D over at Dumb Domme put up an interesting post that triggered a lot of conversation. It’s on the subject of introducing femdom into an existing relationship in sneaky/subtle/incremental/deceitful ways (delete as applicable). I’m not going to comment on the specifics of the situation she addressed as I don’t have the background. I will make some more general comments and, as usual, I’m going to take a potentially controversial line.
I think that the reason guys are nervous about raising the issue is, ironically enough, the same reason dominant women get annoyed by the public culture of femdom. For a lot of people the idea of female domination immediately conjurers up ideas of whips, boots, chains, sniveling men and snarling ice queens. It’s likely to provoke a strong WTF?! reaction. Yes, it’s great to talk about desires and needs, but when a phrase provokes a strong visceral and negative emotional reaction, that’s not a good place to start the conversation from.
I’d also say that it’s important to define exactly kind of dominant relationship is being sought after. There’s a big difference between a relationship that is D/s based and one that simple involves kinky activity in the bedroom. I suspect a lot of guys fantasize about the former, while really being interested in the latter. And if kinky fun is the goal, then who cares exactly what you call it? If it turns out my partner actually enjoys tying me up and pegging me, do we have to discuss the idea of femdom? Or can we just fuck?
When it comes to being sneaky and deceitful, let me float an analogy out there. Let’s say I’d like my partner and myself to eat more vegetables. Ideally, from my perspective, we’d be vegetarian or close to it *. However, I know she has a visceral reaction to vegetarians. Thinks they’re a bunch of lentil eating kaftan wearing hippy freaks. So rather that raise the idea directly I try cooking some really fabulous vegetable dishes I think/hope we’ll both enjoy. We still eat meat, I just shift the menu balance over time. If she hates it, then no harm, no foul. Clearly we’re never going to agree. If she likes it then I’m in a much better starting point for the discussion. And maybe, if my only goal is more vegetables rather than a full blown vegetarian diet, I might not even have to raise the issue at all.
Is this deceitful? Probably. I’ve got an end-goal that I’m not working towards but not sharing. Does it matter? I don’t know. Depends on the relationship. Is it morally wrong and an asshole thing to do? I don’t think so. While talking about and sharing fantasies is good, I’m not sure there’s a need to lay them all out there in one fell swoop. Particularly if you’re in an established and currently non-kinky relationship.
The image is by photographer William Waldron from a series done for Men’s Journal.
* Note that this is a very theoretical example. In reality I’m not entirely opposed to vegetables. They’re just down on my list of things to eat below meat, fish, carbs, fruit, fungus, paper, precious metals and deadly poison. But if we run out of those, I’ll be all over the vegetables.
Also note that the original post by D was written by a dominant woman in a kinky relationship. This post was written by a single guy who is not in one. Weight the advice accordingly. Caveat Emptor.
“We still eat meat, I just shift the menu balance over time. If she hates it, then no harm, no foul. Clearly we’re never going to agree.”
There’s a fine point, however, in that *you* are doing the cooking, meal planning, etc. That is, from one perspective, you’re topping. What would the situational ethics be if *she* were the primary cook/meal planner, and you asked, begged, demanded, or sneakily manipulated her into cooking more vegetables and less meat?
I think that positioning it as begging or demanding sets up a different content to the one I was talking about here, or even the one in the original post by D. I think a lot of the original comments assumed that was what happened, but I’m not sure it was automatically the case. For the purposes of this discussion I’m working on the assumption that everyone behaves themselves and can reasonably request/negotiate/back-off as appropriate. Obviously if the guy is being a dick and nagging or using unfair emotional pressure then that’s always wrong. My point was more about overall strategy and approach rather than the ability to discuss a single activity (or meal in the analogy).
When it comes to the cooking analogy then, like all analogies, it does break down if you push it to far. It takes two to tango in the bedroom but one person can do the shopping and the cooking. To try and stretch it a little further :), I’d say if she was doing the cooking then his approach should be to ask suggest vegetable focused dishes when menu planning comes up, share vegetable heavy recipes that he thinks she’ll like, volunteer to cook some nights, etc. Basically be a good considerate person, while still trying to demonstrate that vegetables can be tasty and that eating vegetarian doesn’t mean being some sort of food freak.
I’m probably the last person that should be suggesting how to approach a kinky marriage, given I’ve never been married. I just felt that the incremental approach to kink wasn’t automatically the terrible thing people seemed to be suggesting. And that sitting down to talk about Femdom in general as a starting point might not always be an ideal first step.
-paltego
Hi Paltego:
I believe that for most guys this starts as a set of kinky fantasies and fixations that revolve around play in the bedroom. It really is a bad idea to bring that sort of thing up on the first date, especially if you are seeing someone in a vanilla context. Over time however it is something that needs to be addressed. Being subtle and manipulative does work but only to a certain extent. Giving your lady a foot rub for example is an excellent place to start. Being gentlemanly, polite and chivalrous is another. Eventually, however, one does have to take the plunge and “confess” what is on your mind. I have done this more than once and yes it is difficult. I imagine it’s a bit like the feeling a sky diver gets jumping out of an airplane for the first time. I have traditionally started the conversation by asking for kinky bedroom play (often something specific) not for a full time 24/7 D/s relationship. IMHO you can’t force that. O/our diet has become progressively more “vegetarian” over time. 🙂
Hey hmp,
Well as I said to Tom, I’m probably the last person to be writing on this. You’ve got way more experience in this particular area than I do.
I do agree that for a lot of guys the starting point is specific activities that appeal. And that may or may no grow into a desire for something more complex and pervading.
However, I’m not sure I’d use the word manipulative to suggest doing single specific activities. I definitely think you can’t get to a D/s relationship without actually telling the D part of the equation what’s going on! But I think suggesting some light bondage, or anal play or how you’d like to focus on her pleasure is a valid approach to start with, and doesn’t risk dragging in a lot of BDSM cultural baggage. It sounds like that’s in part how you have approach things in the past.
-paltego
(e-mail correction)
Not related to your post today, but just saw that the image at the “First World BDSM Problems” is Domme in leather millitary trench and cap and SWASTIKA arm band. I can get with the leather look, even the millitary/prisoner thing is OK. Personally, I think the Nazi arm band crosses the line into some deeply offensive territory.
Comments? I’d like to see the community come together around the idea that explicit Nazi symbolism should be rejected as in poor taste and too offensive and hurtful to large number of people to be accepted.
I think this is a complex issue. I’m not sure I even have a well formed opinion. Nazism was certainly abhorrent. On the other hand a lot of the imagery from that era has entered into the general culture and been appropriated for all sorts of books, films, comedies, etc. When I see a uniformed model adopting elements of it I don’t automatically think that anyone who enjoys the image harbors Nazi views or supports their ideas. Although personally, which I have a minor kink for military uniforms, I’d be very uncomfortable doing a scene with overt Nazi paraphernalia like that armband.
-paltego
“ I’d like to see the community come together around the idea that explicit Nazi symbolism should be rejected as in poor taste and too offensive and hurtful to large number of people to be accepted.”
WWII German style uniforms are pretty distinctive, so even though the SS, swastika, or Iron Cross might be missing, the look of the uniforms themselves are no less provocative – or perhaps I should say “evocative”.
I’m not defending the continued use, mind you (I don’t have that particular kink), it’s just that I don’t see how it would make that much difference.