questions, questions, we got questions...

[mickeym]

I was just having a chitchat in email with a few friends, and I've come to the conclusion that I need to ask this to a larger audience:

Why are there *so many* people out there who perceive BDSM (any combo of those letters) as = dub-con (and sometimes, non-con).

Where does this perception come from?

I realize, too, that sometimes labeling creates issues. What should a story be labeled if there's an agent or device that kicks things off? (Such as poisontaster's Sex Pollen 'verse.) Then, yes, I'll believe that there's (implied) D/s and dub-con.

BUT. More often than not what I see is someone posting and what looks like "oh, hey, this has D/s in it! It must be dub-con! Because surely no one would be in a relationship LIKE THAT totally by consent."

Well, uh, yeah. Lots of people would, have and are.

So, thoughts, anyone? Is this a fanfic phenom? Do you see it in original fic? Published (like pro books). And how do YOU see BDSMfic? If you see it as dub-con -- even if it's an established 'ship -- why? I'm not going to judge or jump on anyone, but I am genuinely curious.

Comments

[raynedanser.livejournal.com]

BDSM = Noncon/Dubcon? Really?

Um. No. I see it as ... God I don't even know how to put it into words. But no.

[mickeym.livejournal.com]

Yeah, no. You and I have pretty similar ideas of what constitutes Non/Dubcon (and what *doesn't*), so no worries. But it seems like there are cycles and trends, and lately it seems the more "hardcore" the kink, it gets slapped with a BDSM and Dubcon label. Which leaves me going 'buh?'

[raynedanser.livejournal.com]

It sounds to me, based on this post and its responses, that perhaps a delicious meta post is in order by SOMEONE. lol (not me, not experienced enough by far)

It would also be interesting to see if the authors were asked what they based the dub-con warning on and if the BDSM factor was the sole reason or not.

[janissa11.livejournal.com]

Honestly? It sounds like it comes from ignorance. A lot of people have not got the first clue what BDSM relationships really are, and conflate those with more negative scenarios.

And I think it's probably a far broader misconception than simply fannish. :-P (She says, having been down a very unpleasant road years back related to these misconceptions.)

[mickeym.livejournal.com]

*hugs you* I remember you telling me about some of that very unpleasant road, yes. Just as I remember you and I talking endlessly about D/s and BDSM and lifestyle versus casual, and on and on.

But I suspect you're right about the ignorance thing -- and someone further down commented that probably a lot of the 'information' some of the newer fans/writers are using comes from watching TV like Law and Order: SVU.

[trueshellz.livejournal.com]

Personally I think BDSM stuff is where relationships are pretty trusting, theyre not always dub con or non con but can be
I mean to do half the stuff that BDSM entails you gotta trust someone alot for it to happen
Safe word being the tip of the iceberg, they have to know your limits and you have to be able to trust them completely
x

[mickeym.livejournal.com]

Yes, there has to be incredible trust -- by both parties, toward both parties. If there isn't, it's not going to work. BDSM relationships, if they're working and both parties are doing their parts, there isn't any noncon or dubcon. It might be difficult for an observer to see that there's consent -- particularly if bondage is used, or things like a ball-gag, but that doesn't mean it's not there.

[trueshellz.livejournal.com]

I think most people see alot of stuff on TV and think OMFG! and then freak out
x

[linda3m.livejournal.com]

I truly believe it's because most 'vanilla' people get all their information about BDSM from watching Law and Order: Special Victims Unit.

[lunardreamed.livejournal.com]

Yes to this!

[trueshellz.livejournal.com]

Very true
x

[lazy-daze.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I think that stems from a lack of people understanding what it's about - hell, my BDSM epic was also a schmoopfest, they aren't mutually exclusive by a long shot! Obviously functional BDSM relationships are almost defined by being consensual as it's something that each person wants strongly in their own way with their own needs. But there are subtle lines between dub-con and BDSM in certain aspects of it - for example, physical restraint and one person taking such a strong lead can have a dub-con flavour even if you and the characters know it's technically 100% consensual, and that subtly may pass some people by while reading if BDSM isn't, I don't know, totally their thing? And they don't get what's implied? If I'm making any sense? XD

In the main, yeah, it's probably people just naively lumping together stuff like bondage and domination with consent issues. Sigh!

[zortified.livejournal.com]

I think the confusion comes about since within the scene one person might not be consenting to specific acts (might not be asked, or allowed to express permission explicitly) but, of course, is consenting to the overall scene itself. So maybe authors are warning for dub-con behaviour, but which is in fact part of the scene to which the players are consenting. Like they'd warn for watersports or other kinks?

[zelda-zee.livejournal.com]

I haven't seen that but it strikes me that someone equating BDSM or D/s with non- or dub-con probably isn't terribly familiar with BDSM and should probably do some more research. Sometimes people write about stuff they don't really understand because it turns their crank - maybe it's that kind of thing.

Though I know there's a sort of radical academic argument out there that BDSM is rape. I don't have much patience for that, myself.

I really love fic with hardcore kink in the context of an established relationship, especially leavened with affection and understanding - and although I've read a fair amount of it, I'm usually not a fan of noncon (though it can work for me if it's in context and has a purpose in the fic). They seem like two entirely different things to me.

[lunardreamed.livejournal.com]

I actually would not think it was a fandom thing. I mean, if it weren't for fandom, I might conflate the two, but most of the first fics I encountered with BDSM were very specific about the necessary trust and rules and stuff. Fandom kind of set me up to figure out the truth by opening my mind.

[poisontaster]

I think that one part of it, like everyone said, stems from ignorance/unfamiliarity/naivete about D/s, bdsm relationships and a lack of understanding.

I think another part of it has to do with fandom's delicate flowerness about labeling. I know a lot of us, myself included, feel like we have to warn EXTENSIVELY for anything that's not vanilla grade schmoop because of the possibility (or, one could argue, inevitability) of someone coming along and getting squicked, triggered or otherwise traumatized.

Now, to be fair, I don't particularly WANT to squick, trigger or traumatize anyone (who isn't looking for that, anyway) and so I label and I do my best to make sure the people who are clicking my links know what they're getting into. OTOH, I do struggle a LOT with "how do I label this??" "How might someone NOT me look at this situation?" and I err on the side of caution more often than not. *shrugs*

May I comment, though on the FINE COLLECTION of bdsm icons we've all pulled out to respond to this post. I approve! :)

[hunters-retreat.livejournal.com]

I know more than one person in rl who have issues with this concept, so I don't think it's a fandom thing. I just think there are a lot of people who don't understand and because of that they don't try to. They stil to their misconceptions, and in a lot of cases don't realise that there are any misconceptions. And let's be honest... how many people feel comfortable enough looking for someone to ask about it??

Just my 2 cents.

[piratenista.livejournal.com]

I think it goes way beyond a fanfic problem (i.e. a lot of vanilla folks don't get it), but it's probably more evident there due to the inexperience (age?) and lack of understanding of the writers. They equate dominance/submission and S&M as being of dub-con or non-consensual nature. People in the lifestyle know that there is a large element of trust and mutual consent in the things they do. You don't see the misconception very much in "pro" published erotic fiction (my sex library 400+ books so I'm well read ;-). Published authors have a much better concept of it. There's a very big difference between being in a consensual, trusting lifestyle and doing things you both enjoy versus binding and sexually torturing or raping someone against their will. I think you're correct in your observations.

[kaiz.livejournal.com]

What everyone else said; basically, clueless people are...clueless.

This mis-perception is a much vaster problem than just amongst fannish people. If you spend any time reading blogs re. sexual assault, esp. date rape, it becomes obvious very very quickly that there is a general (and dangerous) lack of clue about what constitutes actual honest-to-god consent in even vanilla sexual encounters.

[fannishliss.livejournal.com]

I'm just talking off the top of my head... but this is an interesting topic to me, so i thought I'd pitch in.

It seems like mainstream porn writing has traditionally shown bdsm and noncon more closely linked.... and every so often I'll come across some mainstream thing that totally squicks me because it's all beatings and sexual violence and is totally non con. So I do see some evidence that there is an equation with bdsm and non con in the mainstream.

I think because we live in the world of slash we demand more complexity than the mainstream.... I think slash reveals power relationships between partners (because the element of gender is removed) -- bringing BDSM elements closer to the surface. In slash, someone has to choose the receptive role (rather than being sexed for it) -- though that's not necessarily a passive or submissive role, for sure.

The best BDSM reveals the psychological complexity behind both roles -- the top's desire to continually challenge the sub's perceived limits, the sub's desire to express ever more completely his willing obedience.

There's a passage called to mind from Anne Rice's Exit to Eden where the guy is tied to a post and flogged, and he can totally handle it till the domme blindfolds him -- then he loses it. It's edgy scenes like that that probably blur the lines for folks -- the guy totally consented -- but he still flipped out. it's a wonderful dramatic moment in the story (wouldn't be so great if kids tried it at home of course)

What bothers me more is the idea that seems so pervasive that the sub is passive, or lazy, or that the top is doing all the work. But really I think it's the same phenomenon -- like some kind of tamed down "bdsm" where the top kind of does all the work without making the sub do anything challenging or difficult...... as opposed to really great bdsm, where that expansion of limitations allows hotness to blossom. Pushing at boundaries like that might look like a consent issue, but it's the point where the top and the sub together achieve transcendance over their own limitations, and thereby, ecstatic union -- the ultimate goal, imho, of bdsm.

Case in point, remember when poisontaster's Sam asked Dean to wear the corset, and Dean balked? and then Sam doubted himself, and Dean felt rejected, til Dean finally convinced Sam he was truly willing by presenting himself unequivocally trussed up and vulnerable in the corset? Consent issues in their heads nearly shut them down, but Dean's true submission opened them back up. Perfect!

Sorry to teal deer, but this is where I live!

[fannishliss.livejournal.com]

--ps, I wanted to add, that I think slash and the actual bdsm world are kind of overlapping spheres --but I don't want to lump the actual bdsm world (which is necessarily sophisticated about consent) with what I'm calling the mainstream above, which I think is really still pretty vanilla and, well, mainstream!!

[munibunny.livejournal.com]

These are probably just people who aren't familiar with the terminology or specific kinks. They'll learn. Hey, I thought watersports meant water skiing until a few months ago. LOL

Seriously, though, I hate to sound old and jaded but there are a lot of young people reading fanfic these days who don't know much about sex much less things like bondage and orgasm denial. :)

[qwertypoiuq.livejournal.com]

I'm calling fandom ignorance, as is so often the case, but I'm sure it's a common misconception outside of fandom. Since it's one of my kinks I know well enough to tell the difference, but probably because of the resurgance of dub/non-con lately and people liking to use bondage to up the kink factor in their fics, folks probably just make assumptions and don't bother researching further. But the trust and commitment involved in BDSM should be something that more people know about, because it's one of the hottest parts of the lifestyle to be portrayed in fics, IMO.

[dine.livejournal.com]

I think it's general ignorance - we just notice it more in fandom because folks are posting stories/warnings which make it clear they don't understand.

most pro fiction dealing with the subject probably has a bit more research/editing behind it, and of course your average (wo)man-on-the-street doesn't talk about it, so we just don't see/hear what they think.

[arabella-hope.livejournal.com]

I've never seen anyone have that perception....WEIRD.

[softbluebuddy.livejournal.com]

I personally have a very difficult time with reading non-con or even dub-con. Really difficult.

On the other hand, consentual BD is something that I enjoy very much, though I'm not a huge fan of S&M, but in a consentual setting I have no problem with it.

I find consentual BDSM to be highly erotic and am very easily pulled in to read these fics, either fanfic or printed works.

In fact, my deepest desire is to be in a consentual D/s BD relationship as the sub. I could live the rest of my life without ever being involved in non-con or dub-con situation. But if I had a Dom that I trusted, I'd have no problem having the physical relationship implied there.

[wendy.livejournal.com]

Really??? How have I missed THAT perception considering I hoover up every D/s fic that exists? *frown*

[dreamlittleyo.livejournal.com]

I should probably scroll down and read comments before I post this comment, because I'm sure someone has already made my point more coherently than I'm about to: but the dub-con perception of BDSM relationships befuddles the HELL out of me. Because the whole point of such a relationship, to my understanding anyway, is the consent. The act of willing submission, whether it involves pain or not. If the consent is dubious, then someone in the relationship is doing it wrong.

I don't really have any idea if it's a fanfic phenomenon, though what little published work I've read doesn't seem to offer this problem. But I also tend to steer mostly clear of it in fanfic, just because for me it's not a strong enough kink to compensate for how easy it is to find it done badly.

(I feel like I should add the caveat that I've never been sure if my own perceptions comport with reality... but there are my just-before-bed sleepy thinky thoughts just the same)

[joans23.livejournal.com]

For me personally BDSM does not equal dub-con. I've never read it that way. Maybe people want to read dub-con into it? Or they just don't know any better? Which I kinda don't accept - I don't know much about BDSM at all, but I totally get that it's completely consensual. Hell, I just have no idea.

[nopseud]

To these people, I say {points to icon}

Clearly, this whole problem is a symptom of hanging around in the wrong fandoms. Come back to popslash, where everyone is smart and cool, and we don't have warnings anyway, and even if we did BDSM is so vanilla that it still wouldn't even rate a mention.

[bard-mercutio.livejournal.com]

I have to agree that there's a lot of dub con in fanfic due to how exactly the characters get into these situations. "Aliens made them do it" being one totally awesome cliche.

I've done a couple BDSM fics (more D/s than the other) and while I'd never warn for dub con, I think that the reasons are so varied that they're almost the story itself. Like Getting It, a Bass/Kirkpatrick story I wrote. The dub con element there is that it's a first time fic and Chris (the top in this case) is jumping in without any idea of what he's letting himself in for. To me, that's the dub con, not anything that happens to Lance, the sub. It makes the story interesting. (Er, not that hot guy sex is uninteresting by itself.)

To relate that back to your original question/point, yeah, unless you're working with established relationship fics, you're probably going to be dealing with dub con in at least a minor way. (And even then you can get into it, but it's not as automatic.) It's not the kinky aspect of it that mandates the dubious part of the dub con. It's because, in my opinion, BDSM does involve consent issues and unless the characters are really confident about what they want and what their partners want, someone is going to have issues of some kind. (Plus, y'know, those create conflict and all that plot stuff.)