BDSM
Vocabulary … are we listening or condemning?
Words are
expressive; we use words to describe thoughts and emotions in a way that helps
us to communicate that which we wish to say. This functions, because words have
meaning[i]
by which we can express our ideas and concepts.
The fact,
that the word ‘heaven’ has a different meaning as the word ‘heavy’, shows that
words are particularly suited to express differences that sets one idea, or
concept apart from another. In this sense we say that we define words; they are
outlined, limited and restricted to have this and not that meaning. Of course
there are exceptions to it - like words that are used metaphorically or that
are ambiguous in their meaning – but this does not take away the fact, that in
order to clearly understand what we say, we also in the cases of those
exceptions, we have to specify our intentions and we make use of additional
words to do so.
But the
whole concept of words as being meaningful is centred on the idea of
rationality. Therefore, love is better expressed in deeds on an emotional
level, as it can be done with words. Words seem to be the instrument of our
logical faculty, with its basic true and false distinction. Behaving socially
e.g. does not exclude the use of speech, but behaviour can also be expressed
simply by actions that are not verbal utterances. Such behaviour also follows
‘definitions’ that we call social rules. The fact that we distinguish good and
bad social behaviour is inherently related to our logical ability and that again
to our ability to speak in a language that is developed in a social process
like culture. And also the word emotion is not an emotion itself, but it refers
to something that we ‘label’.
The idea
that words are limited, context dependent and only in active use, as expressed
in sentences, develop their full lingual functionality, should make us aware
that words themselves are not our reality and are only means that we use to
communicate with one another, or with ourselves.
So what does this mean for BDSM?
First and
foremost it means that the limitations of speech itself, also apply to our
ability to express our BDSM experience verbally. Saying “This will hurt” can
invoke many reactions. It can mean that you will swing that flogger with an
extra bit of force right on top of that outstanding butt. Yet, it can also mean
that you are about to clean a little bruise with alcohol. Stating things more
clearly - like: I will hurt you with this flogger - is not a great help, as we
still do not know how much it will hurt, or why we are motivated to hurt
someone.
The
language we use in BDSM is borrowed from our normal language. We use the word
hurting, and naturally by most people this is perceived as something negative,
something unpleasant that is to be avoided. But while flogging, we are not
hurting because of that, but we are spending sensations on someone’s skin,
these sensations invoke emotions and bodily reactions in that other person,
which in return leads to another perception of the pain. It is a psychological
thing and something that – as an interpretational context in which the activity
makes sense – cannot be expressed in those few words: I will hurt you.
So many of
the things we do and wish for, can be explained in words, but for those not
understanding the mechanisms behind it, the motivations, the rewards, the
pleasure, the words do not make sense in the way it does to us.
Explaining
things like motivations, feelings of pleasure or sexual impulses in rational
concepts that are clear and obvious to others is very complicated. It is not only
specifically hard in the case of BDSM, it is the same with normal sexuality, complex
feelings and religious or mystical experiences or simple things like the beauty
of a sunset or a particularly artistic painting; what it does to us can be
expressed in words, but it is not the full experience, not the complete picture
and in some ways even confusing in itself.
This also
means, if someone else has a different understanding or a situation, or even
seems unexpectedly close, it does not necessarily confirm that you have indeed understood each
other. Normally you will, as our words are not that vague, but assuming that
you speak plain language can be misleading. Particularly in a scene where so
many differences in sexual kink are gathered under an umbrella abbreviation
like BDSM, this should prompt us to cautiousness and consideration; are we
listening or are we condemning …?
Sir Cameron
[i] How words
have or carry meaning is not an issue here; whether words refer, are signs, or
if we attribute meaning to words; for who is interested, please get yourself
some books on the philosophy of language. Good sources are Wittgenstein’s
Tractatus, John Searle, Paul Ricoeur, Jaques Derida, Willaim Alston and of
course, Wikipedia.
No comments:
Post a Comment