Thanks to everyone who voted for me, and to all of you who read my blog. It feels so great to be able to put these ideas out and know that they connect with people.

I haven’t been blogging much this past few weeks due to work deadlines, but I’ve been using the chance to post up some of the interviews I did over the summer so there’s not been a gap. I’m mulling over some more blog posts to come soon though. I’m still thinking about consent (what actually happens when we bring ideas of sexual consent into other aspects of relationships?) and BDSM (with the upcoming 50 shades movie what advice would be useful to people wanting to bring kink into their sex lives?)

Also I’ve been working on a great project with a couple of friends for Asylum magazine. The whole of next year we are contributing features to the magazine about mental health and comics. We put out a call for submissions and were completely overwhelmed by the response: loads of fabulous comics, and writing about how people had found comics helpful in thinking about their own experiences, as well as reflections on specific comics. It has inspired me to start making more comics myself (something I haven’t done for a few years), so I might well be sharing some of those here as well.

The post Sex blogging superhero! appeared first on Rewriting The Rules.

Content warning: relationship conflict and abusive relationships are touched on briefly in this post.

A decade ago I started studying three topics that have pretty much defined my career: open non-monogamy, BDSM, and bisexuality. I just checked my CV and found that my first academic publication in these areas came out in 2004: an interview with the ever-fabulous Jen Yockney of Bi Community News for the Lesbian and Gay Psychology Review (now appropriately renamed the Psychology of Sexualities Review). That was quickly followed by an interview, in the same publication, with the equally wonderful Dossie Easton, about her writing on kink and polyamory.

Me and Jen Yockney more recently

It’d taken me six years since finishing my PhD to start researching these topics. My first paper based on my PhD (on a different topic) had been rejected with cruel comments from one reviewer. So I decided that academic research wasn’t for me and to focus on teaching, which I really enjoyed. I still have major issues with that side of academia. But then I started to read about gender and sexuality for my teaching, and to attend more interdisciplinary conferences. I realised that it was possible – perhaps even beneficial – to research topics that were personally relevant.

Although I can’t say that this guiding principle has made for a completely easy ride (to say the least!), I have learnt a huge amount from researching polyamorous, BDSM, and bi communities. My work has always been led by the question of what we (i.e. everybody) can learn from such communities, rather than the more traditional psychological question of how they can be explained. The answers I’ve explored have focused on the benefits of more open approaches to relationships rules around monogamy, the consensual arrangements that kinky folk use in their sexual activities, and non-binary understandings of sexual attraction (i.e. not just attraction to either ‘the same’ or ‘the opposite’ gender).

Recently I’ve been reflecting on the directions that my thinking about relationships has taken in the last few years. I realised that these themes of openness, consent, and non-binary are still very present, but in different forms. Previously I’d just thought of openness in the context of non-monogamy, consent in the context of (kinky) sex, and non-binary in the context of sexuality.

I thought I’d write a couple of blog posts to explain the ways in which my thinking has expanded out lately, considering the benefits of applying openness and consent to our relationships in a much broader way. Regarding non-binary I have a much longer piece of writing bubbling away about what happens when we apply this concept beyond sexuality and gender to our ways of relating, feeling, and thinking.

I’ll spend the rest of this post on openness.

Open non-monogamous relationships

Probably the first revelation in my explorations of open non-monogamy was the fact that it was possible at all. Wider culture presents long term monogamy as the only way of doing relationships, with non-monogamy only being possible in the form of cheating, which will inevitably mean the end of the relationship.

I found that various forms of swinging and open relationships offer the possibility of couples having additional sexual relationships in an honest and open way. Primary/secondary polyamorous couples show that it is also possible to have love relationships outside a primary couple.

I also found that polyamory opens up the possibility of relationships beyond this conventional couple-based model. There are Vs, triads and quads, poly families and networks, and all kinds of other ways of managing multiple love relationships. This offers an alternative to the conventional model of putting The One partner or spouse way at the top of a hierarchy of important relationships, with all of the high expectations this places on that relationship.

The diversity of love relationship concepts, by Kirstin Rohwer

However, as I explored these things myself and talked with colleagues about it, one thing that became apparent was that many of these models still generally place romantic, or sexual, partnerships as more important than other kinds of relationships. In fact there can be a risk that the division between partners and friends becomes even larger when we have more partners, and perhaps even less time or energy for friends, or for other kinds of relationships including our relationship with ourselves.

Another thing which I recognised in myself and others was that it becomes possible in open non-monogamy to replace a search for The One perfect partner with a search for the perfect relationship style which will solve all the problems inherent in close relationships and/or mean that you are constantly bathed in the reassurance and validation of multiple adoring gazes.

Neither of these issues is a reason to reject open non-monogamy in favour of a return to monogamy. It’s not an all-or-nothing situation where we can find one universally ‘right’ way of doing relationships and dismiss all the others. Rather I concluded that we need to embrace the diversity of possible relationship structures: versions of singledom, coupledom and polyamory; monogamies and non-monogamies and all the possibilities in between; friends-based, family-based, and partner-based models; and anything else that people are doing. Along with this it’s important to recognise that different things work for different people and at different times in their lives.

It ain’t what you do it’s the way that you do it

So that is probably about where I got to in the monogamy chapter of Rewriting the Rules and the other writing I was doing about open non-monogamy around that time.

Since then I’ve increasingly recognised how – in many areas – it seems like we get so focused on what people do that we pay much less attention to how they are doing it. I’ve started to wonder if the latter question might actually be the more useful one.

For example, this year I’ve been analysing sex advice books (more blog posts on that topic will doubtless be arriving soon!) It took me a while to realise one of the major problems with them: they were all about what people do sexually rather than how they do it. So all the advice was about trying different positions or ‘spicing things up’ with toys or techniques. There was much less on what I would see as the more important matters of how you figure out what you like, how you communicate that to others, how you ensure consent, how you learn about different bodies, and lots of other kinds of how. In the book that Justin Hancock and I are writing on this topic one thing that we’ve already decided is that the focus will be much more on the how.

Going back to relationships I think a lot can be gained from a more how-based approach. As I said I’m increasingly convinced that issues of what people do, in terms of structuring their relationships, is rather less important than how they relate within them. Both academic research and media on these topics often gets obsessed with the what: Look at those crazy polyamorists, or swingers, or whatever! Instead perhaps it’d be more valuable to look across all different kinds of relationships to explore how people do their relationships in ways that work well, or not so well, for them.

This brings me back to openness because I think that is a key part of this how. I’m going to touch on three ways in which we might consider the openness of our relationships which go beyond whether they are monogamous or not, and could apply just as much to monogamous as non-monogamous relationships. These are:

• Being open to vulnerability,
• Opening the windows on our relationships, and
• Opening up our possibilities.

Open to vulnerability

The research on conflict suggests that we tend to respond in two ways when there is conflict in our relationships. We tend to withdraw, or we tend to attack. Withdrawing includes all of the different ways of putting up defences to protect ourselves. Attacking includes all of the different ways of projecting the conflict outwards, onto the other person, instead of accepting any responsibility ourselves.

Strong versions of withdrawal would include things like storming out, or completely shutting down. Weaker versions would include shifting the conversation to avoid the topic, subtly putting up our defences so the other person can’t get in, or distancing from a relationship without letting the other person know there’s a problem.

Strong version of attacking would include hurling abuse and insults, or physical attack. Weaker versions would include sharply dismissing another point of view, niggling and nagging at the other person to let them know about aspects of them that we don’t think are okay, jokey putdowns, or complaining about them to other people.

Both of these strategies of withdrawal and attack are ways of protecting ourselves where we’re vulnerable. Think about conflicts you’ve had. They only tend to happen when someone has triggered something you feel vulnerable about –whether you’re consciously aware of that at the time or not. If that triggering doesn’t happen then it isn’t really a conflict. It’s just one person having a go and another person finding it easy to empathise with them and/or to step away kindly.

A – very challenging – alternative to withdrawal or attack in situations where we’ve been triggered is openness. This involves staying open to the vulnerability that we are feeling rather than putting up our defences, or attacking or projecting blame.

Another part of this is being open to the vulnerability in others: recognising that their withdrawal and/or attack likely stems from their own vulnerability. This is perhaps an even greater challenge as it involves being open and compassionate to others at the very moment that they are being the most difficult, threatening, and hard to empathise with.

Whether with ourselves or with others, such openness involves staying with the situation rather than attempting to shut it down; taking the the time to notice what is going on (which will likely involve taking some time out before returning to it); recognising that there is a sensible reason for the seemingly inexplicable behaviour of the other person or ourselves; and going slowly and gently enough to find it (or trusting that it is there if it doesn’t easily reveal itself). It also involves the openness to let the other person know about our vulnerability, or to listen to theirs in the vulnerable situation of realising that we are the one who triggered it.

This form of openness is clearly applicable to all relationships, not just partner ones. Although it may be the relationships that we spend most time in, and that we are most highly invested in, that challenge us the most because it is much less easy to simply withdraw from them.

Opening the windows on our relationships
One question that you might well have had reading the previous section is about abusive dynamics. The idea of being open to our vulnerability, and to the vulnerability of others, is certainly a challenging one to apply to situations when one person is consistently physically or emotionally attacking the other. This is something I’ll return to in the next post on consent.

Another important aspect of openness occurs to me when thinking about abusive relationships. Something that we know from the research on domestic abuse is that abusers tend to isolate their partners from friends and family, pressurising them into keeping aspects of the relationship secret. A particularly worrying thing about the popular Fifty Shades of Grey series is that Christian doesn’t allow Ana to talk about the kinky side of their relationship with anybody in her life.

Fifty Shades of Grey: Not the most open relationship

So another important aspect of openness in relationships could be how open they are to other people beyond the relationship itself. Perhaps it could be a warning bell in any relationship if we’re feeling that we have to keep elements of it private or secret, or that we are unable to talk about the difficult parts of the relationship with other people.

Recently I was in a pub conversation with somebody who was complaining about how badly her housemates were at doing the chores. She was in the process of moving out and her partner, who she was moving in with, nervously said that he hoped that she would be able to talk about the issue directly with him if it became a problem, rather than discussing it with friends in the pub!

I take the partner’s point of course. Part of openness to vulnerability would, I hope, be that we could try to talk with each other directly when there is a problem. But I also found myself thinking that I would like it if my partner (or any other person in a relationship with me) felt able to chat to other close people about our issues. Of course it would feel vulnerable for me to know that this was happening, but actually I would prefer the safety of feeling that vulnerability whilst knowing that our relationship was getting fresh air through it in this way, to the more questionable safety of keeping our ‘dirty laundry’ to ourselves.

Abusive dynamics are not specific to physical violence. Nor are they specific to situations where just one person abuses another: it can be a lot more even between the people concerned. And nor are they specific to partner relationships, as anybody who has ever been in an abusive friendship or a bullying situation at work will confirm.

Openness in the form of transparency, or letting others in, is therefore another aspect of open relationships that is well worth exploring for ourselves, and with the people we’re in relationships with, no matter what kind of relationship it is.

As I explored in the conflict chapter of Rewriting the Rules, the current cultural pressure is to present our relationships as perfect, and to never admit to any struggles. Bringing this kind of air and spaciousness to our relationships could be beneficial not only to us, but also to the people we open up to because they won’t be able to use our supposedly ‘perfect’ relationship as an unrealistic point of comparison any more. Such openness more widely could also help us, as a culture, to recognise that relationships of all kinds can be tough, rather than suggesting that any one kind of relationship structure will really lead to ‘happy-ever-after’.

Opening up our possibilities?

So we’ve considered openness in the form of being open to vulnerability (our own, and other people’s), and in the form of transparency in relationships. A final form that I thought of is whether any particular relationships opens up, or closes down, the possibilities of the people in it.

When I wrote the break-up chapter of Rewriting the Rules I realised that most of the chapter failed to address the most urgent question that people tend to have around break-up, which is how to know when they should break-up with someone. I struggled with providing advice about this because, of course, it is so specific to that person and their situation. One suggestion I did come up with was to think about whether it felt like the relationship was more opening up the possibilities of the people in it or more closing them down.

I still don’t want to do much more than put that idea out there as one to think about, perhaps not just at the end of the relationship but all the way through it, and in all kinds of relationships: parent/child, friends, siblings, colleagues, and neighbours, as well as partners.

Of course it is likely that there are all kinds of openings up and closings down going on constantly, but the different ways in which this is happening, and how that feels for us, seem like useful things to reflect upon, ourselves and with the other person or people. This is another thing that will come up again in the next post on consent because it is definitely interwoven with treating people consensually.

Concluding thoughts

Now that I come to the end of this long post (thank-you if you’ve made it all the way through) I realise that this whole series could be titled ‘rewriting rewriting the rules’!

I guess it’s also part of this way of seeing these things to acknowledge the inevitable imperfection of any one thing that I write, and to try to be open and transparent about that. While I’m alive everything is a process: a work in progress. An ongoing blog is a good way of capturing that.

Find out more

For more on non-monogamous or polyamorous relationships, check out these blog posts:

• Consensual relationships revisited
• Non-monogamy
• What is non-monogamy?
• Is non-monogamy for you?
• Polyamory and wonder women
• Polyamory books
• Monogamy
• Infidelity

You can find my books and zines about relationships here:

• Make Your Own Relationship User Guide
• Queer relationships zine
• Rewriting the Rules
• The Secrets of Enduring Love
• Enjoy Sex (How, When and IF You Want To)

The post Open Relationships Revisited appeared first on Rewriting The Rules.

Can you tell me a bit about your background and your past research into BDSM practices?

I’m a senior lecturer in psychology at the Open University and I’ve been studying BDSM and other sexualities for around ten years now. In 2007 Darren Langdridge and I published a book called Safe, Sane and Consensual (Palgrave, 2007) which brought together many of the main people researching BDSM at the time.

What drew you to study this subject?

I’m generally interested in sexualities and relationships that fall outside the mainstream and what people in general might be able to learn from those who do things differently.

I also work as a sex and relationship therapist and we often find that people with sexual difficulties find it difficult to communicate about what they like sexually. People in the BDSM world have come up with lots of ways of communicating about what they do which can be helpful for everyone (for example, ‘yes, no, maybe’ lists of what they’d like to do; ways of negotiating sexual consent, and safewords for when they want to stop).

Can you tell me overall what kind of conclusions you drew from your research into this area? What were the main findings?

I’ve studied several aspects of BDSM. Perhaps my main finding was about diversity. People who are unfamiliar with BDSM often assume that it involves a small range of things and that everyone does it for the same reason. For example there is a common stereotype of high-powered businessmen going to a leather-clad dominatrix to be whipped in order to relieve the pressure of their job. I found that BDSM includes many different practices and that people do it for many different reasons.

For example, BDSM can include: physical sensations (from feathers to candlewax to floggers), bondage (from handcuffs to rope to intricate ribbons), domination and submission (somebody waiting on somebody else, somebody ordering another person around), discipline (spanking, telling off, etc.), dressing up, and role-play (cops, pirates, medical, school, etc.). All these things can happen separately or in combination.

For some BDSM can be a way of giving up control and letting go, for others it is a fun, playful activity. It can mean taking on a different role and being somebody else for a while, it can be a form of relaxation, or it can be a way of showing strength and how much you are capable of enduring. It can help some to explore something that scares them (pain or bullying), it can be a way of building intimacy with another person, or it can provide a reason for being looked after and cared for afterwards. It could means many of these things even for the same person, or on different occasions.

From what you’ve seen, do you think the BDSM community around the world (and the number of people interested in BDSM and practicising it) has grown in the last five years or so?

Definitely.

If so, why do you think more people are becoming interested in BDSM?

I think that the 50 Shade of Grey phenomenon has been vital in this. It has brought BDSM into the mainstream and enabled a lot more people to be open about their interest and to bring these kinds of practices into their sex lives. I don’t think it is so much that more people are interested who weren’t before. Surveys have always found high numbers of people to have fantasies about being tied up, spanked etc. (often over 50% of people for these common activities). It is more that people now feel more able to be open about it.

How is BDSM perceived by the public do you think, and has this perception changed recently? If so, due to what?

In the past it has been very stigmatised. I think the perception has changed somewhat due to things like 50 Shades, and the increasing popularity of BDSM equipment in mainstream sex shops, etc. Lots of people now feel that they should include some ‘spicy sex’ in their sex life. However they still often draw a line between what they do (e.g. fluffy handcuffs and a little role-play) and ‘real’ BDSM which can still be ridiculed and distrusted. This is a shame as I think there’s actually a lot to learn from people and communities who have been practicing BDSM for years.

How would you explain the benefits (both sexual and psychological) of BDSM to an outsider? What is it about BDSM that attracts people, and how does it differ from other sexual practices?

Like I said before there are many different reasons that people do BDSM. Some simply find it fun or a turn-on. For other it has deeper benefits. For example, some people talk about the trust and intimacy involved with BDSM partners, or how it helps them reach a spiritual state. Some feel that it helps them relax, or that it enables them to get over difficult times in their life.

I think the main sexual benefit is that it can get people talking about what they enjoy sexually. With mainstream sex people often assume that they know what each other wants automatically and that causes many problems. With BDSM the assumption is that you need to negotiate it first.

Does BDSM have to be about sex, or is it more about connection? Is sex usually involved, or only sometimes?

Only sometimes. For some people BDSM is about sex and there are orgasms involved. For other people there might be a different kind of climax (of sensation or emotion, for example), or no climax at all. For some, BDSM is actually something more like a leisure activity, a sport, an art form, or a spiritual practice, than what we usually think of as sex.

What are some popular misconceptions about people who participate in BDSM?

There is still often a view that people who are into BDSM might be dangerous or psychologically disturbed in some way. The evidence actually shows that there is no basis to this stereotype and that people into BDSM are no more likely than anybody else to be criminal or abusive or to suffer from mental illness.

What about this idea that you have to be damaged in some way to like it: do you think that’s true?

50 Shades of Grey included the common myth that people who are into BDSM have been abused as children. Again there is no evidence that this is an more common than in the general population.

The book also, perhaps, suggested that men are more likely to be dominant and women submissive. Actually the evidence is that people of all genders can be dominant, submissive or switches (enjoying dominating and submitting).

From a psychological point of view, how does BDSM affect people? Are there dangers?

As with everything there can be risks so it is important that people know what they are doing both physically and psychologically. My main worry is that, if BDSM continues to be stigmatised, people will still find it difficult to be open about it and then they are more likely to do it without education or the support of more experienced people. That is when things are more likely to go wrong. I’d recommend that people read some of the books on the topic (by people like Dossie Easton and Tristan Taormino) so that they know what the potential risks are.

What is it about a person’s psychology that allows them to feel pleasure or excitement from physical pain? Is a certain amount of danger in life a need of human beings?

Well first of all, as I said before, there isn’t always physical pain involved. Lots of BDSM involves other things than sensation, and even sensation play isn’t always painful. Research suggests that much of the pain we experience is down to the anxiety about the pain. Remove the anxiety and the pain is much lower (that is why anti-anxiety drugs can be used to operate on people if anesthetics are not available). So for people who are sexually excited about pain the sensations are likely to feel very different than for people who are scared by it.

I think that good analogies are to long-distance runners, rock-climbers, or other sports people. They also take part in activities which can be very painful, but because they are excited by what they are doing or committed to enduring it, the experience is very different. I’m not a neuroscientist, so can’t comment on exactly how this works on a brain level, but I imagine that we might see similar chemicals (such as endorphins) involved in BDSM as we do in sporting activities.

Is it dangerous to test these boundaries?

Not if people know what they are doing. And, again, it is important to remember that a lot of BDSM play is not about testing boundaries at all. For those who do like to test their boundaries of endurance through BDSM it can be a fulfilling experience, as it can be for sportspeople.

What about the 50 Shades of Grey phenomenon? Is it good that more people know about BDSM through that, or does it paint a very misguided view of BDSM by perpetuating that only those who are damaged in some way will enjoy it?

As I’ve said here I think that 50 Shades has been both a positive and a negative thing. It has opened up the possibility of BDSM for lots of people who hadn’t felt able to consider it before, and has got people talking about BDSM and sex more broadly. At the same time it does perpetuate some problematic stereotypes, so I would like to see a more diverse range of books about BDSM (including different practices, gender combinations, and scenarios) so that people can get a sense of the wide range of activities and motivations involved.

Find Out More

If you liked this, do consider supporting my Patreon.

Here’s some links to other posts of mine you might find helpful…

• All about BDSM
• Getting informed about kink
• Figuring out, and communicating, what you’re into
• Consent, consent, consent
• Consensual relationships
• The wheel of consent

Also check out my books, zines, and podcasts which cover this topic in more depth:

• The Consent Checklist
• Enjoy Sex (How, When and IF You Want To)
• The Psychology of Sex
• Make Your Own Sex Manual
• Erotic Fantasies Zine
• Dom/sub podcast
• Power and consent podcast
• Safe, Sane, and Consensual

The post BDSM: What do we know? appeared first on Rewriting The Rules.

Why do people sometimes prefer Dom/sub relationships?

D/s is one aspect of the wider category of BDSM (Bondage and Discipline, Dominance and Submission, and Sadomasochism), sometimes also known as kink. Some people are into all of the things listed under BDSM, and some only some of them. D/s is generally distinguished from SM because it is more about power than about physical sensation (although some use these terms more interchangeably).

In D/s activities one person generally dominates the other, or has power over them, therefore people tend to prefer D/s if they find a power dynamic to be exciting in some way. Of course it is pretty common for sex and power to be mixed together in our culture. For example, a lot of romance fiction involves people being rescued from peril or being swept away by somebody more powerful, and a lot of people fantasise about having the power of being utterly desirable to their partner.

What is involved in a Dom/sub relationship?

If somebody identifies as being into D/s, or having a D/s relationship, then they probably include power play in their sex life, and perhaps in other aspects of their relationship. People can identify as dominant, submissive, or switch (which means that they are sometimes dominant and sometimes submissive). It might be that people stick to the same roles each time they play together, or that they take different roles on different occasions.

For most people, being D/s will be something that they only do some of the time (for example, just in pre-arranged scenes – often, but not always, involving sex). Such scenes could involve any kind of exchange of power. For example, the submissive person might serve the dominant one food, or give them a massage; the dominant person might order the submissive one around or restrain them or punish them in some way; people might act out particular power-based role-plays such as teacher and student, cop and robber, or pirate and captive.

Some people who are into D/s might have longer periods, such as a holiday, where they maintain their power dynamic. And a few have lifestyle or 24/7 arrangements, where one person always takes the dominant, and the other the submissive, role. However, even in such cases much of their everyday life will probably not seem that different to anybody else’s.

How does it differ to the traditional ‘vanilla’ relationship?

This depends very much on how important it is in the lives of those involved. Some D/s relationships would look very much like a vanilla relationship but just with a bit more power-play involved when people have sex. Others would have something of the D/s dynamic in other parts of the relationship. However, it should be remembered that most vanilla relationships have specific roles (e.g. one person takes more responsibility for the finances, one person is more outgoing socially, one person does more of the looking after, one person takes the lead in sex). In D/s relationships those things tend to be more explicit, but perhaps not hugely different.

So perhaps the main difference is in the amount of communication. Most people involved in BDSM stress the importance of everything being ‘consensual‘ so there will probably be much negotiation at the start about the things people do and do not enjoy, and the ways in which the relationship will be D/s. Checklists and contracts can be useful ways of clarifying this. So, for example, there may be limits about the kinds of activities and sensations people like, whether they enjoy role-play or not, and which aspects of the relationship will have a D/s element.

Why do so many people have misconceptions of this type of relationship?

The media portrayal of BDSM has tended to be very negative, often associating it with violence, danger, abuse, madness and criminality. Research has shown that actually people who are into BDSM are no different from others in terms of emotional well-being or upbringing, and that they are no more likely to get serious injuries from their sex lives, or to be criminal, than anybody else.

Often the media also focuses on the most extreme examples, such as very heavy and/or 24/7 D/s arrangements, rather than the more common relationships where there are elements of D/s. For these reasons people may well have misconceptions about D/s relationships. This is why it is useful to get a range of experiences out there in the media – so people can have more awareness of the diversity of things involved and the continuum (e.g. from light bondage and love bites to more scripted scenes and specifically designed toys).

How do couples go about beginning a relationship like this?

A good idea for all people in relationships, whether or not they are interested in D/s, is to communicate about what they like sexually early on, and more broadly about what roles they like to take in the relationship. Often people just assume what they other person will enjoy or how they would like the relationship to be.

For example, one good activity from sex therapy and from the BDSM community is to create a list as a couple of all of the sexual practices that either of you is aware of, and then to go down it writing ‘yes’, ‘no’, or ‘maybe’ about whether it is something that interests you, and sharing your thoughts. It can also be good to share sexual fantasies or favourite images/stories and to talk about whether (and, if so, how) they might be incorporated into your sex life (the Nancy Friday and Emily Dubberley collections of sexual fantasies can be helpful with this). It is very important that people only do things that they really want to try (rather than feeling coerced into certain activities) and that it is accepted that there will likely to be areas which aren’t compatible as well as those that are.

BDSM communities and websites are a great place to look for more information from those who have been involved in these kinds of practices and relationships. Also local fetish fairs and kink events often include demonstrations and workshops. There is more in my books Enjoy Sex and Rewriting the Rules about communicating about sex and relationships.

Some people have a BDSM relationship outside of an existing ‘vanilla’ relationship. What effect can this have on a marriage or couple relationship?

Again this varies. Although it isn’t always out in the open, many couples have arrangements where they are open to some extent (e.g. monogamish couples, the ‘new monogamy’, open relationships, swinging, polyamory, and ‘don’t ask don’t tell’ agreements).

Having different sexual desires is one reason why some couples open up their relationship to one or both of them being sexual with another person. If this is communicated about clearly, kindly and thoughtfully, it can work perfectly well. The important thing again is kindness and communication.

In regards to the hit book 50 Shades of Grey, many husbands have bought this for their wives and girlfriends. What does this say to them, and how would you help a couple who want to get more involved in this sort of lifestyle but don’t know how, or they are too shy to approach it?

The kinds of conversations and activities mentioned above are a great idea. One of the good things about 50 Shades of Grey is that it has opened up this kind of conversation for many people. However, it is important not to assume that the only form of BDSM is the one described in the book. In a heterosexual couple it may well be that the woman is more dominant, for example, or that both people switch roles, and the things that they enjoy may well be different to the ones which Ana and Christian engage in in the book.

If you want to read more about different practices and how to do them, then there are lots of good books available about BDSM. Dossie Easton and Janet Hardy’s books The New Topping Book and The New Bottoming Book are great places to start, as is Tristan Taormino’s The Ultimate Guide to Kink.

For couples who are really struggling to communicate about sex, or who have very different desires and are finding it hard to reconcile this, it might well be useful to see a sex and relationship therapist for a few sessions. The Pink Therapy website includes many kink-friendly therapists.

Find out more:

Here’s some links to other posts of mine you might find helpful…

• All about BDSM?
• Getting informed about kink
• Figuring out, and communicating, what you’re into
• Consent, consent, consent
• Consensual relationships
• The wheel of consent

Also check out my books, zines, and podcasts which cover this topic in more depth:

• How to Understand Your Sexuality
• Sexuality: A Graphic Guide
• The Consent Checklist
• Enjoy Sex (How, When and IF You Want To)
• The Psychology of Sex
• Make Your Own Sex Manual
• Erotic Fantasies Zine
• Dom/sub podcast
• Power and consent podcast
• Safe, Sane, and Consensual

And if you liked this, please do consider supporting my Patreon.

The post Dominant and submissive relationships appeared first on Rewriting The Rules.

I push open the door and stumble through, tripping over my own feet and falling headfirst into the office.
Double crap – me and my two left feet! I am on my hands and knees in the doorway to Ms. Grey’s office, and gentle hands are around me, helping me to stand. I am so embarrassed, damn my clumsiness. I have to steel myself to glance up. Holy cow – she’s so young.
‘Mr. Kavanagh.’ She extends a long-fingered hand to me once I’m upright. ‘I’m Clarissa Grey. Are you all right? Would you like to sit?’
So young – and attractive, very attractive. She’s tall, dressed in a fine gray suit, white shirt, and black tie with unruly dark copper-coloured hair and intense, bright gray eyes that regard me shrewdly. It takes a moment for me to find my voice.
‘Um. Actually – ‘ I mutter. If this woman is over thirty, then I’m a monkey’s uncle. In a daze, I place my hand in hers and we shake. As our fingers touch, I feel an odd exhilarating shiver run through me. I withdraw my hand hastily, embarrassed. Must be static. I blink rapidly, my eyelids matching my heart rate.
‘Mr. Kavanah is indisposed, so he sent me. I hope you don’t mind Ms. Grey.’
‘And you are?’ Her voice is warm, possibly amused, but it’s difficult to tell from her impassive expression. She looks mildly interested but, above all, polite.
‘Andrew Steele. I’m studying English literature with Ken, um … Kenneth … um Mr. Kavanagh, at WSU Vancouver’
‘I see,’ she says simply. I think I see the ghost of a smile in her expression, but I’m not sure.
‘Would you like to sit?’ She waves me toward an L-shaped white leather couch.

Interesting questions, I think, include:

• What is striking about this version which isn’t in the original, and vice versa, and what does that suggest about our common understandings of masculinity and femininity?
• What kind of woman and man do we imagine Clarissa and Andrew to be (compared with Christian and Ana)?
• What impact would other changes have on our reading of the text? (e.g. making it a ‘same-gender’ relationship, having the student as the dominant person and the rich CEO as the submissive, switching the backgrounds such that Ana has the history of abuse and adoption rather than Christian, or altering other dimensions such as age, class, race, body-type, etc.)?

Thirsty for more? Try reading:

• Genderswitching in classic novels
• One novelist’s experience of switching gender in his novel
• A site which regenders webpages

The post Fifty shades switched appeared first on Rewriting The Rules.

My latest project is to write a paper about the conversations about consent that happen in the Fifty Shades of Grey trilogy, and comparing these to recent conversations about consent that have been happening in kink and other sexual communities.

One main point of this is that Fifty Shades of Grey represents quite a conventional understanding of how consent happens. Generally Christian suggests something and if Ana doesn’t explicitly say ‘no’ they end up doing it. Additionally to this, outside of their sex life, he often does things that Ana has explicitly asked him not to. It seems that consent is only seen as applying to sex, not to the relationship more broadly.

Several bloggers in kink communities have recently pointed out that such simplistic understandings of consent, along with stigma around kink itself, have conspired to mean that many people have experienced rape and abuse in these settings and have felt unable to speak out about it. This has lead to an ongoing conversation about consent, power and abuse on the internet and at community events which is much more sophisticated and productive than some of those that preceded it.

It seems to me that there is a lot to be learnt from such conversations for those who – perhaps having read Fifty Shades of Grey –  are beginning to engage in kink, but also for people more widely: in a sexual context and in general.

The first step in my investigation has been to collect together a sample of blog posts which have addressed these topics. I hope to pull out the main themes and tensions from these posts in my paper, with a focus on the practical suggestions that have been made for addressing and avoiding abuse within sexual communities.

I’ll list the blog posts which I have found so far here because others may find such a list useful. Also, if people have additional blog posts on this topic to suggest, please let me know. I’d particularly like to include all of the (publicly available) ones that have been integral to these discussions.

I’ll also update this blog further once I’ve had chance to analyse the blog posts in more depth.

Blog posts relating to consent and abuse in kink and other sexual communities

Calls to action

• Chang, S. (2012). The bad kind of pain: Kitty Stryker talks sexual abuse in the BDSM community. San Francisco Bay Guardian (23rd January). Accessed (22 October 2012) from: www.sfbg.com/sexsf/2012/01/23/bad-kind-pain-kitty-stryker-talks-sexual-abuse-bdsm-c.
• Clark-Fory, T. (2012). When safe words are ignored. Salon (29th January). Accessed (22 October 2012) from: http://www.salon.com/2012/01/29/real_abuse_in_bdsm.
• Kinkylittlegirl (2009). Abuse and control. Kinkylittlegirl (14th December). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://kinkylittlegirl.net/2009/12/14/abuse-and-control.
• Kinkylittlegirl (2011). Awareness of BDSM related abuse is growing. Kinkylittlegirl (17th April). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://kinkylittlegirl.net/2011/04/17/awareness-of-bdsm-related-abuse-is-growing.
• MacAulay Millar, T. (2012a). There’s a war on part 1: Trouble’s been brewing. Yesmeansyes (23rd March). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/23/theres-a-war-on-part-1-troubles-been-brewing.
• Pervocracy (2011a). Rape culture: What is rape culture? Pervocracy (10th March). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://pervocracy.blogspot.co.uk/2011/03/rape-culture-one-what-is-rape-culture.html.
• Pervocracy (2011b). Rape culture: Defending the indefensible. Pervocracy (21st March). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://pervocracy.blogspot.co.uk/2011/03/rape-culture-defending-indefensible.html.
• Stryker, K. (2011b). Safe/ward: I wish I could use a safeword on rape culture. Purrversatility (16th July). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://purrversatility.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/i-wish-i-could-safeword-rape-culture.html.
• Thorn, C. (2011). Thinking more clearly about BDSM versus abuse. Clarissethorn (2nd August). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://clarissethorn.com/blog/2011/08/02/thinking-more-clearly-about-bdsm-versus-abuse.
• Valentine, L. (2012). It’s time to move on the conversations about kink and feminism. Siliconevalley (1st March). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://siliconevalley.org/2012/03/01/its-time-to-move-on-the-conversations-about-kink-and-feminism.
• West, N. (2011). Sex negative actions in sex positive communities. Purrversatility (13th November). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://purrversatility.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/guest-post-what-to-do-when-sex-negative.html.

Experience of abuse

• Pervocracy (2012b). Why didn’t I just call the cops? Pervocracy (22nd February). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://pervocracy.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/why-i-didnt-just-call-cops.html.
• Stryker, K. (2011a). Safe/ward: I never called it rape. Purrversatility (8th July). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://purrversatility.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/i-never-called-it-rape.html?zx=5c0ea9b0489a1607.
• Williams, M. (2011). Consent [violated]. The perverted negress (27th March). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://www.mollena.com/2011/03/consent-violated.
• Wiseman, J. (2008). Are we men a bunch of lying pricks? Bayareabdsmpolyamory (26th January). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://bayareabdsmpolyamory.tribe.net/thread/fdb72ec0-03ff-4c5d-a2d5-edea9026294a.

Advice relating to potential perpetrators

• Bauer, A. (2010). A field guide to creepy dom. Tranarchism (30th December). Accessed (22 October 2012) from: http://tranarchism.com/2010/12/30/a-field-guide-to-creepy-dom.
• Mahem, M. (2011). How not to be a douche in the dungeon. Missmaggiemayhem (2nd December). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://missmaggiemayhem.com/2011/12/02/how-not-to-be-a-douche-in-the-dungeon.
• Maxine (2012). Getting away with it: How you are probably a sex criminal too. Emanix (17th October). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://emanix.livejournal.com/26762.html.
• Mint, P. (2007a). Your kink does not get a free pass. Freaksexual (28th February). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://freaksexual.wordpress.com/2007/02/28/your-kink-does-not-get-a-free-pass.
• Pervocracy (2011c). How to not be creepy. Pervocracy (16th July). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://pervocracy.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/how-to-not-be-creepy.html.
• Stryker, K. (2012). Playing with fire. Consentculture (4th February). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://www.consentculture.com/2012/02/playing-with-fire.

Developing consent cultures/community guidance

• Creatrixtira (2011). Ways to combat sexual abuse / power-based violence (esp if you are in an alt-sexuality community). Creatrixtiara (exact date not recorded). Accessed (22 October 2012) from: http://creatrixtiara.tumblr.com/post/7629548153/ways-to-combat-sexual-abuse-power-based-personal.
• Mint, P. (2007b). Kinky abuse and community response. Freaksexual (11th April). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://freaksexual.wordpress.com/2007/04/11/kinky-abuse-and-community-response.
• Pervocracy (2012a). Consent culture. Pervocracy (18th January). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://pervocracy.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/consent-culture.html.
• Pervocracy (2012c). The scene is not safe. Pervocracy (20th April). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://pervocracy.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/scene-is-not-safe.html.
• Stryker, K. (2011c). A “What you can do” guide for commmunity members. Purrversatility (19th July). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://purrversatility.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/safeward-what-you-can-do-guide-for.html.
• Stryker, K. (2011d). A “What you can do” guide for commmunity leaders. Purrversatility (29th July). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://purrversatility.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/safeward-what-you-can-do-guide-for_29.html.
• Veaux, F. (2012a). Some thoughts on ethics, safety, and conduct in BDSM: Part 1. Tacit (14th July). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://tacit.livejournal.com/382208.html.
• Veaux, F. (2012c). Some thoughts on ethics, safety, and conduct in BDSM: Part 2. Tacit (23rd September). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://tacit.livejournal.com/387227.html.

Complicating consent

• Boldlygo (2012). Consent toxicity. Boldygo (12th October). Accessed (22 October 2012) from: http://boldlygo.co/?p=286.
• MacAulay Millar, T. (2011). Domism: Role essentialism and sexism intersectionality in the BDSM scene. Yesmeansyes (May 2nd). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2011/05/02/domism-role-essentialism-and-sexism-intersectionality-in-the-bdsm-scene.
• MacAulay Millar, T. (2012b). There’s a war on part 2: The creepy dom and the people on the fringe. Yesmeansyes (29th March). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/29/theres-a-war-on-part-2-the-creepy-dom-and-the-the-people-on-the-fringe.
• MacAulay Millar, T. (2012c). There’s a war on part 3: A fungus among us. Yesmeansyes (2oth April). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2012/04/20/theres-a-war-on-part-3-a-fungus-among-us.
• MacAulay Millar, T. (2012d). There’s a war on part 4: Just us. Yesmeansyes (24th April). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2012/04/24/theres-a-war-on-part-4-just-us.
• MacAulay Millar, T. (2012e). There’s a war on part 5: Wallowing in the SL-op. Yesmeansyes (30th April). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2012/04/30/theres-a-war-on-part-5-wallowing-in-the-sl-op.
• Millbank, L. (2012a). Under Duress: Agency, Power and Consent, Part One: “No”. A radical transfeminist (19th January). Accessed (22 October 2012) from: http://radtransfem.wordpress.com/2012/01/10/under-duress-agency-power-and-consent-part-one-no.
• Millbank, L. (2012b). Under Duress: Agency, Power and Consent, Part Two: “Yes”. A radical transfeminist (23rd January). Accessed (22 October 2012) from: http://radtransfem.wordpress.com/2012/01/23/under-duress-agency-power-and-consent-part-two-yes.
• Millbank, L. (2012c). The ethical prude: Imagining an authentic sex-negative feminism. A radical transfeminist (29th February). Accessed (22 October 2012) from: http://radtransfem.wordpress.com/2012/02/29/the-ethical-prude-imagining-an-authentic-sex-negative-feminism.
• Millbank, L. (2012d). “What rape is not” – and a suggested new crime. A radical transfeminist (exact date not recorded). Accessed (22 October 2012) from: http://radtransfem.tumblr.com/post/30163502692/tw-what-rape-is-not-and-a-suggested-new-crime.
• Mint, P. (2007c). Towards a general theory of BDSM and power. Freaksexual (11th June). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://freaksexual.wordpress.com/2007/06/11/towards-a-general-theory-of-bdsm-and-power.
• Thewindow (2012). Why talking about ‘gray’ situations causes anger. Consentculture (16th February). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://www.consentculture.com/2012/02/guest-post-why-talking-about-gray-situations-causes-anger.
• Thorn, C. (2012). S&M aftercare… or brainwashing. Clarissethorn (16th June). Accessed (22nd October 2012) from: http://clarissethorn.com/blog/2012/06/16/sm-aftercare-or-brainwashing.

The post Consent and abuse of power in kink and other sexual communities appeared first on Rewriting The Rules.

In the first post the author defines what they mean by the term which is an attempt to move beyond the dichtomy of ‘sex positive’ and ‘sex negative’. New sex-related phenomena (such as the recent 50 Shades trilogy, or any new ‘sexualised‘ trend amongst young people) tend to be met by two responses: either criticism of the ways in which the phenomenon reproduces and reinforces problematic gender roles, and often coercive or violent sexual practices (sex negative), or defence of all sexual practices and erotic materials as liberatory, with an emphasis on people having freedom to choose what they do sexually (sex positive).

[Note: as Radtransfem, commenting on Sex Critical, points out, it is also often the case that the ‘sex’ in ‘sex negative’ and ‘sex positive’ actually means different things. For example, in ‘sex negative’ what is meant is often ‘objectifying-women-negative’ and in ‘sex positive’ what is meant is often ‘diverse-sexual-practices-positive’]

The author of Sex Critical argues for an alternative position to sex negativity/positivity – being sex critical – whereby all sexual representations and practices are considered equally critically. This is an important point because it tends to be non-normative sexualities (such as sadomasochistic sexual practices or lesbian, gay and bisexual sexualities) that are subject to scrutiny in wider society, whereas people rarely question the sexualities that are considered to be ‘normal’. It is also important because there is a tendency for some ‘sex positive’ writers to assume that all sexual representations and practices are inherently good and liberatory, when actually there might be reason to question the ways in which they operate, and problematic norms that may be present.

So being sex critical we wouldn’t assume that any sexual representation or practice was beyond question, or inherently  positive. Rather we would ask questions about it such as how it fits within wider culture, what ideologies it upholds, and whether it really offers any kind of truth about who we are (something that is often assumed about sexuality).

Sex Critical is written by a humanities scholar, so is perhaps more focused on representations of sexuality than on our own sexual practices. From a psychology/therapy perspective I am interested in how the idea of being sex critical might be useful in people’s daily lives. My chapter on sex in Rewriting the Rules certainly has a sex critical flavour as I question how people might be constrained by the cultural rules about what kinds of ‘good’, ‘normal’ or ‘great’ sex we should be aspiring to, and then look at the possibilities that are opened up, and closed down, by various sexual communities who understand and practice sex in different ways to this (e.g. bisexual, sadomasochistic, erotic fan fiction, and asexual communities).

Here are some initial thoughts on how we might be sex critical about our own sexual practices, desires, and the representations we see around us. For all of these we might ask the following questions:

• How does this relate to common cultural ideas about sex? Does it perpetuate them and/or resist them? In what ways?
• Who is included/excluded? Is there room for sexual diversity or is one form of sexuality presented as good/right/normal/ideal?
• What is opened up and closed down in terms of possibilities for us? In what ways might it free us up, or limit and constrain us? (e.g. in terms of the roles we might take and the experiences we might have)
• Is there any sense that this sexual practice, desire or representation might mean different things to different people at different times, or is it assumed that it always means the same thing universally?

So, for example, a woman reading and enjoying the 50 Shades trilogy, and thinking about bringing some of the ideas from the book into her own sex life, might think that:

• Cultural ideas: The books suggests the possibility for sexual practices beyond genital sex (the cultural norm), but they do also suggest that women shouldn’t need to communicate about the sex they want and that men should automatically know what they want and be able to provide it (problematic cultural norms).
• Inclusion/exclusion: 50 Shades includes the possibility of  forms of kinky sex being  part of our potential sexual repertoires, but it also all take place in a heterosexual context, between just two people, who meet cultural ideals around attractiveness (youth and desirability to others): anyone outside of this seems to be excluded. Also it seems that orgasms are important (so what about people who struggle to orgasm, or for whom orgasm is not vital to sex?)
• Opening up/closing down: It might free us up to expand our sexual menu in some directions, enabling us to talk about our desires because we know that so many millions of people share them (given how popular the book is). However, it might also limit how far we can go in challenging rigid gender roles in relationships and sex, such as the idea that men should be active, dominant and protective, and women passive, submissive and in need of protection.
• Multiple meanings: We might easily get the impression that only troubled people who struggle with intimacy should be into BDSM, as well as thinking that only certain forms of BDSM are acceptable (the ones on Grey’s ‘yes’ list, or the ones that Ana goes along with). Instead we might recognise that lots of people enjoy BDSM for a variety of reasons, and that people have different activities that work for them (rather than there being a universal agreement on what is and isn’t okay).

The post Sex Critical? appeared first on Rewriting The Rules.

I’m in The Independent blog today discussing the Fifty Shades of Grey phenomenon. Follow the link for the full debate or read just my bit below:

It’s rare that any new phenomenon is a purely positive or negative thing, rather it’s more useful to ask what possibilities they open up and close down.

The popularity of the 50 Shades trilogy demonstrates how common enjoyment of sadomasochistic (SM) fantasies is. This is helpful because people often have narrow ideas about ‘normal’ sex, and anxiety if their desires stray outside of this. Sexual problems are linked to an inability to tune into, and communicate about, what we want sexually, so it is certainly useful to open up a diversity of erotic possibilities.

On the downside, the books perpetuate damaging myths about people who are into SM, including links to childhood abuse and dangerous behaviours, which are not supported by any evidence. Ana rarely talks about her desires but Christian telepathically knows how to turn her on. This takes the emphasis away from communication. Also she orgasms at the drop of a hat whilst most women cannot orgasm from penetration alone.

Some argue that the female submission in the books is inherently anti-feminist. It’s possible for submission or dominance to entirely focus on the other person (linked to norms of women putting others’ pleasure before their own), or to emphasise more mutual enjoyment. It’s worth being aware of how conventional gender power imbalances can play out in any form of sex, but that doesn’t mean that a specific dynamic or activity is necessarily problematic.

Much more troubling is the wider relationship between Christian and Ana which perpetuates some problematic myths about love: that stalking behaviour is romantic; that it’s okay for a man to control a woman’s work, eating, contraception and friendships; that a woman should change a man into what she wants him to be. All promote a kind of possessiveness that would make a mutual relationship very difficult.

Find out more:

My favourite article on the 50 Shades phenomenon is Laurie Penny’s piece in The New Statesman.

Another good piece was published in The Guardian by Suzanne Moore.

Pamela Stephenson-Connolly wrote wisely about the dangers of demonising BDSM in the books in The Guardian also.

The post 50 shades feminist? appeared first on Rewriting The Rules.