Of Kink and Blog-o-sphere Kerfuffles

Generally, I tend to avoid the anti-S/m dust ups around the blog-o-sphere that spring forth with stunning regularity from the keyboards of those who co-opt the term "radical feminist."

But every so often enough pissed friends point me at enough bullshit that I can occasionally be coaxed into writing a little something.

This was originally intended as a brief comment to the Most. Awesome. Comment. Ever. post over on Let Them Eat Pro-SM Feminist Safe Spaces.

But it grew.

It grew beyond reason, and certainly beyond comment legnth.

So I've moved it here as a full post instead.

For readers who have no idea what this is all about, be glad. (Or read Pro-SM Feminist Safe Spaces' tag documenting the BDSM-and-feminism kerfuffle in inverse order, starting at the bottom of the page. Most of the relevant links are either in that or in the comments thereon.)

But back to that little comment that grew, here it is in it's entirety:

***

What so many of these oh-so-outraged women miss is that until fairly recently, it would have been exceptionally rare for them to have this level of visibility into the things we do.

Placing ads, exploring kink.com... by and large they wouldn't have had any immediate jumping off point to know WHERE to place such ads, (and it's still a LOUSY methodology,) or the ins and outs of the language were it not for the increased visibility in that they've been afforded.

Note that Leatherfolk were not out playing evangelists. The visibility they (the outraged) now enjoy comes as a direct result of commercialization, and into spaces where we self select and gather just as any other demographic has online.

Time was, not so long ago, that finding out about certain communications vehicles, much less entering into Leather spaces, would simply not have been an option for them.

To gain access to such meant going in person, and having someone willing to vouch for you. It meant entering what had often been a Gay male domain.

These days, they need only punch up whatever website they care to fear this week, get themselves all worked up, and then start typing.

A few rare Leathermen took me under their wings and taught me the core values of what being a Leatherperson entails; among them the critical importance of discretion, appropriate time and place, and "not frightening the horses" so to speak.

Of course for many of our critics they can only see the flat images on their screens, they know nothing of the ideology or highly ritualized behaviors that go with so much of Leather.

One of the first "Leather" books I was ever told to go read wasn't some (at the time unwritten!) manual of how to flog, nope I was told to go brush up on my Emily Post.

Those amazing Leathermen taught me the importance of being above reproach in one's dealings and finances, being a person of their word and personal honour, expressing deep loyalty towards those deserving of such, knowing when to defend oneself and one's tribe and when to hold your tongue, and not drawing attention.

To do otherwise could bring undue scrutiny down upon the community, these concepts being passed down from a time when raids on Gay spaces without so much as a pretense were common.

Yes, the net has changed everything, some for the good- breaking isolation and making "deviants" such as ourselves feel far less alone in this world.

But it has also come with a price- that things which were once deeply private and shown only to lovers or others deemed to have "the right stuff" and a deep willingness are now mere clicks away for any and all.

That and perhaps our critics have missed a key point, Lao-tzu's "Those who know don't talk. Those who talk don't know."

Certainly something they may wish to keep in mind the next time they should happen to be perusing the kink-o-sphere.

Splattered all over screens everywhere decontextualized images, a comic book notion of what Leather is, now readily available to every Joe and Jane Schmoe.

The vast majority of whom have no framework to fit some of what they're seeing into (even those within the community often have no mentors to answer questions, no training.)

Internal to the community AIDS had more to do with that than any online change in information flow could ever have done.

Yet for those external, yes we are in effect put 'on trial' because suddenly people who simply never would have seen what we do behind closed doors can now spend countless hours fixating and obsessing over how what we do must somehow affect them, or if not them, then at least the broader class of womyn more generally, or so their false notion goes.

The reality of course, is that we were doing this long before they noted our presence, and no, how I did or did not happen to fuck my wife did not affect broader class womyn other than to have if anything served as a binding closeness between the two of us in our (genuine) Radical Feminist activism.

All of it has been decontextualized down to the flat screen though. They know little to nothing of (and in certain cases absolutely refuse to discuss) the fact that much of what we call modern Leather comes not from the heterosexual end of things 9D is so obsessed over, instead many of the traditions have roots in the disempowered Gay Male sub-community of those who came back from WWII and didn't fit.

They looked at the suburban postwar world of "settling down" and having kids, and opted to hit the open roads on motorcycles with some of the few people who understood what they had seen and what they had been through, and their feelings for one another. They created small nomadic tribes with other men.

They were outsiders.

Womyn to womyn S/m has reflected those sentiments at times even more so, in that not only have we been Queer outsiders to the broader society, we are also often outsiders even to Gay Leather.

(Hence names such as "The Outcasts," "The Exiles", or more generally groups such as "The Renegades.")

To refuse to examine the origins and context much of leather culture grew in is not merely to erase Queer history and Queer methodologies of survival, but to actively reinforce the very heterosexism and heterocentrism they decry.

Ironically, they now claim to essentially speak on behalf of and in protection of womyn and womynkind- a feat only made possible when subsets of womyn who love and yes, ultimately sleep with other womyn, who know a great deal about womyn's authentic desires, and who have been (real) Radical Feminists since back in the day are relegated to "traitors" or "collaborators with the patriarchy." They thereby attempt the coup d’état of not merely erasing us, but usurping our positions as womyn who yes, know a thing or two about womyn.

To their minds, what we have to say are often unpleasant and unthinkable realities about womyn. Things that must then be projected into a form of "othering" as no "real woman" could ever possibly genuinely want the things we do, we must therefore to their thinking either be deluded or under a form of coercion, both of which conveniently disqualify us from what they now co-opt as "their" revolution.

Except of course, for them, it's more often than not revolutionary, as 9D herself would be/has been the first to fess up to. (See point 2 here.). To then utilize the term "Radical" (meaning "to the root") while explicitly rejecting "to the root" forms of social change, instead insisting that working within the existing systems (oh, LIBERAL feminism- bingo!) is the way to go is for her to 'wear the colors of the enemy' or co-opt our terminology for her own (assimilationist) purposes.

While for some Kinkyfolks, they may feel a need to justify themselves, now that we are being lied about, savaged and put up 'on trial,' others of us on the other hand, have always understood we were living at the edges and as exiles to begin with. I don't need to justify myself or my life to anyone.

I don't answer to those who co-opt and subvert the title "Radical Feminist" without ever so much as noting that some of us who used it long before they also wear (earned) Leathers, and were doing so long before the outraged-come-lately happened along.

As "exiles" we've always known that there is a time and place to stand our ground, and other times and places where going on the defensive or trying to justify our existence merely becomes counterproductive.

I've always been where the front lines are when it really matters, and if that's not "feminist" enough for those with smoke blowing out their ears from behind they keyboards, my answer really comes down to "Tough shit."

They've got a problem with it, it's their problem, not mine.

Now do some of us have a fair amount to say about the commercialization of the "work" we do, and the increased visibility into our world others are now afforded? Of course. But when it's time to say those things we do them in our spaces under our rules, not the false constraints of blogsites like 9D's, the preclude even my own existence as a Leatherwomyn.

Yeah I know, this is post-length. It's long overdue such be said- and as should be clear by now it's only going to be said in "our" spaces, not theirs.

***

I also made an earlier comment on another post on that same tag, Nope. I'll republish it here as well just to keep all my writings on this particular dust up available in a single place:

***

"If you have that kind of dark side, it might be best to leave it unexplored. Or kill yourself"

Yeah, I caught on that bit too.

For her, the notion of people like us existing in (her) world is just too frightening.

She would feel more comfortable if people like ourselves were either not here or at minimum not visible.

Since she's apparently not the type who feels the need to rid the world of us, herself personally, she'd rather we just "opt out."

A lot cleaner and neater that way.

Certainly no blood on her hands. No, certainly not.

The the instinct to purge those she finds so frightening, so terrifying, etc. lies just beneath the surface.

The difference being of course, radical feminist Leather womyn such as myself feel no need to purge the universe of the likes of her.

She who is so quick to condemn has never heard of me, knows nothing about me, and certainly isn't reading my (at times) "submissive" womyn's blogging in relation to a male partner.

I am after all both S/switch and Bi. Being such, I therefore fall straight on into the exception bin for her, that she so conveniently dismisses and refuses to discuss.

Womyn living within the context of consensual power exchange with other womyn is most certainly NOT on the agenda over there.

Of course our "individual experiences" are dismissed as she'd rather only discuss what she perceives as some twisted version of experiences on on the whole (what a handy way to dismiss any womyn who would dare disagree, and her own experiences.)

Nope, she'd rather bemoan the (commercial fetish) fate of the armory building, a building she herself by her own admission once coveted and now chalks up to having in essence, fallen into the hands of the enemy.

Seriously, gal, it's just real estate and sex, get over yourself already.

Sex the likes of which she both clearly has a fascination with and yet insists she sickened by.

This clearly qualifies her as having an opinion we should all listen to about on such matters- not so much.

Funny, I don't find myself writing post after post about whatever kind of sex she may (or may not) be having. 07 February 2009 10:05

***

Who knows, perhaps six months from now when the next regularly scheduled "feminist" anti-S/m dust up occurs I may just link to this post instead of wasting my time giving them essentially the same earful all over again.

No S/switches allowed

(I'll probably do several BRXX posts, this is one of them)

'Flashback' to Snoopy from Peanuts, confronted with a 'no dogs allowed' sign.

Yeah, like that.

Or the archetypal boys clubhouse with the 'no girls allowed' sign posted on the side.

Yeah, like that.

There are days when I'm just so sick of this shit.

No, I'm not going to be able to say all I'd like to, because much of what goes on in spaces like BRXX, even things like the schedule or who presented what are tucked behind the wall of the members area. (See the public schedule and list of presenters. This is all you got unless you registered.) But I'm going to speak somewhat generally about what I've had enough of.

In the workshops, one segment was geared towards "submissives", and another towards "switches" (apparently dominants didn't get a space of their own on the schedule.)

In the end, I attended neither of them, partially out of being told I wasn't welcome at one, but primarily out of disgust.

(I'm at a difficulty here, as I cannot quote the program/descriptions in full, to give full context. I don't like that, but basically, by the nature of the event itself, they've made it unnecessarily difficult to write what really needs to be said here. Most events at least post a list of workshop descriptions and who will be presenting them publicly, with BRXX it was all behind the wall of paid registration. Even the dungeon rules were behind the wall of registration, which made making the decision about whether or not to even attend in the first place tricky, as you don't know what exactly you're agreeing to until after you've registered. Certainly made me raise eyebrows at their notions of 'consent'. In essence, you don't know exactly what it is you're agreeing to be bound to until AFTER you've registered.)

The S/switches roundtable was listed as discussing various issues regarding switching and "misconceptions" about switches.

The submissives roundtable on the other hand was explicitly labeled as only for those who identify as "slave, sub, or bottom only"..."Sorry no tops or switches allowed".

So let's review-

* No space set aside for Dominants

* A space dealing with the topic of switching, more a discussion about switching and dealing with misconceptions about it, open to anyone far as I could tell.

* And finally (paraphrasing here) a "submissives only" kind of space, for an internal dialog amongst those who identify as purely that end of the 'spectrum'.

This is somewhat problematic from where I sit for lots of reasons.

Among other things, it means that someone who uses the word "submissive" to self identify EVEN IF THEY DECIDED THEY WERE SUBMISSIVE LAST WEEK/EVEN IF THEY HAVE NO EXPERIENCE IN THE REAL WORLD WHATSOEVER is allowed into the sub room, even as someone like me, who has spent the past 11 years in service, collared, living our version of 24-7, and wearing a locked on 'permanent' 'collar' of sorts about my wrist for the last year and half or so can't.

In my day to day existence I self-identify most clearly as Sir's property. But apparently my 'contaminating' S/switch influence would somehow infect their submissive "safe space". Yeah, this is a problem.

This is a problem in that in much of Queer Leather culture, anyway, Sirs and Masters usually began as slaves. One usually didn't tend to spring forth fully formed, a MASTER with whip in hand, at least not if one hoped to be recognized as such by a broader community. Nope, you began in service. Learning skills, being mentored, earning your leathers, and eventually in time with the support of those around you, and with community recognition of where one was headed, you transitioned into a position at the other end of the spectrum. At least, that was the (Queer) Leather community I once knew.

So any notion of a 'safe space' set apart from any tinge of dominance- brought in either by "tops" (to use their word) or "switches" is laughable from where I sit- or at least (possibly) an extremely heterocentrist view of things.

Both of which are made all the more ironic in light of the fact that person/'presenter' running the submissives' roundtable is not het identified and has made a living off being labeled/self labeling as "Old Guard". (A term in and of itself blog worthy.) One might think that this presenter would be uniquely qualified to undermine such assumptions about everyone in a room of 'slaves' would intrinsically evermore REMAIN on the 'slave' end of things, but no. Apparently not.

Saddest part of all this? By hanging the 'no switches allowed!' sign out, they turn away a wealth of experience and to put it bluntly insight. Yes, at times some insights born of having experience both ends of the whip, which leads to it's own understandings and explorations of empathy. But also the experiences and insights of those who have lived as 'slave, sub or bottom'.

And to be sure, I can't have been the only S/switch too discouraged and disgusted to even set foot in the place. That said, how prey tell, did they intend to ensure their 'pure zone' in the first place? I mean, what, asking everyone walking in the door 'you're not a ~SWITCH!~ are you?' DNA tests? Some kink equivalent of Kinsey scales to be filled out while connected to polygraphs? The mind boggles.

The main thing I walk away from this particular incident with a feeling of sadness. Sadness that the voices of those who have 'been there' and might actually have meaningful, perhaps even useful things to say are once again shut out out of prejudice. Our years of experiences are once again swept aside out of fear that a S/switch might somehow damage the intended 'purity' of a space. And that's everyone's loss. It's a community loss.

I wrote about that community loss back here, saying

"Thus I find myself talking with two sets of friends- would be mentors bemoan their lack of ability to find someone to pass on their skills, history, traditions and knowledge to, and those young in Leather, bemoaning their inability to find voices of experience."

Prejudice, specifically in this instance against S/switches is (one example of) exactly the kind of thing keeping these two sets of people apart. And I know we as a (much broader) 'community' could do better.

On a more personal note, the other side effect of what I carry away from this whole experience? The presenter running the submissives' space was one of the swaying reasons I had decided to go to BRXX in the first place, I wanted a chance to hear said presenter speak.

Worse, due to scheduling, the submissives' roundtable, (yes, something I was actually looking forward to- until I saw I was being told get the hell out) was going to be the only chance during the weekend to actually see anything they were presenting.

Now, on the back end of it, I feel no need to go out of my way to see this particular presenter at all. At some point, if it's convenient to me, at an event I'm already at, I may sit in- somewhere I'm allowed, if only to see firsthand what the hell went this wrong.

I slept in instead of going to the switch's segment. They weren't going to be gathering a mob with pitchforks and torches, ready to storm the castle (i.e. the 'submissives only space,) and educating ME about the misconceptions about S/switches ain't exactly the problem here. (Although the presenter for the submissives' roundtable probably belonged there more than they'll ever know.)

And I wasn't allowed in the submissives' roundtable, so that was that.

I went to a good 'how to' sort of workshop instead.

As a self identified Radical Feminist, can I understand the value in 'womyn only spaces' and similar? Yes. The feminist community went through its own, yet different version of this in terms of Lesbian only spaces and the 'contaminating influences' of heterosexual womyn.

The difference here is that some S/switches do live in their day to day as submissives, slaves, and bottoms, whereas heterosexual womyn don't in their day to day lives live as those who sleep with womyn- although some of us Bisexual Womyn do. Bisexuals like S/switches go through precisely this kind of being ostracised. Being both Bi and Switch, I can't help but feel like I've been here before.

I've fought these battles before. And damn it, while we get to learn over and over and over from everyone else's mistakes, those fucking us over never seem to learn. As I said, I'm sick of it.

Unfortunately, this can't be confined to just 'oh it was one presenter'. This was systemic in terms of Black Rose allowing the creation of such a space within its event. Glancing over the other workshops, this barring of people, even people who often identify as the very group the workshop was about stands out as rather unique. (Yes, ageplay- adults acting as "littles"- spaces often bar other adults entering without a "little" with them, but the adults in this senario are not people who sometimes self identify as "littles".)

I can understand asking Dominants not to attend, (or perhaps not participate in) a discussion by submissives for submissives about submission (although in watching they could potentially learn a great deal). But to tell S/switches, many of whom live our day to day lives primarily on the submissive end of things to 'get out and stay out' is just, well, bullshit. And Black Rose OKed that.

Had I been able to go, I would not have been there to discuss 'profound observations from the handle end of the whip'- those would have been off topic and out of place, it was simply neither the time nor the place for such. As a sometimes workshop moderator myself I can understand how easy it can be for someone to sidetrack a discussion, but rather than barring us premptively as a class, instead give us the chance, and then if there's a problem deal with individual behaviour (hint, this is where moderators MODERATE! Facilitators FACILITATE, and get back on track), don't deal with such by excluding a class of people.

Had I been allowed in, I would have been there to discuss the things submissives discuss. Believe it or not, just because I'm a S/swtich that doesn't mean I'm incapable of staying on topic.

And I sure as hell would not have been there to 'scope out the subs' for later hunting purposes. Although if that was the moderator's fear, barring S/switches isn't going to do a thing about the other 'sub/slave/bottoms' in the room who decide later that they're more interested in being the Dominant/Master/Top. In short people's identity often changes through time, and no amount of prejudice against people who self identify with a certain label is going to 'protect' anyone from someone else who once sat next to them in a workshop coming back at some later date with a different self identity or a different set of realizations about their identity or experiences under the belt.

So I guess you could say part of my Black Rose XX experience was in being told in no uncertain terms, from the organizational level down that I was unwelcome in one of the very spaces I was particularly interested in going to. I don't think most other attendees had that experience.

The sad things is it's ultimately a community loss.

I'm not saying this was my primary experience of the event, just that it was an important one, and one that left an impression.

I hope other people running events in the future will keep such in mind in their own planning.

My Raincheck

So, by way of 'making up for' not getting the whips out over the course of a recent event, Sir had more or less given me a 'raincheck'. Which is what we finally got around to the other morning.

Sir was up early in the morning, and after I came down he eventually headed upstairs to shower saying maybe we could get around to something thereafter. I waited downstairs and went about my morning, not sure whether to expect anything or not. Eventually he called down and told me I was to come up to him.

I came to the big bedroom (which is also sort of our 'Work' room) to find him standing inside dressed all in black with a wicked grin on his face. (Eventually, I may get to a post about the room we primarily use, but for now, it will suffice to say it's "His" room, our bedroom, and clearly his domain. I have rooms of my own as well, although they are such at his pleasure.)

I stood outside the door and undressed (as it's the room I don't wear clothing in without explicit permission, one of our few rules) then by his permission, entered.

At the foot of the bed, there's a soft black bench with low arms at each end and lots of pillows; soft golden chenille and others with a shadowed black ornate floral orchid pattern. On days such as this, it is pulled out from the end of the bed, the pillows set aside, and the bench is then covered with a soft black sheet. It's just long enough for me to lie across comfortably, my head resting on one of the arms. Four black leather straps encircled each of the bench's legs, then come up towards the left and right raised ends. Across each end, Sir had attached two of the highly polished chrome spreader bars, each the width of the bench. On the bed laid several of my favourite whips, and the four black padded leather cuffs. Without saying a word, I knew what laid in store.

He told me to come around to the bed. Then lovingly, he buckled each cuff onto my limbs, first my wrists then my ankles. He crossed the room to the toolbox compartment organizers and pulled out four of the small nickel plated padlocks, then returned to me and proceeded to lock the cuffs onto me. This little 'ritual' of sorts in and of itself is enough to get me into a mindset.

(Soft black leather and shiny polished steel is very much our aesthetic. Metal and leather. Although somewhat ironically, I have no interest in many of the metal cuffs or collars we so often see. I suppose you could say we're both rather selective about our tools.)

He kisses me, and leads me across the bench, face down. Limb by limb, he clips the cuffs onto the spreader bars leaving me unable to escape, and a ready target. He ensures I'm comfortable, then disappears over towards the rack where we keep our whips hung. I'm not blindfolded, but I'm not sure I want to know, just yet, either. So I turn my head and close my eyes, giving over to him, and what he wants.

Anyone who has ever been sensually whipped can readily identify the two primary different sensations, 'thud' and 'sting'. For me, when I'm under Sir's whips, these two have two completely different effects. 'Thuddy' makes me sink, deep into a place where I've very inarticulate, but very pliant, and welcoming suggestion. 'Stingy' on the other hand, tries to lift me off of whatever I'm securely attached to, and leaves me fighting myself, begging for it to stop, and sometimes crying. (This does NOT however mean I actually want it to stop.) Each of these are their own head (and body) trip. It takes someone with a particular sense of timing and ability to 'read' me to combine them both over the course of a brief period. Neither of these are things I entrust to people I don't know well, as both leave me very emotionally raw.

Sir is one of the few people I know who can make me change gears as it were, between the two, and still leave me in a state where I actually enjoy it. Unfortunately, it's not something I find I can do often, and it takes both of us being in a particular state of mind and comfort to actually pull it off.

In any case, without telling me that was what he was about to do, that was the state he worked me into. Working from whips that can, when used a particular way feel more akin to a good massage, on to whips that once I'm warmed up, yes I can take, even though it's a most peculiar kind of enjoyment.

Back at the Floating World, we had found a flogger made of the satin cord it seems every kinky person has worked with or made something out of at some point. Just ordinary fabric store cord carefully woven into a nicely formed handle that felt good in my hand with a bazillion purple satiny tresses. The reason it came home, though, was that each of the tips had been carefully dipped repeatedly in 'tool dip', the rubber coating for tool handles. The balance was nice, and I knew instantly that those tails would sting horribly.

Well, I was right. And THAT will teach me to pick up a tool, having it in mind for use with perhaps a pretty girl somewhere in my future. I should know better. And I should know that just as I was always taught, before you use a tool on someone else, you should have it used upon yourself, so you know, down in your bones what it's capable of. While ultimately, of course I'm fine with all of that, it being the way things are done, and it is simply to be expected, I did not however expect this particular tool this particular morning.

Which led to many cries of "I hate that whip!... Don't stop."

By the time my morning's ordeal was 'over', I was very 'floaty'. Sir released me from my bonds at the bench and let me lay across the bed. We spoke briefly, and then he very matter of factly went over to the small table in the corner and returned with several sets of adjustable clamps with which he heightened my neediness beyond excruciating.

Then he removed them, and left me unfulfilled. He allowed me the cuffs for the rest of the day (actually, I slept in them that night only taking them off the next morning.)

The lovely anguish that is being left afterwards is not something I would normally enjoy. But with him, after this in particular, it was wonderful, feeling that ache combined with the soreness from the whips earlier, it left me constantly aware of HIM as I drifted through the next day or so. It's that awareness, that feeling of being owned, posessed, taken somewhere I rarely go with anyone with trust at the core of it that I treasure above all else.

BESS- "Switch, no longer a dirty word"

So Sir and I attended Wednesday night's BESS (Baltimore Educational and Social Society) educational meeting. This week, they focused on S/switches- which despite being one myself, I despise the terminology for as it implies a binary 'on/off' dichotomy, rather than the more realistic multitude of realities that many of us live within. While I continue to search for better terminology, I tend to write the word in such as way as to imply a both/and at the same moment, "S/switch" in my own writings.

Unfortunately, false binaries plagued the presentation itself, leading to vast oversimplifications. And while the presenters acknowledged they were engaging in such, they marched boldly onward anyway- relying upon a straight line continuum betwixt 'Top/Master/etc- which jokingly got referred to as 'the dark side' and 'bottom/slave/etc' which in turn became 'the light side'. While such may work for duct tape, it rarely works for human relationships.

In any case, in very Kinsey scale fashion, there was much discussion on how most folks fall somewhere in the middle- and hence the discussion of 'switches' began.

I on the other hand, reject the false binary and instead see far more of a 50's stylized 'starburst' design (see Ace Jackalope's "Sputversary" for the definitive photo essay and description of objects similar to what I'm describing), a three dimensional object, with many continuums intersecting at various center points, although in my model the 'center points' along each line may not be even, thus creating many unequal arms.

Further, being bi, and poly, I may have one starburst for what I seek in one partner, or one partner of a particular gender, and another completely separate starburst for another partner, perhaps of another gender.

As for the lines/continuums piercing the center ball, they can be any number of things;

perhaps a pain related continuum- Sadist/masochist
an ownership related continuum- Master/slave
a gender portrayal continuum- Butch/femme
more or less a 'who leads' continuum- Dominant/submissive
a service continuum- Served/Serving
The Kinsey Queer related continuum- homo/het
Etc. Without doubt, there are many, many more.

The fact of the matter is that most of us in describing ourselves, and most of our partners or desired partners fall somewhere in the middle of each of these continuums. So we end up with starbusts, not straight lines when trying to accurately portray the realities of our real lives. And those points along each of those lines may change through time, from relationship to relationship, and partner to partner- even under one roof.

Three other quick notes, there was a strange emphasis on S/switches 'switching' in relation to "moods". For me, "mood" has nothing to do with it- the relationship to the partner determines the parameters, although when I have been in a relationship with another 'switch' while we may have partially changed roles though the course of years, we 'trended' towards one dynamic or another over the course of time, not nightly or hour to hour.

Secondly, while some may relate to "Poly, Bi, Switch" (PBS) as "greedy", I relate to it more as "PBS- and no that doesn't mean I'll sleep with you." Both Sir and I are highly selective about our partners.

And finally, remarkably, it took most of the workshop before it was finally mentioned that the way these things USED to be done was that Masters began as slaves. This was not 'switch' so much as it was earning the eventual right to call oneself "Master" it was about learning skills and earning leathers- a process most of today's Masters bypass entirely. But that 'starting at the bottom' had a great deal of value, among other things it taught a root of empathy with the things one was going to put their own slaves/bottoms/etc through.

It seems to me, "empathy" is the key word in relation to the S/switch experience. How one holds workshops without focusing upon that aspect leaves me wondering if it is perhaps so obvious as to be invisible, thus remains unidentified.

I was taught you never use a tool on someone else that had not first been used on you- and that had to do with having an intimate understanding of what the tool was capable of, what sensations it produced, and what kinds of potential reactions to expect. It had to do with earning the right to use that tool on another.

In these days of 'instant (true!) Master- just add internet!" such a process is unimaginable. Mere mention of such would be met with blank stares.

No, I'm not demanding all today's "Masters" begin at the bottom and work their way through. Some already have an innate empathy which seems to allow them to bypass the process and not be the worse for it, others, on the other hand, could use to first hand experience. It might help them understand that just because a work of fiction kept a girl naked and on her knees for 10 hour stretches, real girl's real knees aren't likely to enjoy that.

So, for my own reference, the calendar listing for the event.

October, 17th
Topic: Switch, no longer a dirty world..
With: Griffin and ann goodpet

– Being yourself in a world that loves labels and titles. This discussion will cover the way the lifestyle view switches, the different type of switches and switching, and how to maintain relationships when one or more partners are switches. Also will covered will be types of scenes that are often avoided by non-switching Tops but are, oh, so much fun. Griffin identifies as a Master who bottoms. His slave ann is a bottom who has been known to do some service Topping.

Griffin: Griffin, has been active in the lifestyle and the DC area scene for over 10 years. He is an active pony player (watch for Him in the documentary Born in a Barn), kidnapper, presenter, and all around scene player. Griffin enjoys rough play, takedowns, and wrestling along with the lighter sensuous scenes. Although well versed in a variety of tools of the trade, and different play styles, He is often seen doing intense physical scenes without any of the traditional toy use, only using His own body as His tools. Playing on the edge, Griffin follows RACK (Risk Aware Consensual Kink). Griffin is an alumni of the Master Taino’s Masters Academy and a member of Black Rose and on staff at Crucible. When not at an event He can be found sailing, working on His experimental Gyro-plane, or practicing sword fighting for the SCA tournaments. He currently lives in District Heights, MD with His dog Mandy, His partner and slavemate, ann, and salve lorrie, the newest member of the Griffin Household. Griffin’s home, fondly referred to as Castle Griffin, is a service/teaching household and host several lifestyle events throughout the year, including slave retreats, formal Master Dinners, play parties, and SIGs.

Ann Goodpet: Ann Goodpet identifies as a service submissive and slavemate to Griffin and has been active in the lifestyle for over 7 years. She is has been an active member, service provider, presenter and scene player in several groups in SC, NC, and the DC area. She is a member of Black Rose and staff at the Crucible. She lives in District Heights, MD with her partner and Master, Captain Griffin, His dog Mandy and slave lorrie, the newest member of the family.. ann enjoys the M/s lifestyle and is often doing service for groups, leather families, events, and individuals, always under the approval and guidance of her Master. ann is an alumni of Master Taino’s slave Academy. In addition to lifestyle activities and event, ann enjoys sailing, camping, SCA events, and any hands-on building project.

A rant that covers a lot of ground- getting things out of the way

This is another, older diary entry, from May '06;

Getting some dirty laundry "out of the way"

Ok, so maybe it's just me. Maybe I'm a freak.

I'm intentionally not posting the source for what's got me railing this morning, as it seems a common enough attitude amongst SOME of the modern leather people I keep stumbling across. No need to publicly shame the women interviewed or who wrote the piece that's got me all riled up, (let's face it, the interviewee in question is doing the best she can to find her own way, and has found her own measure of happiness, I don't begrudge her that.) So I’ll dispense with the descriptions, other than to say the woman who expressed sentiments similar to the following self identifies as a Het leather person, a submissive who was interviewed by another self described "leather chick", "leader" who writes a webpage some other pages syndicate from time to time. Thus I stumbled across the comments I’m about to paraphrase.

When a 'submissive' someone or other makes a statement along the lines of-

"In the mornings I get up and make coffee for (Dom's first name), prepare His breakfast, and serve Him. Once that's out of the way..."

Again, maybe I'm just a fossil, but am I missing something?

If any part of one's 'service', whether that's making and 'serving' breakfast, or the more general morning 'service' one performs to one's (collared in this case) Top/Dom/whatever is merely a thing to "Get out of the way" I guess I’ve got some serious questions.

Any form of 'service' as merely something to get done and over with? Phew- yeek! When did that happen? I must have missed the memo.

As a self described (S/)switch myself, let me be the first to assure all within ‘earshot’, if I'm serving my Sir (I'd never refer to him by his First name in that context!) or any other partner, I'm fully present in the moment, and not looking forward to 'getting that over with'. I'm not suffering through, looking forward to 'me time' at the other end of this crap I have to endure. I’m right there, in that moment, in that doing, and no matter whether it be ‘shit work’ or the most pleasurable duties imaginable, I’m not biding my time. And that is EXACTLY where I wish to be.

Furthermore, as a S/(s)witch, coming at it from the Domme side, if any 'submissive' comes to my life and my space with that kind of outlook, they've no business being mine. Period.

It’s the Leather equivalent of the vanilla, “Beige, I think I’m paint the ceiling beige” whist lying upon one’s back and ‘thinking of England’.

As should be clear by now, I'm not in any way saying this kind of ‘get it over and done with’ attitude is unique to the Het leather scene, just that that's where I've found much much more of it. I can only assume that perhaps some of the rigors of Queer Leather life, and some of the risks we face (by our mere existence) as Leather Queers shape us a bit differently. Our rare spaces are all the more valuable in that they are rare. Incredibly so for Leatherwomyn. Our ability to sexually be who we are is a hard fought battle, not something to try on for size, or 'play' with.

When I came to Leather, it was the 'work', Tools, not toys. As there was always risk not merely involved, but at the forefront of our minds, this was nothing one took lightly. Perhaps we came to our Leather identities despite the risks, as we could no longer live in ways that denied our deepest selves, it was compelling to live out that truth, and was not confined to bedroom behaviours, it was who and what we were. Certainly some in the Het scene live this too, but for others, I grow concerned. Drive, Passion, and the demand to let our truth live out our lives sometimes seems absent. And yes, that absence can also be apparent in the Queer crowd.

Still, it takes a certain something to find the hidden places on the bad side of town, show that you are worthy of an invite, and show that willingness to learn, and can and will behave properly when you finally reach that dimly lit Shangri-la. These are acts of need, and it is a vetting process of sorts, something unimaginable to those who look for the next munch on the local leather calendar and show up having read ‘the books’ and thinking they know, and thus don’t need to sit quietly and watch. ‘Net know’ is worlds apart from knowing. Knowing comes borne of risk and threat, and trust and honour. Consequences were always just around the next corner. And in an age when communications were so incredibly different, finding a kindred spirit was a rare and wondrous thing, never to be taken for granted.

Yeah, and no doubt we walked uphill both ways through a foot of snow to and from the Leatherspace.

Well some did, but they did so before my time, so I was fortunate enough to be able to walk in their footprints. Some in today's 'scene' deny there ever were footprints, much less that there could possibly be any value or worth in following such. For all the lip service the Leather Archives gets in Het-land, I don't see the same understanding of it from Het Leatherpeople.

So here I sit, a Bi, S/(s)witch Leatherwomyn, collared to her Sir. Confused yet? I'm not. I know exactly where I stand.

Unfortunately, where I stand is outside many structures, and with this further devaluing (my judgement, my journal, my opinion- deal) I keep running across, I feel distant and often repulsed by what passes for today's Leatherculture. And I'm not the only one. Other folks who have been around for a while, some may notice, are not 'around' so much anymore. And that's a damn shame, considering that as this devaluing continues to slide, people who remember ways it 'used to be' are in many ways more in demand than ever. The constant drumbeat for 'leaders' for 'mentors' and this odd fascination with romanticized notions and mythologies of 'old guard' are all just expressions of yearning. Yearning to be a part of a tradition, to know you're not alone, others have tread this path before, and that yes, since S/m has many genuine risks to it, both technical and societal, you're not completely alone out there working 'without a net'. To both good and ill, this then gains expression through both institutionalization and shared notions of 'common rules' which in some cases were never intended to be such.

Take, for example, a (somewhat changing) set of rules that were scrawled off for play parties at science fiction conventions (back in the day). These were specifically designed for the kinds of venues they would be used in, and among that particular subset of the broader 'scene' for the duration of certain specific events- cons. Yet over time, as many Het couples got their first in person introduction to the scene by way of those parties, when they began throwing their own parties, the rules migrated along with them. Few revisions were made to suit the new venues and subsets of the community, instead, the hastily scrawled off rules became regarded as community norms. It's not dissimilar to a game of telephone, played out in fetishwear. The 'rules' which were never THE RULES, became THE RULES to the exclusion of all else. What people miss is that THE RULES were jotted down, perhaps on something as simple as a napkin back over a meal with friends. They were written by people looking at a situation- one which had certain legal parameters.

The idea of other people coming up with other guidelines that more aptly fit their circumstances has become verboten, as now messing with the 'sacred texts' has become tantamount to stepping beyond the parameters of community standards. It's weird as hell to watch recent marketing slogans that we aimed at external, non-kinky culture like "safe, sane, and consensual" become not only THE LAW, but also something many now demand we hold one another, internal to Leatherculture to- always forgetting that some of us were Leatherfolk, tormenting pretty girls long before their precious LAW had even been dreamed up.

So what does this all have to do with little miss 'once that's over with'? Something's getting lost. Or maybe it already got lost.

Call it gut, but something has been lost, when I now watch people writing online about how you must NEVER play with anyone who 'manipulates you', or makes you feel 'out of control'. I don't even recognize this new 'leather' scene. Some of us just find such notions outright laughable. Feeling, ‘manipulated’ or ‘out of control’ may not merely be the hottest and wettest for some people, it may well be THE POINT!

So the 'mentors' new Leather craves so desperately just stop showing up to events. In part, because we don't need flogging 101 for the 150th time. But also for the deeper reasons, we simply have no idea how to function in a world where 'submissives' expect their 'Dommes' to e-mail them a week before the 'date' with an outline, detailing every aspect of what a 'scene' will look like, so the 'subbie' in question can shop around to get exactly what they want. (Real example here folks.)

Another reason some of us are disappearing is a simple logistical one. I may be collared by a man, but that does not mean we are a Het couple, and when I choose to be with a womyn, I'm immediately written off as being contaminated by the man in my life. There are few spaces that accept the realities of the fluidity of some of our sexualities. Simplistic breakdowns by gender or by what sex or gender one's partner may be, or may be playing don't work for some of us. And we need spaces that reflect those realities.

As an artist, I sometimes talk about ‘art that needs an manual’, if it takes 300 pages to explain it to the average person, mostly written in ‘art-speak-ese’, my guess is the piece has failed to communicate. (Hah! Get a load of the length of this diary!) Venues for Leather communities can likewise, fail under the weight of the manuals required to sort out the who’s who and who’s doing what, and what do we think of that? This is some of why many elders have retreated into Leather families, Leather houses, and private clubs, most Leather scene-sters will never even realize are there. We don’t want manuals or to have to ask permission to love who and how we do, not from the outside world, and doubly so from whatever passes for our chosen ‘community’.

The stark realities of pre-net and post-net Leatherpeople and our cultural ‘norms’, sometimes feel insurmountable. Ultimately, it’s a loss to both, those recent, and those elders. Despite the divisions, both real and artificial, we need one another. That is the real travesty here. To people like myself “Leather service” alongside “once that's out of the way..." are simply unimaginable. But my guess is, the Leatherworld I inhabit may be equally unfathomable to the woman in question. Yes we each have found our happinesses. But when the interweave of generations in a shared culture (if we still have one) is torn, the loss is great. Thus I find myself talking with two sets of friends- would be mentors bemoan their lack of ability to find someone to pass on their skills, history, traditions and knowledge to, and those young in Leather, bemoaning their inability to find voices of experience.

To restore some of our voices to the 'community' the 'bad' news (for some) is that some venues (not all) are going to have be a bit more complicated- places where you won't be able to tell what's going on by merely looking as visual cues like gender or even preconceptions. 'Scorecards' may practically become 'necessary', (as if they weren’t already? Fear not, I'm only joking, most of already have our hands quite full, thank you!)The 'good' news, though, is that if there are spaces in which we can be ourselves, I'm guessing some folks would gladly come back. We too feel a desire to pass on our knowledge, Some feel drawn to being ‘voices of the old ways’, yet feel stifled by rigid compartmentalized subsets of 'community' in terms of spaces and what they feel they can comfortably say and do. No I’m not talking merely spaces friendly to genders in different arrangements, I’m talking about spaces in which not adhering to the magic incantation ‘safe sane and consensual’ is not grounds for gathering up the villagers, lighting torches, and a mob making its way up toward the strange dark house on the hill where the ‘monster’ lives.

The other good news, is that for some of us, this is Leather is our lives, it's damn real, and we don't live anywhere where getting any of this, even a single moment of it 'out of the way' ever crosses our minds, mid-service or otherwise.

A post on ending Leather relationships

Recently, on an e-mail list, there was a question about ending Leather relationships and what happens to symbols, tools, and collars. The following is what I wrote in response.

***

I'll speak to some of how I was taught by friends in the midwest in the mid to late 80's about how we tried to conduct our relationships and how one relates to tokens and tools, particularly when relationships come to a close. These are just some of how I learned and some of how I (personally, speaking as a switch) have structured my own relationships. A lot of how I deal with tools and objects at an end has everything to do with how we related to the objects and the meanings we imbued them with throughout the course of the relationship.

First and foremost, I was taught was that how a Leatherperson conducts their personal affairs reflects deeply on them, and so just as one would enter into a relationship with honesty, forthrightness, and no hidden motives, ideally the same should be able to be said (again, *ideally*, anyway) of drawing one's relationships to a close if that time comes. Just as we negotiate a beginning, so too, must we sometimes negotiate an end- in good faith, honestly, articulately, and without hidden motives. Ending as civilly as possible is about many things, not merely maintaining a reference of sorts. I think it says a lot about a person, and about how they care/cared for their partner through the relationship to end it as civilly as possible.

When that's not possible, well, do the best one can to end it as civilly as possible- while still standing firm on what one's genuine needs are. There are some things that genuinely cannot be budged on without loosing parts of oneself, and on those things holding firm may be the civil thing one can do.Maintaining one's self respect is important as well, because even after the relationship is long gone, you still have to look yourself in the mirror in the morning. At the end of the day, it's you you have to live with.

One of the key qualities of a Leatherperson was that he or she kept their word. If they said it, they did it. This applies, doubly so perhaps, to when 'the going gets tough'. How one ends a relationship, and whether or not one 'does right' by the other person, not to the exclusion of self, but to their word and to the extent they can is a measure of a person. Do you bend over backwards for an abuser, no. Emphatically, NO. Here, I'm talking about situations where both parties did what they could, an honest attempt, it didn't work out, and now it's time to do something else. Being adult about it is important.

Reputation was an important aspect of Leatherlife in the community I was a part of back then (it still is to me), and so being a person of your word was very important. That also meant knowing when to say no, and when to turn things down, even if the other person was going to be unhappy, because it was better to say no at the outset rather than say yes, and then try to back out later.

Another aspect of reputation and respect meant not gossiping or badmouthing about one's ex after it was over.

Genuinely giving honest answers if asked about them? Say what needs to be said, but don't editorialize or badmouth, stick to the facts. If asked your opinion, make it clear that it's your opinion, give a very short summary, (sentence or two, unless there's pertinent safety information and you're being asked for a recommendation for example. Make it clear that that was at that time, x number of years ago, and the other person may have learned new skills, etc in the intervening x years) and leave it at that.

As for tools and other Leather symbols from the relationship? Being switch myself, I've some experience from both ends.

I was taught (and maintain in relationships that I have had) that the collar belongs to the Dominant/Top/Sir/Mistress (whatever term one uses, I'll just use "D" in this as a shorthand) as it is their property and extended to their submissive/bottom/girl or boy/plaything (whatever term one uses, I'll just use "s" in this as a shorthand) as a symbol of their relationship to the D.

Which was always predicated upon really 3 things-

1. that the D in the relationship had chosen/procured/and extended the collar for/to the s in the first place

2. that the symbolism of the collar initially had to do with coming under ownership or protection of said D- which carried with it the idea that the D was taking responsibility for that s and that the D's collar was an outward, external symbol and reminder of that.

3. and finally, that the collar, similar to other leathers also falls under a rule I was taught- that if a D puts a piece of leather on their s, the s is not to remove it until the D removes it or gives permission or instruction for when and how it is to be taken off.

As the collar was chosen, procured, in some cases even designed by the D, and then extended to the s as a symbol of those reciprocal aspects of the relationship (that of the s being owned, and coming under the D's protection and responsibility), the collar was never viewed as being "owned" by the s. It was a privilege to wear the collar of a Dominant (never "their" Dominant as the possessive term wasn't used in relation to the Dominant who owned/owns one). It was a privilege that could also be taken away at any time, although that would be considered a pretty severe measure and potentially signaling the end of a relationship.

I was also taught that while a D may remove (their) collar at any time, the s could not remove it without permission. (See point 3 above.) So if an s wanted the collar removed, or more broadly out of the relationship, it was their responsibility to ask the collar be removed or permission to remove it, which also, had the implication of either loss of privilege, end of ownership, and potentially end of the relationship.

I have known a few couples who have at one time or another set a collar aside for a time, and then at a later time returned a collar. Not wearing the collar didn't mean the end of the relationship, but it certainly indicated vast changes in the structure of the relationship, and in at least one case a massive renegotiation and fundamental changes prior to wearing the collar again. I even know of one couple who had one collar for a period of time, another period of their relationship without a collar, and then a third period which was marked by 'retiring' the initial collar and procuring a second collar, as a way of saying this is not the same relationship they had, but was something new and different, based on a completely renegotiated relationship that started from as close to 'scratch' as possible.

In any case, I was taught the collar always went back to its owner, (the D). The one (often unstated) 'rule' in that though, was that as each collar was unique to the individual who wore it, each collar represented a particular relationship, and thus the now empty collar was never to be 'recycled' or worn by others.

A lot of these ideas related to collars of a somewhat different era, though, deeply personal collars that were custom pieces, often made by a D themselves, or by a club or bar artisan at the request of a specific person for a specific person. I'm not saying today's collars AREN'T, I'm just saying these ideas came from a specific time.

Piercing rings, bars, etc (a more recent issue in relationship endings) again, has everything to do with how the people involved related to them through the course of a relationship. If at the time of the piercing it was made clear that these were ownership rings, and symbols of the D, then at the relationship's close, I feel they are within their rights to ask their tokens back. Sure, you keep the piercings themselves, but if the rings were symbols of a particular person 'returning' them can be a very visceral symbol of ending. (Buying yourself your own set of rings and placing them in the holes can also be damn liberating/symbolic of 'self ownership'.)

Other Leathers; jackets, vests etc, were often 'earned' so they went with the s, as they had earned them. (There are a few exceptions, but they related to exceptional circumstances.) What I was taught was that when one started out as a s, you were entitled to your own boots, belt, denim, and in some communities vest. Everything else, jacket, chaps, armbands whatever, were either

A. explicitly gifts (now owned by the s)

B. earned (through special service to the community or the D, or through undergoing an ordeal and coming back changed)

C. or the D's property placed upon you and not to be removed until they took them off.

At the conclusion of a relationship, the D could take back what pieces of theirs they put on you, but pieces you had earned or that were gifts you could take with you. That's part of why it was important to understand when a piece of leather was being put on you at any point in the relationship whether it was the D's (thus their mark or symbol on you) , a gift that was yours to keep, or earned. Some of the more 'ritualized' aspects relating to Leathers themselves were about making it clear what the nature of the item you were being given, or being placed upon you was.

As for whips and other implements, I learned these were always the responsibility and property of the D- unless they were things you entered the relationship with (anything you came with, you could take).

Any tool that 'tasted blood' was completely unique to an individual s- and upon a relationship ended, they stayed with the D- never to be used again, not unlike the collar.

What this means as a practical matter is that just as I have love letters and other 'artifacts' from previous relationships, I have my ex's collar, and several tools that will never again be used on anyone.

As for whether such tools and symbols are kept individually, or shared immediately or eventually through places like the Leather Archives and Museum (http://www.leatherarchives.org/ ), or even burned as a means of symbolizing the release and end, these are all things to think about and perhaps even write into contracts preferably long BEFORE any end comes.

The other HUGE factors sitting in the middle of relationship endings, (that could take books, far more than any single e-mail post), are both the emotional dependency and loss an s feels at the end, upon no longer having that particular D in their lives, and the concrete 'real life' losses this can mean- i.e. lack of ownership of property or lack of their own credit rating, or retirement funds, etc those kinds of things that may or may not be 'side effects' of a relationship. In short the things that had they not been in a particular relationship they might otherwise have had.

(I haven't even touched on children in the middle of relationships, nor am I going to here, but it is something to think about now, BEFORE the possibility of a relationship end.)

The emotional isolation is a somewhat unique facet of our lives, and no number of friends etc can stand in for that now empty space where a D once was. That said, having a support network, and not being cut off from other friends etc in the first place is something to build into the life of any s- LONG before a break up. (This can also help prevent the s jumping at whatever 'next' D appears in their lives, just to fill that emptiness.)

As for the real world parts, caring about one's s during the relationship also means caring about one's s if the relationship should end. This means ensuring that while they may be owned, they aren't going to be left homeless and penniless at the end of two decades. It means real world things like a credit rating, like helping build 'real world skills' in addition to learning proper tea service. Etc.

As for those of us living the s end of the equation? It means no matter how in love we are, no matter how much we trust, we still make sure that we're not going to be completely out in the cold should the bad day ever come. That yes, we will still have friends, we will still be able to earn a living and rent a place of our own if need be, etc.

Even if we're so fortunate as to 'never break up', we may find ourselves responsible for the care of a longterm incapacitated D, or face the possibility of our beloved passing before we do. Not being useless, completely alone, or stuck is part of what need to take care of, now, in the day to day, not later.

(That's more than I expected to write, but it seems like the kinds of things I don't often hear passed along verbally or see in books.)