HOUDINI
CONNECTIONS WEB SITE
http://www.houdini-connections.co.uk/4-info/Topics/twelve.htm
Prints as 9 pages - words 6586
These topic heading were originally
starting points for informal group discussion
in a college course on Human Sexuality.
THE NOTES WERE FIRST PUBLISHED
IN THE 1993 FETTERS UK CATALOGUE AS
"EROTIC BONDAGE - 12 Talking Points"
AND HAVE SINCE BEEN EXPANDED ON IN COURSES AND WORKSHOPS
ON THREE CONTINENTS.
A series of topics for informal discussion
INTRODUCTION
College
courses on Human Sexuality are flourishing around the world. That’s because
many people are looking for answers to their social and emotional problems
which result mainly from the stresses of life today. Simplistic religion does
not provide enough answers for a lot of these people, and although many
Humanities courses seem to be anti-religion, in reality they are just
anti-dogma; admitting that man’s awareness
of human psychology has advanced slightly in the past two thousand years.
Exploring
the complexities of human sexuality and the dangers of suppression of natural
instincts does not mean that Human Sexuality courses argue for total
self-indulgence. As with all education, the aim is to encourage responsible use
of knowledge rather than allow misinformation to support politico/religious
control of whatever persuasion.
Of
course, in Britain today, social study courses which touch even marginally on
sexuality are already inhibited by the sinister 'Section 28' which forbids Local Authority funds to be
used to “promote” homosexuality. This deliberately ambiguous piece of recent
legislation is a typical example of the Establishment’s inability to deal
intelligently with sexuality in it’s many and various forms. It also
demonstrates the lack of concern in politicians about matters of personal
self-determination and the increasing backdoor manipulation of policy by
'moralistic' pressure groups.
Enough
preamble, here are the 12 Talking Points
PURE INSTINCT?
I’m
a simple soul but I know what I like. I arrived at it without any outside help,
having wasted too much time along the way denying my instinctive preferences.
No one ever seduced or corrupted me. My
preferences I now realize have been with me since early childhood, when I climbed into my fathers tall rubber
gardening boots and systematically tied myself to a drainpipe with washing
line. That was at the age of about six. I still remember the event, and now
trust my instincts and distrust dogma, specially when its purpose is to control
by deliberately inducing guilt ... specifically about (dare one utter the
words) sexual gratification!
My
personal moral creed is more along the lines of “Do unto others as you’d have
them do unto you” rather than “Thou shalt not”. This isn’t self-indulgence,
it’s protection of the inner-self. After forty-five years of knowing my own
erotic preferences I’m happy to say I have never, in pursuit of
self-fulfilment, made anybody seriously unhappy or forced them to do anything
they didn’t want to do ... which is more than might be said for a lot of people
who like to tell us how to live our lives.
Instinctive
attraction towards one or more aspects of what for the moment we’ll call Erotic
Bondage emerges in only a small percentage of the population ... and of this
percentage, many manage to sublimate or repress these instincts. Whether this
makes them better people or easy to live with, who can say. I’m not a
psychologist but it certainly seems to me from statistics that more crimes are
committed by sexually unsatisfied people than sexually fulfilled ones.
Back
to the subject of natural inclinations towards tying-up games: too many people
arrive at them independently for them not to be somehow natural. Perhaps it
could be a specific gene ... but so perhaps could the seed of homosexuality ...
so what! ... so is having red hair. My point is (I knew I’d get around to it
eventually) if anybody reading these notes has thoughts, fantasies, fears or
attractions concerning physical restraint of man by woman, woman by man, woman
by woman or man by man ... “It’s better out than in” as my old Granny used to
say. I’m not advocating that you should rush out and try it, necessarily ...
but I am suggesting you get your thoughts on the subject into perspective in
the light of the rest of these TALKING POINTS.
WHAT’S IN A NAME?
The
word Bondage means different things to different people. For a member of a
Biblical tribe and a medieval surf it meant two distinctly different kinds of
control situation. The word is old, the meaning keeps shifting ... but a bond
is and always has been a contract of some sort. A modern-day Stock Broker and
Shakespeare’s Shylock would both regard it as something mutually agreed between
responsible people: a deal freely entered into.
Today
bondage is a blanket term used to describe a wide variety of different
activities and fantasies all of which involve physical restraint to a greater
or lesser degree. The wide range of different games involving a change in the
balance of power achieved through physical means (rather than purely emotional
or psychological strength), deserves some clearer distinctions. A roll of cellotape
by the bedside, a fully equipped dungeon in the basement or an elegant
stainless steel chastity belt worn under an Evening Dress to the opera are
distinctively different games. Can they be lumped together as 'Bondage'?
Perhaps so - perhaps no.
Certainly
the concept of mutual agreement needs to be emphasized. At whatever level of
game playing, physical restraint of anybody against their will is a crime in
anybody’s book. The popular misconception that all 'Bondage and S&M' is
imposed on unwilling victims or indulged in by sad individuals needs to be
exploded. As a step towards this a few more precise words in the general
vocabulary would help to clarify the picture. 'Power Exchange' is a term worth
considering for a physical handicap willingly accepted by a stronger partner to
give the less physically powerful partner an advantage. This can open doors to
all sorts of erotic and sexual possibilities which otherwise might be
short-circuited by the stronger’s ability to reassert control at any time.
Particularly
because the word 'Bondage' in the tabloid press carries with it implications of
unwilling involvement and Politically Incorrect behaviour ... clearer
definitions based on real knowledge need to be discussed, explained and
explored.
Consent
is obviously the key.
POLITICAL CORRECTNESS & the FETTERS
catalogue.
Anybody
who risks discussing Bondage in public can expect to touch a few raw nerves ...
and Political Correctness is the flavour of the decade.
But,
firstly, let me explain to those of you who don’t already know ... for the past
20 years I have been making bondage equipment. I’ve always been a practical
sort of person, so I made what I couldn’t afford to buy ... not that much was
available commercially at that time anyway. The development of a hobby into a
business is often dangerous. It’s like living in a candy store. But, over the
years, I have retained my original enthusiasms.
So,
back to POLITICAL CORRECTITUDE and a commercial Erotic Bondage equipment
catalogue: Let’s take a quick look at the main areas of political sensitivity:-
GENDER DISCRIMINATION?
No
photos of women appear in the current FETTERS catalogues (NB this was published
1993) despite the fact that a lot of women like to buy our products. Is this
discrimination? Showing pictures of women physically restrained is a much more
politically sensitive issue than showing men. Violence against women is a
serious reality, and I take real life social and domestic violence very
seriously. In the past when FETTERS was targeted (we think unreasonably) by a
'WOMEN AGAINST VIOLENCE TO WOMEN' group in the
COMMERCIAL EXPLOITATION?
Offering
for sale products specially designed to restrain has been criticized as making
the means available. Rope, chain or rusty wire are easily available to people
intent on committing criminal acts; adhesive tape, chain and padlocks abound in
the real world, folks. Availability of the paraphernalia of Erotic Bondage from
so many commercial sources only goes to prove that such games are enjoyed by
many more people than the disapprovers of such games care to admit.
'PROMOTING' THE IDEAS?
Is
to describe relationships which include apparent physical force likely to
encourage domestic or social violence? Many experienced game-players claim the
opposite; that mutually agreeable exchanges of pretended force or violence help
to defuse anti-social inclinations. Psycho-drama and Group Therapy courses
confirm that repressed emotions are often at the root of social violence. However,
critics insist that availability of any information on positive aspects of the
subject is dangerous. However, to more
open-minded thinkers, the implications of suppressing information or denying
such a basic right of the individual to choose for him/herself in such personal
matters are very sinister.
DO FETISH CLUBS CORRUPT?
Sexually
oriented contact clubs and information
networks of any kind are inevitably reported by the media as being 'Vice Rings'
and subjected to undue police attention. Because the games we’re discussing
here should NEVER BE PLAYED BY STRANGERS, organized opportunities for
like-minded people to make contact offer valuable safeguards. Networking helps
to identify potentially irresponsible game-players ... and word soon gets around.
Gatherings of mutual interest groups offer a learning experience ... and I’m
not talking orgy time. Discussion and demonstration programs help to identify
dangerous practices. In my not so humble opinion, sensibly run social contact
clubs should be encouraged rather than driven deeper underground.
SHOULD CONTACT ADS BE CENSORED?
Specialized
social clubs are expensive and urban centres far apart ... and there are a lot
of people out there in the wilderness. Why are publications which carry
sexually explicit Contact Ads such a sensitive subject for The Establishment?
Out-of-date laws which regulate postage in
Since writing this:
Development of the Internet and World Wide
Web has been targeted as a medium The Establishment is determined to control.
Recently, ex-Prime Minister Thatcher once again threw her weight against
freedom of information or individual choice. She has specifically named S&M
as something to be purged from the Internet, at the same time omitting to
mention the massive range of Neo-Nazi material gaining popularity on World Wide
Web. In the
SURRENDER OF SELF
Power
Exchange games very often attract people who in everyday life are
decision-makers. Willing surrender of responsibility by inviting control makes
an ideal leisure activity, even if sustaining that power exchange requires
enforcement. The degree to which power is surrendered is usually negotiated in
advance, establishing parameters of the changed physical/emotional/dramatic
relationship.
Too
precise a game-plan may lead to only token surrender of power. A broader range
of acceptable alternatives agreed in advance gives the controller more freedom
to surprise, challenge and sustain the altered state; making the exchange more
fulfilling for both parties. Giving
yourself into the power of someone else not only removes responsibility, the
lack of choice creates its own sense of freedom. Many people feel free to
indulge in behaviour which would be unacceptable to them if they were free to
choose. Barriers can be crossed when you have chosen to allow limitations to be
imposed. Is that a paradox?
However
physically challenging the action may become this surrender is also
therapeutic. “A change is as good as a rest” as my old Granny used to say.
(Little did my old Gran know she’d end up in a debate about Bondage!).
Permitting or inviting someone else’s control inevitably remains a matter of
degree. Pre-agreed limits and exclusions may be flexible but must be respected
rather than grudgingly agreed to. As in all games there are rules. It should
also be remembered that 'Altered States' achieved through Restrictive Practices
often include emotional and social as well as purely physical temporary
changes. These changes allow a wide range of alternatives to be explored. It is
a complex area of inter-personal communication which can add depth to any
relationship ... and the objective should always remain mutual satisfaction or
stimulation.
MUTUAL CONSENT
Disapproval
of so-called 'Bondage' activities is too often based on the idea that personal
freedom is at risk. In spite of the fact that willing surrender of
personal liberty is what attracts most people to Power Exchange games, the
disapprovers often use apparent removal of choice as an excuse for their
prejudice. Paradoxically, these folks are happy to insist that their personal
opinions on the subject should be imposed on everybody else ... preferably by
Law! So, this subject of Mutual Consent is of prime importance to existing and
would-be game-players.
The
actual legal situation of anyone who enjoys physical restraint and power
exchange games is discussed elsewhere. Here and now, the ethics of different
sorts of control and counter-control games is all that concern us.
Unfortunately, the arguments recently used to criminalize specific aspects of
S&M game-playing in
By
refusing to recognize Mutual Consent as an essential factor in certain (maybe
extreme) S&M activities, they have clouded a previously clear legally
accepted line. Consent or lack of consent is what so many social, domestic,
sexual disputes hinge upon.
Players
of S&M games no longer have the protection of the law in
Returning
to agreement between those involved in such games: Every partnership whether
permanent or transitory must arrive at its own mutually acceptable set of
ground-rules. For this, as already discussed, vocabulary needs to be precise.
An ability to communicate private, perhaps painfully personal needs is
something two people are wise to establish.
SAFETY FACTORS
This
topic demands far more space than most proceeding TALKING POINTS.
However
intense or elaborate physical restraint situations become, alertness,
sensitivity and know-how on the part of the person in control are essential.
When anybody is restrained, constant monitoring is usually advisable .... but
there are no absolutes. I have learned never to say never. To leave someone
alone totally helpless can be part of the trip for both players. Of course
there are risks in leaving someone overwhelmingly incapacitated, unable to
communicate. Frankly, if it’s staged properly they don’t know whether they’re alone
or not. Maybe slamming the street door is enough to convince some people
they’ve been abandoned and the house may catch fire or their controller may get
run over by a truck. But for experienced game-players such bluffs don’t work;
you need to know that the bitch or bastard really has left you to whatever fate
may befall. From a safe and sane (a favourite S&M/Bondage catch-phrase)
point of view, that is a high risk situation. But for some people the risk is
part of the thrill ... and is it any riskier than bungee jumping?
The
best advice is to build on experience. Familiarity with the play-partner’s
style needs to be as close as regular tennis opponents. Awareness of the
physical and emotional limits of the willing 'victim' is necessary. In
addition, in most cases it’s reassuring if the controller has physically
experienced the things he/she is now doing. There’s no substitute for personal
experience; the effect of various positions and materials, the physical/mental
progression of various immobilizations, the bodily responses during an
elaborately structured scenario usually have to be felt to be fully
appreciated. All risks should be calculated risks; guesses should be educated
guesses.
Possible
safeguards and emergency measures are too numerous to list here. There are a
few books available from around the world but, absurdly enough, most of them
are suppressed in
Physical
restraint and S&M games are usually no more dangerous than any other body
contact sport; they can occasionally result in bumps and bruises, aches and
pains the morning after. Near misses with circulation, breathing or balance
cannot be totally avoided. Also, like in any other active sport there are rules
which are framed to protect the players. Again these rules are published in
magazines such as 'DUNGEONMASTER', 'BOUND AND 'GAGGED' and 'SandMUTOPIA
GUARDIAN', all of which are banned in
CONSENSUAL NON-CONSENT
Now
here’s a sophisticated extension of a topic to blow the minds of the
Politically Correct. In a nut shell ... a lot of people attracted to power
exchange games wish to surrender ALL responsibilities. However, behind most
do-your-worst invitations the ground rules have already been established. Even
when the most extreme sounding kidnap or (dare one say) rape fantasies are
discussed, certain mutually agreed limitations are implicit in the planning.
It’s
commonly accepted that physical restraint encounters shouldn’t happen between
strangers. Getting to know someone socially or through a personal
recommendation or seeing them in action at a club demo provides an essential
safety barrier. The thrill of not
knowing what is going to happen is fine, but in reality it’s fraught with
danger. Without ground-rules any 'No limits' encounter can fail for a lot of
unexpected reasons. In the early stages of 'Mutual Consent' encounters general
likes-and-dislikes are exchanged, specific physical imitations or emotional
no-go areas are identified. When inviting someone to totally remove all choice
from you ... the ALL is already qualified.
Even
when putting oneself at real risk is the main attraction (and in my opinion
every individual should be free to decide to what extent that risk is worth
taking) most people instinctively calculate the amount of real risk involved.
Awareness of risk doesn’t necessarily dampen enthusiasm for it ... or we would
have no fire fighters, police force, lifeboat crews or explorers of caves.
Modern life is dangerously short on risk-taking opportunities ... which is
perhaps why so many young people are turning to Social Crime.
No
one is suggesting that organized risk-taking via S&M and Bondage Fantasy
Enactment games is the answer to otherwise predictable lives. But, consenting
to surrender consent should be an acceptable concept ... as long as information
is available to limit the implicit dangers. I’m not making radical
recommendations here, I am facing the indisputable fact that elaborate Role
Playing fantasy enactment scenarios with virtually no specified limits are
happening in clubs and private bedrooms in many parts of the world every day.
Believe me they are. If you were allowed to read “DRUMMER” magazine or “BOUND
& GAGGED” or “MASSAD” you would have more information on which to base your
own opinions.
To
provide a total removal of choice experience for somebody can be more dangerous
for the giver than the receiver. The responsibility of making a dream come true
is fraught with unexpected pitfalls. Just as it’s impossible to please somebody
unless you have some indication of what they like ... most of us don’t know if
we will really enjoy something we’ve fantasized about until it happens for
real. Occasionally dreams have a way of turning into nightmares, so if someone
invites a “No Limits” experience and it’s more than he/she bargained for, it’s
up to the controller to try to recognize the signs. BUT in a situation where
the “victim” also wants the luxury of being able to resist, complain, scream
for help if allowed, get angry ... the controller of the scene has to double
guess and sometimes triple guess a manipulative “bottom”.
During
what might seem to be a ruthless forced control scene, sensitivity to the
delicate balance between the demands of the fantasy scenario and the actual
mental/physical state of the willingly
helpless victim (especially if he/she is efficiently immobilized and gagged) is
essential. For the controller of such a scene to sustain the energy and
atmosphere, improvising while following a pre-determined plan; anticipating
needs while monitoring changes in emotional climate; deciding whether to push
the scene ahead or ease up temporarily ... is a tightrope. The responsibilities
of the controller, whether male or female combines the roles of stage manager,
director, script-writer, lover and GOD.
Even
token surrender of ALL choice is a subject for any couple to explore in detail
before jumping off the high diving board. It’s advisable to have first
played together in the shallows.
MIND GAMES
Several
of our TALKING POINTS so far have discussed turning fantasies into reality.
Mind Games rely more on distorting reality in the mind of the
controlled/restrained person. For example, to threaten some helpless soul with
something they specifically don’t want ...
although you have no intention of doing it to them ... but you convince
them that you will. That’s a simple “Mind Fuck”, to use the charming American
term. A more sustained mind-blowing trip can be as elaborate as actually
carrying out a physical kidnap scenario involving four well-rehearsed
accomplices, two motorbikes and a pick-up truck ... and keeping the scenario
developing for anything from four to 24 hours. That takes good judgement of
your “victim’s” needs and mind-set ... plus good casting, sustained Role
Playing and efficient Stage Management. Pure theatre. (See chapter on Kidnap
Fantasies in the book 'SO I LIKE TO GET
TIED UP - SO WHAT!?' ).
Mind
Games are often improvised and don’t always need elaborate planning. To get
somebody willingly helpless for an afternoon of comfortable mutual fun ... and
then within their hearing pick up the phone and invite a couple of friends
over, suggesting they “Bring that little
black box”. That can give the hapless
helpless an hour of anxiety, apprehension, anger or frustration waiting for the
doorbell to ring ... even if you had your finger on the phone cut-out while
apparently making the call.
Again everything is a matter of degree. If the
bond between two game players is strong enough and their mutual taste is for
very intense scenes, a mind manipulation experiment can generate real
desperation, fury and anxiety. Such an experience may not be erotically
pleasurable at the time but, like a lot of painful and seemingly extreme
SM/Bondage happenings, they are survived rather than enjoyed at the time. Then,
in retrospect, they can fuel a stimulating fantasy for many months to follow.
Of course, such intensity is not everybody’s cup-of-tea.
Revenge
and retribution can also stem from a successful Mind Fuck if the two
protagonists enjoy Role Reversal. In many catch-as-catch-can relationships, to
pay back with interest is the name of the game. Suspense is another factor: As
any good film maker will tell you, suspense often comes from what you think
might happen but are not quite sure when or how it’s going to happen. Sustaining
the game on that level requires creative imagination and energy. To jump
somebody you like through a series of difficult hoops using mainly mental
manipulation provides a wonderful world of alternatives for the creative
(sadistic?) mind. And the receiver of the treatment can end up more drained
than at the end of a physical sex marathon. However, for a partner to be in
control of the sexual as well as mental merry-go-round on such a trip can be an
experience to remember.
ARE PHYSICAL RESTRAINT GAMES S&M?
Many
people would say “Yes”, some would say “Who cares?”. DeSade and Masoch between
them left us a legacy of different ideas and images. Today their published
works are only marginally influential. People who do make the effort to explore
them either find their ideas distasteful or disturbingly attractive; either a
turn-on or a turn-off. Whichever way, the names of this unlikely duo have been
combined to form a dangerously imprecise blanket term for a wide variety of
tastes, fantasies and everyday activities which do not figure in the writings
of either man. In reality most of their writing falls outside our strict
parameters of MUTUAL CONSENT.
So,
to get back to our topic, in my experience many people who are attracted to
tying-up situations are not necessarily turned-on by the entire range of what
are conventionally called S&M
activities such as pain, humiliation and rough sex. These can be totally absent
from a devoted Bondage Enthusiast’s list of preferences. Also, everything is a
matter of degree ... which reinforces my point that distinctions need to be
clear if game-players are to communicate their likes and dislikes successfully
... and if “outsiders” are to understand the subtle distinctions within the
subject ... particularly regarding CONSENSUAL NON-CONSENT.
I’m
sometimes accused of making distinctions where none exist. Of course there are
overlaps at all levels of SM/Bondage (as it’s generally lumped together). But
one quite clear distinction is interesting to explore: People who like to be
restrained as a prelude to experiencing something else often have a different
mind-set to those who like to be wrapped, strapped, chained, encased or
isolated as a challenging or luxurious end in itself. No better or worse, no
righter or wronger ... just different. Many FETTERS customers have confessed to
me that they are “Into Bondage but not into S&M”. They’re almost apologetic
about it. Where do they pick up this inference that if you’re into one you have
to be into a whole range of other games? Perhaps it’s our constant stringing
together of S’n M’n Bondage?
Restraint
need not necessarily be uncomfortable ... or, deliberately, it can be an
elaborate progressive physical endurance test. Even so, are either of these
S&M trips? Escaping from restraints can be exhausting and exhilarating.
Failure to escape can lead to painful threatened consequences which are
stimulating to anticipate or worth making a more painful effort to avoid. “Pink
Cloud” physical restraint situations allow the mind to luxuriate isolated from
the real world if there are no uncomfortable pressure points. Bags and sacks
and hoods and helmets allow the imagination to float free. Sensory deprivation
which removes sounds and sight and sense of touch soon opens up pathways to
intensified sensual responses. Changes in air flow, temperature or position
effected from outside, beyond the control of the receiver can be a serious
experience of powerlessness ... and an enjoyable Power Trip for the controller.
People
who aren’t instinctively aware of the potential of physical restraint as an end
in itself ask what the 'Bondage Top' gets out of it. The elaborate processes of
wrapping, strapping, cocooning, controlling, adjusting, intensifying,
slackening, provoking or reassuring are like playing a sensitive musical
instrument. The erotic potential of sensitizing and de-sensitizing, isolating
and surprising, infuriating and calming offers a vast landscape of creative
self-indulgence for the person controlling a physical restraint trip for a
willing subject (a better word than Victim).
Masochism
in its traditional meaning might apply to the recipient but hedonist may be a
more accurate description, because the sole intention is towards pleasure even
if the pleasure comes through discomfort, pain or helplessness. The controller
may have a sadistic streak or just a wicked sense of humour, or be a
voyeuristic sensualist. Also, the sense of power can be a trip in itself ...
while, after a session, the demand for creative energy plus the responsibility
can leave the controller as drained as the physically challenged
recipient!
IS BONDAGE A FETISH?
A
provocative title and, at this point in the proceedings, perhaps irrelevant. My
dictionary defines a fetish as “An object superstitiously invested with divine,
demonic or erotic power, and as such held in awe and usually worshipped” ...
but it’s not a very good dictionary. The word Fetishism gets “Erotic interest
in some object intimately connected with a person adored”. Where this puts
bondage equipment or tying and being tied as a pleasurable pastime beats me (if
you’ll excuse the expression.).
Motorcycle
boots and stiletto heels, leather corsets and latex bodysuits, army camouflage
or sequins & feathers have recognized erotic connotations ... but are they
Fetish Items? The Marquis DeSade preferred fur. Is it a case of ... whatever
turns you on? The reason for including this slot is to explore the repeated
suggestion that pleasure gained from physical restraint is in itself a fetish
or “perversion”. To some people the act of restraining or being restrained is a
potent sexual stimulant. To others it’s simply a way of redressing the balance
of physical power during erotic games. Rope, chain, hospital strait-jacket or
police handcuffs attract some people’s attention whenever they see them. Many
bondage enthusiasts admit to have had an unfocused attraction towards such
images since early childhood. Are these, as I once heard an academic ask,
“icons which excite the erotic psyche” or simply theatrical properties
necessary to completing the picture for a personal fantasy scene? Role Play
can demand detailed stage management.
Bondage/SM scenarios are often, as I’ve said before, pure theatre ... symbolic,
stylized; an exercise in escapism.
Perhaps
the stereotype Dominatrix or Leather Master is a fetish object, but the reality
behind the theatrical mask is often disarmingly human. The interaction is what
matters. As fetish items, the tangible physical reality of most restraint
equipment, whether metal or leather, won’t allow you to get too far away
from REAL. But how-ever restricted or
imprisoned your body is, the mind is free to make the experience whatever you
want it to be. So, fetish objects may support your fantasies or intensify your
imaginings.
Fetishism
as a word is often used as a blunt instrument along with kinkiness, decadence,
perversity and sexual deviance. There’s perhaps a more precise word for any
impulse which draws you to explore beyond the edges of so-called '
CORRUPTION THROUGH INFORMATION
There
is a false premise that if people don’t get to hear about something they won’t
do it. That doesn’t hold water. We’ve already discussed how a surprising number of people intuitively
arrive at a liking for tying-up games before they’ve discussed it with anybody.
Too many of them spend too long believing they’re the only people in the world
with erotic fantasies involving physical restraint. Most of what is available
to read on the subject is ill-informed. If 'Repressionists' argue that
availability of information will encourage people to try things they wouldn’t
otherwise try. The other side of that argument is that too many people
instinctively drawn to it, already try it without sufficient information to do
it safely. I’ve met several of the survivors.
Police
files are full of 'Death by misadventure' cases. People don’t need the FETTERS
catalogue to buy washing line, luggage straps, padlocks or to play in mail
sacks nicked from the Post Office. All have been used for self-indulgent
purposes by people around the
If
banned Erotic Bondage magazines corrupt it is because the banning infers that
to enjoy such self-indulgences is kinky, perverted or deviant (as the tabloids
like to put it). I just want to de-mystify it a bit. In doing so I may also
de-glamorize it for the people who think it’s trendy to be kinky. In my
encounters with HUMAN SEXUALITY studies, very seldom do people who haven’t
already got a natural curiosity about it develop a sustained active
interest. Either it’s in you or it
isn’t. In my experience very few people can be persuaded to it unless they do
it to please a partner. Can that be bad?
As a bright young student in
Restrictive
Practices aren’t for everybody. But, if
somebody has decided they want to find out more about the subject, is it wrong
to help them towards an opportunity to meet with other people who are more
knowledgeable on the subject? That is not corruption it’s common sense. In terms of channelling natural urges, if you
want to try Kick-Boxing or Judo you start by finding a qualified Master rather
than just kicking the hell out of a friend and hoping you eventually get it
right. In Martial Arts increased know-how and practiced skills bring with them
increased responsibility.
History
proves that the banning of any pleasurable activity does not stop it happening.
Usually, it just gets less safe and more expensive. Physical restraint games
with or without erotic overtones may not be for everybody but they are as old
as the hills. Society allows people to shin up mountain rock faces in the
pouring rain, or play Rugby football in the winter mud with virtually no
clothes on ... so if consenting adults choose to spend their weekends tying one
another up for their mutual enjoyment ... I say don’t knock it till you’ve tried
it. But if people are tempted to try,
then I particularly want them to do it safely and responsibly and only with
consenting partners.
SERIOUS SADISM
Everything
discussed so far has seriously and genuinely insisted that MUTUAL CONSENT must
be the basis of all activities considered here. Real sadism and real violence
are a completely different issue. The darker side of human nature is a fact of
life. Manifestations such as Nazi Death Camps and the Catholic Inquisition are
history, but the same dark forces are noticeably at work today in
Today,
political ambition and religious self-righteousness are still used as excuses
for sadistic, vicious and violent excesses. These range from Irish terrorists
of both persuasions destroying Ireland, Christian Fundamentalists howling abuse
and condoning murder outside abortion clinics ... down to the depths of the
good citizens of Cade County, Virginia campaigning in the streets with placards
proclaiming “Thank God for A.I.D.S.”.
What
I call Sadism is often a factor in Man’s Inhumanity to Man (“People’s
Inhumanity to People” doesn’t have the same ring to it but is more accurate).
Many good people, in defending their deeply felt beliefs, have toppled over the
edge and exercised emotional if not physical violence to others. The dark
forces in human nature are close to the surface, and the smallest thing can
trigger them unless we remain very conscious of the dangers. The urge to defend
our opinions and our territories are natural. Defence too easily turns into
attack.
My
argument, in reviewing these disturbing natural tendencies is double edged:
1) There is innate
violence/sadism in most of us.
2) To channel such
impulses through controlled outlets is safer than bottling them up ….
FOR SOME PEOPLE.
Most
social violence is the result of frustration. Intelligent recognition of the
forces at work is the only solution to many problems. Prohibition seldom works.
Repression is a negative force. Bung up the spout of a steaming kettle and the
lid will blow off! These are all facts of life not solutions. I’m offering no
solutions to the ills of the world, to the frailty of human nature or the
failure of organized religion to deal intelligently with so many forces they
perceive as being evil.
In
the context of this discussion I’m only interested in pointing out that people
who MUTUALLY CONSENT to act out scenes of physical control and counter-control;
who give or receive actual physical 'abuse' to a degree acceptable to
themselves ... are less danger to themselves and other people than if they are
prevented or inhibited. Arguments against prosecution of 'Victim-less Crimes'
have had a lot of media coverage recently. So why are they still given such
high priority in over-stressed courts, with the victims of prosecutions filling
up overfilled prisons at great expense to the Tax Payer? Can this be purely the
result of lobbying by self-styled 'Do-gooders'? Today’s social ills are too
many and too extreme for police and politicians to waste valuable resources on
interfering with the private bedroom activities of responsible individuals.
The
current sweeping clampdown on sexually explicit literature may appear to be a
move to curb social decay ... but it could also be seen as a convenient
platform for desperate leaders of the political and religious Establishment.
Police investigations into non-consensual abuse, corruption of minors and
cruelty to animals I heartily endorse. But the constant linking of fetish
related or SM activities with CHILD ABUSE and SEX WITH ANIMALS in the media
seems to be a deliberately sustained manipulation of the truth.
On
the topic of Personal Liberty I am aware that many new Personal Freedoms
impinge upon other peoples personal freedom (for example over-amplified music).
But in the privacy of the bedroom between consenting adults, I’m a firm
believer that the line between self-indulgence and self-determination whether
spiritual, moral or social surely rests on the benefit / harm ratio as
perceived by the individuals involved. The responsibility of both law and
politicians in such cases should be to ensure that other people MIND THEIR OWN
BUSINESS.
Enough
already - end of Talking Points.
Words
6586
http://www.houdini-connections.co.uk/4-info/Topics/twelve.htm
Feedback
on any topic is always welcomed by