CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE

WOMEN'S PERSPECTIVES OF BDSM POWER EXCHANGE

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

For the degree of Master of Arts

in L"'lterdisciplinary Studies

By

Emily Elizabeth Prior

I

August20ll The thesis of Emily Elizabeth Prior is approved:

Dr. Sabina Magliocco Date

Date

Dr. Suzanne Scheid, Chair Date

California State University, Northridge

ii Acknowledgements

This research was funded in part by a grant from the Thesis Support Program at California State University, Northridge.

This research was approved by the Research Advisory Committee of the Community-Academic Consortium for Research on Alternative Sexualities (CARAS).

I would like to thank my thesis committee, Dr. Suzanne Scheid. Dr. James Elias, and Dr. Sabina Magliocco, for their continued support and assistance. 1 would also like to thank Matthew Lynch and Cielle Williams, and the women who graciously allowed me to interview them, for their encouragement and strength.

m Table of Contents

Signature Page 11

Acknowledgements iii

Abstract v

Chapter 1: Introduction 1

Chapter 2: Methodology 15

Ethnography 15

Feminist Ethnography 18

Self as Subject: Autoethnography 25

Chapter 3: Identit'j 36

Chapter 4: Power Exchange 58

Chapter 5: Conclusion 80

Bibliography 92

Appendices 97

iv ABSTRACT

WOMEN'S PERSPECTIVES OF BDSM POWER EXCHANGE

By

Emily Elizabeth Prior

Master of Arts in Interdisciplinary Studies

Using ethnographic methods and feminist theory, this research analyzes women's sexual identities and power within the context ofBDSM (bondage/discipline, dominant/submissive, sadist/masochist) power exchange relationships. This research expands upon the work of Taylor and Ussher (200 1), Langridge and Butt (2004 ), Cross and I\1atheson (2006) a••1d others, focusing on BDSM as a social, not psychological, phenomenon. I argue women who engage in these relationships and identities are furthering the ideals of third wave feminism, exploring sexuality on their own terms.

v Chapter 1

Introduction

I found my local BDSM community largely by accident. I wasn't really looking for it. In fact, it never occurred to me that something like it really existed. It was unfathomable to me that a space where people act out sexual fantasies and taboos actually exists, much less that such a space could be accessible to someone like me and be safe.

And yet ... while going through a difficult and drawn out divorce simultaneously but not surprisingly coupled with my own search for my sexual identity, I found myself coming in contact with a bevy of interconnected individuals who showed me this very special path over a period of several months. This path has elongated to several years now, and I often equate it to the yellow brick road out of The Wizard ofOz, with friends and enemies met along the way, adventure, self-discovery, and in the end finding that home is right where I left it. Oh, and more importantly, that it took this strange adventure to bring color into my world again. A rainbow of amazing colors that I could never have imagined in my wildest dreams was placed in front of my eyes and has dazzled me ever since.

It took me many years to honestly declare to myself that my sexual identity included words like "queer" and "sadomasochist". Even after being a self-identified member of the larger BDSM community, it still took me many years to develop the language and confidence to be able to declare my selfhood in terms of my sexual identity.

1 There are many words used by this group and the connnunity in which it finds itself that could be considered slang or may not be familiar to the reader. In order to establish not only the flavor ofthe group but to maintain use of the terms this community sees as proper, I have kept all such words. These words will be in italics when they first appear and definitions can be tound in Appendix B.

1 This can be limiting because the English language often does not allow for a lot of subtleties of variance, but it can also be freeing to discover that somewhere there exists some words that at least come close to describing who I am or who I want to be.

As it is in life, many roads are traveled concurrently. While discovering my sexual identity I was also discovering other identities, rene\ving identities that had been cast aside previously, and strengthening identities that needed shoring up. I found myself returning to college to finish a Bachelor's degree that I had started years before-- before I was married, before I was divorced, before I was a divorced single mother, before I really started to find myself My daughter was especially supportive, as was my current partner.

In returning to school I found myself drawn to sex and gender studies from a variety of perspectives- anthropological, sociological, psychological, historical- and all of them overlapped and converged on topics of sexuality, women, sexual identity, power, feminist theory, and so much more. Now I had an academic theoretical basis with which to understand my experiences. I could begin to see the common threads that link these larger constructs together, weaving an extremely complex tapestry of human interaction and context. I found myself especially drawn to the intersections of power and identity, and how women especially have often been denied the self expression of both of these. I

/ started to see a link between BDSM sexual expressions, power, sexual identities, and the lack of women's perspectives on such topics and their intersections. I also found a link between third-wave feminism that allowed for women who engaged in sex work and/or enjoyed pornography to be proud feminists who were choosing sex as a way of expressing and experiencing autonomy and control. I recognized that women who engaged in BDSM sexual practices, especially those who defined themselves in the

2 bottom or submissive roles, were doing the same thing. Although seemingly lacking or giving up control or power, these women were using their sexuality to express and experience autonomy and control, albeit in a somewhat subversive, non-traditional manner.

In the language ofBDSM, there exists the power exchange. This has been discussed in many community-created texts and has come to be more academically accepted as the central focal point ofBDSM relationships, rather than pain or other concepts. Power exchange within this context is often linked with various aspects of eroticism and sexuality and generally can be defined as the giving and/or receiving of

" ... sexual, sensual.. . force or authority to, from, or with someone else" (Henkin and

Holiday 1996:29). Within the community, this exchange is more or less taken for granted.

It is understood that this is the centering mechanism through which a host of erotic, sensual, sexual, and spiritual paths may cross. People within the community talk about it, pontificate about it, and write about it, but they don't really examine it much.

On the other side, the real world, the "vanilla" world, there is the scientific and academic communities. Granted, there are a lot of kinksters who are scientists and academics, and vice versa. In fact it seems that BDSM draws a particular population of middle to upper-middle class, mostly white, well-educated individuals (Connolly 2006).

Still, the scientific and academic communities by and large have done an amazing job over the past century or more to do their best to ridicule, minimize, politicize, sanction, criminalize, penalize, and all together quash individuals and groups who associate themselves with anything outside ofheteronormative sexual behavior. And in the realm of non-normative sexual behavior, things like bondage, domination, submission,

3 whipping, Master/slave relationships, and so much more definitely fit the bill as a type of

behavior to attack, and eliminate if possible.

In recent years, since about the 1960s and especially -vv'ithin the last twenty years,

more work has come from the academic and scientific communities that has attempted to

take a more objective look at activities, behaviors, and personalities that could be

grouped under the larger BDSM umbrella. Some of these works have even been

positively focused and have come from people who cross over into both worlds of vanilla-academia and SM Still, much of this work has focused on attempting to

legitimize the normalcy of such acts and behaviors without really trying to explain what people are doing and why. Further, most of these works make it painfully clear that the researchers have taken a «hands off" approach, studying BDSlv'I from a safe distance,

unwilling to get their hands, and bodies, involved in what happens and yet somehow coming to conclusions about what people do. This approach really doesn't work when studying BDSM because it is the doing that matters. Only when you can embody what is happening can you get any true sense of what is happening, and more importantly, what the significance is (see Behar and Gordon 1996 and Stoller 1997 for exampies).

The previous century of work focused on activities and behaviors related to

BDSM purported to assume that BDSM \vas an inherently negative experience brought about by persons who suffered from some type of mental illness or defect (Freud 1938,

1953, 1959, 1961; Kraffi-Ebing 1965; Stekel1965). This stigma ofBDSM activities, behaviors, and identities as being related to mental illness and even coercive, illegal sexual activities (American Psychiatric Association 2000) has le-d not only to published works that remain problematic for people who engage in these activities but also the

4 public perception that people who engage in these activities are inherently mentally ill and a menace to society at large.

Over the past ten years more social science studies have been published about

BDSM, BDSM communities, and BDSM activities and behaviors that allow for the possibility that these activities, behaviors, and people not may not only be mentally healthy, but well-adjusted and happy. For example, Taylor and Ussher conducted a study in order to further understand the complexity of individuals who practice SM. By interviewing twenty four self-identified sadomasochists, they found that "' ... SM can only be understood through a 'phenomenological analysis' of its often multiple, subjective meanings and that these meanings can only be understood within their socio-cultural and historical context" (200 1:31). Although Taylor and Ussher did not set out to prove or disprove any hypotheses, their collection of data through interviews " ... was used to generate a four-iactor definition of SM: consensuality, an unequable balance of power, sexual arousal, and compatibility of definition" (200 1: 293 ). This definition of SM acknowledges that the activities are consensual in nature and are being acted out as a means of sexual arousal (although not exclusively). This definition also acknowledges the important role of power exchange within BDSM activities and relationships, which may or may not include an exchange of pain.

Building upon Taylor and Ussher's work, Langdridge and Butt (2004) also conducted a phenomenological study that analyzed text from websites where people wrote about a variety ofBDSM practices and activities from the perspective of personal ac.counts, fiction, health education resources, academic \vriting, pornographic writing, and other styles. This analysis concluded that these "sexual stories" could be used to

5 provide information about "society and the story of sadomasochism" (2004:48). They

found that "[s ]tories of S/M break boundaries, as the taboo topic of sexual violence is placed centre-stage" (2004:49) but they also found that the authors of these stories felt certain that there was nothing wrong with them or what they were doing, except in the eyes of the larger social construct. Langdridge and Butt telt that these stories and activities were more dire~tly parodies of societies' power relationships, and not the coercive power relationships that previous researchers continued to expound.

At the same time, feminist scholars were also hotly debating BDSM sexuality, not from a mental illness perspective but from a sexual oppression standpoint. While

" ... some feminists regarded sadomasochistic sexual practices as inseparable from patriarchal hierarchies based on relations of dominance and subordination" others felt

" ... that sadomasochistic practices constituted a legitimate form of consensual sexual activity that women were entitled to enjoy without fear of discriminatory judgment by society or other feminists" (Chancer 2000:2). This argument about BDSM sexual practices is an extension of the radical feminist versus third-vv-ave feminist regarding sex work and pornography. While radical feminists believe that all of these are forms of patriarchal oppression and thus inherently negative towards women, third wave feminists generally agree that they can all be proactive, consensual, and positive experiences for women.

By 2006, several more studies were published about BDSM. Whereas the previous work had relied on mainly text analyses to define BDSM and related activities and behaviors within a more modem context, these studies were starting to analyze the psychological and sociological implications of identifYing within this subculture. Cross

6 and Matheson (2006) conducted studies to assess what was currently understood about sadomasochism with an eye toward testing popularly held academic views on the subject.

The views being investigated were the historic psychoanalytic perspective that these practices are done specifically in order to satisfy feelings of guilt and shame; the popular psychopathological/medical model that these practices are a symptom of mental illness or maladjustment; the radical feminist perspective that sadomasochism is fundamentally misogynistic; and the escape-from-self perspective that these practices, especially masochism, are used as a means of temporarily escaping from a higher-level self­ awareness.

Cross and Matheson conducted this study by having participants complete several psychometric inventories known to measure the theories they were interested in. The participants were obtained through the internet and were asked only if they self-identified as sadomasochists; they did not necessarily consider themselves members of a particular organization or community. This study was not only important because of its focus, but also because it managed to obtain a rather high yield for participants, N=93. In the end,

Cross and Matheson concluded that «[n]one of the prevaiiing academic perspectives on

SM ... was supported by the data" (2006: 14 7). They point out that "[s ]upport for the null hypothesis is generally regarded as inconclusive ... [therefore] these results should be viewed with caution" (2006: 14 7 -148), however this study leaves room for questioning the more popularly held beliefs about sadomasochism and those that engage in it. At the same time Cross and Matheson also found that " ... all four groups indicated generally pro-feminist attitudes ... '' indicating that they held« ... beliefs consistent with feminist tenets of equality for the sexes and breaking free of traditional gender roles" (2006: 146).

7 They concluded from this data that the radical feminist contention that BDSM sexuality reflects anti-feminist beliefs was unsupported (2006: 146).

Connolly (2006), a therapist and researcher, sought to debunk the popularly held psychopathological theory that people who engage in BDSM are inherently mentally ill.

Her study consisted of providing a battery of psychological instruments that are regularly used to analyze the state of a person's mental health to a group of people who self­ identified as being members of a BDSM community and!or engaging in the BDSM lifestyle. Connolly's study found that people who identify in this way not only did not exhibit any specific abnormalities in regards to mental health, but when compared to the general population, it was difficult to tell them apart.

Hall (2006), in an attempt to show that people who engage in sadomasochistic practices are capable oflong-term committed relationships, interviewed tour couples who were willing to speak about their relationships and experiences. Although Hall noted that such a small sample cannot be extrapolated to include even t..lte entire BDSM community at large, this was stili a good attempt to try and understand the relationship dynamics between people who engage in this way. His study determined that these couples felt they had made satisfactory, compatible matches with their partners, and that this was due largely because they shared this particular sexual orientation.

In this same year, Weinberg's (2006) review of the sociological and social psychological literature surrounding sadomasochism was published. This comprehensive work looks at more recently published research, and discusses the various methods used to analyze sadomasochism, including questionnaires, content analyses, essays, and ethnographic research. Weinberg's review concludes that" ... social science research in

8 sadomasochism over the past three decades indicates that this is a complex social phenomenon, not easily nor accurately summed up by psychoanalytical perspectives.

Contrary to the psychoanalytical view that SM is an individual psychopathology, sociological and social psychological studies see SM practitioners as emotionally and psychologically well balanced, generally comfortable with their sexual orientation, and socially well adjusted" (2006:37). He goes on to say that modem researchers should treat sadism and masochism « ... as sociological phenomena, dependent upon meanings which are culturally produced, learned and reinforced by participation in sadomasochistic subcultures" (2006: 19) rather than as a pathological mental illness that needs to be cured.

Although all of these studies have been exiremely helpful in attempting to shed a positive light on BDSM, few of them have engaged participants directly, and none of them have directly observed what people are actually doing. Moser did some direct observations for his article published in 1998, researching how sadomasochistic interactions played out in semi-public settings. This article discusses the structure, function, and purpose of SM parties, including rules of etiquette and the types of sexual interactions that occur or can be expected. Although an important contextualizing piece, this article still does not really speak to what people are doing and feeling, and more / importantly, what their perceptions are of what they do.

In 2008 Newmahr published an article based on her doctoral dissertation, which was an ethnographic field study of sadomasochism. This is a unique account of an anthropologist researching BDSM as a subculture. Newmahr spent four years immersing herself in an east coast BDSM community, giving her time to learn the nuances of interaction and protocol expected from this group. She allowed herself to become totally

9 involve~ volunteering with local organizations for events, confining her social circle to the people she encountered in the local BDSM communities, and eventually crossing the line from inexperienced observer to inexperienced practitioner. Her ettlu1ography brings information and a substance to light that had been lacking in previous endeavors to study this subculture. Newmahr also took the risk of exposing herself: not only to this subculture, but to academia, as she recounted her experiences and unashamedly admitted that she actually participated in some activities.

Newmahr' s work also pointed to resurgence in feminist work that explored female sexuality. "Despite the interest in rhetoric, very little feminist research was actually being conducted on SM. In the heat of the decade-long conflict over feminist sexuality, the contributions of early empirical work on S:t\.1 garnered relatively little attention, and SM never quite emerged as an important academic issue in its own right"

(2008:625-626). One has to wonder why work about SM really never made it to the forefront as a feminist topic to explore.

Not too long after, Williams's book Playing Dangerous Gaf!les was published ····------·------~------· ------~------·

(2010). This account, from a sociologist, is also an ethnographic study wherein Wiiiiams challenges his own immediate perceptions ofBDSM ("Who the fuck would enjoy being whipped!" (2010:15) and comes out the other side confirming his own sexual identity as one that fits within the spectrum of BDS:t\.1. This narrative is an honest and baring portrayal from a social scientist who decided to learn more about something he did not understand.

These ac-eounts have opened the door to the possibility that BDSM communities can be studied legitimately as subcultures within themselves. They also have created

10 space for the individual researcher to use him- or herself as a subject within this

discourse.

Finally, an online article was published not too long ago addressing the topic of

women who enjoy being dominated in bed (Henderson 2010). Although this article is

mostly an account of an interview with Susan Wright, founder and president of the

National Coalition for Sexual Freedom (NCSF), she discusses women who identify as

submissives and feminists, focusing on the idea that feminists can aiso be sexually

submissive women who enjoy being dominated in their sex lives, but not necessarily in

their everyday interactions. This is not an academic article, but it shows that there is an

interest in teasing out some of these complicated notions of identity.

Even with some researchers "going native" and discovering their own unique

sexual proclivities while studying BDSM subcultures and some researchers coming out

of these subcultures into academia, many people who practice BDSM are wary of

researchers, and rightfully so. The status of one's mental healt.h, ability to care for

children, job status, and social freedom all have been attacked, stemming from "research"

that shows that peopie who engage in BDSM are unwell and unfit. Popular media uses

the sexiness and allure of kinky sexual activities to sell everything from perfume to

clothing. People who engage in BDSM are often portrayed as freaks and serial killers,

holding young, innocent girls hostage in their basements for years. Even the news

sensationalizes the trinkets ofBDSM- handcuffs, leather straps, a whip, a metal cage­

when some real serial killer is discovered. Even with more current research that eschews the idea that people who practice BDSM must inherently be mentally ill and a threat to

11 society, the bitterness and non-consensual pain caused by all of this bad press is still very real for many people who practice BDSM.

This study focuses on the experiences of thirteen women, twelve interviewees and one researcher. On the surface these women seem to fit many heteronormative standards.

They are all white, or can pass as white. They would all be considered middle to upper­ middle class based on level of education achieved or in progress. Seeing them in public one may glimpse indicators of expressive individuality, but nothing glaringly screams

.. freak," '"queer," "lesbian," .. dyke," or "sadomasochist," at least not to most people. They range in age from 22 to over 60 with general appearances ranging from attractive, young women to the head of the PTA. In other words, they, we, all seem normal from an outsider's perspective. Although this was not a planned portion of the research, it is important and interesting to point out that looks can be deceiving. If we look deeper, these women are mothers, daughters, sisters, workers, artists, professors, researchers, retirees, students, models, designers, and more. And if we are willing to go even deeper, we find that they are also sadomasochists, submissives, slaves, dominants, Masters, ponies, trainers, captives, masochists, and even more.

What can be learned from thirteen women who appear normal but are actually people who practice various forms of kinky sex? In a world where sexual norms are changing, but most people are still unwilling to openly discuss sex or sexual issues, the results of this research will expand the currently growing information about BDSM and the people who engage in these particular marginalized and often negatively stereotyped sexual behaviors. This study will also expand k..nowledge about how women who engage in these behaviors feel about the behaviors and themselves, \vtth some extrapolation how

12 women and people in general feel about sexuality and sexual identities, and what those

roles mean to our overall sense of being. The interviews will also add to an expanding

number of archived interviews from members ofBDS.tv1 communities by adding women's

voices to the collections. In this way, this study will not only help social science research,

but will also help to historicize accounts ofBDSM community members for the

communities' mw future use.

By asking the following questions I hope to explore the intersections of identity

and power through the lens of BDSM:

• What is power exchange in this context? What does it mean and how do women

in particular do it and feel about it? Does engaging in SM power exchange affect

other areas of their lives?

• What role does pain play within SM power exchange? Is pain an important part of

SM power exchange?

• Do women who engage in SM power exchange consider themselves feminists? If

so, does identifying as a feminist contrast with sexual identities like submissive,

slave, and other tenns generally considered the a.Tltithesis to feminism?

• What do women want to say about these topics? What are their identities and can

they describe and define them in ways that we can understand and possible

extrapolate to a larger population?

Discussing Foucault, Rozma1in writes "Thus, the fundamental question of power should be: What are the material and cultural conditions that enable women to adopt an

13 ethos through which they can gain the power to govern their lives, actions, and practices through self-knowledge?" (2005:9) Much like using science fiction to explore the realities political landscapes, the lens ofBDStv1 sexual activities and relationships can be used to explore how women perceive, gain, relinquish, and control power because it allows for focused attention on identity and power that is both symbolic and actual. As

Willis writes, '"Sex in this culture had been so deeply politicized that it is impossible to make clear-cut distinctions between patriarchy" (1992:222). Maybe this work will not be able to make those dear cut distinctions either, but it can begin to explore women who do feel they have control over themselves, their presentations of themselves, and their sexualities to such an extent as to allow others to have some of that control for the woman's ovvn pleasure and well-being.

And in the end, if"[f]eminism has been a movement devoted to helping women become selves and subjects rather than objects and men's others" (Abu-Lughod 1991: 139) then maybe studying women who practice such divergent sexualities as BDSM can help us to understand a space where women do have control and power, and are the subject and not the object. This work is a step in that direction, showing women's power and identities through non-normative sexual practices in order to discuss places where women's power and identities can be recognized and acknowledged.

14 Chapter2

Methodology

Ethnography

"Anthropology. . . is the most fascinating, bizarre, disturbing, and necessary form of witnessing left to us at the end of the twentieth century" (Behar 1997:5). This is no less true at the beginning of the twenty first century. Anthropology, and ethnography in particular, offer a detailed accounting of people and culture, not only to discover and analyze what people do, but also how they do it, why they do it, and how that connects to what other people do outside of the sphere of the field site. And, what better approach to research the fascinating, bizarre, and sometimes disturbing activities of those who practice BDSM?

The social sciences are rooted in ethnographic research, that study of the «other" by immersing oneself in a foreign community. Ethnography lends itself to detailed descriptions of individuals, groups, and settings, while also providing data that can be analyzed for themes or issues (Creswell 2009). This data can be collected through various methods, although ethnography tends to lend itself best to participant observation.

Participant observation is a primarily anthropological research method by which I one immerses oneself in a culture, group, or activity in order to gain a more in depth understanding of that culture, group, or activity. Participant observation is what makes ethnography ethnography. This form of research places the researcher directly within the field and makes him or her part of the immediate activities that those being researched participate in. Not only does this contextualize the research in the here and now, but it also provides the researcher with other contextual clues that might help analyze otherwise seemingly random interviews and/or events. It provides '" ... pru"*t of a strategy that can

15 allow us to discover the existence of patterns of thought and behavior... " (Dewalt and

Dewalt 2002:100).

As Bernard writes, "Participant observation is about stalking culture in the wild - establishing rapport and learning to act so that people go about their business as usual when you show up" (2006:344). He goes on to explain that "participant observation reduces the problem of reactivity- or people changing their behavior when they know that they are being studied ... ,, (2006:354). The researcher who has managed to immerse herself within the group being studied is more likely to observe real actions and reactions without too much fear that her presence has created an artificial environment. This type of rapport can take months to establish, building trust and making the researcher an ordinary if not invisible presence that hopefully will allow for a more honest and realistic field experience. I spent many months before engaging in my research re-building connections I had made previously within the community, as well as establishing new ones. This not only served to create a rapport for my research, but also re-acquainted me with friends that I had lost touch with.

At the same time, "participant observers can be insiders who observe and record some aspects oflife around them (in which case, they're observing participants) ... " / (Bernard 2006:347) and perhaps this is important to point out. In this case, I am more likely an observing participant than a participant observer. I am much more of an insider with this group than an outsider, even given my time away from the group.

More specific to this research, participant observation was done in a variety of settings and at a variety of events. These settings included spaces that were entirely public, such as restaurants and social events that were advertised to adults living within

16 Southern California (mostly Los Angeles County); semi-public, such as classes, discussion groups, and parties that were open to adults who had some connection to the larger Southern California BDSJ\.1 communities~ and private, which were by invitation only or required a membership with a specific organization in order to participate. Each of these events presented " ... a perfect environment tbr observational research, since voyeurism is cornmon and even encouraged" (Moser 1998:20). One of the cardinal rules, so to speak, of the larger BDSM community is that consent must be clearly and expressly given/offered before one is expected to participate in anything. This makes it very easy to observe events without having to directly participate, and in fact many people within these communities greatly enjoy showing off or performing for those who are merely watching.

I did feel, however, that this research would be richer and more interesting ifl was involved more directly, and not "merely watching." As \Witten earlier, this has been a bone of contention among researchers who have studied BDSM, wherein many make it quite clear that they were not doing, only observing. To me, this is not participant observation, this is only observation. If I were studying a group of women who worked in a factory, it would be reasonable to assume that I would endeavor to engage in some of the activities they did in order to provide a more full account of their experiences. In this same vein, I chose to engage in some similar activities as the women I interviewed in order to better understand and analyze what they told me about power exchange and their sexual identities.

As well as participant observation, semi-structure-d interviews were conducted with twelve women. This type of interview follows a guideline, or interview schedule

17 (see Appendix C), of prepared questions but also allows for a more open, free-flowing,

organic interview environment (Dewalt and Dewalt 2002). Semi-structured interviews are

very useful when one has only one chance to interview participants without the luxury of

follow-up interviews (Bernard 2006).

Newmahr writes, '•As ethnographers, we can simultaneously own both analytic

and interpretive approaches, contextualizing our subjectivity in the histories and

narratives of the members of the communities we seek to understand" (2008:640).

Ethnography is a subjective science, although objectivity is a goal sought after through

distancing oneself, maintaining specific boundaries with informants, and coming into a research space as an outsider. However, in recent years this approach to ethnography that

situates the researcher as object and the group as subject has come under scrutiny especially in regards to feminist ethnography.

Feminist Ethnography

Feminist ethnography can take many forms, but can be generally described as female or woman-driven and/or focused. This type of ethnography also has a tendency to include some amount of assistance to the group being studied, either social or political, as a means of providing an outlet for the voice of those who tend to be silenced, if not actively then by ignorance of their existence and/or importance. Feminist ethnography also has a tendency to offer those being studied the opportunity to guide and shape what is produced from the research. Finally, the feminist ethnographer has a tendency to position herself within her research, offering a perspective that can be missed when one is attempting to be the omniscient observer.

18 Feminist ethnography is often woman-driven and/or focused, and usually presents women and/or women-centered activities at the heart of the research. This brand of ethnography provides a perspective that can be, and often is, lost when male ethnographers are conducting the research. "The promise of feminist ethnography is that we can elicit accounts and produce descriptions of these kinds of practice and thought that are part of female consciousness but left out of dominant interpretive frames, shaped around male concerns" (Devault 1990:100). The hope is that women interviewing and observing women will not only allow for a better interpretation but will also provide new information that had previously been unavailable or missed.

This approach also tends to focus on the language of women, how women speak and are spoken to, and how women listen with respect to other women. Especially when speaking of sexuality and identity it is important to find the right linguistic tools in order to elicit the response one is looking for. Not only did I need to be caretul of my language during interviews so as not to unduly upset or offend anyone, I also had to use terms and euphemisms that women who practice BDSM use and understand. Even as I attempted to find definitions for words like "captive," ..slave," .. pony," "bunny." and "victim" within this particular context, I also had to have some understanding of the general language used. Devault discusses this in her work as well, stating that the relationship between the researcher and the women she interviews must be one in which the researcher "recruit(s] her respondents as partners in the search... so that together they are constructing fuller answers to questions that cannot always be asked in simple, straightforward ways"

(1990:100). Devault goes on to point out that one outcome of this is the use of"you know" during interviews. At first she ignored this a part of modern speech style, but later

19 when rereading the interviews she had transcribed, Devault realized that she did in fact know what the women were trying to convey based on her own personal experiences.

"You know" was not only being used as a pause or speech filler, but as a way of asking for or conveying understanding from one woman to another, each who had presumably experienced something similar.

Looking through the pages of interview transcripts from my own research, I can search for «you know" and find it probably a hundred times if not more. Sometimes it is just filler, something to say while thinking of the next thing to say, but sometimes it was also that affirmation of shared experience or information. In some cases, it took the form of conveying regular, vanilla experiences or ideas:

" ... and, you know, I have to make living... I have to pay my bills and yet I think that there's a balance that you want to achieve to have the type of life that you want to have otherwise why would you do tllis? (laughs)" (Interview with subjanice, February 8, 2011 ).

"I've had jobs where I've felt very submissive, you know, looking back at the entertaimnent industry it kind of warrants that kind of, you know... " (Interview with Holly, February 6, 2011).

"You can't really force somebody to do something. It's not proper. It's not morally, you know, it's not morally right" (Interview with Mistress Daria, February 1, 2011).

Other times it took the form of shared BDSM experiences or ideas:

nl like the way I feel when I do it. It, you know, tickles me through and tr«ough and rewards my inner person and my spirit and it feeds that... "(Interview with subjanice, February 8, 20 11).

" .... although once in awhile, you know, we're doing the simple burglary to victim or captive is typicaL.. " (Interview with Claudia, January 28, 2011 ).

20 "When I'm doing a lot of vanilla things I just don't feel right ... I feel like I'm ... I'm judged ... I'm, you know like when I'm in the SM world I feel that I'm accepted no matter what" (Interview with Evelyn, Februa.-y 3, 2011 ).

" ... but I do enjoy a lot of play that people consider very edgy, you know, I do enjoy fire play and when I play with wax it's with blow torches and metal grinders and like ... 11 (Interview with Georgia, February 5, 2011 ).

"I mean, there's a time and a place for a very serious headypace-interrogation-beat-the-crap-out-of-you scene but there's also a time for, you know, giggly spankings ... " (Interview with kat, February 8, 2011).

".. .it's kind of a contract, you know, you agree to terms like --I will do this for you if you'll do that for me and you do set limits ... 11 (Interview with Lani, February 11, 2011 ).

The primary difficulty raised with this type of research is how to position one's self and one's subjects without recreating the power imbalance that seems to be inherent in research. Behar points out that it is very difficult for women to study other women, making them the subject of the research, "without objectifYing them and thus ultimately betraying them" (1997:28). This tends to be countered with a conscious awareness on the researcher's part to stay true to the women being studied while providing an honest account of what is being studied. The ethnographer must always be keenly aware of her position as researcher, and the power that that position may offer."... [F]eminist ethnographers must grapple with issues of power and exploitation not only in the larger society but also in their ow11 research endeavors" (Christman 1988:70). It may not be possible for the researcher to entirely position herself outside of that power structure, but

21 to stay conscious of the meanings and interpretations that structure may denote is an important step in the right direction.

Of specific interest to this ethnography is the subject of women who engage in

BDSM activities and self-identify with sexual identities related to these activities. It is interesting to note that many early sexologists seemed to be in agreement that women did not participate in sadomasochistic sexual activities, despite popular literature to the contrary (Breslow, Evans, and Langley 1995). Breslow, Evans, and Langley go on to suggest that "[t ]he questions remain as to whether females exist in meaningful numbers within the subculture and, if so, how they resemble sadomasochistic males" (1995:252). I had no trouble locating plenty of women to observe and interview. The female-male ratio remains to be analyzed, but I would be cautious in accepting that the nex.1: step is to do a comparative analysis with men. This has been the problem with research on women all along- the idea that what really needs to be studied is how similar women are to men, regardless of topic. I suggest t.hat women can be studied as a stand-alone primary group and that this can provide interesting and useful information without a need for a male comparison in order to legitimize their experiences or the interpretations of those expenences. I

Another important aspect of feminist ethnography is the focus on assisting the group being studied in some social or political way, if only to give them a voice. More recently gay, lesbian, and queer theorists have been utilizing oral histories as a way to gather information about these often marginalized and disenfranchised groups. This is an especially important tool for groups who cannot rely on a previously written history, as they are often filled with gaps, misinformation, or lacking entirely. "Feminist researchers

22 try to empower (rather than exploit) historical narrators by trusting their voices,

positioning narrators as historical experts, and interpreting narrators' voices alongside the narrators' interpretations of their OVvn memories" (Boyd 2008:177). Although accounts of gay and lesbian history have been on the increase as archives such as ONE National Gay and Lesbian Archives in Los Angeles strive to collect such histories, the accounts of people who self-identifY more with BDSM are still far behind. In 1991 the Leather

Archives and Museum was established in Chicago. Although many within the BDSM communities will agree that the history of these communities began with post-w'WII gay leather households and gatherings, this focus has a tendency to leave holes in regards to women's histories within the larger BDSM community construct. More recently, the

Leather Archives and Museum has begun the Women's Leather History Project, collecting and processing interviews, accounts, and ephemera related to women within

BDSM communities. The interviews collected for this thesis have been recorded in such as way as to be easily transferrable once this project is completed. Participants had the opportunity to agree to have their interviews archived. Those interviews and accompanying transcripts will be transferred to the Leather Archives and Museum one year after completion of this project to be stored and housed for the future use of I researchers and members of the larger BDSM community. In this very real way, the women participating in this project have had the opportunit'J to be a part of the growing history, as well as be heard as individuals.

Feminist ethnography lends itself to a very organic style of research wherein the participants guide and shape the research. Although this can lead to problems of getting off track and losing one's place in the larger research project, this also can lead to a

Z3 deeper understanding of the information being presented. Especially in the case of women talking with women, there is a level of understanding that seems to be inherent, although I am by no means stating that all women understand all other women. Certainly issues of class, race, ethnicity, and sexual identity can influence this dynamic, and not always in a positive way. However, Christman points out that •· ... it has been women who have continued to make explicit the c.onnections between their explorations of what it means to be a woman and their own lives and in the societies they study" (1988:72). l'VIore importantly, in this style of research "[t]he researcher is actively involved with respondents, so that together they are constructing fuller answers to questions that cannot always be asked in simply, straightforward ways" (Devault 1990:100). This is especially important when researching such broad and often difficult to define subjects as identity and power.

In the case of this project, it was important for me to have a guideline regarding what I planned to ask about and even what types of answers I was expecting, generally speaking. I also had to be particularly aware of the language I was using when asking questions about women's sexual identities, their possible multiple lives (often described as "vanilla" for their everyday life and "kink" or "SM" for their sexual life), and ideas about feminism or being feminist. Devault put it best when she said that '" ... to fully describe women's experiences, we often need to go beyond stfu"'ldard vocabulary- not just in our analyses, but also in the ways that we actually talk with those we interview. By speaking in ways that open the boundaries of standard topics, we can create space for respondents to provide accounts rooted in the realities of their lives~' (1990:99). This was a major goal of this study, to use language and definitions that the women I interviewed

24 would not only understand, but used themselves - to determine what that language is, how it is used, and what it means to them. Given the time constraints of such a project, it was incredibly useful that I already knew and understood the language used within this group. Even with this knowledge, however, the women I interviewed still managed to assert their individuality by using terms and definitions that had not occurred to me.

Self as Subject: Autoethnography

Abu-Lughod suggests that "[g]eneralization, the characteristic mode of operation and style of \vriting of the social sciences, can no longer be regarded as neutral description" (1991:150). She suggests that rather than continue to uphold the paradigm of the «other," ethnographers should be writing "ethnographies of the particular" as a means of"unsettling the culture concept" (1991: 149). This ethnography in particular places the researcher within the group being studied, as both an outsider and an insider, or a "halfie" as Abu-Lughod would say.

Ethnographers such as Abu-Lughod and Behar have written extensively about the self as subject within cultural anthropological field work. It should be no surprise that these ethnographers, who write from a perspective that includes a more positive or inclusive perspective of the self as subject, are women who often research and write from a feminist ethnographic perspective as well. More recently. two social scientists separately endeavored to explore the world ofBDSM, using themselves as subjects in order to learn more about this subculture. Their explorations come from the perspective of individuals who had never been a part of any BDSM community, nor had they any

25 background or previous experience with what they were going to experience within the

groups they studied. In my case, I am more of an insider than an outsider. One may even

consider me a "halfie"; I am both an academic researcher and a member of the larger

BDSM community. I find myself traversing a strange divide between those who research

"other'' communities and being a part of one of those communities. This puts me in a

unique position of being able to speak the languages and understand the customs of both

of these communities. From the perspective of the academic research community, I am

biased because I am part of the group I am studying, although I would argue no more or

less so than ifl chose to study my ethnic or religious heritage. From the perspective of

the BDSM community, I am biased because I am a researcher. I am one of"them"- a

member of the group who has a history of using people from marginalized groups such as

this in order to stigmatize, define negatively, and possibly cause more harm than good.

What this speaks to is positionality, the practice wherein the researcher must delineate her

position in relation to the group or subject being studied, with the implication that this

position may influence aspects of the study. I trod this tightrope lightly throughout the

entire research process.

Abu-Lughod writes about how the halfie's dilemma is more extreme " ... notjust

because they position themselves with reference to two communities but because when they present the Other they are presenting themselves ... " and she goes on to say that

" ... both halfie and feminist anthropologists are forced to confront squarely the politics and ethics of their representations. There are no easy solutions to their dilemmas"

(1991:142). In using myself as a subject of reference for this study I open myself to criticism that other ethnographers, anthropologists, and social scientists do not have to

26 endure. I must question myself, and be questioned by others, as to how objective I can be when doing field observations and interviews, but that is not the only issue. I almost must judge how much of myself is appropriate to reveal through my field notes, observations,

participation, and even during my analysis of the information I gather. How much is too much? This puts me in a very vulnerable position, both academically and personally.

Behar discusses what it is to be "the vulnerable observer," noting that " ... the worst that can happen in an invulnerable text is that it will be boring. But when an author has made herself or himself vulnerable, the stakes are higher: a boring self-revelation, one that fails to move the reader, is more than embarrassing; it is humiliating" (1997:13).

I would argue that revealing one's self, especially one's sexual identity, can be just as embarrassing. So, then, why do it? Behar goes on to say that "[t]he exposure of the self who is also a spectator has to take us somewhere we couldn't otherwise get to"

( 1997: 14 ), and this is the crucial point. Although there have been less than a handful of good accounts of what it is like to experience BDSM activities, behaviors, sexual identities, and communities from a complete outsider's perspective, there have been even fewer accounts of people who identify as a part of this subculture and are academic researchers who can provide a more in-depth analysis of what is going on because they already know the language, the customs, the protocols, the layout of the land. And, as

Williams writes "unlike many people of sexual minorities, I am in a position to speak up.

I am a researcher" (2010:51). This is an important point to make. As a researcher I have been granted some amount of authority, by academia and by the BDSM subculture. Not only is it my duty to be as objective as possible when gathering and analyzing data, but it is also my responsibility to represent this group in the best way that I can. Obviously,

27 there can be a conflict of interest here. What if I come across data that does not represent this group in a positive way? What if my data does not support my hypothesis? What if my personal perspective and experience is vastly different from those that I interview?

These are important questions to address, but they would be no less important if I were a complete outsider.

This use of the self as subject, or autoethnography, is something that is lacking in current academic discourse. «[Vvlithin academia the professional self is frequently cut off from the personal self, and ... there is a need for scholarship that integrates the two"

(Williams 2010:36). This is not to say that it is not useful or necessary to study cultures or peoples different from one's self, but it is just as important to integrate one's personal and professional selves, recognizing that in doing so one may become the object of one's own research. More specifically, when it comes to researching sexual minorities and/or deviance "there is little, if any, SM research wherein the researcher actually participates, and some scholars understandably seem to clarify that he or she was not involved"

(Williams 2010:23 ). This seems like a reasonable statement to make, to not get involved when researching SM or similar activities, except that if this were some other legal activity that the group being studied was participating in then academia would be hard­ pressed to understand why the researcher did not become directly involved while conducting participant-observation. It seems everjone gets squeamish when the activities in question resemble or are something sexual in nature. Again, the position of the researcher, the one who must decide what she is comfortable with, capable of doing, and willing to experience must come into play.

28 I will clearly and unequivocally state that I am a member of this subculture and I feel strongly that this research is done in the spirit of attempting to shed a positive light upon a group that has been stigmatized for decades if not centuries. I am also a feminist and an ethnographer, and that too persuades me to be open and represent this population as best as I can and as accurately as possible. Being a woman with a sexual and community identity that falls within the sc.ope of this study allows me access that other researchers would not have, and therefore it also allows this access to the larger academic community. The women I met and spoke with want to be heard, want a voice, and approved of me assisting in this way largely because of my status among them, and that position has allowed me to do this work.

Being positioned within this group certainly had some benefits as well. Most of the women and other people that I encountered at social events were not put offby seeing me there. I knew how to dress and interact and managed to hold my own without my presence interfering with the activities I observed. This also gave me ac.cess to women who might not have otherwise agreed to being interviewed. That I was considered a part of the group was important. This put many otherwise wary women at ease, understanding that I would do my best to present them in the best way possible without being / exploitative, unsympathetic, or just plain rude. Christman ""Tote" ... I believe it was my shared status with a woman .... that allowed and encouraged women to speak of issues that might be seen by outsiders .... as irrelevant to research ... " (1988:76). Many of the participants spent time after I conducted my interview, to "interview" me, wanting to know my status within the subculture, checking my academic and secular credentials, and my authenticity as a member of the group as well as someone worthy of carrying out the

29 research. They specifically asked me "What do you do?" or "What do you like?" This was not an enquiry regarding my profession or hobbies, but rather a search to find out if what I do could be considered by them as sufficient BDSJ\.1 activities to warrant my status as a researcher and member of the community. It was very important that I not only said that I did things like bondage, whipping, flogging, and other activities, but that they could see me do them at events. Although no one is ever forced or c.oerced into doing anything she does not want to do, there is tacit understanding within the BDSM communities that of you want to be taken seriously you must do things, and others should be able to witness you do things. This vetting process during interviews became an increasingly important part of the interview process, leading me to adjust for extra time during any one interview for the women to interview me.

Being a member of the group under scrutiny certainly has its drawbacks as well, although more of these seem to come from the academic side than the community, at least in my case. It is important that my analysis continues to scrutinize my own involvement, and rather than ignore that involvement or somehow defend the integrity of my work by claiming a scientifically detached stance, I must critically discuss how my involvement and participation deepens or interfered with my understanding of the research (Christman 1988).

Although I was already familiar with a couple of the people I planned to interview, and I had been a member of the larger BDSM community in Los Angeles fur several years, I had been out of touch with many people a..nd community events for the past two to three years due to graduate school. For several months before I began my research, I spent time reestablishing myself within the local community. I attended social

30 events where I knew I would encounter people, and especially women, who identify with

the BDSM subculture. Some of these events were public, or semi-public, and some of these events were more private~ being held in the homes of people that I knew or with

whom I shared mutual friends. I knew that I would need to reestablish some of my ties to the community in order to gain the trust of women that I might not have previously met.

In ethnography, this is usually done as a precursor to serious fieldwork, in which one begins to form social ties and alliances that will allow the researcher to have access to participants and informants.

I also had to establish myself as a serious researcher. This involved presenting a thesis proposal to the California State University, Northridge Graduate Studies

Committee in order to review my request to use human subjects. To make certain that my proposal and methods were sound as well as establish credibility within both the academic and alternative sexuality communities, I also submitted my proposal to the

Community-Academic Consortium for Research on Alternative Sexualities (CARAS), an independent research advisory committee that examines research being conducted in conjunction with BDSiv1 communities. Having received approval from both agencies, I felt that I was able to begin collecting data.

Participants who were interviewed were provided with a copy of the California

State University~ Northridge Experimental Subjects Bill of Rights~ a Consent Form~ and after the interview, a debriefing torm that included contact information for the local Kink

Aware Professionals organization for any participants who may have felt that my interview caused harm or distress. The contents of these documents were read, discussed with~ and signed by potential interviewees prior to commencing the interview.

31 Interviewees were made aware that their real and JJscene" names would not be used in my fieldnotes or transcripts, but that they would be provided with a random pseudonym for the purposes of the research. As part of the Consent Form, interviewees were given the option of having their recorded interviews archived for future use by researchers and/or BDSM community members. All interviewees consented to this.

Women who were observed during field observations were not given the opportunity to consent directly. This would have been very difficult as, on any given occasion, I could observe up to eighty or more women at an event. I chose to treat this like any ethnographer observing large groups of people interact wherein it is impractical to get express consent from every individual involved. I did, however, code my fieldnotes so as to protect the anonymity of persons, places, and organizations. I also did not take any photographs or video of any individuals or events. When possible and appropriate, I did disclose to individuals I had contact with what I was doing and researching, and what my plans were to execute said research.

Data collection took place over approximately six months time, including field observations and interviews. The first several participants for interviews were chosen based on my existing knowledge of who they are, their standing within the local communities, and their ability to possibly assist in finding other participants. This is often referred to as snowball or respondent-driven sampling wherein key informants are used to locate others (Bernard 2006). This can be an extremely helpful way to find participants, especially when studying a delicate or difficult topic or when working with participants who may not otherwise be willing to come forward and be interviewed. By about the fifth or sixth interview, however, word had spread within the larger BDSM community within

32 Southern California. Although I specified that I was looking to interview women within

Los Angeles County, I was contacted by women from Northern California, San Diego and Orange Counties, and from other states. This leads me to believe that a larger study is warranted and wanted.

First contact with potential interviewees was made by phone, email, or in person.

For most of the interviews, it took several contacts back and forth to schedule dates, times, and locations. For the most part, I recommended that the women either allow me to come to their home, or another quiet setting of their choice, in order to conduct the interview. I conducted more than half of the interviews at the individual's home, two interviews were conducted in a public park, and one interview was conducted in my home. I allowed each woman to assess her level of comfort Vv'ith me in, and I let this set the stage for where the interview was to be conducted. Only one woman had a partner present during the interview. Since I only knew the first three women previous to conducting this research, it did not surprise me that some of the women wanted to meet in more public spaces. Not only is this considered safe, but is standard practice within the

BDSM community when meeting a stranger.

The interviews took from forty minutes to three hours to complete. In general, the less experienced and/or younger women took less time with the interview than some of the older and/or more experienced women. I felt this was due to the possibility that women with more experience with BDSM seemed to have spent more time throughout their lives thinking about their identities and some of the issues presented in the interview, whereas those with less experience had not really yet come to the point of thinking about these topics. Also, interview sessions that lasted longer were not entirely

33 due to the interview per se, but also the vetting process discussed earlier. Several women took the opportunity after the interview had been conducted to ask me about my personal thoughts, life, and sexual identities related to the interview topics. I shared what I was comfortable sharing, recognizing that it often made them feel better about the process of the interview and the research in general to see me as one of them, and a real person, and not just a scientist who was using them in some way. As Christman writes, "[there are) ethical dilemmas for feminist researchers who encounter women informants who are so willing to share the intimacies of their lives ... women's shared subordinate structural position in society results in an almost immediate identification between female informant and researcher. The danger of research once again exploiting women's position is a real one" (1988:78). I had to be consciously and constantly aware of the information I was gathering and using, and what my intentions were once I had that information. I also did my best to make it clear to the women I interviewed what my intentions were as well.

Some interview sessions took more time because the women wanted to socialize and discuss current or upcoming events, people we knew in common, and other similar topics. Again, I felt this was an important aspect of the interview, and the research process overall. These women have entrusted me with a great deal of information and insight about their personal selves. I felt it was the least I could do to spend some additional time with them in a more social way as well.

All interviews were recorded with a tape recorder onto normal bias tapes, and then transcribed. This allowed for a more natural flow of conversation during the interview while also clearly demarcating the beginning and end of the more formal interview process. Notes were also taken during the interviews, although these were

34 mainly used to help me come back to points that I wanted interviewees to expand upon without interrupting the immediate flow. Many of the women interviewed were surprised by how easy and quick the interview itself was, with one woman even remarking that she was surprised that I did not make her cry during the interview. I tried to make it clear to every woman that I spoke with that my intent was not to make them cry, uncomfortable, or ill-at-ease in any way. Several of the women seemed to have a good time during the interview, however, and spent a lot of time laughing and being jovial. Although all of the interviews were transcribed, portions of some are used as direct examples while others are used as part of the general information gathered.

It is important to understand that this sample population is located in Los Angeles, a large metropolitan area. Although there are certainly women who practice BDSJ\.1 across the world, it seems there are higher concentrations within large cities within the

United States and Western Europe (Protose, Inc. 2011 ). This may be due to a variety of factors, including socio-economic status, level of education, and political and social agency in making choices about and/or acting on one's sexual identity. At the same time we must understand that although Los Angeles may seem affluent and open to all expressions of identity to some, this city is actually toted as being one of the most I disparate when it comes to income equality (Kurtzleben 2011 ), which could lead one to ponder whether or not Angelinos really feel they have agency to express themselves. In fact it is often within such areas where people feel powerless regarding economic and political issues that subcultures emerge. It is then likely that by examining one of the many subcultures within Los Angeles we can gain an understanding of how power and identity interact, are displayed, and are inverted to achieve the needs of the individuaL

35 Chapter3

Identity

"To identify is not to oppose desire. Identification is a phantasmatic trajectory and resolution of desire; an assumption of place; a territorializing of an object which enables identity through the temporary resolution of desire, but which remains desire, if only in its repudiated torm." - Judith Butler

Many of us will agree that our identity is who we are. Although many words can be used to describe that identity, at least in Western society we each feel that our identities are unique to each individual. In this chapter, I discuss the topics of self- identifying, multiple identities, identity and performance, and feminist identity. Within this discussion I argue that women can and do self-identify in a variery of ways, including as sexual submissives and feminists, and that this identity is not necessarily detrimental or powerless but can be a powerful and effective means of expression, fulfillment, and feminism.

Our identity is who we are, our sense of ourselves. We use many terms and definitions to try to distinguish personal, unique identities from others. Sometimes we identify ourselves based on our profession - "I'm a chef," "I'm a bookkeeper," "I'm a I teacher." Sometimes we identify ourselves based on our relationships to those around us

-"I'm a mother," "I'm a brother," "I'm a grandparent." With these types of identities, it has become widely accepted that we can hold many of them at once without too much argument or conflict, such as 'Tm a chef and a father" or "I'm a daughter and an author."

There may be conflict between the identities themselves, regarding how much time each takes to maintain, establish, or perform, or if one is more important than another, either to

36 the individual or society. Still, we have a fairly easy time recognizing that these multiple

identities exist within each of us and we are capable of maintaining them without too

much conflict for the most part.

This topic of identity starts to get more complicated when we introduce an

individual's sexual identity into the mix. Somehow we have a more difficult time with

statements like 'Tm a father, a professional athlete, and I'm gay" or 'Tm a mother, in

charge of the PTA, and sexually submissive." Especially with sexual identities that do not

fit heteronormative standards, this becomes problematic, although usually more so for

society than for the individual.

How are sexual identities constructed, or are they? Butler writes "[t]here is a tendency to think that sexuality is either constructed or determined; to think that if it is

constructed, it is in some sense free, and if it is determined, it is in some sense fixed.

These oppositions do not describe the complexity of what is at stake in any effort to take

account of the conditions under which sex and sexuality are assumed" (1993:94), and

sexuality seems to be most definitely complex. We no longer live in a world, socially or biologically, that accepts that only two sexes, male and female, exist. Although there may be various arguments as to the legitimacy or acceptability of people who are intersex or transgender, they clearly exist. The same goes for sexual orientation identities. We no longer have only heterosexuality or homosexuality to choose from/ but also terms like queer, dyke, leather daddy, slave, pet, and others are more available as identifiers for people to use to describe their sexual identities. Some people even use several of these terms all strung together to make their sexual identity or orientation more clear. One of

2 I am not saying here that one chooses one's sexual orientation, but that there is a larger variety of identifying tenninology available to choose from. -

37 the women I interviewed described herself as bisexual, although mostly gay, a 24/7 slave

with her Master (who is intersex), a bunny, an equal partner to her girlfriend, and

somewhat submissive to the girlfriend she and her Master share. Another woman I

interviewed described herself as queer with her real sexual orientation being rope, since

that was what she most turned on by. In tact, none ofthe women described and det1ned

their sexual identities in simple terms. Even if they did at first, by the time they were talking more about their identities later in the interview, it became clear that their sexual

identities were complex. Are their identities constructed or determined? Some of the

women I spoke with felt that these had always been their identities, even ones that

included words like slave or dominant others were not sure. Whether constructed or

determined, free or fixed, their sexual identities are clearly complex. Butler writes "such efforts to underscore the fixed and constrained character of sexuality, however, need to be read carefully, especially by those who have insisted on the constructed status of sexuality. For sexuality cannot be summarily made or unmade, and it would be a mistake to associate 'constructivism' with 'the freedom of a subject to form her/his sexuality as s1he pleases"' (1993:94). This is especially salient when we understand that a constructed sexuality or identity is not necessarily a freely formed sexuality or identity. Also, that something like sexuality has been constructed does not mean that it is not fixed, just that it is not necessarily pre-determined. That a person has a constructed identity does not mean that person created that identity for themselves freely - the identity may have been constructed by some other outside torce or person, and without the knowledge or consent of the person who \vas given that identity.

38 In American society it has become popular to self-identifY, to use terms that seem

to fit based on what an individual feels her or his identity is regardless of how others

might view them. McCall and Simmons tell us that this" ... role-identity is [a person's]

imaginative view of himself as he likes to think of himself being and acting as an

occupant of that position" (1966:67). In preparing for this project I created a matrix of

sorts that delineated nine possible sexual identity intersections consisting of a sexual

orientation identity in rows and a BDSM orientation in columns:

Top/Dominant l Bottom/Submissive Switch I I I Heterosexual/Straight I I i Gay/Lesbian I I I I Bisexual I I I l l i

Table 1. Sexual identity matrix.

I decided that I would try to get at least one or two women that fit each category

in order to get a balanced mix of identities, orientations, and experiences. In the

interviews I asked each woman to define and describe her sexual and BDSM orientations.

I did not provide terms for them to choose from because r wanted them to be abie to seif-

define. Here are some of the answers I received, starting with Ms. Allison, my first

interview, through Lani, my last interview:

39 "I think of myself as kind of bi, kind ofpan... queer is a word that has come into use as of late and J suppose that applies ... " (Interview with Ms Allison, January 12, 2011 ).

"Queer... well I define myself as a slave with a service masochistic tendency"(Interview with slave barbara, January 25, 2011).

"Captive, although if I were forced to use one of the classic categories I guess I'd have to say bottom but I prefer the term captive"(Interview with Claudia, January 28, 2011 ).

"Sadomasochist. I'm a sadist and I'm a masochist" (Interview with Mistress Daria, February 1, 2011).

"I am bisexual with a little ... with pansexual in it too. I'm ... I like both sexes and I accept all sexes" (Interview with Evelyn, February 3, 2011).

"I consider myself a switch ... sadomasochistic switch" (Interview with Ms. Francis, February 4, 2011).

"I guess I kind of identity as queer ... I'm a submissive and a pet. .. occasionally I've been a slave ... " (Interview with Georgia, February 5, 2011).

"Well ... up until very recently it was straight, and now it's bicurious, heterojlexible, fluctuating, evolving ... I don't quite know what to label it. .. " (Interview with Holly, February 6, 2011).

"Het hetero ... Submissive bottom" (Interview with Irene, February 8, 2011).

"I am bisexual. I like people or I don't ... I always put myself down as a submissive" (Interview with subjanice, February 8, 2011 ).

"In general I'm bisexual but I say I'm a 5 on the Kinsey Scale ... I'm almost all the way gay ... I am a 24/7 slave but I am also a professional switch ... I'm a bunny ... " (Interview with kat, February 8, 2011). "I am bisexual. I would consider myself a Y-t lesbian. 25% of the time I'm attracted to females and the rest of the time I'm attracted to males. I am mostly sub but I am also a switch" Interview with Lani, February 11, 2011 ).

40 When I redesigned my matrix to include the terms that the women used to identifY

themselves sexually and added the women into the matrix, this is what occurred:

Top/ Bottom/ 1 Switch ICaptive Slave ! Sado- 1 Dominant Submissive I Imasochist I l lI l I I I IHeterosexual/ Irene Ms. I Straight Francis L I Mistress lGay/Lesbian I I l I I I Daria Bisexual Evelyn, IClaudia kat 3 I I j subjanice , I l Lani

I 1 Queer Georgia l slave I I I barbara I Pansexual !Ms. I Allison I i I I Questioning/ l Holly Not sure l l I I

Table 2. Revised sexual identity matrix.

3 To preserve the identities presented to me, I have changed the names of the women but not the way in which they refer to themselves. Therefore, women who wrote their names using lowercase ietters and/or adding Ms, Mistress, sub, or slave to their names has been kept intact as tl:ris is an importallt point of etiquette witl:rin BDSM communities.

41 I found that even as someone who identified within some of these outlying categories as well as being well-versed in BDSM language and open to my participants self-identifying, I still fell into the academic hole of attempting to presume who my participants where or might be and made the attempt to fit them into categories that I had created. As Devault describes, as a feminist researcher I need to be "aware that naming is political... and that women's activities have often been labeled in ways that serve the project of controlling and subordinating women" (1990: 11 0). She stressed that researchers, especially researchers who are women, must be careful not to use language that does not fit our populations, and thus be guilty of mislabeling or misrepresenting who they are. In this case, I had to be willing to change my course of collecting and intervieVv'ing participants and allow for other language and identities to come to the surface.

Laying out these identities in this matrix, however, makes it difficult to see the many overlaps and exceptions, as Ms. Francis also identifies as a sadomasochist, kat also identifies as a bunny, Georgia also identifies as a pet, and Lani also identifies as a switch.

Further into the interviews this becomes even more complicated as subjanice refers to herself also as a pony and a trainer, Mistress Daria speaks more about her experiences as I a masochist while at the same time identizying herself as primarily a Dominant, and several of the women discuss multiple on-going sexual and/or BDSM relationships that may or may not seem to fit with their initial terms and definitions of their various sexual identities. Although we often take for granted that one's sexual orientation "includes homogeneity of sexual behaviors, sexual fantasies, and participation in a ... community... " (Rothblum 2000:194) and that aspects like behavior, identity, ru1d desire

42 are congruent with one another, we are usually only referring to a unidimensional sexual orientation - lesbian, gay, straight, bisexual. This does not take into account other sexual orientations, such as queer or pansexual, nor does this allow for layered sexual identities that may include dominant, submissive, and the others used by the women I interviewed.

Furthermore, this presumes that one who is lesbian, gay, or straight can be so and be identified in this way if and only if all of their behaviors, desires, and identities are in congruence with what it may mean to be gay, straight, or lesbian. Even without the complicated layers that BDSM orientations may encompass, it is not impossible for a lesbian woman or gay man to have experienced heterosexual sexual relationships, in reality or fantasy, and yet still identify as lesbian or gay. Nor is it impossible for a straight woman or man to experience what may be considered homosexual relationships or fantasies and still maintain a straight identity (Gutmann 1996). Adding the layers of

BDSM identities can make this even more complicated, but should also help to illustrate the wide spectrum of sexual identity.

For example, I identity myself as queer although others may look at me and identity me as heterosexual because they see me with a male partner. American society

allows for self.identification, to a point. Clearly some people are more able to self­ .I identifY and broadcast this identity to the larger social culture than others. Other identifYing factors such as race, socio-economic status, religion, sex, gender presentation, and residence can determine how much freedom one may have in displaying one's self­ detennined identity without incuning legal and/or social sanctions. This is yet another area where identity, power, and sexuality tend to overlap.

43 Within the BDSM subculture there is a lot of self-identifying going on. Identity signifiers such as scene names, online names, modes of dress, body modifications, and more are based within a marginalized sexual construct that is both purposeful and important. It should come as no surprise that individuals within any marginalized group would use the symbols of that marginalization as a means of sett:identitying, holding those symbols up as banners to proclaim their rights to their individuality and identities.

Within BDSM one ofthe most common self-identifYing signifiers is having a scene name. This is a name that one chooses for oneself and can have multiple layers of meaning. For some, their scene name is way to remain anonymous within the vanilla world, not allowing their SM identity to be disclosed for fear of retribution should someone in the vanilla world discover their clandestine sexual activities. For others, the reverse is true - they are closeting their vanilla lives from their SM interactions, not wanting these worlds to mix and possibly become problematic.

For ot.hers, their scene names become something much more akin to adopting a new and realized identity that better descnbes who they are. Strauss writes "[t]he names that are adopted voluntarily reveal even more tellingly the indissoluble tie between name and self-image. The changing of names marks a rite of passage. It means such things as that the person wants to have the kind of name he thinks represents him as a person, does not want any longer to be the kind of person that his previous name signified" (1959: 16).

Just as this can happen through the taking of a family name during marriage or adoption, individuals within BDSM communities often create scene names for themselves that they feel better describe who they are and are better suited to their real and/or wanted personalities. Scene names often include prefixes such as Master, Mistress, Ms., slave,

44 sub, boy, Sir, girl, and others to help denote the SM orientation or interest of the individual. Scene names also may include using capital or lower case letters to denote this as well. Referring back to Table 2 you can see how the women I interviewed named themselves. Although the female names provided were given by me to assure anonymity, the way their names are written, either with prefixes or in lower case letters, is how each woman presented herself to me. I wanted to preserve their self-identities even while creating anonymous identities for them for the sake of this study. You will also note that some of their names look and read normally, like Claudia, Holly, and Irene for example.

These women did not present their real or scene names to me in any specific format outside of the norm, therefore I chose to preserve that as well. This is not to say that they don't engage in self-identification but this does not entirely make itself evident in the format in which they present their names.

Boyd points out "[m]ore recently, Butler has argued that self-knowing and self­ disclosure - that is, claiming a sexual identity- function to reiterate, through language and practice, the very terms upon which the ideas of normative and nonnormative sexualities are constructed" (2008: 179). This too can be seen in the "revised identity chart" I constructed. As more women used more terms to describe themselves, the chart becomes more and more complex. Identities and terms for those identities start to cross over one another, with some terms being used analogously while others are used to separate identities from the normative language to create more unique, and possibly more descriptive, identities. What becomes even more intriguing is when the women are asked to define the terms they are using to identify themselves. Lees start with the terms I was already prepared for: Dominant, top, submissive, bottom, and switch.

45 Ms. Allison defined herself as a Dominant/Master. When I asked her how this

differed from her using the term Mistress to describe herself she answered:

"1'v1istress for me is a diminutive term in the same way that actress is a diminutive term. And within the industry of course the term actor is acceptable for both genders at this particular point and time. Mistress also has the connotation of a little, you know, play on the side in a heterosexual situation with a man who is connected to someone else and I never connected \vith the term Mistress. That is why I like Ms [Allison] which is always respectful and ifi take someone on for my own I prefer Master" (Interview, January 12, 2011).

In this way Ms. Allison has created an identity for herself that clearly states that

she should be taken seriously. It is interesting to note how Ms. Allison points out the argument of sexist language, that terms used for women in one sense are meant to denote authority over others while at same time those terms do not hold the authority that the masculine version of the terms denote. Rather than take the term Mistress and attempt to redefine or reuse it in a way that may have authority, Ms. Allison has taken the tem1

Master, deciding that she holds the authority and power to use this as a means of defining who she is to herself and to others.

Whereas Ms. Allison speaks of always having been dominant throughout her life and in all arenas of her life, Mistress Daria speaks of her dominance in a sadomasochistic sense, where she is the one in charge and gains pleasure from inflicting extreme sensation on others. At the same time, Mistress Daria recognizes that being dominant is not her sole identity, and that occasionally she allows others to inflict eAireme sensation, and even pain, upon her for her pleasure. Interestingly neither of these women, nor the other women who identified as switches, seemed to have difficulties associating with their dominant roles. P.Jthough some women who are sexually dominant do experience

46 incongruity with their feminine roles (Scott 1992:32) none of the women I interviewed seemed to be experiencing this.

·with these categories of identity, it is also important to note the nuances between terms that seem very alike, most especially bottom, submissive, slave, and captive. It would be easy tbr most people to see these terms as synonymous with one another, and on a certain level they are. In general, all of these terms denote a person who is giving control to another for a period of time, either sexually and/or in other areas of their lives.

However, the nuanced differences come through in how that control is given. For the most part, any one of these terms could fall under the larger term of "bottom," generally defined as the person who is receiving. Keep in mind, however, that even this gets complicated when discussing a dominant who is receiving a massage from her submissive - in the case the dominant is technically on the bottom, or the receiving end, of this dyad, but it is assumed that the dominant instmcted or ordered the submissive to administer the massage, which places the dominant back into the top position. Getting back to how bottom can be distinctly different from the other terms however, one can bottom for another without being submissive to them, and without being their slave or captive, or anything else. In my case, since I switch, I can choose to be the one receiving a whipping without taking on any of the other roles concurrently.

A couple of the women who identified themselves as submissive were not sure how to define the term for themselves; they merely stated that submissive was what felt comfortable to them to use as a BDSM identity term. Other women who identified as submissive said things like ". . . how I would like to ideally define it would be the bottom of a power exchange relationship but not necessrui.ly being powerless, you know,

47 essentially submissive's kind of when, you know, when you get under it they're the ones actually running the show, they have to be the ones consenting to these things ... "

(Interview with Georgia, February 5, 2011) and "[b]eing in ... an outsider's point of view, being the one with no power but from somebody in the scene they would actually understand that you have all the power'' (Interview with Lani, February 11, 2011 ). It is clear that for these women submissive does not mean a person without power, agency, consent, or identity. In tact for these women the identity of being a submissive denotes a special power that allows them even more control over SM sexual situations than they feel dominants or tops have. In essence, the submissive has the power to say "No," and this seems to override the possible power of a "Yes" from a dominant or top.

Submission is often thought of as a particular type of bottoming. In general, it is agreed that not all bottoms are submissives, but that all submissives are bottoms. A submissive willingly gives her (or his) control to another for some period of time. This ca.ll include sexual and non-sexual interactions. The distinction between submissive and slave becomes a lot more murky. Many of the women I interviewed gave very similar definitions to these terms, and yet seemed to also indicate that there was a clear distinction between the two. subjapice and slave barbara each defined their identities as "I obey." Evelyn stated that slaves have a higher protocol that must be followed and kat seemed to agree, stating that as a slave she had a signed contract with her l'-v1aster or

Mistress, indicating a more structured relationship than that of a submissive. However, kat also said that she has lived in a 24/7 dominant-submissive Master-slave relationship, which seems to blur the lines between submissive and slave. Besides a higher protocol or a more structured relationship, the distinction between submissive and slave seems to lie

48 not within the type of relationship nor in the partner's identity, but in how the woman

who defines herself as a submissive or slave assesses her own personality. With one

exception, the women who identified as submissive felt that identity was not just a part of their sexual identity but also a description of their day-to-day identity. This does not

mean that they are not capable of or do not control their own lives, but that they would prefer not to. The women who identified as slaves made it very clear that they were not

submissive at all, although they would allow another to have control if that partner could prove that he or she was deserving of such control. Thus it seems that a submissive is more willing to give control than a slave, and I think that this is where the more structured Master/Mistress-slave relationship comes into play. A slave understands that when she gives that control, protocols often require her to no longer negotiate cert.ain aspects of the relationship, unless she has decided to leave the relationship entirely, whereas a submissive is more likely to be asked to negotiate aspects of her relationship with an understanding that doing so will not necessarily end the relationship.

subjanice and slave barbara, although using different terms for their identities, have very similar definitions. For each of them these identities are intricately linked to their spiritual identities and their sense of who they are as a complete person. Being a sub / or slave in this context for them is not limited to BDSM or related activities~ this is how they engage with the world around them as a whole. For example, when I asked subjanice how she defines submissive, she said, «1 obey." She went on to describe different ways this may play out, from getting someone a glass of water to dressing the way her Master has instructed, but in the end that is the best definition of her identity as a submissive. slave barbara's answer was not that much different: "[F]or me the identity of being slave

49 is a part of who I am. A slave is always in service to and obedient to whomever is the

Master. .. " (Interview, January 25, 2011). It is also interesting to note that both of these women described relationships in which they were in service to gay men. In subjanice's case she and her Master did engage in sexual activity, although he still identified himself mostly as gay. For slave barbara there was not sexual exchange in the heteronormative sense with her gay Master although they did engage in power exchange that had an erotic elementto it. This leads one to conclude that all ofthese identities, while seemingly specific, can also be quite broad and can encompass a range of other sexual identities that may seem to be in conflict with one another but are necessarily so.

The difference between captive and slave or submissive is somewhat easier to define, although it can be much more difficult to comprehend for some. Claudia defined captive as being "more of a resistance type role" wherein the appeal is that she is forced to do things. Although there is still grey area here, since one could presumably force a slave or submissive to do things, Claudia's captive role is entirely about force. It should be understood, however, that although forced sex and coercion are a part of her relationships and sexual identity, she does distinguish this from rape. Claudia acts out consensual forced sex fantasies with her partners, which is not rape.

l'v1s. Francis and Holly defined themselves as switches. Usually this term means a person who plays various roles, sometimes top or dominant, and sometimes bottom or submissive, depending on a variety of factors incJuding partners, play space, mood, type of play they are engaging in, etc. Both women defined switch without too much fanfare, stating "I can go back and forth on the spectrum of my desires basically" and "it depends on the person," respectively. In the BDS~1 communities, switches are sort of the

50 bisexuals of the gay-straight continuum, with most preferring a certain role more than

another, but not exclusively so. Although I did not study this aspect specifically, it would

be interesting to survey whether or not sVv1tches feel more or less disenfranchised than

bisexuals. Are people within the BDSM communities telling switches they can't really be

switches, but must choose one side or the other? Neither Ms. Francis nor Holly noted

this, but that does not mean other switches have not experienced this.

A few other interesting identity terms came up in the interviews, including pony,

pet, and bunny. For Kat and Georgia, their identities as bunny and pet,

respectively, are pretty similar. Within their current households part of their role is to act

as a family pet. They are cared for, loved, snuggled, groomed, and played with as if they

were a pet. This is not their only identit'j Vv1thin these households, but their pet personas

are ones that provide pleasure and relaxation for themselves and their owners. Also, they

each noted how different these identities are from when they are submissives or slaves.

Within their bunny or pet identities they are not disciplined in the same manner that

would occur in their other identities, nor are they engaged with sexually.

subjanice also identifies as a pony and a trainer. Although her identity as a pony is

somewhat akin to Kat's and Georgia's pet identities, within BDSM communities ponies

have a very specific role identity that includes specific protocols, training, and other

elements that less formal pet roles do not necessarily have. subjanice explains her

experience as a pony: "[t]here's many levels to pony play in that it involves that the pony must be there, willing to listen, like you're waiting for the commands ... you're waiting to obey... like you're wanting to do everything that your commander ... your trainer wants you to do ... '' (Interview with subjanice, February 8, 2011 ). This pony identity fits well

51 with subjanice's submissive identity, and in many ways is another facet of how she

performs as a submissive. Her identity as a trainer came about because her trainer left the

country~ and subjanice wanted to continue doing pony play. She found that she could do

this by offering to train other would-be ponies, or playing with others in the trainer role,

thus continuing to engage in pony play even though she is not necessarily the pony all the

time. In this sense, subjanice is taking a top or authoritative role, but she does not feel

that this is any way changes her submissive essence of someone who does for others.

This is akin to what Butler writes in Bodies That Matter, '"[t]hat identifications shift does

not necessarily mean that one identification is repudiated for another; that shifting may

well be one sign of hope for the possibility of avowing an expansive set of connections"

( 1993: 118). In this way, subjanice and others have given themselves permission to move

between and among various roles and identities without losing who they are at their core.

Just as we can accept that a person can be a woman, a feminist, and a mother, we can

begin to accept that that same woman can also identifY as a submissive and a pony.

Another aspect of identity theory that is important within this context is that of

identity and performance. One can pose the philosophical question "Does one have an identity if no one is there to see it performed?" We would likely agree that individuals have identities even if no one is around to interact with them, but at the same time we also acknowledge that our identities, or our performance of our identities, are often influenced by those around us. Within the context ofBDSM interactions this is no less true. Especially in more public or semi-public arenas, like with anyone, identities are performed ·with knowledge of what the setting will allow and not allow, and how the other individuals, or performers, are likeiy to react and engage. Hopkins (1994) discusses

52 how using the term "scenes" to describe SM interactions is purposeful. He goes on to describe how these scenes are consciously constructed performances, including an acknowledged audience and the seeking out of other performers. In this way, power exchanges enacted in spaces where others are present are not only SM performances but performances of identity. These public exchanges help to affirm and reaffirm one's presentation of identity.

This type of performance is much more overt than some other types. We perform our identities all the time by the way we dress and interact with others. We do not need to create a scene in order to perform our identities for others. For example, I describe in my field notes how I and others are dressed for certain occasions:

I dressed for the occasion, wearing a sparkly red cocktail dress that received many compliments throughout the evening. I also wore seamed stockings, a leather garter and thong, and black high heels. My partner wore dress slacks and a dress shirt ... People were dressed in various outfits that included long coats and capes, corsets, high heels and boots, as well as very casual clothing like t-shirts and jeans. (Fieldnotes, December 29, 2010)

All of them were dressed very nicely, in lingerie, corsets, long robes, and heels. The man was on all fours in front of the group, with a collar and leash on. He was also wearing jeans, at-shirt, and sneakers. (Fieldnotes, January 9, 2011)

tv1ost people were dressed pretty casually,. although a few people dressed up more and one person was wearing an obvious metal slave collar and cuffs. (Fieldnotes, January 28, 2011)

The first three se-Ctions above describe how various pe.ople, including myself, dressed for play parties. The range of dress is from very elegant and dressy to casual and

53 every day. These ways of performing identity can be read as how important a particular event is for the individual, who they may be attempting to attract, what type of play they may be likely to engage in, etc. The last section describes people attending a discussion group. This is considered a casual event, and yet there were still people who were dressed up more than others. Of particular interest is the person wearing a slave collar and cuffs in this setting. Not only is this sending the message that she is owned by someone and therefore a particular protocol must be followed in order to interact with her, but it is also a point of pride for her to be able to display her slave status in a semi-public forum. This type of identity performance is one that is often not tolerated or considered acceptable outside of an SM conte:x.1:, and so validation of this identity must often be found through displaying the accouterments within an Stv1 context where others can openly acknowledge and comment on it. This is a good example of what Moser points out when he writes that these spaces create "an atmosphere where individuals can gamer support for their behavior" (1998:25). Williams comments on this as well, stating that BDSM spaces allow for ".. . a way in which complex parts of our identities can be expressed, and that sometimes these hidden parts of us cannot interact in "normal' spaces" (2010:136).

Whether someone is openly displaying her slave collar, encased in latex pony gear, or wearing lingerie as formal event couture, it is important to recognize that these displays, these performances, help to reinforce individual sexual identities within a complicit, positive environment.

Another aspect of identity that I investigated was whether these women identified themselves as feminists, and what that means to them. Holly, kat, Lani, Mistress Daria,

54 and subjanice all clearly answered in the affirmative, that they consider themselves

feminists. They defined feminism in the following ways:

"I guess for me a feminist would be a woman who claims the right to her life and the right to live it as fully and engagingly as any man ... certainly nothing wrong with that... " (Interview with subjanice, February 8, 2011 ).

"Believing that my gender has nothing to do with my intelligence, my ability, my capability, whether I'm dominant or submissive in the lifestyle or outside of it whether I'm able to be an executive or be able to ... I think it means that women are equal to men in every possible way that it's possible to be equal..." (Interview with Holly, February 6, 2011 ).

"It means that I believe in the overall theme of the feminist movement-- that women and men are human beings of equal value whether or not they are exactly the same in all fashions ... I consider myself sex positive feminist, sex worker feminist ... I am not the kind of feminist that hates BDSM because it's inherently degrading to women and rm not the kind of feminist that thinks that all heterosexual intercourse is rape because it involves penetration, so I don't agree with all feminists ever, but I agree with the overarching theme of feminism so, as hard as it is sometimes to identity as a feminist, I'm not going to stop because I don't like what some people are saying" (Interview with kat, February 8, 2011).

"Yes. For me it's ... you don't need a man to open the door

for you but if he wants to open the door, go for it. .. let him I do it. You don't have to do everything yourself but you have to treat each other as equals" (Interview with Lani, February 11, 2011).

These definitions of feminism denote a sense of strength, well-being, and equality, and that these are positive qualities that these women strive to achieve and presumably seek out in partners. Interestingly, Ms. Allison and slave barbara were the only women who did not feel that the term "feminist" applied to them. Ms. Allison stated

55 that she was not comfortable being associated with radical feminists, and therefore felt

that identifYing as a feminist at all may skew other's perceptions of her. slave barbara had this to say when asked if she considered herself a feminist:

"No and yet there are many who would. Ifs amazing. People come up to me and thank me for being their role model and I'm like Dudette! (laughs) Get a grip! But I guess in the traditions of some of the more philosophically thoughtful feminism, probably the more traditional. .. originally which were really genuinely about liberating women and giving voice to true feminine power ... in that minority case maybe but in terms of what we see today that runs the gamut of feminists and feminist thought I don't associate with that... I'm not out there to bash men for being men and different and I'm certainly not ... I certainly don't ascribe to feminist distorted logic" (Interview, January 25, 2011).

So it seems that even for the women who would not use the word feminist to

describe some part oftheir identity, some of the ideals of feminism still ring true with

what they believe in and practice. Just as third wave feminism allows for women's sexual

expression and freedom to be pursued through sex work and enjoyment of pornography, there seems to be room for the inclusion of women who identi£)1 as sexual submissives

and slaves \.vithin this framework. It seems clear that these women do not see themselves

as doormats, being subjugated by their partners or by an overarching system of /

patriarchal inequaiity. These women are strong and capable of negotiating pleasurable relationships that meet their emotional and sexual needs.

I began this chapter with a quote from Butler "[t]o identifY is not to oppose desire ... " (1993:99). This is important to understand, especially when discussing sexual

identities. It can be argued whether or not our sexual identities are the core of our overall identities, but it seems clear that how we identifY sexually influences and is influenced by

56 our other determiners. And whether that desire is sexual desire or a desire to fit in, be understood, or be allowed the ability to enjoy the rights of being a recognized citizen, all of these are clearly influenced by our sexual identities. Foucault would have us believe that we can create ourselves through practices of knowledge, but as Rozmarin points out, this •·... is not complete if one doesn't see the forces that prevent women from attributing positive meaning to their bodily experiences, sexuality, and desires" (2005:10). By examining women's sexuality through the lens ofBDSM power exchange relationships we can easily see the many forces that would not allow a woman to '"attribute positive meaning to [her] bodily experiences, sexuality, and desires." Radical feminists and others view BDSM sexual orientations and expressions as extreme examples of women's oppression, subjugation, and can use this as a reason to oppress and subjugate more by not allowing women this form of sexual expression, not to mention using this as a means to enforce social, political, and legal control. This conservative argument against allowing such practices or forms of identity tends to suggest, "Well, if we allow t.his, what comes next?" There is, however, no substantiated argument that proves that these practices and identities are harmful. As Rothbium writes, sexual orientation is diverse

" ... with each individual having a unique template of erotic and affectional identity, behavior, fantasies, relationships (including relationship status), and emotional attachments, all of which can change over time. These components can be (and often are) incongruous, so there is no simple relationships among behavior, identity, and desire"

(2000:196). It is clear even from a dozen interviews that these women's sexual identities are complex.

57 Chapter4

Power Exchange

'"Sexuality' is far more of a positive product of power than power was ever a repression of sexuality."­ Paul Rabinow

Power and the exchange of power is a topic that often surfaces when discussing women's issues, identities, and feminism. In fact, I believe that power is the hinge upon which feminism developed, as all forms of feminism attempt to assert the power of women, by showing how and where women have or do not have power, and therefore showing the need for a balance in power across social, political, and personal arenas. In this chapter I define power and power exchange within the context ofBDSM relationships, discussing asymmetry of power and how power often includes some system of rewards and/or punishments. I analyze ideas of power as they relate to sexuality. My discussion of power and power exchange within this context asserts that women can feel powerful in roles or identities that on the surface seem to be without power, and the sense of powerfulness that is gained by embodying these roles empowers these women in other areas of their lives. I argue that if the premise of feminism is for all women to have power, than this must also apply to women who consciously choose to give someone else control of that power for the woman's own satisfaction and needs.

So then, what is power exchange within the BDSM context? Before I go into the various social science theories and extrapolations regarding power and identity I would like to provide the answers that were provided during interviews as well as my own findings while observing and participating in various activities and events. The answers to this question range from basic answers like «Just two different people playing a role"

58 or "It's a give and take" to more complex answers. Ms. Allison describes power exchange from the dominant perspective:

" ... essentially what I seek is that surrender, that commitment, that choice to hand the reins over to me, to give me the scepter and tor it to be a joyous and willing choice makes it even better ... for me the power exchange only has meat to it when it is not required from either party and is a conscious choice to make certain declarations to each other which change the dynamics of a typical relationship" (Interview, January 12, 2011 ).

subjanice and slave barbara describe power exchange from the submissive or slave perspective:

"Seductive. (laughs) Very seductive. Power exchange is where you have an agreement that one person is going to lead and one person is going to follow. One person's going to support the other person in wherever they want to lead totally. One person's going to agree not to make the other person wrong no matter what they do. You can no longer have that discussion ... I think that's the ultimate power exchange, truly, that you can be with that person and never make them wrong ... if you can accept them the way they are and the way they're not and empower them always, that's the power exchange that can create miracles...... I think that the true power exchange is to somehow give yourself to that person so that you're all of a sudden having hot sex in a way that he didn't really see it coming ... and that's what I do ... that's for me ... that's the ultimate power exchange to renew a person ... return them to themselves" (Interview with subjanice, February 8, 2011 ).

"From a slave's perspective, total, which is another reason why I am not in a Master/slave relationship, because for me there :is one gate ... one yes ... Total power exchange :is merging my needs, my wants, my desires to that ofthe person I am in service to" (Interview with slave barbara, January 25, 2011).

59 One can infer from these descriptions that dominants and submissives are seeking to fulfill similar needs, although from differing perspectives.

Among all of the women I interviewed, power exchange includes the following elements: trust, negotiation, and consensuality. Some women also include elements of balance, giving up and/or taking, surrendering or submitting, and setting and obeying of mles. Two women make clear that power is not what is being exchanged at all, but control or authority over one's personal power is what is being given or exchanged. slave barbara says:

"One thing that I didn't say about power exchange that I want to go back and readdress is that when I talk about this aspect and when I teach it I don't use the word power because it comes back to this issue about whether the slave is a dishrag m not. Slaves that I know are extraordinarily powerful people and what is being exchanged is not power. I don't give my power away. I can't. Ifs an energetic part ofwho I am ... what I can consciously give away is authority.. . so what I talk about is authority exchange as opposed to power exchange. What I mn consenting to is giving you authority over my power. You better have equal. . . equivalent amount of power to be able to deal with it because if you don't I'm in control... so I don't think we exchange power, we exchange authority ... We're not exchanging power, we're exchanging authority in a conscious,• consensua~1 manner... " (Intervtew, . January '>5~ , 2011).

In my field experience I attempted to both engage in and observe power exchanges, or exchanges of authority and control. In the field it was more difficult to discern between power and authority being exchanged, and maybe this is a matter of semantics. Still, it is clear from direct experience and observation that this is a conscious give and take, and whether power or authority are being exchanged does not seem to be as important as understanding that both parties have power.

60 Here are two very different examples of how this type of exchange can play out during a scene at a party. Below I quote from my fieldnotes:

We began to play, me flogging then whipping his back, scratching him with my nails and with vampire gloves. I knew I really got him when he started giggling. When I hit him hard, he giggled, making me laugh too. He was trusting me to give him an enjoyable and interesting experience without banning him. I was trusting him to respond in a way that would let me know if everything was okay. (February 14, 2011)

Later in the evening I saw the end of a scene between two women. It was an intense. hard scene. There was no giggling or laughter, and the woman who was topping was really whipping the bottom hard. I was sitting very nearby and never heard the bottom give a safeword, so there was no reason why the top should have stopped. Still, by the end of the scene, the woman that was bottoming was literally on the floor and sobbing. By that point, the top was holding her and rocking her in her arms. (February 14, 2011)

In my personal experience where I am playing with someone I had never previously played with, I was being careful not to go too far. We had only met once before and had spent maybe twenty minutes discussing our limits and what type of play we wanted to engage in. We had agreed that we liked a lighter, sillier style of play while at the same time my play partner made it clear that he enjoyed a lot of pain and that I could be very hard on him. I made the conscious decision that I was not going to get anywhere near his limits during this first time because I needed enough time to be reassured that what he explained as his limits and what he was willing to actually engage in were synchronous. This follows with the definitions I heard that stressed trust, negotiation, and consensuality.

61 Although the scene I observed was a stark contrast to the one I engaged in, these elements were still in place. The two women I observed playing "vith one another were engaged in an intense scene where one woman pushed the other to her breaking point By the end of the scene, the woman who was taking the beating was lying in a fetal position on the floor with her hands over her head and crying. The woman who had been beating her grabbed a blan.lcet and wrapped it around her, then lovingly held and stroked her as she cried. This scene still stressed trust, negotiation, and consensuality, even if it may not seem obvious to someone who does not engage in these activities. The woman who was being beaten was under no obligation to allow it to go that far and could have stopped the scene at any time. Even if the woman topping her had been unwilling to stop for some reason, if the bottom had said, "Red!" the scene would have been stopped by others in the room.4 This is a good example of what slave barbara and subjanice discussed about being a slave and fully giving up control to another.

Both of these scenes are very different from one another in tone, but a power exchange is still apparent in both. In the scene where I was topping, I had been given controi of the activities, how they would happen, how hard or light the play wouid be, and ultimately I was in charge of the safety and well-being of the person I played with. At I the same time, I had to trust that he had been honest with me about his limits and play style and also that he would indicate when he wanted or needed the scene to stop.

It is important to note that although we played for about an hour at the party, I contacted him the next day via email to make sure he was still okay with what we had

4 In the settings where I did my participant observation, using the word "Red" to stop a scene is weH-known. In fact, there are signs and other methods of providing information that tell attendees to use this as a means of stopping a scene they feel is out of control or needs to end for some reason.

62 done and that there were no negative after-effects, either physically or emotionally. This is called aftercare and is an important part of the power exchange as well, although it often goes unnoticed when people discuss power exchange. Even though I did not ask anyone about aftercare specifically, Ms. Allison did bring it up during our conversation.

"[o]h ... and the aftercare. Let us not minimize the aftercare! For someone to have suffered discomfort ... for someone to have come to tears at my hands and then, as I hold them and wipe away the tears and have them say, 'Thank you, Ma'am' AHl Heaven!

Heaven! I love if' (Interview, January 12, 2011 ). I want to stress that aftercare is not only necessary when someone has been brought to tears or had their limits pushed. Aftercare is just as necessary when the play has been lighter, because even light, sensual play can bring up emotions and other issues that may need addressing after the play has finished.

Although this topic has not been seriously researched, people within BDSM communities anecdotally speak about how aftercare is very often more important for the top or dominant, especially emotionally and psychologically, than for the bottom or submissive. Where the bottom may have to recover physically and emotionally, the top may experience some amount of guilt or other negative feelings about having hurt another person, especially if that person is someone he or she feels strongly about. In this / case, the power exchange occurring during aftercare may be one of the bottom reconfirming permission they gave prior to the play, and possibly even the top handing authority or power back to the bottom, thanking them for allowing the play, and the exchange, to occur.

With that being said, I think it's important to bring up the role of pain within the context ofBDSM and power exchange. It has been noted that pain is not the central focus

63 of all BDSM play, and in fact for some people, pain has no place whatsoever (Cross and

Matheson 2006). I asked the women I interviewed about the role of pain in SM power exchange and for their definitions of pain within this contel!.i. Three of the women say that pain is a necessary element of their SM play and that they actively seek experiences that include elements of pain. Three other women say that pain is not important to them in an SM interaction. Three women also discuss how they use SM pain as a way to relieve stress or deal with problems. Seven of the women also explain that pain within

SM is about context

Ms. Francis, kat, and Evelyn all explained that pain is a very necessary part of their SM experiences. They each used terms like masochist to describe this need, as well as relating the pain to sexual satisfaction and orgasm. Evelyn went so far as to describe her fear of needles, but her willingness to endure needle play because she likes the sensation it provides.

Lani, Irene, and Claudia all explain that pain is not a necessary part of t.heir SM play, although they each endure it for the sake of the play on occasion. Lani explains that she likes the idea of pain much more than the actuai physical sensation of pain.

Interestingly, although both Irene and Claudia say they do not like pain or find it necessary to enjoy a scene, they each describe circumstances under which they do in fact enjoy or endure certain modes of play t..~at could be considered painful by some people.

For example, later in the interview with Irene, she says, "I mean for me if I'm in a really good scene I get really ... let's just say I get off... so I'm not really about pain ... I like bondage more. rm not really big on the pain ... I like the sensation ... the sensation of the flogger hitting my back and sometimes it... sometimes it is about the pain... like a really

64 good spanking" (Interview, February 8, 2011). This seemingly contradictory statement is not that unusual, especially when asking people who engage in BDSM activities about pain. I discuss this below in a section on the conte:xi of pain.

Pain also connects to ideas of relieving stress or dealing with everyday problems.

Irene, Mistress Daria, and subjanice all describe this to varying degrees. Irene describes it this way: " ... you feel like the world is c-Oming in on you and you feel that pain it. .. it's just. .. I guess maybe it's almost a distraction ... it kind of triggers that release of all that... the emotional crap that's been sitting ... been building... " (Interview, February 8,

2011).

subjanice's account is the most moving as a way of using pain and BDSM as a means of working through an experience or replacing something negative with something positive:

"Pain play. . . I very specifically got into it because it's a 4 natural way to get high ... I... as much as I have 21 years in the BDSM world I'm also 21 years a sober cocaine addict. .. it. .. it just simply ... pain play ... yeah it replaced getting high. It's a natural way to do it ... I remember I had this person that was my partner at the time and I wasn't always a good submissive (laughs) oh boy! I pissed him off and he took a crop and he beat me and I mean really, truly beat me and he was angry and he beat me and he beat me and he beat me and beat me to the point that I could feel the endorphins falling off, you know, around, you know, up my forehead and down my face ... I actually feel it draining the same way that I felt when I took cocaine like, you know, when, you know, you're really, really high, you know what cocaine does? It shoots the endorphins and things right between your eyebrows and :it just goes all over your body and so pain play is a way to naturally make that happen and there are many, many ways thougt,_ to make that happy button go... I thiak that that is one of the most delightful things about BDSM is that I do not have to necessarily be beaten any more to have that experience ... " (Interview, February 8, 2011)

65 More than half of the women I spoke with explain that pain is understood within its conte:x·t. Some pain is considered bad pain, like when you stub your toe on the coffee table, while other pain is considered good pain, akin to a runner~ s high or an athletic burn where you are aware of pain and feel pain, an yet you continue to push yourself and endure it, and sometimes even enjoy it. Several women explain that they have a high endurance for pain although they do not really like it very much. They explain that they are willing to endure the pain for the sake of their partner, the style of play, or a BDSM relationship they are in. The women who identify as slaves or submissives all speak of being willing to endure pain, whether or not they specifically like it (although several do) for the sake of a relationship and the activities that relationships create. Some women endure some amount of pain or discomfort because it comes with the territory of some of the activities they enjoy. For example, Claudia reports that she is willing to endure some discomfort from bondage because she enjoys bondage a lot; she is not specifically tu.rned on by the pain it creates, but she is turned on by other elements ofthe bondage. A few women also indicate clearly that pain that is not married to something specifically sexual or erotic is not interesting or tolerable for them. Pain can be an element of the play, but there also has to be some other sexual or erotic stimulation as well in order for the pain to be pleasurable.

Ms. Allison and slave barbara also discuss how pain can move the experience of the power exchange to another level:

"The idea of someone enduring discomfort at whatever level for my sake is like ... better than ice cream. I mean that definitely sings to me! Again because it's a declaration of an additional level of commitment, an additional level of

66 trust and that's delicious. I like challenging someone's boundaries. I like stretching their ... levels" (Interview with Ms. Allison, January 12, 2011).

"To me the pain is a physical manifestation of the shadow aspect that needs to be danced, and the more conscious I am, the more aware I am, the more reverentially I approach SM, as more than and beyond just eroticism" (Interview with slave barbara, January 25, 2011).

Although pain can be an essential part of SM play and power exchange for some people, this still remains but one element of many that create and support the power exchange between those who are engaged in :it.

Somewhat in contrast, I also asked women what role fun and play had within

BDSM power exchange, if any. Every woman I spoke with agreed that fun and play are important elements of the power exchanges they engage in. Some explain that this aspect manifests itself in the clothes they wear. slave barbara says, "I revel in pink tiaras, lame flags, red socks with leather, gold shoelaces ... " (Interview, January 25, 2011) and others, like Ms. Francis, explain that this manifests in the toys, or implements, that are used during SM play, "there have been times where there's been aspects of Disneyland brought up in a scene ... some of my paddles have Disney characters on them ... Barbie ...

Stewie ... I've actually made friends and gained a reputation in the scene when I was a little more active because I had actual toys for toys ... so I go at it with a sense ofhumor"

(Interview with Ms. Francis, February 4, 2011). All of the women recall times when they are silly, or the play itself is silly, irreverent, campy, and childlike. They also speak of the importance of Slv1 play and power exchange to have this element. Silliness and playfulness do not seem to be necessary all the time, but it is clearly a part of their regular experience and an element that is sought after just as much as, if not more than, pain.

67 My observations of SM interactions at events reinforce this as well. Here is a description of a scene I excerpted from my fieldnotes:

It could have been a serious scene, and yet it wasn't. Everyone was laughing and giggling, even those who were watching. Some of us stood outside of the smaller room watching the scene. One of the "cops'' came to the doorway to '"control the crowd". She was very funny and was clearly enjoying playing tllis role in a very comedic fashion. She even commented to one or two of the onlookers, asking them where they had been, why were they laughing or watching what was going on, did they need to be taken into custody, etc. Meanwhile, the other female cop "interrogated" the woman, inspecting her high heeled boots on the pretense of searching for evidence of having previously assaulted a cop with them. Eventually, they let the woman go with a punitive spanking, which was not done harshly at all, but seemed more of a silly way to end the scene. (January 29, 2011)

Later that same evening I was engaged in a scene. Although the scene itself was not meant to be silly, it started that way:

I also engaged in a scene where I was the one in the top role. My partner arrived later to the party and we did a scene where I spanked and flogged and whipped and scratched him on his chest and back. What was difficult was not switching roles and being the one on top. What was difficult was when we started playing the song changed and started playing a song that we had watched our daughter dance to (in a rather silly way) years before. We just always associate that song with her silly dance. We started laughing and it took awhile to get into the right headspace where we could play in a sensual and sexual way and not think about our daughter dancing in the living room. Even with that though, the entire night seemed to have an underlying goofiness to :it that actually really worked for me. ! like my SM play to be fun, even when I'm being serious about the implements I am using, so the laughter and the rowdiness of the party worked for me. (January 29, 2011)

68 It is also important to note the language that is frequently used within BDSM parlance. Words like play and toys are often used to describe what a scene consists of or what is being done in SM. kat describes the usage of these words within the contexi of

BDSM this way:

" ... I talked about why we code SM activities as play and all of the toys we use as toys, because as adults we get to play and it's very much about having fun and there's probably also a little bit of,

Both pain and playfulness can be elements of the BDStv1 power exchange, and although there are many individual definitions, this exchange of power encompasses trust, negotiation, and consensuality. Interestingly enough, these elements are not usually seen as a part of power exchange outside of the BDSM context. Within the framework of feminism it is important to note that participants are engaging in these activities, whether or not pain is involved, as something that they enjoy and fulfills sexual and emotional needs. If we are to believe that feminism is about affording power equally to women and / men, than \Ve must accept the possibility that women use power to suit their needs, even if those needs seem foreign, confrontational, or anti-feminist on the surface.

Power is often discussed in terms of asymmetry, wherein power can only exist if there are at least two Ui1equal entities. Blau ( 1964) discusses u~at in order for power to exist, one person or actor must be in a superior position to and be capable of exerting his will on the other. Similarly, McCall and Simmons write that a person must be« ... in a

69 position to drive a harder bargain for his definition of the situation and his plans of action" (1966:157) in order for any sense of power to occur. All of these theorists believe that power cannot exist without a differential in resources, whether they be material or personality-driven. In fact, Blau writes, "Interdependence and mutual influence of equal strength indicate lack of power"' ( 1964: 118).

Although it is possible for this differential to be positive, as Yamagashi, Gillmore, and Cook report it is still " ... the relative value of the resources to be exchanged [that] is the... source of differential dependence and thus of power" (1988:838). They go on to state, "The one who controls the more scarce resource has more power" (1988:838).

Thus, even in a positive exchange wherein one may be exchanging certain goods for other goods, or services for other services, the power relation can be seen through the relative worth of those goods or services. One must be inherently better or more valuable in some way in order for power to exist between the people acting out the exchange. This seems to be in direct conflict with what women report to me about their BDSM power exchanges. slave barbara points out that someone wanting to be her Master needs to be her equivalent in order to be up to the task of being in a power exchange relationship with her. Others state that partners or potential partners are considered equals and share I responsibility for the exchange and the relationship, even if the edifice of the relationship is couched in terms of a Master/slave relationship. Mistress Daria states:

"Power exchange is ... the exchange of giving up, you know, having trust in the individual that you are exchanging power with ... where they give up total control and in turn I give them my energy and my power as well because we feed off each other and that's basically what power exchange is" (Interview, Febmary 1, 2011).

70 This can be interpreted as an even exchange of control for power, wherein

Mistress Daria is giving power to the person who is giving her control.

At the same time, some of the women identifying as bottoms, submissives, or slaves state they feel that they actually gain more from the exchange than the people topping them. kat explains:

'"... you are on food restriction, you have to eat this and this and this ... and then there's the checking up and feeling like you're taking care of... or whether it's, you know, physically I'm going to beat you and then I'm going to snuggie with you or whether it's, hey! Here's $50, go get a bikini wax sort of thing... I almost think that I get the better deal out of it because I get so taken care of' (Interview, February 8, 2011).

In this case, kat feels as if she is getting more from the power exchange because so much attention is being paid to her and her well-being. It is important to remember here that she wanis her Master to do these things to and with her. If he were to ignore her~ or forget to check up on her, not beat her, or not tell her whatto do, she would likely feel 1 I that there is something wrong with the relationship and may even begin to doubt his Iov~ and affection for her.

Holly also brought up this idea of asymmetry and how the bottom or submissive is actually gets more, pointing out that although she feels there is an even exchange within her BDSM relationships and play, she really does not understand what the top or dominant gets out of it. When Holly says "maybe he's getting a need met by doing things to me" her tone suggests she is not convinced that her partner is getting as much out of the exchange as she is.

71 It is important to note that even if asymmetry is a required condition of power and the exchange therein, it is not likely that one party will always have more power than the other at all times. It is more likely that power will shift from person to person, and this is

" ... ordinarily accompanied by (and often the basis of) shifts in events and activities that call torth different role-identities~' (McCall and Simmons 1966: 158). This speaks to an exchange of power or a give and take that is not usually one-sided or beneficial to only one party engaged in the exchange. This also speaks to the possibility that power can be exchanged differently and constantly depending on the identities, roles, and activities of those involved. subjanice explains it in this way:

"It's really remarkable how that works. You see if you can go and give someone to be the best person they can be it requires you to be the best person you can be, so it bounces back and forth and all of sudden you can't tell who's on top and who's on bottom because the energy just flows and flows. I think that that's very natural. That's the real seductiveness of if' (Interview, February 8, 2011).

Several other women discuss this aspect as well, especially in regards to identities of being a sadomasochist or a switch, wherein those identities present a BDSM personality type that is interested in and \villing to flow between identities of top and bottom, dominant and submissive, depending on the circumstances and the people with whom they are playing. Although this flow may not take place in the course of an individual scene, it could occur throughout the course of a relationship, where a woman would top and then bottom to a partner, and vice versa, over time. This may also occur during a person's play, but not with u;e same p-arwer, where a woman would top certain people and bottom to others. Therefore, she is switching back and forth between giving and receiving, but not necessarily within one relationship or play scene.

72 Another concept related to power is that power often includes some system of

rewards and punishments. Power may be exerted by rewarding good behavior or actions

and punishing bad behavior or actions. Reward may take the form of not receiving

punishment, just as punishment may take the form of a reward being withheld. Reward

and punishment may also be used to coerce or influence someone into an exchange, thus

exerting power over that person. "This suggests a distinction between coercive power,

which rests on the deterrent efiect of negative sanctions, and influence based on rewards

as that characteristic of exchange transactions" (Blau 1964: 116). Foucault points out this

type of coercive power is prevalent throughout society, on larger levels like the prison

system, and on smaller levels within the household ( 1990). He writes, " ... in any case one

schematizes power in a juridical form, and one defines its effects as obedience" (Foucault

1990:85). It could then be concluded that obedience, or disobedience, is the result of the

power exchange in which rewards and punishments are used to coerce a reaction or state

of behavior. Coupled with the statements above, this type of exchange can be performed

back and forth by people, and includes some asymmetry of equality between those

engaged in the exchange.

Several women discuss a system of punishments and re\vards as an element of

their power exchanges. kat describes her current form of punishment when she does

something incorrect or that her Master does not like: ". . . for me right now I have been

caned frequently for punishment because it is a very quick and effective punishment and

in the past I have written lines or had essays or restrictions or something...... I have disappointed my Master and this is a correction, but it is ... it's something that I'm glad to ... " (Interview, February 8, 2011). Mistress Daria discusses that although she identifies

73 as lesbian, she will occasionally play with men. Even though she is not sexually intimate with them, she still offers them the reward of sexual self-release if they have done something well.

These examples of punishment and reward must be contextualized, however.

Within the context ofBDSM, what may be considered a punishment or reward can be very complex. Equating punishment with activities that are generally socially acceptable as corporal punishment and equating permission for orgasm with reward is not necessarily what happens in a BDSM exchange. When talking with kat it becomes clear that although currently caning is being used as a punishment, this activity is not always a punishment sometimes caning is a pleasurable activity and can have sensual, sexual, and positive reinforcement attachments for her. Punishments and rewards can be difficult for outsiders to understand if they do not grasp the logics of the BDSM context Within this subculture, punishments and rewards are not defined by particular activities. We may think of caning, spanking, bondage, whipping, blindfolding, sensory deprivation, food and/or bodily function control, and a myriad of other activities as obvious punishments.

In the .. real" world this may be the case, but within BDSM these supposedly punishment activities are inverted into sensual, erotic activities that manv see as uleasurable and as ~ ~ rewards for good behavior. In fact, very often the worst form of punishment is having

"L~ese activities and those like them withheld for a period of time_. rather than administered.

Rabinow, in discussing Foucault, writes, "[w]hat makes power hold good, what makes it accepted, is simply the fact that it doesn't only weigh on us as a force that says no, but that it traverses and produces things, it induces pleasure, forms knowledge,

74 produces discourse" ( 1984:61 ). This is certainly true when discussing BDSM power exchange. I argue that this type of power exchange is at its essence an erotic or sexual exchange, although not exclusively so. Also, the sexual exchange here is not always overt or obvious. One may watch BDSM power exchange taking place and note that nothing overtly sexual occurs - the parties involved are not necessarily naked, do not necessarily involve any form of genital touch or contact, and do not necessarily engage in activities that most people would define as sexual. Still, it is clear that power and sexuality are inextricably linked.

In The History ofSexuality (1990) Foucault focuses on various aspects of sexuality and power. His primary focus is on how the institutions of academy, punishment, and law create an overarching structure that attempts to form and conform sexuality through social and political power. Interestingly, Foucault does not believe that these edifices constrict or restrict sexuality and its power, rather because of the nature of oppression, sexuality's power is given a space, even if it is in the form of perversion. He writes:

••. . . society succeeded only in giving rise to a whole perverse outbreak and a long pathology of the sexual instinct At issue, rather is the type of power it brought to bear on the body and on sex. In point of fact, this power had neither the form of the law, nor the effects of taboo. On the contrary, it acted by multiplication of singular sexualities. It did not set boundaries for sexuality~ it extended the various forms of sexuality, pursuing them according to lines of indefinite penetration. It did not exclude sexuality, but included it in the body as a mode of specification of individuals. It did not seek to avoid it; it attracted its varieties by means of spirals in which pleasure and power reinforced one another" (1990: 47).

75 In this way, Foucault sees a different outcome to society's attempt to control

individual sexuality. He does not believe that sexuality is bounded by the law and social

conformity. rather sexuality is a force in and of itself that is beyond a man-created power

and has the ability to be inclusive of a variety of practices despite what may be

considered an officially sanctioned definition of sexuality. In modem sexual social

science research, his officially sanctioned sexuality is often described in terms of

heteronormativity, against which essentially all sexuality is deemed appropriate or not

depending on how closely it conforms to this standard. What I believe Foucault is saying

is that even if modem humans wish to attempt to restrict sexuality and its inherent power

through a system of heteronormativity, in actuality this is not in fact what is happening.

Rather than restrict or deny other forms of sexual expression, this strict enforcement of

heteronormative standards actually creates a playground in which other sexualities may

thrive. Foucault states that these marginalized sexualities become even more attractive

because of their marginal status. What originally starts out as sexually appealing because

of its counter-heteronormativity eventually becomes sexually appealing through finding

other like-minded individuals. During one of the discussion groups that I attended during my fieldwork, it was clear that some newp~opl~ were <.lqtwntothe group by a / combination of two feelings: a need to tind others like themselves and a need to explore . .. .-: .. ·--~------~~~ . .. - ··- ._., -·· . - . ·.- ---~ -···-<-- ---~--~ ---- . an area of sexuality outside of the accepted norm. Newcomers seemed fascinated not only by the idea that such a group actually exists, but that people within the group are articulate and thoughtful. I observed a constant undercurrent of interest in sexuality - . • --- --··''¥"'·"-·-"'·--"·''-'·• "~"--' ·"''' permeating the discussions and the flavor of the topics being discussed.

76 People I spoke with at events discussed how sexually charged the idea ofBDSM is for them. The notion that BDSM is viewed as taboo is also part of the draw. Butler points out, "[t]he enumeration of prohibited practices not only brings such practices into a public, discursive domain, but it thereby produces them as potential erotic enterprises and so invests erotically in those practices ... " (1993:109).

Although I did not pursue the topic ofBDSM as taboo with the women I interviewed, while attending various events I found that people within the BDSM communities have varying opinions regarding the marginalization of their sexual identities. Where some people feel that there is great power in exercising one's right to an individualized sexual identity, others comment that with so many unique individuals the uniqueness of the whole community seems to be become less exotic and interesting in some aspects. There is also discussion during some events of how mainstream society has co-opted material and visual aspects ofBDSM (corsetry, handcutTs, high leather boots, and other paraphernalia) to such an extent so to mock its nature, diminishing the strength and power ofthese artifacts for the communities. At the same time many people express feeling empowered by relating to a marginalized sexuai group, equating this with feelings of autonomy, self-efficacy, self-reliance, and self-actualization. I

For example, several times when interviewing Claudia she expressed her connection with BDSM to ideas of self-actualization. She says " ... the importance of the role play or the BDSM roles for me is being able to self-actualize a certain part of my personality ... " (Interview, January 28, 2011) and that this self-actualization not only brings her closer to who she wants to be but also makes her feel closer to her partners, who are consciously a part of her ability to self-actualize. In self-actualizing, Claudia has

77 the power to have agency over herself and her sexuality, whether that be her partner choice or her interest in pursuing SM activities.

Returning to Rabinow' s statement "' [s ~uality' is far more of a positive product ' -----~~·~-~--~~-'-·-~'" -·--~---, ------"~· ---·- ._ ••••• -·~----····'~-'·---·--'"------"--·- •<•"·'· ...~'--~----· of power thal)_~~~~r was ever a repression of sexuality" (1984:62), we can begin to see ~.------· how these women are interpreting their sexualities as positive products of power, at least within the context of the BDSM power exchange. These accounts describe women who have found pleasure, playfulness, and beneficial consensual relationships by means of utilizing an exchange of power that is sexual in nature and yet does not seem to oppress or degrade them. This is a system of power in which those involved set up and maintain the structure as a construction to reach personal, sexual, and relationship goals. The women I interviewed and observed are just as likely to engage in painful activities as more romantic or playful activities. They are clear that it is not the activities themselves nor whether a man or woman is in charge that determines the power exchange so much as how partners negotiate and gain from the exchange that matters.

Some radical feminists would have us believe " ... that SM borrows its script from the patriarchal framework of Western culture ... thus endorsement of sadomasochistic sexuality is seen as necessarily anti-feminist and misogynistic ... " and that it " ... indicates an over-arching acceptance of patriarchal dogma from whence ... all notions of domination and submission ultimately derive" (Cross and ~1atheson 2006:135). I believe this argument begins to lose its hold when one recognizes that BDSM power exchange and the related activities are not replicating the overarching patriarchy so much as simulating it, and possibly even poking fun at or threatening it. From a third wave feminist perspective, these women are consensually engaging in sexual power exchanges

78 that provide them with a sense of :freedom and control, even to an extent where they feel free to allow someone else to have that control for a period of time. Although this seems to be the antithesis to the tenets of many radical feminist beliefs that may view BDSM power exchange and its components as oppressive or even abusive, the women I interviewed and observed did not feel this way.

79 Chapter 5

Conclusion

This research has found that these women are not «objects and men's others," but

"selves and subjects" (Abu-Lughod 1991: 139), capable of negotiating for their own needs and desires. These women intellectualize and analyze their sexualities and are consciously aware of what they are doing and how those actions make them feel. These women utilize BDSM power exchange not only for sexual pleasure and enjoyment, but also to define and strengthen their sexual identities. And none of these women seem powerless, incapable, or weak.

In exploring BDSM power exchange I found that the core of this is trust, negotiation, and consensuality. This is a common theme throughout all of the interviews and fieldwork. Consensuality is a strong factor in BDSM power exchanges, and in fact, is a topic that comes up more often than a-fly other. Every woman I interviewed stressed the importance of explicit, clear consent when engaging in power exchange relationships and in other BDSM activities. Within the context ofBDSM, consent is not assumed or implicit. It is something that must be explicitly given and can be withdrawn at any time.

This definition of consent challenges the belief that submissive women do not have power, because in this context, submissives have absolute power to say yes and no. This also supports the notion of the power exchange encompassing an unequable balance of power, but it must be recognized that this balance of power often weighs on the side of the bottom or submissive. From an outsider's perspective, it may look like the top or dominant position holds all of the power, but this is only because the bottom has given

80 permission to the top to have control for a period of time. Even in the case of Claudia, who prefers to have control taken from her rather than seeming to freely give it, she has previously given permission to her partners to take control in this manner because it is what she enjoys.

Weinberg (2006) suggests that sadism and masochism be researched as a sociological phenomenon, not as a pathological mental illness. Given the depth of insight and analysis undertaken by members of the BDSM community, it is clear that there is a function, logic, and structure to these interactions that defies pathology. This is a subculture with distinct and complex structures that warrants further investigation.

Although the women use different terms to describe what power exchange is, the basic elements include balance, giving up and/or taking of authority, surrender or submission, and setting and obeying of rules. This resonates with the social science theories about power exchange discussed earlier, including Blau (1964), McCall and

Simmons (1966), and Yamagashi, Gillmore, and Cook (1988), among others. When we add the elements of feminism and sexuality into power exchange, this allows us to argue that women who engage in BDSM power exchanges have power, regardless of their sexual or BDSM orientation, and that thjs power is used to fulfill sexual, emotional, psychological, and relationship needs. BDSM_ power exchange is not merely fulfilling base human needs for sexual contact, or conquest, but is being used to fulfill and explore the intellectual and emotional needs of those so engaged.

I found that these interactions and sexual identities do not affect other areas of some women's lives; BDSM is a separate part of their identity and «regular" life. For others their BDSM identity, sexual orientation, and identity are so integrated that there is

81 difficulty in pulling these identities apart for separate examination. It should be understood that an integration or lack of integration of all our selves is not necessarily good or bad, healthy or unhealthy. Many of us use a particular identity and corresponding personality in different settings, behaving and reacting differently at work and at home, with family and with friends. These women are no different. Some of them make adjustments to their identities based on the environment, where others do not. Many agree that by having the freedom and ability to act out their BDSM interests they are able to handle work, family, and social obligations. In this way, as in many others, BDSM power exchange is a positive part of their lives.

Taylor and Ussher also conclude that their definition of SM acknowledges that

BDSM activities and relationships may or may not necessarily include an exchange of pain. My research supports this finding. The women I interviewed and observed have divided views as to the importance of pain during BDSM activities, although I have the impression that more enjoy or tolerate pain as a part ofBDSM than they let on initially.

Some of the women could take it or leave it, having no true interest in giving or receiving pain, but are willing to tolerate pain for the sake of the play or relationship. For some of the women pain is an essential part of their needs and identities, and not having this ( element in an exchange could result in lack of orgasm, the need for a different partner, or a renegotiation with the current partner. None of the women say that pain should not be an element of their play. This leads me to believe that the role of pain in BDSM relationships is contextual. Pain seems to be a tolerable-to-necessary element, varying in degree, intensity, and need based on the people involved, the type and style of play, and many other elements. This is an area where more research is warranted, and possibly by

82 combining the disciplines of social and biological science we may be able to better analyze the role of pain in these encounters. Still, it seems clear from my research that pain is not the central focus of BDSM, and that the exchange of power is a much more important element of these interactions.

Cross and Matheson (2006) conclude that there is a general belief of pro-feminist attitudes among their subjects, leaving them to argue that the radical feminist contention that BDSM sexuality reflects anti-feminist beliefs is unsupported. Again, I find this to be true among my participants. Almost half of the women define feminism as a system that informs their inherent power as women, as sexual people, and as equals with men. Ms.

Allison and slave barbara are the only women who say they are not feminists, although their comments lead me to believe that they are not interested in being labeled as feminists as long as the term feminist is equated with radical feminism. Much like one can decide to no longer outwardly affiliate oneself with a political party that has publicly become too extreme for that individu!tl, Ms. Allison and slave barbara have decided not to affiliate themselves with feminism in order to avoid being seen as radical, man- and sex-hating feminists who have muddied the waters for other less extreme feminists.

When the participants viewed feminism as a basis for supporting equality among the I sexes as well as supporting an individual's rights to expression and being, then a pro­ feminist attitude was often supported.

Many women identify as both feminists and submissives or slaves. Interestingly, there is a paradox of sorts here, at least on the surface. It can be difficult to grasp that there are women who self-identify with roles that feminism has worked to eliminate, and yet identify as feminists. As a result of third wave feminism, women are viewed as

83 defining their own sexuality and identities, even if that includes an interest or profession in pornography or other sex work. It is my contention that third wave feminism provides a space for women in BDSM communities to e:xrpress their sexual identities fully, even when those identities seem counterintuitive to the ideals of feminism. Women who do identify as submissive, sexually or otherwise, find a space where they can fully express themselves, as integrated, well-balanced, and powerful, women.

There has been, and will likely continue to be, debate regarding whether or not

BDSM has a role " ... in perpetuating and exonerating real-life inequalities, oppression, and violence" (Taylor and Ussher 2001: 312) due to its nature. It is true that BDSM activities can include extremely, or seemingly, violent things such as whipping, spanking, humiliation, and other torture-like activities. It is important to note, however, that the real difference comes in how these activities are implemented. It is considered taboo within

BDSM subcultures to do any of these activities, and even seemingly mundane gestures such as hugging or kissing, to individuals without their explicit consent This is an exceptionally large difference between these activities and real oppression and violence that must not be overlooked. Real oppression and violence rarely comes with the consent of the victim. Hopkins puts it well when he writes, "It is simply not justified to assume that an SM participant finds real violence, real sexism, or real domination and submission desirable ... calling an Sl\.1 person sexist is like calling someone who plays l\.1onopoly a capitalist" {1994:126). In fact, in many instances BDSM power relationships and identities are either poking fun at or otherwise inverting the status quo of male dominated heterosexual relationships. Even in the case of women who identifY as submissive, either as a personality trait or as a sexual identity, these women are not interested in supporting

84 patriarchy, they are interested in having fulfilling relationships without interference from people or cultural norms.

The identities described here: submissive, slave, dominant, top, bottom, s-vv1tch, captive, sadomasochist, bunny, and pet, have general definitions that may be applied to other people with the same or similar identities. In my research, I used these terms and definitions to begin conversations about sexual identities and their meanings. It is important to understand that due to regional and cultural difierences, within the same local community these terms and definitions can vary. These variations challenge researchers because it is difficult to agree upon a common vocabulary to use for testing hypotheses. I propose that this individualization of identifiers is meant to frustrate researchers and others who would be so ethnocentric as to believe that only identities that are easily determined, defined, and static across many variables are legitimate.

In this thesis, I discuss identity and power as separate but interrelated topics. On the issue of identity, I explore the importance of self-identification, especially within a feminist context. BDSM identities such as dominant, submissive, slave, pony, captive and others are not separate from other self-identifies, such as mother, lover, artist, lesbian, or straight These are additional and congruent identities that work together to create a whole, integrated person. Several women indicate that being allowed to self-identify and being allowed to pursue various BDSM activities and relationships give them a sense of self-actualization and awareness. This supports Weinberg's point that" ... [i]ntegration into the S&M subculture appears to be positively correlated with adjustment to self-

1"d entity • as an ..C'AA::uv1er "f}9Q"·'J97) , __ .- · .

85 I also discuss the idea of identity being fixed or constructed, elucidating Butler's

(1990) point that a constructed identity and freedom to form one's sexuality or sexual identity are not necessarily the same phenomenon. In the case of the women from this study, there is some amount of freedom involved in constructing sexual identities, but without in-depth research on their upbringing, childhoods, psychological make-up, and other tests it is impossible to truly know how freely constructed their identities are. What is important, though, is that the women feel they are agents in constructing their identities, including their sexual identities, and that they engage in social and individual behaviors and activities that allow them to reinforce current and create new identities for themselves.

What can studying BDSM power exchange tell us about social relations? As

Langdridge and Butt argue, studying BDSM relationships allows us to study resistance of social and sexual norms" ... and also [the] contention that stories of dominance and submission parody power relationships in society, by drawing attention to them"

(2006:49). My sample of women is mostly white and middle-class. By engaging in these relationships, they push beyond the social boundaries of what is considered acceptable and proper for women. They are not interested in being wives and mothers with no other identities, nor are they necessarily interested in being the powerhouse woman who can do it all. They are determined to do and be who they are, whatever that may be any given moment.

Taylor and Ussher also discuss this power dynamic as being " ... reflexive and not necessarily weighted in favor of men. Instead, SM was positioned as a parody of abusive, divisive sexual relations, turning 'normal sex' on its head, ridiculing it, undermining it,

86 exploiting it and exposing it, with the ultimate intention of destroying it" (200 1 :303).

Langdridge and Butt (2004) find that the stories about BDSM are expressions that parody power relationships rather than reflect the dynamics of actual coercive relationships, as was previously thought. Although I did not ask my participants if they had any political or social goals of undermining and destroying hegemonic masculinity and the patriarchy through their sexual relationships, it is clear that there is an undercurrent of exposing and poking fun at heteronormative sexual and relationship standards. Not only do these women practice non-normative sexual activities, but they practice non-normative relationships, ranging from multiple partners, to same-sex or gender-fluid partners, as well as relationships that require negotiation and explicit consent for all activities, not only those in the sexual arena. subjanice and slave barbara, for example, are just as likely to negotiate who cooks and does the dishes within their relationships as they are to negotiate what sexual and BDSM activities are amenable.

As indicated above, the women I interviewed are not under the impression that the power relationships they engage in are actual coercive relationships, but that these relationships have elements of playfulness and positive eroticism that is enjoyable, and not oppressive. In their view these relationships are not necessarily reproducing patriarchal control. In fact, upon deeper investigation it seems that these relationships may be simulating, rather than replicating, the patriarchy. Patrick Hopkins writes,

"Replication implies that SM encounters merely reproduce patriarchal activity in a difterent physical arena. Simulation implies that SM selectively replays surface patriarchal behaviors onto a different field. That contextual field makes a profound difference" (1994:123). This simulation of patriarchy can be seen in relationships where a

87 female slave or submissive serves her partner, sexually and within the household. The significant difference here is that the women who are doing this are explicitly choosing to do so for their own personal, spiritual, and sexual gratificatio~ not out of a need for financial or social support that they cannot get elsewhere. These women are self­ sutiicient and reliant, and are not in these relationships because they feel they have to be, but because they want to be. That is not to say that all BDSM relationships are egalitarian and are never abusive, but it is not fair to say that BDSM relationships are necessarily patriarchal and oppressive because they are BDSM relationships.

Califia states that one of the reasons why SM might be so threatening to the established, normative sexual order is "S&M roles are not related to gender or sexual orientation or race or class. l\.1y own needs dictate which role I adopt" ( 1995: 14 7).

Although more work needs to be done that would include male and transgender groups, as well as a larger array of sexual orientations, this study shows how roles like dominant, submissive, slave, or others are not necessarily correlated with gender or sexual orientation. I am not certain, however, how diverse race and class categories are within

BDSM subcultures. During my observations I saw people of non-white races. They did not seem to be equally represented, nor did any come forward as possible participants. I also wonder if BDSM relationships are conducted across all socio-economic statuses, as these activities tend to require at least a modicum of disposable income. I believe Califia correctly acknowledges how BDSM allows for one's own needs to dictate the roles that are adopted, although further investigation should be conducted in order to establish that this too plays out across gender, sexual orientation, race, and class. Califia concludes

"[o ]ur political system cannot digest the concept of power unconnected to privilege"

88 (1995:147). Califia points out that BDSM power exchange relationships are not defined

by who has the most, who is the more masculine or feminine partner, or who has the most

individual agency. They are based on what is mutually beneficial to those involved.

Through negotiation and consent, women engaging in BDSM power exchange

relationships find spaces in which they can openly express the range of their identities

without fear of being sanctioned in some way.

At the core of the BDSM exchange we find a system based on negotiation, trust,

and consensuality. This system allows individual identities to be expressed and empowers

those engaged in the system. Women have agency and control over their sexualities, and

are not only capable of negotiating for their needs and wants, but are provided with a

space that encourages their direct input. The feminist ideals that are present include

equality, agency, and networking for the betterment ofthe individual and the group are

present. From a national view, where many people do not feel powerful or secure due to

economic crisis and perceived governmental inefficiency, this microcosm provides a safe

haven for individuals to explore various identities and modes of power.

This work has also been conducted using feminist research methods, allowing me

·to insert myself into some portions of the study as well as allowing the women and the I work itself some agency in which to create the end product. One of the goals of this

project has been to provide another space in which t.~e voices of women can be heard.

Although many are vocal within the context of the BDSM subcultures and other areas in

which they interact, these women's voices are rarely heard within academia. Through this

study, I hope to have honestly and accurately captured the voices of women in the BDSM

89 community in Los Angeles. The women whom I interviewed were so gracious to allow me to talk with and observe them. I am grateful for their participation in this study.

1v1y own experiences as a participant gave me deeper insight into what women described for me, and afforded me the opportunity to discover first-hand what engaging in BDSM power exchange can be like. Although this is certainly a very individualized experience, I think my participation, observation, and interviews were able to provide clear common experiences that could be referred to in my conversations with women. My participation also allowed for a better connection to those with whom I interacted, giving them confidence that I would not misrepresent their experiences.

There are many limitations to this research project A few of the limitations include interview population size, array of sexual, race, and socio-economic identities in the sample. "In a more recent nationwide survey of sexual attitudes and behaviors, Janus and Janus asked men and women about their personal experience with a number of kinky sexual behaviors. The most prevalent, sadomasochism (SM), was endorsed by 14% of men and 11% of women ... " (Tomassilli, Golub, Bimbi, and Parsons 2009:439). The survey referred to was conducted in 1993, before the Internet was a regularly-used accessory for social networking. Also, in some locations, kinky sexual behaviors are not I considered as aberrant as others, so this percentage is likely higher now. Interviewing a dozen of women in Los Angeles is not enough research from which to draw grand generalizations, but this study does provide rich insight into women's experiences and the

BDSM community, and may be used to guide future research on sexual identities.

As I previously mentioned, those interviewed in this study are not entirely representative of women within the BDSM subculture in Los Angeles. Individuals

90 representing the full range of sexual, racial, and socio-economic backgrounds did not participate in this study. Although many women who presented themselves as tops or dominants were observed and subsequently asked for interviews~ only one woman interviewed identified herself as a dominant. Other women who presented as such, and may have self:identified as dominant, were not interviewed due to problems arranging intervie\vs. Also, all of the women presented themselves as a white, middle-class population. It would have been beneficial to include other races and classes. However, it was not possible.

The collection methods used were semi-structured interviews and participant observation, mostly from an anthropological perspective. While I believe that qualitative methods should continue to be used when researching these topics, collecting quantitative data and using other disciplines may be helpful in rounding out this research.

Over the six months that this research was conducted, I touched upon a very small amount of what can be garnered from these subpopulations in regards to topics of identity and power, as well as other topics. It is clear that research using similar and other methods to focus on a larger and differing populations could yield information that would not only be interesting but useful to illuminate the complex and fluid nature of sexuality and the ways that sexualities intersect with other aspects of life or cultural domains.

91 Bibliography

Abu-Lughod, Lila 1991 Writing Against Culture from Recapturing Anthropology: Working in the Present Santa Fe: School of American Research.

American Psychiatric Association 2000 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders DSM-IV-TR Fourth Edition. Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc.

Behar, Ruth and Deborah A Gordon, eds. 1996 Women Writing Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Behar, Ruth 1997 The Vulnerable Observer. Boston: Beacon Press.

Bernard, H. Russell 2006 Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Lanham: AltaMira Press.

Blau, Peter M. 1964 Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Lnc.

Boyd, Nan Alamilla 2008 Who is the Subject? Queer Theory Meets Oral History. Journal of the History of Sexuality 17(2).

Breslow, Norman, Linda Evans, and Jill Langley 1995 (1985) On the Prevalence and Roles of Females in the Sadomasochistic Subculture: Report of an Empirical Study. Archives of Sexual Behavior 14.

Butler, Judith 1990 Gender Trouble. New York: Routledge.

Butler, Judith 1993 Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of Sex. New York: Routledge.

Califia, Pat 1995 (1979) A Secret Side of Lesbian Sexuality in The Advocate, Issue 287. San Mateo: L.P. Publications.

Chancer, Lynn S. 2000 From Pornography to Sadomasochism: Reconciling Feminist Differences. The Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science 571(77).

92 Christman, Jolley Bruce 1988 Working in the Field as the Female Friend. Anthropology & Education Quarterly 19(2).

Connolly, Patricia 2006 Psychological Functioning of Bondage/Domination/Sado-masochism (BDSM) Practitioners. Journal ofPsychology & Human Sexuality 18(1).

Creswell, John W. 2009 Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Cross, Patricia A. and Kim Matheson 2006 Understanding Sadomasochism: An Empirical Examination of Four Perspectives. Journal of Homosexuality 50(2/3).

Devault, Marjorie L. 1990 Talking and Listening from a Woman's Standpoint: Feminist Strategies for

Dewalt, Kathleen and Billie Dewalt 2002 Participant Observation. Walnut Creek: Altamira Press. Interviewing and Analysis. Social Problems 37{1).

Foucault, Michel 1990 (1978) The History of Sexuality Volume: 1 An Introduction. New York: Vintage Books.

Freud, Sigmund 1938 The basic writings of Sigmund Freud. A.A. Brill (Trans.). New Tork: Modem Library.

Freud, Sigmund 1953 (1905) Three Essays on Sexuality. The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud, Vol. 7. London: Hogarth Press.

Freud, Sigmund 1959 (1924) The economic problem in masochism. Sigmund Fre~ collected papers, Vol. 2. New York: Basic Books.

Freud, Sigmund 1961 (1920) Beyond the pleasure priniciple. New York: Liveright.

Gutmann, Matthew C. 1996 The lv1eanings ofMacho: Being a Man in Mexico City. Berkeley: University of California Press.

93 Hall, D.S. 2006 Power and Love: Sadomasochistic Practices in Long-Tenn Committed Relationships. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality, Vol. 9. Accessed electronically September 30,2010: http://www.ejhs.org/volume9/Hoff-5.htm

Henderson, Alex 2010 Women Who Like to Be Dominated in Bed: Talking to BDSM Submissives. AlterNet. Accessed electronically November 4, 2010: http:!/www/alternet.org/story/148616/

Henkin, William A and Sybil Holiday 1996 Consensual Sadomasochism. San Francisco: Daedalus Publishing Company.

Hopkins, Patrick D. 1994 Rethinking Sadomasochism: Feminism, Interpretation, and Simulation. Hypatia 9(1).

Krafft-Ebing, Richard von 1965 (1886) Psychopathia sexualis. New York: Stein & Day. Stekel, Wilhelm

Kurtzleben, Danielle 2011 Large Cities Have Greater Income Inequality. U.S. News and World Report. Accessed electronically July 9, 2011: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/04/29/large-cities-have-the-greatest­ income-inequality

Langdridge, Darren and Trevor Butt 2004 A Hermeneutic Phenomenological Investigation of the Construction of Sadomasochistic Identities. Sexualities 7(31 ).

McCall, George J. and J. L. Simmons 1966 Identities and Interactions. New York: The Free Press.

Moser, Charles 1998 S/M (Sadomasochistic) Interactions in Semi-Public Settings. Journal of Homosexuality 36(2).

Newmahr, Staci 2008 Becoming a Sadomasochist: Integrating Self and Other in Ethnographic Analysis. Journal of Contemporary Ethi!ography 37(5).

Protose, Inc. 2011 Fetlife.com Accessed electronically July 9, 2011: http://www.fetlife.com.

94 Rabinow, Paul, ed. 1984 The Foucault Reader. New York: Pantheon Books.

Rothblum, Esther D. 2000 Sexual Orientation and Sex in Women's Lives: Conceptual and Methodological Issues. Journal of Social Issues 56(2).

Rozmarin, Miri 2005 Power, Freedom, and Individuality: Foucault and Sexual Difterence. Human Studies 28(1 ).

Scott, Gina Graham 1992 Erotic Power: An Exploration ofDominance & Submission. New York: Carol Publishing Group.

Stekel, Wilhelm 1965 (1929) Sadism and Masochism, the psychology of hatred and cruelty, Vol. 2. New York: Grove Press.

Stoller, Paul 1997 Sensuous Scholarship. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Strauss, Anselm L. 1959 Mirrors and Masks: The Search for Identity. Glencoe: The Free Press of Glencoe, Illinois.

Taylor, Gary and Jane M. Ussher 2001 Making Sense of S&M: A Discourse Analytic Account. Sexualities 4(3).

Tomassilli, Juiia C., SaritA Golub, David S. Bimbi, and Jeffrey T. Parsons 2009 Behind Closed Doors: An Exploration of Kinky Sexual Behaviors in Urban Lesbian and Bisexual Women. Journal of Sex Research 46(5).

Weinberg, Thomas S. 1995 (1978) Sadism and Masochism: Sociological Perspectives. The Bulietin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 6(3).

Weinberg, Thomas S. 1995 (1994) Sociological and Psychological Issues in the Study of Sadomasochism. Annual Review of Sex Research 5.

Weinberg, Thomas S. 2006 Sadomasochism and the Social Sciences: A Review of the Sociological and Social Psychological Literature. Journal ofHomosexuality 50(2/3).

95 Williams, DJ 2010 Playing Dangerous Games. Alberta: Book1ocker.com, Inc.

Wi11is, Ellen 1992 Feminism, Moralism, and Pornography in Beginning to See the Light: Sex, Hope, and Rock-and-Roll. Wesleyan University Press, second edition.

Yamagashi, Toshio, Mary R. Gillmore, and Karen S. Cook 1988 Network Connections and the Distribution of Power in Exchange Networks. The American Journal of Sociology 93(4).

/

96 Appendix A: Interviews and Fieldnotes

Interviews

Interview ·with Ms. Allison, January 12,2011

Interview with slave barbara, January 25, 2011

Interview with Claudia, January 28, 2011

Interview with Mistress Daria, February 1, 2011

Interview with Evelyn, February 3, 2011

Interview ~1th Ms. Francis, February 4, 2011

Interview with Georgia, February 5, 2011

Interview with Holly, February 6, 2011

Interview with Irene, February 8, 2011

Interview with subjanice, February 8, 2011

Interview with kat, February 8, 2011

Interview with Lani, February 8, 2011

Fieldnotes

Collected September 12,2010-February 14,2011 I

97 Appendix B: Glossary

All terms are defined by the author within the context of the subculture studied.

BDSM/SM -An acronym that stands for consensual Bondage, Discipline, Dominance,

Submission, Sadism, and Masochism. BDSM and SM tend to be used interchangeably within this subculture.

Bondage- Any form of restraint from handcuffs or leather cuffs, rope, or verbal commands to remain still.

Bottom - A person who is on the receiving end of a sexual or BDSI'vi activity.

Bunny- A person acting and behaving like a bunny. This may include being fed, petted, groomed, caged, and other activities associated with actually caring for this type of pet.

Captive- A person who enjoys the fantasy of being captured.

Dominant- A person who is in the role or orientation of one who is in charge and in control of the power exchange.

Domination- The act of being in control a.Tld in charge of the power exchange.

Fire Play -A style of SM play that includes the use of fire, heat, and related elements as a form of sensation play.

Flogging- A type of whipping that utilizes a flogger, or whip with many tails.

Gay Leather Household- Although primarily utilized by the gay leather communities, heterosexuals and other orientations also emulate this structure. A particular type of organized relationship consisting of individuals who may or may not be physically living within the same household, structured with a hierarchy based on level of experience and knowledge about leather/BDSM history and practices.

98 Heads pace- A state of mind akin to euphoria brought about through BDSM activities and power exchange interactions.

Heteroflexible- A sexual orientation wherein the person mostly identifies ·with being heterosexual but is open to changing that orientation under certain circumstances or with certain individuals.

Kinksters- A euphemism used to denote people who engage in BDSM or kinky activities.

Leather Daddy- A specific role within the gay, and more recently the heterosexual, leather and BDSM subcultures. This person is usually, but not always, male, is in a role of authority, and acts as a mentor as well as other roles.

Masochism - The preference for or orientation towards receiving extreme sensation for sexual gratification.

Masochist - One who prefers or reels oriented toward receiving extreme sensation for sexual gratification.

Master -A title or honorary role for a person who has expertise with one or more aspects ofBDSM.

Master/slave Relationship- A specific style ofBDSM relationship wherein a person

(Master) is in charge of and may control the actions, behaviors, and other aspects of the other (slave). Denotes a more official or long-term relationship. This may or may not include an actual written contract.

Pan/PansexuaJ- A sexual orientation that is focused on activities as the primary object of desire rather than gender or sexual orientation of the partner or potential partner. This

99 can also be used to describe a BDSM space or event that allows all sexual and BDSM orientations, rather than being available only for a specific group.

Pet - A person who identifies with the behaviors and activities of being cared for as if they were a pet-like animal. See bunny above.

Pony - A person who identifies with behaviors like grooming, prancing, riding, and other activities associated \vith being a pony. Ponies and Pony Play are usually more structured than other forms of animal play.

Queer - A sexual orientation that crosses the boundaries of other orientations or is in any way difficult to define.

Sadism - The preference for or orientation towards giving e:xireme sensation for sexual gratification.

Sadist - One who prefers or feels oriented toward giving extreme sensation for sexual gratification.

Sadomasochist- One who prefers or feels oriented toward giving and receiving extreme sensation for sexual gratification.

Scene Names - Identities individuais give themseives for use within BDSiv1 subcultures.

Slave - A title or honorary role for a person who has entered into a specific subservient type ofBDSM relationship.

Submission- The act of giving up control within the power exchange.

Submissive- A person who is in the role or orientation of one who gives up control within the power exchange.

Switch- A person who is in a role or orientation that may change between top/bottom, dominant/submissive, etc. depending on the partner or activity.

100 Top- A person who is on the giving end of a sexual or BDSM activity.

Trainer - A person who instructs and guides, and is usually associated with ponies and pony play.

Vanilla - A euphemism used to describe people, places, and events that are not a part of

BDSM subcultures or are noted as being outside ofBDSM subcultures.

Victim- A person who enjoys the fantasy of nonconsensual role play in the role of the victim.

Whipping- Using a whip or flogger within BDSM activities.

101 Appendix C: Interview Schedule

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE

WOMEN'S PERSPECTIVES OF BDSM POWER EXCHANGE PROJECT

INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE

1) What name would you like to use for this interview? (Real, scene, other)

2) What is your age?

3) What level of education did you complete? (HS, college, etc.)

4) What is your sexual orientation?

5) What is your SM/Ds orientation? What does that mean to you? Vv'hat is your definition

of the terms you are using?

6) Are you in a relationship? What type? Describe the relationship.

7) How does your S.t

identity?

8) How do you define power exchange as it relates to BDSM?

9) What roles does power exchange play in your BDSM experiences and relationships?

What does it mean to you?

10) How does your sense of yourself as a woman compare or contrast with your BDSM identity and the power exchanges you engage in?

II) For you personally, what role does pain play in SM power exchange? How do you define pain \\rithin this context?

12) For you personally, does SM power exchange have a place outside ofSM play and interaction?

102 13) How does engaging in SM power exchange affect other areas of your life, if at all?

14) Is play and fun interconnected with SM power exchange? How?

15) Do you consider yourself a feminist? How does that integrate or work against the S~1 power exchange relationships you engage in?

/

103