SuiGenerix

My hard limit is you doing this.

You have to stop. Today, right here, right now.

You have to stop listing sexual contact with minors as a hard limit.

Every single time you do, you perpetuate the malicious myth that alternative sexualities are without moral center; that kinky people are, by definition, unethical people. When you write "No sex with children" in a profile, you reify the sociocultural demonization of kink. You contribute validity to the wholly, absolutely false perception that people who enjoy BDSM are criminals.

Do you know, mes amis, the statistical percentage of convicted pedophiles situated within the actual D/s rubric? Zero. Yes, zero. And yet some days it seems that every third profile I run across includes this caveat. But why stop there? Why not add Grand larceny to your hard limits list? Why not add murder? Or any other hypothetical crime?

You do realise that for much of the 20th century, vanilla homosexuals were deemed predators - gay people were for a very long time forbidden, whether by overt statute or de facto, from working with children. Remember Anita Bryant and "Save Our Schools"? In a 1976 national survey, more than 70% of polled Americans agreed with the assertion that "Homosexuals are dangerous as teachers or youth leaders because they try to get sexually involved with children." Seventy percent of the United States believed that gay people are inherently child molesters.

This has slowly changed over the past four decades - now, "only" 39% of the population would feel uncomfortable leaving their children in the care of a homosexual teacher or mentor. Why am I talking about vanilla homosexuals? Because the same phenomenon is operative: Mainstream culture scapegoats divergent groups. Anything that is not congruent with its own identity must, as a psychic defense mechanism, be demonized. The anxieties and insecurities of its own social body are projected outward and attributed to an innocent oppressed minority.

Do you know, mes amis, who makes up the bulk of convicted child rapists? Heterosexual vanilla white men, at a whopping 94%.

Mainstream culture would have everyone believe that the BDSM world is the modern Sodom and Gomorrah, a pestilential wasteland inhabited by the worst kind of degenerates, and people interested in harming children. I've never met a single person even remotely associated with the D/s community who has ever even heard of an actual Dominant trying to bring children into a sexual scenario. But here we are, with hundreds - thousands? - of CM profiles declaring abuse of children as a hard limit.

If those were merely superfluous words, I wouldn't have taken time out of my day to share these thoughts in this venue. But they are far from innocuous. They cause harm. They perpetuate a vile and damaging stereotype. They are unnecessary. Perverts we may be, but only in the best sense of the word. We are not criminals. We are not monsters. We are not child molesters. Kindly don't give credence to society's assertion that we are. 

I've accumulated an entirely untenable backlog of messages - as such, I have to hereby advise all newcomers to refrain from contacting me until late May.

(Naturally, if you are a slave or submissive with a PhD in critical theory, gender studies, literature, and/or philosophy who also happens to make an outstanding roasted walnut, goat cheese, macerated pear, and mâche salad, consider yourself very much excepted.)

What is possible between two people?

If this seems to you like a simple question, easily answered, then you are not suited to make the attempt.

And if it seems otherwise, what do you stand to gain by venturing?

The notice of a highly unusual person. Perhaps even the heart - and therefore also the deft whip and fierce will - of an extraordinary Dominant.


The most important thing you stand to gain by it is of course something else altogether.

Mezza Voce

SuiGenerix was today penning for work a philosophical harmonics analogy inspired by the Philip Glass concert that glows on the short horizon. But when the concept of sympathetic resonance arose, her thoughts turned to the fact that she is attending tonight's concert solo...

Few things in this life are as true as the adage that it's better to be alone than in poor company, but I do begin to wonder just how likely it is that I'm ever again going to find the kind of submissive I want. The trouble is that I have exceptionally high standards and an unwillingness to settle for less (or perhaps the term "different" would be more egalitarian).

In this case, that might very well mean that I never again have a cherished slave at my side as pianists coax forth beauty and pain, and then at my feet in awe when we return home for our private concerto of beauty and pain. My unwillingness to accept 'close enough' could result in spending the remainder of my life without the very special bond that is the force between a Dominant and a submissive whose connection is one of depth, of genuine intersubjectivity - dare I say, kindred souls?

Well, enough of a dark winter evening's somber rumination. The impetus of this jot was an appreciably more pleasant one: To invite all the locals to drop me a line if you'd like to visit us post-show for tapas, wine, and philosophizing about the spaces between notes. The perennial John Cage debate is sure to surface, so a not only elegant, but also lively soiree is assured.

In recognizing the humanity of our fellow beings, we pay ourselves the highest tribute.   Thurgood Marshall

The issue of "tributes" is a pressing one this morning – fully five submissives asking all on the same day for my 'Amazon wish list.' I don't have one. And if I did, I certainly wouldn't post it and demand that total strangers buy me things. That strikes me as at best a bit unseemly, and besides, my favor could never bought: The sincere, carefully chosen words of a submissive who's trying to make ends meet on minimum wage mean infinitely more to me than a lavish gift bought by someone earning six figures.

SuiGenerix frowns on the whole "findomme" phenomenon - although, in fairness, actual financial domination is a legitimate fetish for a few people - and the idea of "tributes" more broadly isn't far behind. I will, however, note here that if anyone wanted to meaningfully tribute who I actually am, as both a person and a Dominant, rather than merely some one-dimensional character called "Mistress," they couldn't do better than helping to make the world a more just place. The Global Fund for Women, Human Rights Watch, Dr. Hawa Abdi's Somalian organization, or the ACLU are all in need of support.


If you aren't familiar with Somalian physician Dr. Hawa Abdi's life and work, it's worth knowing:

On May 5, just after sunup, 750 militants surrounded Dr. Hawa Abdi's hospital. Mama Hawa, as she is known, heard gunshots, looked out the window and saw she was vastly outnumbered.

"Why are you running this hospital?" the gunmen demanded. "You are old. And you are a woman!"

"I told the gunmen, 'I'm not leaving my hospital,' " Dr. Abdi said. "I told them,'If I die, I will die with my people and my dignity.' I yelled at them, 'You are young and you are a man, but what have you done for your society?' ")

Full story available in the New York Times archives.

Kink-shaming: Do I really have to explain that it's wrong?

Apparently, yes.

Kink-shaming, for any of you who aren't familiar with that term, isn't shorthand for the process of attaining sexual pleasure by having someone shame you. That's lovely business, all well and good. If you're aroused by someone humiliating you verbally, viva la you.

See what I did there? I validated your sexual preferences. Your kink might not be my bag (that one happens to be, but anyway...), but I recognized your inherent right to access pleasure in whatever way suits you. What I didn't do is say "that's fucked up!" or "Get off of CM, you freak." Because that would be kink-shaming: Condemning and demonizing a person because you don't like something that they find arousing.

I want to preface this by saying that I'm very pleased by the overall tenor of my inbox. Those who've knocked on my cyber door thus far have, in the main, been nothing but polite. Not all CM users, however, are so lucky.

Although what prompted me to jot this post was the experience of a female submissive, the phenomenon of bullying on a site like this does of course cross gender lines to some extent. It's likely, though, that submissive women in particular are targets - not just of unwanted male aggression, but also of kink-shaming, with transpersons also likely to encounter a fair amount of it.

The female submissive in question, had, long ago, taken the time to write a helpfully comprehensive profile that included all of the consensual activities she was interested in exploring with a partner. Which ones? My point is precisely that it doesn't matter which ones. The only salient point is that they were all legal play between consenting adults. (Although on a personal note, I will add that they hardly struck me as "extreme.")

Her reward for this frankness was to receive graphic verbal abuse and condemnation from various passersby. Because of that reaction, she redacted her profile. Without wanting to diminish her agency – for that gesture is of course, in one sense, an active, empowered response to aggressive acts – it's also a form of forced self-censorship. Bad enough, that, but in a world in which it's often impossible for most people to be "out" as BDSMers, it's not only outrageous, it's also tragic, that some feel they have no choice but to do that self-censoring here as well – in what should be a safe space, free of judgment.

Like all primates, humans are social animals; most people's self-esteem is modulated to at least some extent by peer acceptance or rejection. And, unless you've been living under a rock, you'll have noticed that mainstream society isn't terribly accepting of people who enjoy non-normative pleasures. Such folks are considered freaks by the majority of their fellow citizens, and the deep stigma that's attached to BDSM results in a lot of internalized self-hatred.

Marginalized groups often band together as a countermeasure to societal rejection; to provide the validation and support that human beings inherently need to flourish. I'm not suggesting that everyone here on CM get together and sing "Kumbayah" while weaving friendship bracelets – but it would damn nice if we could treat each other with basic respect. Condemning a total stranger for their legal, consensual sexual preferences isn't okay. Words can be a form of violence– and not the kind of 'violence' some of us share in common as a pleasure.

Perhaps such bullies are just confused, and think that acting like a proper human being is too complicated for them to accomplish. SuiGenerix has good news for you! - It's actually very simple:

Step 1: Understand that all kinks are valid. Anything and everything legal that happens between consenting adults is equally acceptable.

Step 2: If someone's listed interest turns your stomach, that's fine; just keep your distaste to yourself and click past to the next profile.

Voila, you've acted like a decent human being. Pretty easy, right?

All jest aside, you should play nice here in the CM sandbox for all sorts of reasons:

• Because kink-shaming already has plenty of momentum in mainstream society and doesn't need the boost;
• Because a lot of BDSMers already deal with struggles in self-acceptance owing to that consistent cultural message that what they enjoy is "sick";
• Because bullying has the potential to harm a fellow human being, and simultaneously diminishes the bully and his (or, conceivably, her) capacity for self-growth.

But the main reason you should behave respectfully toward your fellow kinksters – no matter how much you dislike whatever particular act floats their boat – is that it's the right thing to do. Period.

So, be good to each other, mes amis. And any bullies creeping around, mind your manners.

Don't make me come in there with my riding crop.

During a bit of conversation last night with some charming submissives, they both separately mentioned that they were surprised and happy to find a Dominant who was so approachable - but, as one of them speculated, didn't that mean some people would assume that I'm 'soft' as a Dominant? On reflection, quite possibly yes - and a greater error one could hardly make.

I've been asked to cane to the point of full-body permanent disfigurement, and have pleasurably done so; I have flayed flesh until red splits to shine a glint of bone beneath, and then literally cast salt into the wounds; these being just two - and rather minor - examples of the severity with which I can engage.* It's despairing, really, just how few people don't think in false dichotomies. I command absolute obedience, and I enjoy inflicting incredible humiliation, hard use, extreme pain, privation, mental and physical agony; that this is true does not preclude my also being a kind, generous, and welcoming person.

There's a lot of one-dimensionality in the BDSM world, and it seems to me that a great deal of it is on the Dominant side; people who respond to a submissive's first contact with an immediate "Crawl, worm!" ethos. Not my style. I'll expect submissives to approach me respectfully - and to be continually cognizant of the value of any of my time that I give you - but I don't need to overtly lord my superiority over you. Any Dominant who's uncomfortable showing their 'human' side - who must be grim-faced'WolfMasterThorThunder', as it were, at all times - is very possibly not terribly secure in their authority.

And besides, what kind of relating is that, really, that instant launching into domination mode with strangers? For the hardcore objectification crowd, sure, but otherwise the kinds of intense emotional and spiritual experiences that are possible in and through BDSM pursuits happen when two people know and understand each other's minds and hearts; it is intersubjectivity that produces them. Well, to each their own, I suppose - and none of this is meant to be a condemnation of other Dominants - but I'll stick with an "Hello, pleased to meet you" at the start.

We'll just let anyone who assumes that civility indicates softness be in for quite a surprise...

* I often use the word "engage" rather than "play" to describe D/s activity. (I could explain why, but perhaps it would be more fun to see if any submissives reading this can offer their idea of why I do.)

Occasional literature, philosophy, and poetry forays may be found on the RSS mirror of my work blog. Interested parties, inquire, as CM TOS does not allow a link.