Is Erotic Power Exchange A Culture?

Occasionally the erotic power exchange (BDSM) community looks at the gay community with a certain amount of envy, as a result of the fact that the latter has achieved quite a bit when it comes to general understanding for and acceptance of different lifestyles. One of the questions, asked in this respect, is the one about being a culture yes or no. Although that as such is a question that can be debated endlessly, fact of the matter is that the narrow - sexual only - approach does not seem to cover all aspects of erotic power exchange. So, are "we" a culture? Below is at least one answer to that question.

First of all: what is a culture? There are of course various definitions, but personally I like to use the one given by anthropologist Ruth Benedict (which is the more or less generally accepted one in the scientific community): "culture is a more or less consistant pattern of thought and action with a characteristic purpose that pervades the forms of behavior and institutions of a society." Hence, a culture is defined by a set of patterns.

Are "we" a "culture" (as in a religious culture, a national culture for example)? If culture is defined as being that total and all-embracing the answer to that question is NO, unless of course you would argue that BDSM-views and opinions have any specific relevance to and influence on social structures, general behavior patterns or institutions (which I personally consider quite unlikely). However, if you take the definition but add the words "limited" and "some", the answer is: yes, we are.

The opposite of the above definition, by the way, is true for the BDSM-community: i.e., the world around us (society) has a direct influence on us (general perceptions, legislation, prejudice, political and religious views, to only name a few) and not in the way they have as a general factor in everyone's life, but directly in (and as a result of) the ideals the community as well as individuals within that community strive(s) and stand(s) for. There are other methods to find out whether or not BDSM is a culture. One of them is to try and establish if there are concepts, views and behavior patterns within a "group" that seem to be more or less generally accepted and are at the root of the group behavior (chaos-theory).

Behavior patterns

Thus the question is: are there such concepts, views and behavior patterns? The answer here - in my view - is yes, there are: there is a more or less generally accepted lingo (that at least is generally recognized), there are concepts (voluntary, imformed consentual, safe and sane for example, negotiation for example, safewords for example). We may not be to good at exactly describing them, but there are norms and values: in general the community has a pretty good general idea about what is acceptable behavior in the group and what is not. In the same way there are (again not specifically written down) certain more or less generally accepted ethics.

And next to that there even is a more or less "creative process" based on the group's ideas (design, clothing, art, photography, writing and more) that usually is recognized as "belonging to or within the group".

Finally, do we have specific and more or less general behavior patterns? The answer again is yes. Coming out for example, finding information, communication and even some negative ones, like taking things personal and concentrating on personal ideas and interpretations as opposed to more general ones.

So, this method also seems to proof there at least is something indicating a culture, albeit not a very well studied and described one (but then again many cultures are not very well, or not at all described, such as many tribal cultures and the entire Maya culture for example).

Is all this enough to claim "we" are/have a culture. With sufficient modesty to say that we will probably not make a difference in changing the world's general ethics my answer to that question is yes.

Are we a sub-culture? A sub-culture is a derivate from something else. Personally, I can not see where we are a derivate of something else, so no, I wouldn't say we are a subculture. And this is where I think we first meet some arguments of the "outside world" that tries to narrow BDSM down to a form of sexual behavior (and to many preferably a sexual deviation). Why would the outside world do that? The answer in my mind is obvious: fear. Sexuality in many (especially Western) societies is something that has always been looked at with double standards. Religions for example (and they have a traditionally strong influence on sexual behavior) have a very double standard here. On one end for example they praise the phenomena of life and giving birth, while at the same time they will condemn women the moment they show physical signs of their ability to give life (like menstruation, pregnancy and such) and call them impure. They will endorse big families with many children but at the same time condemn the act that is at the very root of reproduction.

Fear on one end and narrow minded political views about controlling people's lives on the other are what brings about this element of fear and hence the well-known rhethorical trick of creating a "common enemy" (the evil). "We" are "an evil" in that sense and this evil is described in very simple, one dimensional straight forward terms that usually have little to do with the truth. Which is only one reason to stay away from a purely sexual/psychological approach and try to put things in a somewhat broader perspective.

What is this culture made of?

So, if we are a culture, what is that culture made off? That is where it becomes very hard. There is little research to rely on or find answers in and unfortunately any debate about trying to describe the culture will almost automatically turn into a debate about personal preferences. The reasons for this happening are actually quite simple. Most of "us" live in a very narrow, closed environment when it comes to BDSM (which is not a negative connotation but merely an observation and in itself a direct result of the general social stigmatism and prejudice) and as a result many people only have their personal ideas and feelings to go by, while on the other hand the subject itself directly hits home with almost all of us and brings out - understandable - fierce and intense emotions.

The Internet - even though a blessing in some ways - is not exactly helpful either, since the "net-community" seems to go through exactly the same growing pains the "real life community" (at least in Europe) has gone through some 15 to 20 years ago. Hence, for the moment on the Internet history is only repeating itself, which is not bad as such, since it helps the vast numbers of newcomers, but is of little or no help when it comes to try and debate, research more abstract issues like this one.

Different cultures

As for example Weinberg and Falk ("Studies in Sadomasochism", 1983) conclude, there is very little methodical and theoretical research from the sociological field available when it comes to BDSM. If any work has been done in this area, most of that is journalistic research and not scientific. Still, one fact is generally accepted in the scientific field (and in other areas): there are huge differences between the gay/lesbian and heterosexual BDSM-cultures.

Coming out (which to gay/lesbians is a "second coming out") for one thing is totally different, primerily because coming out as a concept is alien to the heterosexual world since it has never been a real issue. Hence there is little experience with the phenomena and whereas coming out is recognized as probably the most important stage in the life of a homosexual (and treated and respected as such), in the heterosexual world it is predominantly still ignored or undervalued.

Other main differences are in the social behavior patterns. Especially gay men - within their community - are not only more open to different forms of sexuality, it is also very common to act out preferences in a more or less public environment such as gay bars and meeting places. Try acting out your heterosexual BDSM preferences in a public bar or in the local community center and you'll have huge problems. Also, there is a much more integrated process of accepting different preferences within the gay/lesbian community and hence there is a lot more openess and willingness to investigate, whether for personal use or just for better understanding. So yes, there ARE at least two different BDSM-cultures with their own patterns, behavior and general dynamics.

BDSM influence in other social areas

To ascertain if BDSM as such is a culture one method is to identify if the phenomena as such has any inlfuence in other social areas. This is an incomplete list of such influences.

* BDSM has a (sometimes even quite substantial) influence in areas like fashion, pop music, movie industry and art. In European countries it even has an influence on advertizing.

* BDSM has its own literature, art and fashion.

* BDSM has its own media (print and Internet)

* BDSM has its own places for gatherings (clubs, the above facilities, groups, gatherings, munches)

* BDSM has its own organisations (local, national and some - like the NLA - even internationally)

* BDSM has its own lingo, different form others, some of which influences other areas

* BDSM has its own concepts, some of which have also been accepted in or adopted by other areas

* BDSM is an economical factor, in the forms of products like videos, toys, gear, more or less dedicated shops, media and art galleries, clothing and such and - wether we like it or not - prostitution.

* BDSM is scientifically recognized as a phenomena of its own.

* BDSM is the subject of research in different scientific areas (psychology, psychiatry, sociology).

* BDSM is condemned by other groups, including some very influential ones.

* BDSM has lead to specific legislation to try an ban it in various countries and regions.

* BDSM is the subject of political debates and decisionmaking.

Different cultures within the community

Are there different cultures within hetero BDSM? I tend to think there are at least two: Maledom/femsub and Femdom/malesub. First of all, of course they have a lot in common. Probably eighty to ninety percent of their basic cultural patterns are exactly the same (albeit maybe slightly different in their format and presentation). However, there are a few basic differences that in my opinion make them different (mind you, I am not advocating one is better than the other, just different). So where are these differences?

First of all there is a difference in social acceptance. For example, the more or less general assumption is that men can take better care of themselves when it comes to security risks. Hence, a submissive male is generally seen as "less vulnerable" when compared to female submissives. To a certain extent that is true. Male sexuality in general is more open and men are much more used to share their sexual experiences and thoughts with others than women. Men are - more than women and again generally speaking - more used to things like masturbating, exploring their sex organ and the sex organs of others and are more likely to talk about this to others and experiment. Hence they have an advantage when it comes to taking risks and coping with vulnerability. This, by the way, should not be taken as a statement that the male submissive actually is or feels less vulnerable, because this is probably not true.

Another main difference is in the difference in sexual experience. The male experience simply is a more physical one, whereas the female experience is much more mental. This brings about differences in attitude, play forms, safety issues and interaction as well as a couple of cultural differences such as the fact that female submissives are much more receptive - and have a different attitude towards - fantasy.

Female submissives have other cultural differences, such as the conflict of roles (mother, career person, central function in the household/relationship and submissive) which is much more dominant to them then it is to male submissives (and usually much more of a problem). And to many there is the female (social) masochism and role-stereotyping in general (that is not good, but still very much "there").

By the way, here a nice example of similarities as well since this is something the lesbian world also has substantial problems with.

Male dominants - as opposed to their female counterparts - also have many differences, such as their own role conflicts (men aren't supposed to beat women and are brought up that way - in many cultures men still aren't supposed to show their softer sides, hence many have never learned how to do that). And, simply because the subs are different, the dominants are different.

There probably is a long list of other differences, one that should for example be considered is the fact that as a result of the widespread commercialization of the Femdom world, it is a lot easier for male subs to at least find a format to live out their fantasies than it is for female subs.

Is it functional to recognize such differences? I think it is. Not in an effort to conveniently cut up the cake in very tiny pieces in order to find sufficent similarities to determine one specific group, but in an effort to try and identify the differences and address them. Like brothers and sisters are part of the same family, they have their own specifics wants, needs, dynamics and interactions and understanding each other better starts with identifying and understanding the specifics of the other, identifying where differences and where similarities are. Just as it often is very counterproductive to address certain problems by only using either male or female logic (ultimately the combination of both is what usually produces result) it is not very productive to try and push everyone "into the same corset" when it comes to defining cultures. Understanding that there are similarities AND differences is what will eventually establish a better understanding of the entire group.

General significance

Finally, does all this have a relevance when it comes to educating and informing the outside world? Again my opinion here is a positive one. Why? Because the outside world is constantly mixing up different aspects of the different cultures, which does not help the debate nor the education. For example, whenever I am asked to participate in a television program, talkshow, do an interview or whatever on BDSM my first question for the journalist/producer will be "what BDSM?" That usually - apart from it being a very effective way to delay the entire production for a considerable period - leads to a fundamental discussion during the production phase about what the show/interview/documentary is supposed to achieve. That will automatically - usually - lead to a better understanding by the journalist(s)/producer(s) involved and will improve the quality of the end product as well as well the quality of future products by the same producer/journalist. I will do exactly the same when preparing a presentation in any other format and - for example when it comes to informing law enforcement people - one simply has to identify and explain the different cultures because the officier involved will have to be able to judge individual situations in real life and a gay scene is something that is usually totally different from a hetero scene in the first place (not to mention the cases where a male is in fact an abuse victim).

Bottom line: if we want to inform and educate others (which is I think what most of us - latent or not - want or would like to see happen) the first question to ask is: what do we want to inform and educate them about?

Former Dutch journalist Hans Meijer is currently chairman of the Powerotics Foundation, an organisation dedicated to providing quality information about alternative lifestyles.

Australian Left-winger Says We Must Deal with Nationalism, Not Ignore It, Conservative Left Dismayed

Humphrey McQueen says we MUST confront nationalism instead of wishing it away - angers the conservative left

NOTE: This is comment, not straight reporting. The thrust of McQueen's call to arms is, I think, represented fairly, and I am consulting my notes taken at the seminar, but a majority of the details in the paragraphs are my interpretations and feelings about tonight.

Humphrey McQueen attacked conservative-left thought on nationalism on Saturday night, 20th May 2006, at the Brisbane Social Forum in Australia.

[Conservative-Left - claiming to be Left while opposing most, if not all, change.]

Three speakers who appeared to have emotional stakes in conservative-left positions spoke passionately in favour of their views, but I judge (and I am biased) that they failed to win the hearts of most of the room.

The campaign against nationalism of many of the grouplets on the left is not aimed at changing minds, it is aimed at affirming moral superiority, McQueen contended.

(Not a direct quote, but from my notes made 4 hours before the article was written.)

Humphrey McQueen's seminar at the Brisbane Social Forum (University of Queensland Student Union, St Lucia, Brisbane, Australia) was called 'Why Nationalism is Necessary' (its a reworking of a Shelley title about athiesm, he said).

McQueen started off by posing the question of how much nationalism the left needs. He takes for granted that we reject fascism, chauvinism, racism and so on, but what about patriotism? What about nativism? What about their historical roots and the fact that many people feel them?

What about the fact that many problems are specific to local conditions and need local solutions? Saying that some problems have a uniquely Australian solution would be common for at least several decades after a revolution.

McQueen spoke of the book 'Imagined Communities', by Benedict Anderson.

Not because he thinks it is a good book, in fact he thinks its message has been dangerously misconstrued leading to the idea that racism is caused by 'bad ideas' that we can just tell people to stop believing. Racism Solved! (Not).

But because he demands the left starts thinking about this:

What sort of imaginings - what ideas about community, society and humanity - will we have to offer people if we do sweep away the culture that stands now before us?

McQueen also insists that, by refusing to come up with a realistic approach to nationalism, we are ceding valuable ground to the Right. McQueen gave two examples of comments that had been made to him by people who identified as left:

1) "Australian nationalism is filth"

2) An activist used the words 'the maggot of racism' at the time of the Cronulla riots.

McQueen suggested that if an ordinary worker in Australia were to hear these comments, there is a good chance that that worker might think that you were calling her 'filth' or a 'maggot'. McQueens opinion seems to be that this might be unhelpful to us, if we are trying to win the culture war. This contention sparked some debate.

In fact McQueen had already stopped for discussion a couple of times. I had already drawn the fire of one of the conservative left by suggesting that any plan we come up with be just a couple of steps forward of where we are now, to allow for the willingness of people to change. I was accused of being elitist, and thinking that workers could not change (No, I said wouldn't actually. Difference).

An activist from the Socialist Action Group, who up till now I had thought was sensible, weighed in, saying that McQueen's argument was 'crap'. McQueen replied, 'You are the first person who has felt the need to swear', and the conservative who had criticised me said 'its not a swear word, its an ancient Anglo-Saxon word'. McQueen decided not to let pedantry stand in the way of scholarship and calmly explained that in our culture and language the word 'crap' has connotations of insult when applied to one's argument. Then the conservative expressed the view that criticising a female (for it was a female who had used the word 'crap') was sexist. Um...

Fortunately, a young woman with a contrary view and a North American accent spoke up soon saying that she was Australian ('despite my accent') and she would find comments such as 'filth' and 'maggot' offensive. It was clear to me to that this young woman's attitude on nationalism was far more likely to be close to the point of view to the average Australian than the attitudes of the conservatives who had spoken. That makes people like her far more useful than the conservative left.

When it came down to it, in a room of roughly 30 people (who had all paid A$40 to be there), only 3 could be found to strongly, passionately argue against McQueen's point of view. They had the floor for as long as they wanted, and they got to say the same things they always say. And they were heard. No one clapped, no one appeared to actively support them. I don't mean to say that every silent person disagreed with them, but nor were they stirring a great deal of enthusiasm amongst those who had come to listen.

There is no room to be smug. No plans were made. No problems were solved. All McQueen did tonight was demand we begin thinking about the cultural battles of Australia. But his call to arms was clear. Everyone in that room knows what he meant. And I am sure I saw people who want to do more than blame John Howard.

After the seminar broke up I told the young woman I liked what she had said. To my surprise she said she was worried that the room disagreed with her (I think she misinterpreted the tense silence as everybody held back). But I told her that I thought the majority of the room would have been either on her side (well I meant or at least prepared to take her ideas seriously and respectfully and not shout her down, but that takes a while to say). I encouraged her to keep talking.

McQueen was not the only person at the Brisbane Social Forum whose views were at least not entirely orthodox. Deb Kilroy of Sisters Inside, Kim Pate from the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies, Lillian Holt, a Vice-Chancellor's fellow at the University of Melbourne, Caroline Lambert of WRANA, gay media activist and trainer Rodney Croome and 'professional lesbian' Gai Lemon, also with experince in media and training, all stood out as people with enough different and interesting things to say to be well worth the effort. And they were just the speakers. I saw plenty of curious people - some of them still quite conservative in many ways - who can be argued with usefully.

The field can be ours if we take it.

NOTE: Humphrey McQueen is the author of A New Britannia and many other books.

David Jackmanson, at Let's Take Over

Self Hypnosis Simple Exercise To Stop Smoking Now, You Can Implement Today

You have to select a quiet, comfortable place to practice this exercise once you've chosen the place, you need to find a relaxed position. Some people prefer lying down, while others may chose to relax upright in a chair. It's up to you.

After you've found your favorite spot, the lights are subdued, and you've settled into a comfortable lounge chair, close your eyes, take a deep breath, breathing in through your nose...hold it for three seconds...and slowly exhale through your mouth over a six-second period. Inhale...hold it...exhale...inhale...hold it...exhale. Do this for two minutes. Slow, deep, rhythmic breathing helps you to relax. Imagine your tensions flowing out of you with every bit of air you release.

In this tranquil state, you're ready for your self-hypnosis induction, you've already finished the first: relaxation. The following script is the induction process, for stop smoking, finishing up with the awakening technique.

I suggest you tape record the script, or have someone with a calm and serene voice tape it for you, to be played back at each session.

Induction Process

"You're here to take a nap. You're resting comfortably. You're happy to do what you do when you take a nap...forget the rest of the world. Give up the world, and drift off to sleep without care or concern...There is no effort here, it's just comfort and ease...

"There is no trying to take a nap. It's just permission. Permit yourself some calmness, patience, pleasantness, and gentleness. Don't try hard for these things. Permit them in a passing way...

"A second or two of calmness...a second or two of pleasantness...a second or two of gentleness...

"There is no effort or strain involved in these things. Give permission for calmness...give permission for patience...give permission for gentleness...give permission for gentle resolve to feel the feelings I describe to you...

"It's a real good thing we do here today, so let us be pleasant in advance...be patient with me and with yourself...and I will be eternally patient with you...Be gently resolved to feel the feelings I describe to you...

"Those words, 'gently resolved,' are so soft, they're like light' puffy white clouds..."Also, I would like you to pretend and imagine and make believe. These are not false nor are they false feelings...

"I'm happy to tell you that from this moment on, you'll never need to smoke again in your entire life...you cannot be bothered to smoke...It doesn't matter now in what way you formerly smoked...if you smoked when you were driving...or after you ate...when you were on the phone...when you woke up...while you were reading...or at any time, that no longer applies...

You see, instead of the habit of smoking, you now have the good habit of not smoking...of a calmness and self-control whenever and wherever you need it...it doesn't matter who offers you a cigarette or blows smoke in your face...you will not feel tempted or threatened, and you'll respond with something like, 'No thank you, I don't smoke anymore,' demonstrating that you now have control of your mind to make the decision and the will-power to carry it through...

"With each cigarette you no longer smoke, you're more and more reinforced in your new habit not to smoke...Also there will be no substitution of any other habit on the physical level...you will not substitute eating for smoking... In fact, it is your desire to maintain your weight, or if you wish to lose weight, you'll be able to do so even now...now that you've stopped your smoking...

"The same new-found willpower you have acquired in no longer wanting to smoke is there for you in dieting and proper eating...You'll enjoy greater health in ways you may not expect to find...In a few days, your blood will clear and the effects of nicotine will be mainly gone...over a period of weeks and even months, the tars in your lungs will gradually diminish and leave your body...you will enjoy an energy level of unbelievable proportion...

"This is true because you will no longer be inhaling carbon monoxide from cigarettes. That carbon monoxide has been displacing oxygen in your blood...oxygen that should be finding its way to the far reaches of your body...instead, you have been deprived...deprived of oxygen, and instead, circulating poisons...but now, your body will be carrying rich, plentiful oxygen to the far reaches of your body...and your energy level will surge...you'll notice it in only a few days...

"You can use this new energy for many things...plan on doing extra things in business...family...sports...hobbies...in enjoying your life...in increased good health...

"It doesn't matter if, in the past, you had stopped smoking and started again...even repeatedly...no triggers, no emotions, no carelessness, or irresponsible decision-making will ever be a part of, or instrumental in, your returning to smoking...I'm happy to tell you that you'll never have to smoke again in your entire life...and each minute, hour, day, week, month, and year that passes, reinforces this wonderful habit you have NOT to smoke."

The Awakening Process

"I Know that benefit I get from this experience is a positive, healthy experience, and any time I wish to enter this state of ease again, all I need to do is relax in a comfortable position, take several deep breaths, and imagine myself on a wonderful adventure to my special place. Whenever I take several deep breaths and imagine this place, I will notice that I can quickly and easily return to the deep level of relaxation and comfort...

"You will now awaken yourself from this nap by counting backwards from four...and by the time l say 'one' and 'AWAKE,' you will be fully, fully, fully, totally, totally awake...FOUR...you're starting to AWAKE

you are wide
awake and feeling great!"

Practicing this exercise twice in a day regularly will help you cure your fears, stress and anxiety.

How can it take just 1 hour to stop your smoking, forever - no matter how long you've been smoking? The solution is an expertly designed online booklet and audio file you get right here - plus some simple breathing exercises you do for a few days.

The best technique to quit smoking is here

Not only will you lose all cravings in 1 hour, you will not relapse as you've experienced with other stop-smoking methods. Indeed, 94% of everyone who starts actually becomes a non-smoker after just 1 hour!

Imagine how good it will feel to be able to say: I am a non smoker and know that this time it is for real.

I strongly recommend this wonderful program.

Are you ready to quit smoking? Go here NOW!

Pradeep Aggarwal is a world renowned hypnosis guru. He offer free 15 part free ecourse on How to Become a Master Hypnotist. Go and register here now at http://www.hypnosisglobal.com. He also offers articles, books, audio tapes at http://www.pradeepaggarwal.com.