This post may get a little metaphysical. Having previously argued that femdom wasn’t broken, I’m now going to suggest that it doesn’t actually exist. How’s that for consistency?
This post actually started life as a reply to a comment from weezie, and was a continuation of my thoughts on the original post. The reply ended up being such a sprawling mess I thought it deserved it’s own post, so it could at least sprawl at its leisure. Rereading the original post again the last sentence caught my eye.
Maybe I just need a new word – “FemDom” seems broken.
I’ve already tackled the ‘broken’ part, but it seems to me that the first part here, the ‘new word’, really gets to the heart of the problem. Because what actually is femdom? Wikipedia, that definitive purveyor of absolute truth on the internet, defines it as: “Female dominance (or Femdom) is those BDSM relationships and BDSM scenes in which the dominant partner is female.” Which is true as far as it goes, but seems a little circular for a definition.
Being the analytical engineering type I like to define things in very concrete terms. What do I see? What do people do? What actions are performed? When I try to define it in those terms, I very quickly end up with a big complex multi-dimensional space. For example, some possible axis include…
Pain – From an essential part of the experience to something always unpleasant and unwelcome.
Dress – From heavy fetishwear through to normal daily clothing.
Time – From having a very strictly defined and limited playtime to an active 24/7 lifestyle that blends into daily life.
Attitude – From a warm and loving approach to a cold and distant dominance.
Character – From heavy role-playing to an active dislike of any kind of ‘false’ roles.
Submission – From deeply submissive at all times to enforced submission only in aspects of play (e.g. bondage).
Psychology – From humiliation and degradation to affirmation and equality.
I could go on, but you probably get the picture. Any kinky person sits at a different point on these many axis. Or, more likely, sits at a range of different points on these axis, creating a sort of complex multi-dimensional fuzzy shape in kink-space. A heavy masochist/non-submissive/leather loving/role-player occupies a very different area in the space to a submissive/24×7/cross-dressing/cuckold. Some people will have very small tightly focused kink shapes, while others will occupy be far more vague and volatile. The Kama Sutra may describe 64 different sexual positions, but that’s nothing compared to the infinite complexity of kinky coupling.
So if what I observe varies dramatically, if different people use different definitions and the actions are inconsistent, can the concept even exist in a useful and meaningful form? Is it nonsensical to say that the masochist doing a piercing scene with a pro-domme is engaging in the same general activity as a lifestyle submissive giving their partner a pedicure and foot massage? Femdom, if it exists in any form at all, encompasses this entire space. But people typically use it as a shorthand for specific regions that are meaningful to them.
This problem is compounded by the fact that the representation of femdom in pornography and kink culture is clearly not an even distribution across kink-space. For example, the area outlined by pain, fetishwear, humilation and cold dominance is heavily featured in BDSM porn. Whereas people desiring a warm loving approach, with no heavy pain, no fetish gear and a sense of infused submission are far more badly served. Partly that’s a practical decision. It’s a lot easier to portray the former in a photograph or ten minute video clip than it is the latter. It’s also down to market forces, historical tendencies, then influence of other porn genres, etc. And there’s no doubt a self-perpetuating element to it as well, as the culture reacts to itself and not just external pressures.
Whatever the reason for this uneven representation, the result is often the kind of understandable frustration expressed on blogs like Not Just Bitchy, Delving into Deviance and of course the original Bitchy. Fed-up with the leather, heels, whips and snarling pro-dommes, they proclaim this isn’t femdom. It’s a twisted warped version of something that should look very different.
I have a lot of sympathy for this position. I’d like to see a richer and more interesting kinky culture that is welcoming to new people. But it’s not clear to me that this is a zero sum game. It doesn’t seem necessary that the traditionally over-represented areas have to be scaled back for the alternative voices to be heard. The young guy jerking off to leather clad spiky heeled dommes might grow up to be a wonderful and thoughtful submissive for someone. Putting positive alternative voices out there is more likely to make that happen than attacking the images he likes.
The fact we use this single term to describe such an incredibly varied and complex experience is always going to lead to problems. People want to feel a sense of ownership in their self-identified culture, which is difficult when the culture encompasses so much and is pulled in so many different directions. I think one helpful step would be to attach far less importance to the term femdom, and focus more effort on defining and naming the specific areas that appeal to us. Recognize the complexity and validity of the entire kink-space, but carve out and identify important regions. Identities and names provide rallying points and help shape thinking.
Of course, given my blog title and domain name, I probably should be a little careful about arguing femdom doesn’t actually exist as a useful concept. I’d hate to vanish in a puff of logic.
‘I refuse to prove that I exist,’ says God, `for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.’
`But,’ says Man, `The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn’t it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don’t. QED.’
`Oh dear,’ says God, `I hadn’t thought of that,’ and promptly vanished in a puff of logic.
`Oh, that was easy,’ says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.
Douglas Adams in the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy
Finally, to finish what has to be the longest post on this blog to date, here’s a nice image of someone enjoying the thing that doesn’t exist. I found it on Femdom Style Counsel.
You can see the original two posts here and here.
