Playing Well With Others (62 page)

But before we start defining terms, let’s start with a big caveat. A lot of the discourse in the world of alternative relationships these days seems to have to do with describing what you
are:
you’re polyamorous, or you’re in an open relationship, or you’re an ethical slut (thank you), or you’re a swinger. In the BDSM world, the analogous conversation has to do with whether you’re a top or a dominant or a master or a mistress, a bottom or a submissive or a slave. In the greater world, people say they’re gay or straight or bi. The definitions of all these terms vary from year to year and from community to community. Even more important, we find this sort of conversation is pretty limiting in the greater world of what people actually feel like doing at any particular time.

Furthermore, relying solely on labels can lead to grave misunderstandings. If you have heard, for instance, that a “true” slave never says no, and a “true” master never gets fucked, you may disappoint or even enrage a lot of potentially fabulous playmates. One-word labels don’t really work — rather, we advocate that you insist on being truly yourself and thus free to follow your desires wherever (within the limits of safety and consent) they may lead you.

So we recommend talking about what you like to
do:
“My current relationship(s) are shaped like X, and have Y agreements, and I’m looking for someone with whom to do Z” seems to us to be a far more descriptive and less restrictive jumping-off point. We find that focusing on verbs rather than nouns is a great deal more flexible and less open to misinterpretation, and has the added advantage of not leaving you stuck with an identity that might not correspond what you’re in the mood for right now, with that gorgeous creature who’s looking at you and waiting for you to propose something that will make you both very happy tonight.

And even if that gorgeous creature has not read this Appendix and insists on talking about what he or she is (“I’m a polyfidelitous switchable omnisexual female-identified ponyboy with fetishes for Tootsie Pops and ballerina flats; and you?”), we strongly suggest that your next question should be the most useful query that any cruiser can use: “Can you tell me more about what that means to you?” Because “polyfidelitous,” just to pick the first of that amazing word salad of identities, may mean that your intended may only have one particular kind of sex, say penis-vagina intercourse, with their spousal circle, or it may mean that they don’t even kiss anyone with whom they do not share a household and a wedding ring.

In fact, the moral to this entire article is: You Gotta Ask. Let us say it again for emphasis: You Gotta Ask.

Given those parameters, here are some of the ways that you may hear others describing their relationships and agreements.

• Celibacy
  may mean that the individual is avoiding romantic commitments, or that they are not having sex (which may include some but not all of what you think of as “sex”), or even that they don’t masturbate. It may or may not mean that they are still doing nongenital BDSM.
  

• Monogamy
  can mean that the couple keeps some kinds of sex for one another but engages in other kinds outside their relationship, or it may mean that all forms of sexual expression can occur only between the two primary partners. You may encounter folks with agreements that include sexual monogamy but BDSM polyamory, in which case you would be well advised to spend some time finding out what this particular couple has negotiated as “sex.” (Is cock and ball torture or cunt torture sex? How about playing with insertable toys? Welts on the behind? Etc., etc.)
  

• Polyamory
  can mean almost any relationship style besides strictest monogamy (and some relationships that look monogamous to you may feel polyamorous to the people in them, or vice versa). Some people use “polyamory” to talk about long-term multipartner relationships, but many people use it in other ways too. It is absolutely possible to be single and polyamorous; all that means is that you’re committed to honestly disclosing your nonmonogamous state to all your partners and potential partners.
  

• Polyfidelity
  is polyamory-plus — an agreement in which some or all forms of sexual expression are restricted to a closed circle of ongoing partners, like monogamy but with more than two people.
  

• Fluid-bonding
  is a safer-sex strategy in which two (or, sometimes, more) lovers, who have been tested and are aware of whatever STDs they may or may not be carrying, decide to have unprotected sex only with each other, and to use barrier protection with any outside partners. It is not a measure of intimacy or affection — if you get fluid- bonded with twelve people whom you really, really love, and they are fluid bonded to twelve more people, the purpose, which is to protect your own and your partners’ health while making room for some intimate genital contact, will be defeated.
  

• Open relationships
  often refer to a couple whose agreements allow one or both of them to connect romantically and/or sexually with others — maybe together as a team, or maybe separately.
  

• Swinging
  refers to folks who connect with other people recreationally, without the expectation of an ongoing romantic or domestic connection. Such liaisons may take place at parties given for the purpose, or privately, through personal ads and other such connectors. Many but not all swing environments are unwelcoming to gay or bisexual men, and a few feel the same way about gay or bisexual women. Transgendered people may be welcome, or may be admitted only on a “don’t ask, don’t tell” basis.
  

• Pansexual
  and
  omnisexual
  refer to an environment or party space in which all genders and orientations are welcome: same-sex, opposite- sex, and all variations in between.
  

• Folks in a
  lifestyle D/S relationship
  may or may not have agreements about the submissive partner needing to get the dominant partner’s permission before engaging with a new person. It’s prudent to assume that someone wearing a collar or other symbol of ownership will need to seek such permission before engaging with you — but, as always, You Gotta Ask.
  

One final piece of advice. Knowing your own desires and agreements, and being able to articulate them, is your single most important BDSM skill. You may be able to split a rose petal with your singletail, but in terms of your own happiness, the happiness of your partners, and the success of the events you attend, self-knowledge and the willingness to share your truth generously are the best qualities you can possibly offer.

Have fun and play safe!

4H: SM vs. Abuse by Jay Wiseman

excerpted from SM 101: A Realistic Introduction

SM play differs from abuse in many of the same ways that a judo match differs from a mugging. Consider the differences:

1. SM play is always consensual.
   ²
   Abuse is not.
   

2. SM players plan their activities to minimize the risks to one another’s physical and emotional well-being. Abusers do not.
   

3. SM play is negotiated and agreed to ahead of time. Abuse is not.
   

4. SM play can enhance the relationship between the players. Abuse cannot.
   

5. SM play can be done in the presence of supportive others — even at parties given for this purpose. Abuse needs isolation and secrecy.
   

6. SM play has responsible, agreed-upon rules. Abuse lacks such rules.
   

7. SM play may be requested, and even eagerly desired, by the submissive. Nobody overtly asks for abuse — although self-destructive people may sometimes attempt to provoke it.
   

8. SM is done for the consensual erotic pleasure and/or personal growth of both or all participants. Abuse is not.
   

9. SM play can be stopped in an instant, at any time, and for any reason when the submissive uses a safeword. The victim cannot stop their abuser in that way.
   

10. In SM play, the dominant always keeps their emotions under control. An abuser’s emotions are out of control.
    

11. After SM play, the submissive often feels grateful toward the dominant. A victim never feels grateful for abuse.
    

For additional help contact the National Domestic Violence Hotline at (800) 799-SAFE (
799
-
7233
).

4I: Is it a Cult?: The Advanced Bonewits’ Cult Danger Evaluation Frame (version 2.6)

Copyright © 1979, 2008 c.e., Isaac Bonewits
Reproduced with the permission of Phaedre Bonewits

Introduction.
In 1979 Isaac Bonewits constructed an evaluation tool for examining the differences between cults, and groups that happened to have an unusual minority belief system that many found “shocking” in their time. The “ABCDEF” (because evaluating these groups should be elementary), provides a useful tool for prospective members and current members of a given group, but also for the friends and loved ones of members and prospective members. In cult situations it is important to have a relatively simple way to evaluate how dangerous or harmless a given group is liable to be, without either subjecting ourselves to its “power” or judging it solely on theological or ideological grounds.

Though the ABCDEF was designed to examine spiritual, sacred and religious groups, each of the concepts apply within kink, sexual, and sensual groups as well. Instead of offering the secrets of divine wisdom, perhaps a group claims to have ancient sexual secrets that are only available to initiates, for example. It may help individuals in our community to determine just how coercive or dangerous a given group is liable to be, in comparison with other groups, to the physical and mental health of its members and of other people subject to its influence. This is not to infer that BDSM groups are cults in any way, shape or form. However, the tool provides a useful mirror into the world of kink and can be translated into the world of sexuality accordingly.

As a general rule, the higher the numerical total from a given group, the more carefully you should consider how appropriate it might be to be involved with such a group. Though it is obvious that many of the scales in the frame are subjective, it is still possible to make practical judgments using it, at least of the “is this group more dubious than that one?” sort. This requires that numbers are assigned based on actual behaviors of a group, rather than the sexy (or banal) propaganda a kink group may have to lure in potential members. As this can be difficult to do without becoming involved to some degree, consider this an awareness tool as you explore a specific group.

In parts of the world of kink, the following tool is a list of things to be sought out, for example by parts of the master/slave or sacred sexuality populations. If you are part of a population that prizes many of these eighteen traits, do not be surprised if others in the world at large consider you to be part of a cult or potentially harmful influence. At the end of the day, though, we each must make our own choices about what is healthy for our lives and lifestyles.

For further information and translations in other languages, visit www.neopagan.net/ABCDEF.html.

• Internal Control:
  Level of internal political and social power exercised by leader(s) over members; lack of clearly defined organizational rights for members.
  

• External Control:
  Level of external political and social influence desired or obtained; emphasis on directing members’ external political and social behavior.
  

• Wisdom/Knowledge:
  Claimed by leader(s); amount of infallibility declared or implied about decisions or doctrinal/scriptural interpretations; number and degree of unverified and/or unverifiable credentials claimed.
  

• Wisdom/Knowledge Credited to Leader(s) By Members:
  Level of trust in decisions or doctrinal/scriptural interpretations made by leader(s); amount of hostility by members towards internal or external critics and/or towards verification efforts.
  

• Dogma:
  Rigidity of reality concepts taught; amount of doctrinal inflexibility or “fundamentalism;” hostility towards relativism and situationalism.
  

• Recruiting:
  Emphasis put on attracting new members; amount of proselytizing; requirement for all members to bring in new ones.
  

• Front Groups:
  Number of subsidiary groups using different names from that of main group, especially when connections are hidden.
  

• Wealth :
  Amount of money and/or property desired or obtained by group; emphasis on members’ donations; economic lifestyle of leader(s) compared to ordinary members.
  

• Sexual Manipulation of Members by leader(s) of groups;
  amount of control exercised over sexuality of members in terms of sexual orientation, behavior, and/or choice of partners.
  

• Sexual Favoritism:
  Advancement or preferential treatment dependent upon sexual activity with the leader(s).
  

• Censorship:
  Level of control over members’ access to outside opinions on group, its doctrines or leader(s).
  

• Isolation:
  Level of effort to keep members from communicating with non-members, including family, friends and lovers.
  

• Dropout Control:
  Intensity of efforts directed at preventing or returning dropouts to the fold.
  

• Violence:
  Level of approval by leader(s) or group members when violence is used or encouraged, either against other group members or against the world at large.
  

• Paranoia:
  Level of fear concerning real or imagined enemies; exaggeration of perceived power of opponents; prevalence of conspiracy theories.
  

• Grimness:
  Level of disapproval concerning jokes about the group, its doctrines or its leader(s).
  

• Surrender of Will:
  Level of emphasis on members not having to be responsible for personal decisions; degree of individual disempow- erment created by the group, its doctrines or its leader(s).
  

• Hypocrisy:
  Level of approval for actions which the group officially considers immoral or unethical, when done by or for the group, its doctrines or leader(s); willingness to violate the group’s declared principles for political, psychological, social, economic, military, or other gain.