Here’s part of a brilliant blog post by Kate Belgrave: “My Average Life as an Average Whore”. It makes many subtle and thought-provoking points, but also highlights something I’ve said many times before about the contradictions within the sex/kink industry when it comes to power play. During discussions on the old UK Mistresses Forum several years ago, one or two potential subs would criticise Pro-Dommes for exclusivity, high prices and not running their lives and businesses in the same way as any other competitive service industry would, with quantity of clients over quality. Yet if spent my days doing lots of things I didn’t want to do, on someone else’s terms, no matter how much money I might make from doing so, then I’d be just as unhappy as I was in the low-status, low-wage jobs I had throughout my teenage years. If Pro-Domination meant that my own power was merely a service-based illusion for the sake of someone else’s hard-on, I’d hate my job. Sadly, many of the chaps who voiced criticisms on the old forum might never understand why.

From Kate Belgrave in 1998:

“…Now he’s lying in front of me, resting his head on his round, rather hairless arms. I sit on his back, as he asks. I stroke his neck, up and down, with the balls of my thumbs.

And so it is that I begin again to try to decide whether or not I care about this work. I look at my hands on his sticky skin and try to gauge my reaction to the stickiness. I look at him. He’s terribly short. His hairless little feet come nowhere near the end of the bed. His suit pants, when he had them on, looked as though they’d been cut off at the knees.

But it is a lovely suit – beautifully sleek and expensive-looking, much in the Winston Peters style. It is only a pity that this attention to appearance doesn’t extend to the far reaches of his physical person. He stinks. In the shower, he ran the soap down his barrel chest once. He stood under the water for a bit and then he got out.

I notice that between his buttock runs a deep, yellow-brown line which seems to be set under his skin. He has the same odd colouring

between his toes and in the corners of his mouth. It’s odd – it’s set under his skin, like a tattoo. It’s mould, shit, or hereditary – I can’t work it out.

‘Touch my bum,’ he says suddenly. The pillow muffles his voice, so he speaks again. ‘Please touch it.’ I watch my hands as they move towards his backside. I touch him. Straightaway, he moans and starts jerking his backside around. He strikes me as rather theatrical. I try to remain seated on his legs. He’ll roll over onto his back soon.

Then suddenly, he asks me a ridiculous question – ridiculous because it’s utterly unnatural, theatrical. He’s been rehearsing it. He’s lifted it from some movie or other that he’s seen about relationships, or women, or whores.

‘How does it feel having all the power?’ he asks…”

Full article here.

I was recently asked by a gent whether I considered ballbusting to be a “feminist” activity. Well, that’s a complicated one to answer, and all depends upon the individuals involved. A common misconception frames feminism as the hatred of men by women. This is far from true. And of course, feminism isn’t about scoring points of personal revenge on a patriarchal society by kicking some bloke in the nads. That seems an anathema to the entire concept of feminism – which, after all, is about equality and mutual respect, not taking out all the gender-based injustices of human history on one individual’s blameless bollocks.

However, when it comes to kink, if ballbusting is your mutually-enjoyed hobby of choice, whether you’re the buster or the bustee, then of course it can be a feminist activity. Kink and feminism collide in many ways, and both are often misunderstood and misrepresented. Here’s a sizeable chunk of a brilliant article at FeministsForChoice.com about feminism in BDSM:

“…When it comes to feminism and sex I maintain one basic rule: it should be mutually pleasurable for all parties—this includes open, clear, honest communication (speaking and listening), as well as thoughtful reduction of physical, mental, and emotional risks. Bondage, power play, domination/submission, and BDSM can fit into this when it is enacted in a relationship where desires are openly discussed and some clear boundaries have been set. Enjoying domination in the bedroom by a caring or thoughtful sex play partner, does not mean you have sold out your feminist values; it does not mean you think that domination should be carried out in systematically oppressive structures world over.

When you dig below the surface, BDSM at it’s best is feminist-friendly because it allows for mutually consenting partners to play out fantasies and desires that satisfy all involved. (The New England Leather Alliance has put together a fantastic safer sex introduction to BDSM.)

BDSM is frequently characterized as one person (or many) restraining, abusing, or hurting another against that person’s will. In fact for the most ethical practitioners of bondage and BDSM (that would be most practitioners), those involved have already had open discussions regarding their boundaries and established the expectations of the scene. They have also established safe words, that will stop the action whenever they are uttered. In fact, safe words assure that whomever is being dominated maintains the power and control to stop a scene at any time—they might be one of the most feminist sexual tools ever invented…”

Read the full article here.