Sexual Discrimination in BDSM
imported_Sentient Peoples
22-02-2004, 05:35
The Following Issue contains blatant sexual discrimination against lesbian and dominant female – submissive male relationships.
Whips, Chains, and Leather, oh my!
The Issue
An organized crowd of leather-clad individuals, some of whom are on leashes, are protesting against discrimination for those who share their interests.
The Debate
1. Not Important
2. "Yeah," exclaims @@RANDOMNAME@@, another enthusiast, wearing nothing but a collar, "and like other couples, we want the right to display our affection in public. If Master wants to take me walkies in public, he should be able to."
3. Not Important
As you can plainly see, Option Two only allows for relationships in which the dominant partner is male, with the use of the word "Master," which is a term relating to males. Were it a female dominant partner, the term would be Mistress.
As for how to include both without sounding stupid, I don't know, and am open to ideas.
Thought you'd like to know, though.
Frisbeeteria
22-02-2004, 05:48
This is NationStates, not the real world. The issues in this game are wildly exaggerated stereotypes. That's a given. Is it really necessary for issues to react to real-world political correctness?
Maybe we should make them anarchist BDSMs. Then we could get advocates of yet another "blatantly misrepresented" group involved in some real thread hijacking here.
Mikitivity
22-02-2004, 06:09
The Following Issue contains blatant sexual discrimination against lesbian and dominant female ? submissive male relationships.
Whips, Chains, and Leather, oh my!
The Debate
2. "Yeah," exclaims @@RANDOMNAME@@, another enthusiast, wearing nothing but a collar, "and like other couples, we want the right to display our affection in public. If Master wants to take me walkies in public, he should be able to."
As you can plainly see, Option Two only allows for relationships in which the dominant partner is male, with the use of the word "Master," which is a term relating to males. Were it a female dominant partner, the term would be Mistress.
As for how to include both without sounding stupid, I don't know, and am open to ideas.
Actually you are discounting the possibility of a male Dom and male Sub relationship. I highly recommend you visit San Francisco some time in late Sept. The South of Market area has a weekend long BDSM festival "Folsom Street Fair", complete with naked people of both genders, walking around. It is actually very common to see same sex BDSM pairs.
My point is, the question is only as biased as the reader. Where you saw discrimination against female Dommes, I actually read an issue that could imply same sex BDSM couples.
That said, I can honestly attest to the fact that at least in San Francisco I personally wouldn't feel comfortable with anybody making a generalization as to which gender tends to be the Dominants and which tends to be the Submissives. I've seen plenty of both, though I would agree that more often than not, they are mixed couples. And I'm not just making this stuff up, I have a small clue about what I'm talking about here. ;)
BTW: I found that particular issue to be fairly light hearted and pretty darned fun. Before I got it, I was wondering why nations allowed slaves to walk around parks. It was not clear to me in my intelligence briefing that the issue was a BDSM issue. *laughing* I thought it was just some other silly issue.
Slight flaw in the original poster's logic: just because the debate only quotes one person talking about their male Master, it doesn't mean choosing that option will only allow male Masters to take their slaves out in public. That's a complete non-sequitur. No discrimination is implied.