionism: A Social Structural Version. Menlo Park:

Benjamin Cummings

277. Stryker, S., & Burke, P. J. (2000). The Past, Present, and Future of an Identity Theory.

Social Psychology Quarterly, 63:284-97. 189 278. Stryker, S., & Serpe, R. T. (1982). Commitment, identity salience, and role behavior:

Theory and research example. Personality, roles, and social behavior, 199-218. Springer, New

York, NY.

279. Swaminathan, A., & Wade, J. B. (1999). Social movement theory and the evolution of

new organizational forms. In: Academy of Management Proceedings, 1999(1):I1-I6. Briarcliff

Manor: Academy of Management.

280. Samal, P. et al. (2012). Trestní Zákoník I. Obecná Část (§ 1-139). Komentář. 2. Vydání.

Praha: C. H. Beck. ISBN 978-80-7400-428-5.

281. Samal, P. (2007). Usmrcení Na Žádost V Návrhu Trestního Zákoníku. In: Fenyk,

Jaroslav. Pocta Dagmar Císařové K 75. Narozeninám. Praha: Lexis Nexis. ISBN 978-80-8692-

025-2.

282. Sanderova, J. (2006). Interpretativní Pojetí a Kvalitativní Výzkum Sociálních

Nerovností. Nepublikováno.

283. Švarc, J. (2017). ‘Patologická sexuální agresivita’ v praxi. Psychiatrie pro praxi, 18(2),

81–83.

284. Tajfel, H. & Turner, J. C. (1979). An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict. In:

Austin, W. G., Worchel, S. (1979). The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. 33-47.

Monterey: Brooks-Cole.

285. Tarrow, S. G. (1983). Struggling to reform: Social movements and policy change during

cycles of protest (No. 15). Center for International Studies: Cornell University.

286. Taylor, G. W. (1997). The discursive construction and regulation of dissident sexualities.

The case of SM. In: Ussher JM (ed) Body Talk. The Material and Discursive Regulation of

Sexuality, Madness and Reproduction. London: Routledge.

190 287. Taylor, G. W. & Ussher, J. M. (2001). Making sense of S&M: A discourse analytic

account. Sexualities 4(3): 293–314.

288. The Guardian (2015). Fourth Fifty Shades book whips up unprecedented pre-ordering

frenzy (online magazine article). Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jun/

12/fourth-fifty-shades-book-whips-up-unprecedented-pre-ordering-frenzy (accessed 7

September 2015).

289. Thoits, P. A. (1987). Negotiating roles. In: Crosby, F. J. (ed.). (1987). Spouse, parent,

worker. 11-22. New Haven: Yale University Press.

290. Thoits, P. A. (1991). On merging identity theory and stress research. Social Psychology

Quarterly, 54(2), 101-112.

291. Thompson, B. (1994). Sadomasochism. New York: Cassel.

292. Thornton, S. (1996). The Club Cultures. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.

293. Tsaros, A. (2013). Consensual non-consent: Comparing EL James’s Fifty Shades of Grey

and Pauline Re’age’s Story of O. Sexualities 16(8): 864–879.

294. Turley, E. L., King, N. & Butt, T. (2011). ‘It started when I barked once when I was

licking his boots!’: A descriptive phenomenological study of the everyday experience of

BDSM. Psychology & Sexuality 2(2): 123–136.

295. Turner, B. S. (1998). Ageing and Generational Conflicts: A reply to Sarah Irwin. British

Journal of Sociology 49, no. 2: 299-304.

296. Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a Cognitive Redefinition of the Social Group. In: Tajfel,

H. (ed.). (1982). Social Identity and Intergroup Relations. 15-40. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

297. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987).

Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory. New York: Basil Blackwell.

298. Turner, R. H. (1978). The Role and the Person. American Journal of Sociology, 84:1-23. 191 299. Tyrer, P. (2014). A comparison of DSM and ICD classifications of mental disorder.

Advances in psychiatric treatment, 20, 280–285.

300. Van Sell, M., Brief, A. P., & Schuler, R. S. (1981). Role conflict and role ambiguity:

Integration of the literature and directions for future research. Human Relations, 34:43-71.

301. Vanek, M. & Mucke, P. (2016). Velvet Revolutions: An Oral History of Czech Society.

OUP USA.

302. Vaughan, D. (2004). Theorizing Disaster. Analogy, Historical Ethnography, and the

Challenger Accident. Boston College.

303. Vliegenthart, R., & Van Zoonen, L. (2011). Power to the frame: Bringing sociology back

to frame analysis. European journal of communication, 26(2): 101-115.

304. Výbor CPT. (2014). Vyjádření vlády České republiky ke zprávě, kterou Evropský výbor

pro zabránění mučení a nelidskému či ponižujícímu zacházení nebo trestání zaslal vládě České

republiky po návštěvě České republiky ve dnech 7. až 16. září 2010. Council of Europe:

090000168069568d. Available from: https://rm.coe.int/090000168069568d

305. Výbor CPT. (2015). Zpráva pro vládu České republiky o návštěvě České republiky,

kterou vykonal Evropský výbor pro zabránění mučení a nelidskému či ponižujícímu zacházení

nebo trestání (CPT) ve dnech 1. až 10. dubna 2014. Council of Europe: 090000168069568b.

Available from: https://rm.coe.int/090000168069568b

306. Waldinger, R. & Perlmann, J. (1997). Second Generations: Past, Present, Future. New

York: Levy Economics Institute of Bard College.

307. Weeks, J. & Holland, J. (1996). Sexual Cultures: Communities, Values and Intimacy.

New York: Springer.

308. Weeks, J. (1998) ‘The Sexual Citizen’ Theory, Culture and Society 15(3–4): 35–52.

192 309. Weinberg, M. S., Williams, C. J. & Moser, C. (1984). The Social Constituents of

Sadomasochism. In: Social Problems, Vol. 31, No. 4. Oxford University Press. 1984. Pp. 379-

389.

310. Weinberg, T., & Kamel, G. W. L. (1983). S and M, Studies in Sadomasochism. Buffalo:

Prometheus Books.

311. Weiss, M. D. (2009). Rumsfeld! Consensual BDSM and ‘sadomasochistic’ torture at

Abu Ghraib. In: Lewin E and Leap WL (eds) Out in public: Reinventing Lesbian/Gay

Anthropology in a Globalizing World. Maldon, MA: Blackwell Publishers, pp. 180–201.

312. Weiss, M. D. (2011). Techniques of Pleasure. BDSM and the Circuit of Sexuality.

Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

313. Weiss, M. D. (2006a). Mainstreaming kink. Journal of Homosexuality 50(2–3): 103–

132.

314. Weiss, M. D. (2006b). Working at play: BDSM sexuality in the San Francisco Bay area.

Anthropologica 48(2): 229–245.

315. Weiss, M. D. (2006c). Mainstreaming kink: the politics of BDSM representations in U.S.

popular media. In P. Kleinplatz, & C. Moser, (Eds.) SM: Powerful Pleasures. (pp. 103-132)

Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.

316. Weiss, M. D. (2008). “Gay Shame and BDSM Pride: Neoliberalism, Privacy, and Sexual

Politics” Radical History Review.

317. Weiss, P. (2002). Sexuální deviace. Klasifikace, diagnostika a léčba. Praha: Portál.

318. Weiss, P. (2004). Sexuální deviace u žen. Moderní babictví 5.

319. Weiss, P. (2008). Sexuální deviace. Praha: Portál.

320. Weiss, P. (2010). Sexuologie. Praha: Grada.

193 321. Westbrook, D. (2008). Navigators of the Contemporary. Why Ethnography Matters.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

322. White, J. (2013). Thinking Generations. In: British Journal of Sociology 64 (2).

323. Wilkinson, E. (2009). Perverting visual pleasure. Representing sadomasochism.

Sexualities 12(2): 181–198.

324. Wismeijer, A. A. J. & Van Assen, M. A. (2013). Psychological characteristics of BDSM

practitioners. Journal of Sexual Medicine 10: 1943–1952. DOI: 10.1111/jsm.12192.

325. Woo, B. (2009). Subculture Theory and the Fetishism of Style in Stream: Culture /

Politics / Technology. A Graduate Journal of Communication. Spring 2009/2.

326. World Health Organization (2018). International Classification of Diseases. 11th

revision. Manual of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes

of Death. Geneva: World Health Organization.

327. World Health Organization. (1919). Mezinárodní statistická klasifikace nemocí, úrazů a

příčin smrti. Praha

328. World Health Organization. (1931). Mezinárodní statistická klasifikace nemocí, úrazů a

příčin smrti. Praha

329. World Health Organization. (1941). Mezinárodní statistická klasifikace nemocí, úrazů a

příčin smrti. Praha.

330. World Health Organization. (1948). International Classification of Diseases. 6th

revision. Manual of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes

of Death. Geneva: World Health Organization.

331. World Health Organization. (1948). Mezinárodní statistická klasifikace nemocí, úrazů a

příčin smrti. Praha.

194 332. World Health Organization. (1955). International Classification of Diseases. 7th

revision. Manual of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes

of Death. Geneva: World Health Organization.

333. World Health Organization. (1958). Mezinárodní statistická klasifikace nemocí, úrazů a

příčin smrti. Praha.

334. World Health Organization. (1965). International Classification of Diseases. 8th

revision. Manual of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes

of Death. Geneva: World Health Organization.

335. World Health Organization. (1966). Mezinárodní statistická klasifikace nemocí a

přidružených zdravotních problémů: MKN-8. Praha: Bomton Agency.

336. World Health Organization. (1975). International Classification of Diseases. 9th

revision. Manual of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes

of Death. Geneva: World Health Organization.

337. World Health Organization. (1978). Mezinárodní statistická klasifikace nemocí a

přidružených zdravotních problémů: MKN-9. Praha: Bomton Agency.

338. World Health Organization. (1990). The ICD-10 Classification of Mental and

Behavioural Disorders: Clinical Descriptions and Guidelines. Geneva: World Health

Organization.

339. World Health Organization. (1993). Mezinárodní statistická klasifikace nemocí a

přidružených zdravotních problémů: MKN-10: desátá revize: aktualizovaná druhá verze k

1.1.2009. 2., aktualiz. vyd. Praha: Bomton Agency.

340. World Health Organization. (1993). The ICD-10 Classification of Mental and

Behavioural Disorders: Diagnostic Criteria for Research. Geneva: World Health Organization. 195 341. World Health Organization. (2012). Mezinárodní statistická klasifikace nemocí a

přidružených zdravotních problémů: MKN-10. Praha: Bomton Agency.

342. World Health Organization. (2018). International Classification of Diseases. 11th

revision. Manual of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes

of Death. Geneva: World Health Organization.

343. Wright, S. (2010). Depathologizing consensual sexual sadism, sexual masochism,

, and fetishism. Archives of Sexual Behaviour 39(6): 1229–1230.

344. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: design and methods. Sage Publications.

345. Yost, M. R. & Hunter, L. E. (2012). BDSM practitioners’ understandings of their initial

attraction to BDSM sexuality: Essentialist and constructionist narratives. Psychology &

Sexuality 3(3): 244–259.

346. Záhoř, Z. (1930). Rukojeť výchovy k rodičovství na školách. Praha: Československá

společnost pro potíraní chorob pohlavních v komisi ‘Dědictví Komenského’.

347. Zelinsky, D. & Binder, W. (2016). How Not to Prepare Majales. In Sociální studia /

Social Studies 4/2016: 61–79.

348. Zvěřina, J. (2003). Sexuologie (nejen) pro lékaře. Praha: Akademické nakladatelství

CERM.

349. Zvolský, M. (2019a). Email interview 29. 10. 2019.

350. Zvolský, M. (2019b). Personal interview 19. 11. 2019

196 Name register

Abrams 53, 141 Ahluwalia 122 Akerlof 12, 13 Alesina 89, 120, 127, 135 Alwin 120, 121 Antaffi 86, 137 Athanassoulis 75, 79 Atkinson 14, 21, 22, 71, 124 Attwood 35, 64 Avital 143 Barbaree 35 Bardon 12 Bardzell 64 Barker 63, 66, 85, 86, 137, 138, 139 Barnard 45 Barrett 64 Bartosova 98 Bauer 64, 67, 70, 72, 75, 77, 83 Baumeister 35, 42, 74 Bechkoff 71 Becker 5, 11, 19, 25, 53, 67, 68, 69, 82, 91, 93, 94, 95, 161 Beckmann 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 73, 75, 78, 79, 82, 84, 119, 122, 123, 133, 134, 137 Bělehradová 37, 38 Ben-David 143 Ben-Ze’ev 121, 134 Bennett 64 Berger 122, 139, 147 Bernard 125 Binder 88, 90 Binkley 21

197 BizzyBiz 71, 74, 75, 76, 80 Blackstone 14 Boas 21, 124 Bobek 51, 60 Bohnsack 72, Bourdieu 20, Bowler 23, 71 Brandschaft 35 Brichcín 49 Brief 143 Brittain 144 Brown 61, 63 119, 124, 169 Brubaker 140 Burke 140, 141, 142, 156 Butt 64 Califia 42, 44, 66, 67, 138, 164 Califia-Rice 164 Callahan 140 Cardoso 64 Casini 63 Chancer 137 Chu 12 Cipoletta 63 Clair 21, 22, 71 Clark 64 Cohen 19 Comella 64 Connolly 63 Cooke 143 Cooper 140 Corbit 35 Corinne 42 Corsten 120, 122 198 Cowan 64 Cross 42, 45 Cuthbert 34 Cutler 63 Damas 143, 156 De Melo 64, 119 Decker 32 Denzin 21, 71 Diamond 89, 120 Dlouha 71 Durkheim 12, 13 Durrell 8 Dymock 65 Edmunds 120, 121 Eisenstadt 122, 140 Ellen 22, 71 Eshleman 64 Evans 10, 69, 124, Evans-Pritchard 124 Facchini 64, 119 Faccio 63 Feighner 32 Fershtman 12, 13 Fessler 12 First 32 Fiske 12 Forel 29 Foucault 28, 78, 81, Fraser 122 Freeman 144 Freud 28, 29, 30, 31, 44, 86 Freund 31 Fried 143 199 Fuch-Schundeln 89, 120, 127, 135 Fulkerson 64 Garcia 71 Gebhard 137 Geertz 22, 90 Gelder 5, 9, 11, 19, 24, 25, 53, 67, 68, 69, 82, 161 Giddens 138 Glaeser 90, 144 Gluck 91, 144 Gneezy 12, 13 Goffman 140, 142 Golden 142, 143 Goodall 124 Goodson 90, 91, 93, 145 Gosselin 86 Guenther 90 Gupta 86, 137 Guze 32 Haidt 12 Hall 19 Hammersley 14, 21, 22, 71, 124 Harrod 140, 141, 142 Havelková 35 Hebdige 10, 19, 69 Hecht 142, 143 Hegel 13 Henriques 64 Herman 91, 92, 144, 145 Herrová 37, 38 Hine 14, 18, 23, 71 Hodkinson 19, 20 Hoff 63 Hoffman 12, 13 200 Hogg 53, 141, 142, 156 Holland 83 Horwitz 42 House 140 Hunter 64 Huq 19, 20, 21 Hynie 29, 30, 31, 32 Imada 12 Inglehart 134 Insel 34 Jackson 142, 143 Jahn 91, 92, 144, 145 James 80 Jefferson 19 Jenkins 54, 55, 144, 157 Jozifkova 63, 89, 120 Kamel 137 Kernberg 41 Kertzer 120 Khan 64 King 64 Kirch 90 Kleinplatz 63, 87 Kmec 51, 60 Koehler 142, 156, 157 Kolářský 38 Kosař 51, 60 Kozinets 22, 23, 71 Kraepelin 28 Krafft-Ebing 28, 38, 86 Kranton 12, 13 Kratochvil 51, 60 Kratochvil 58 201 Lachmann 40 Lamacz 42 Lamb 120, 122 Langdridge 65, 67, 70, 79, 83, 85, 86, 137, 139, 166 Laws 36 Lee 90 Levitt 43, 86 Lincoln 21, 71 Lindemann 63, 85 Lišková 35, 37, 38 Long 88, 89 Luckmann 122, 139, 147 Luminais 64, 119 Machado 64, 119 Maffesoli 19, 72, 123 Maleson 41 Malinowski 21, 124 Mannheim 121 Marias 121 Marshall 35 Martin 64, 65, 119 Marvanova-Vargova 57 Matheson 42, 45 Mayes 42 McCall 141, 142 McCammon 120, 212 McCauley 12 McRobbie 29 Mead 141 Meeker 63 Mizrach 23, 24 Mohr 32, 33, 34 Money 42 202 Monteiro 64 Moore 20, 21 Moser 43, 48, 53, 63, 86, 87 Mucke 89, 91, 145 Muggleton 9, 10, 20, 68, 69, 129 Munoz 32 Mysliveček 30, 31 Navarrete 12 Newmahr 72, 73, 119 Newton 12 Nielsen 64 Niles 142, 143 Noessel 184 Nordling 70 Novotny 57 O’Donohue 36 Oates-Indruchová 35 Orbe 142, 143 Ortega 121 Patai 91, 144 Páv 49 Pavlovský 33, 37 Perlmann 122 Perrow 144, 157 Pervocracy 71, 74, 75, 76, 77, 80 Plante 67, 79, 83 Plummer 81, 83, 137, 138 Pokorna 57 Portelli 92, 145 Powell 64 Prior 64 Radcliffe-Brown 124 Read 12 203 Reiersøl 86 Ribeau 142, 143 Richters 63, 86 Ridinger 63, 85 Ritchie 138 Robins 32 Rosner 36 Rousseau 143 Rozin 12 Rubin 86 Rust 87, 139 Ryan 91, 92, 144, 145 Ryder 121 Sacher-Masoch 28 Sade 28 Sahlins 90 Samal 57 Sanderova 54 Sandnabba 70 Saner 84 Santtila 70 Saxonberg 1, 3, 127, 134 Scerba 60 Schuler 143 Scott 36, 43 Sedgwick 87, 139 Sellers 143, 156 Serpe 141, 156, 157 Settles 187, 140, 141, 142, 143, 156 Siegfried 122 Simmons 141, 142 Sisson 137 Skeid 86 204 Sloan 63 Sokolová 35 Solomon 35 Spitzer 120, 122, 135 Spradley 14, 71, 124, 125, 159 Sprott 63 Standlee 71 Stankova 60 Stear 78 Stets 140, 141, 142, 156 Stiles 64 Stockwell 64 Stoller 43 Stolorow 35, 40 Storr 137 Stryker 141, 142, 156, 157 Švarc 36 Swaminathan 144, 157 Sweeney 66, 67 Szelewa 127, 134 Tajfel 141 Tarrow 144, 157 Taylor, 78, 79, 86 Terry 141, 142, 156 Tetlock 12 Thoits 143 Thompson 63 Thornton 5, 9, 10, 11, 19, 24, 25, 53, 67, 68, 69, 72, 82, 161 Tiegs 143 Toufarova 57 Tsaros 70 Turley 64 Turner 120, 121, 122, 141, 142 205 Tyrer 32, 33, 34 Ussher 78 Van Assen 63 Van Sell 143 Van Zoonen 142, 156 Vanduchova 57 Vanek 89, 91, 145 Vaughan 89, 90, 144 Vichlenda 60 Vliegenthart 142, 156 Wade 144, 157 Waldinger 122 Walker 64 Walters 2013 Weeks 83, 138 Weinberg 53, 137 Weiss 27, 28, 31, 34, 36, 37, 42, 53, 64, 65, 66, 70, 72, 73, 78, 89, 119, 120, 139, 140 White 63, 120, 121, 141, 142, 156 Wienzierl 10, 69, 129 Wilkinson 65 Williams 53, 64 Wilson 86 Winokur 32 Wismeijer 63 Woo 19, 20, 21, 35 Woodruff 32 Wright 63 Yeverechyahu 143 Yin 14 Yoster 64 Záhoř 29 Zelinsky 88, 90 Zvěřina 36, 53 206 Zvolský 33, 34, 39, 44, 48, 49, 50

207 Abstract

From Steel to Plush: Symbolic Boundaries, Authenticity and Inauthenticity in the BDSM Subculture

Lucie Drdová

With the increasing postmodern commodification of subcultures and their gradual infiltration into the mainstream discourse, subcultures increasingly feel the need to define their position against the deployment, exploitation and misrepresentation of their subcultural symbols in the mainstream culture.

Following the theories of Gelder and Thornton (1997) and Becker (1963), I argue that not only do members of the subculture need to define their position against the mainstream culture to protect the subculture from merging into the mainstream, but also the mainstream culture imposes boundaries on the subculture members, labeling them as outsiders. Although the subculture defines itself against the mainstream culture, at the same time it emphasizes mutual similarities as it attempts to gain wide acceptance from the public. Thus, there is a constant interaction and tension between the subculture and mainstream culture. In this dissertation, I scrutinize the precise ways in which symbolic boundaries are created between authentic BDSM (bondage, discipline, dominance, submission, sadism, masochism) subculture and their inauthentic counterparts, and how the involved social actors legitimize these boundaries. I undertake comprehensive research on how members of the BDSM community maintain the existence of their subculture in contemporary Czech society, despite fragmentation from within.

To find the symbolic boundaries between “BDSM” and “non-BDSM”, my research is designed as an ethnographic study with complementary data triangulation and discourse analysis. I define ethnography according to Hammersley and Atkinson (2007) and Spradley (1980), as a method for describing a culture. Furthermore, ethnographic fieldwork involves the systematic study of what the world is like to people who have learned to see, hear, speak, think and act in ways that are different.

Regarding the nature of the research field, I combine the “traditional” ethnography of subcultural meetings with virtual ethnography (Hine, 2000) to include also the virtual dimension of the BDSM subculture. I apply participatory observation (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007) to examine events in public places. This method is fruitful in identifying what people think, what they feel, what they believe and what meanings they attach to activities. Therefore, I engage in participatory observation in face-to-face events and in the virtual field. I use the triangulation method to complement the interviews and participant observation, where possible and appropriate, with informal interviews, online interviews and online questions in discussion forums. Thus, I search for answers to the same question by using different sources. I chose interview participants in accordance with the strategy of many case study replications (Yin, 1994). Consequently, my research methods include participant observation with the status of observer-as-participant at the subcultural meetings as well as in the online discussion forums and Facebook groups, formal interviews with practitioners and short informal interviews (face- to-face and also online).

Based on Becker’s (1963) and Muggleton and Wienzierl’s (2004) insights, I develop a model of five different forces, which form the symbolic boundaries between the BDSM subculture and the mainstream culture. The relationship is always dialectical and fluid and therefore my five points indicate this dialectical process. Subcultures need mainstream culture for their existence; subcultures cannot develop without a mainstream culture, which in turn cannot develop without subcultures pushing it. First, subcultures attempt to separate themselves from the mainstream to maintain their authenticity and existence (e.g. a T-shirt stating: “I was into BDSM before Fifty Shades of Grey”).

Second, at the same time, subcultures attempt to support a broader appeal of themselves to the mainstream in order to make them legally and socially accepted (e.g. public BDSM events, shows, street celebrations and pride events). Third, the BDSM subculture actively attempts to support the spread of its values to protect BDSM newcomers from the danger of abuse from those outside the subculture who pose as subcultural members (e.g. regular subcultural events designed only for total

BDSM beginners to teach them the complete basic principles of BDSM). Fourth, mainstream culture isolates the subculture by labeling it “deviant” (e.g. the banning of Fifty Shades of Grey in public libraries in Florida). Fifth, at the same time, however, mainstream culture, in the context of capitalism and consumerism, commodifies the symbols of the BDSM subculture by using them in different contexts inside the mainstream culture and changing the symbols’ meaning in the process (e.g. the Fifty

Shades of Grey trilogy itself along with the related literature and merchandising that plays off the trilogy).

This dissertation provides the results of the first ethnographic study of a post-communist BDSM subculture. Moreover, it is the first ethnographic analysis of a BDSM subculture in the Czech Republic.

Thus, this work provides a unique opportunity to explore the covert development of the BDSM subculture during the period of communist persecution and its development after the fall of communism. It also provides the opportunity to compare the development of the BDSM subculture in a post-communist country with existing research on the development of the BDSM subculture in many countries that do not have a communist past.

Key words: ethnography, subculture, virtual ethnography, BDSM, sadomasochism, post-communism.