There’s a new post over on Axe’s blog that has pulled out some immediate, visceral, negative reactions. I suggest you read his post in order to put mine in context, but as a brief overview, he relates a story about a dominant woman who expected him to take her shopping, and assumed he would pay for her. The comments condemn this woman as an asshat, a dishonest prat, and a whore.
Okay. I think this deserves another look. I want to talk about the giving and receiving of gifts.
What’s the issue in Axe’s scenario? Is it that she wanted him to buy her presents? Because I have to admit, I love being bought presents. I have expensive tastes, sensual obsessions, and gifts give me the warm fuzzies. In the right context, gifts turn me on. The idea of tribute turns me on. The idea of making Maymay pay for his orgasms definitely turns me on.
Don’t worry, I will not be offended if my blog stats have halved when I wake up tomorrow.
But is that really the issue? Or is it that she assumed he would buy her presents, bullied him and attempted to coerce him?
Let’s be absolutely clear. I don’t think there’s an intrinsic problem with giving presents as a form of submission, or receiving them as a form of domination (or tribute). And making the logical jump, I don’t think there is an intrinsic problem with financial domination, when done responsibly. I do think, however, that the attitudes surrounding these kinks are far too complicated to leave it at that.
Sometimes I make Maymay buy me things. It gets me off. I think it gets him off as well. It also causes me a welter of confusion, guilt, worry and self-doubt, the likes of which not even sadism can rival. Seriously. There is no other kink I claim that can make me feel like shit.
I suspect that giving money to fiercely independent women is a recipe for disaster. It’s certainly provoked some personal shipwrecks for me. Being paid for, given gifts, or being financially spoiled makes me feel weak. And ashamed, and dirty. And all sorts of other crap that I don’t think I should have to deal with. I know that I am not these things: weak, shameful, unclean.
I also love giving gifts, but I have never stopped to consider that giving Maymay a gift might make him feel bad. There are some deeply gendered issues in that statement. And I have managed to ply arrogance from its negative connotations and embrace it as a tool and a perspective, but I cannot seem to do the same with being spoiled. I can’t get through the issues to find the guilt-free good.
When we talk about financial domination, or the giving of gifts, there seems to be a feeling of general distaste. There is talk of advantages taken, and services exchanged, and it’s all layered over with the still-lingering residue of the dirt that has been culturally ingrained into the concept of prostitution. Money is too dirty an issue for us all to play nice.
We can talk about the exchange of power, and of control, and of pain. But we can’t have a conversation about the exchange of money without that knee-jerk distaste. And where does that leave women like me? The stigma of money has influenced my life in so many directions that I can barely speak about financial exchanges coherently.
And frankly, that pisses me off. Not only because it messes with my potential enjoyment of a kink, but because it messes with my future as a professional in any field of business.
What if, in some possible future, I quit my job and am financially supported by my partner? Should I feel ashamed? The way I am right now, I couldn’t bring myself to be supported willingly by someone else. And I think that’s a pretty crap attitude, on my part. I don’t like that my intrinsic worth as a person is so wrapped up in how much money I can make, or my ability to pay off my debts. I find the perspective short-sighted, and self-damaging.
Let me bring this back on track. I will say spoil me. That’s right. Buy me gifts. I love gifts. (If you can manage to spoil me and not make me feel like shit, you’re probably a miracle worker. Or Maymay.)
But I will never, ever expect that of anyone. I can barely accept gifts as it is. I have worked very hard to be gracious when people give me things, and honestly, I’m not very good at it. Gifts make me feel indebted, because for me, feeling indebted is safer than feeling spoiled. Feeling indebted and uncomfortable is a better place for me than feeling like a silver-spoon, rich-kid brat.
This says realms about me, and my relationship with money, and my relationship with myself. This is a terrific example of how my personal problems fuck with my sexuality. It’s probably the best example I have, because it is the most irrational trigger.
Taking money from others makes me feel like a bad person. It makes me afraid I will turn into the woman Axe wrote about.
It’s not just my personal hang-ups that keep me from embracing this kink. It’s that we rarely take the time to acknowledge the distinction between taking money as a kink and being a spoiled bitch, or a whore. Because if you go play in the comments over on Axe’s post, you’ll notice that no one explicitly condemned that woman for trying to pull a non-consensual scene. They condemned her for expecting to be bought gifts. Those are two different things. The first one is the real problem. The money clouds the issue.
I find it critical that we draw a perspective between the kink and the attitude. Attutide is greater than activity. I kink on gifts. I do not feel entitled to gifts. I consider inappropriate entitlement to be shameful, and non-consensual scenes to be wrong.
Only my attitude excuses me. Only my attitude separates me from her.
It hurts me that because of her, and people like her, and because of my issues regarding money, and because of the way the scene treats money, I can’t claim this kink in good conscience. It hurts me to have to say that a part of my sexuality makes me feel ashamed. That my work to act responsibly, consensually, and wisely is not enough to break that prejudice down in my bedroom, and in my mind.
27 Comments
Don’t get me wrong. If I had the money, I totally would have bought her whatever she wanted despite the fact that she was only interested in my possible credit score.
On the non-consensual aspects (I’m repeating myself a bit, but…), as I responded on Axe’s blog:
Or, the second reason, she’s just an idiot. If she authentically has a fetish for being spoiled, if this is how she normally “plays,” then she’s an idiot for assuming it is anyone else’s default assumption of how to play.
It’s the equivalent of being into cutting (or ball busting, or forced feminization, or anything else) and not bringing it up during initial conversations; then taking you into a room and starting to carve her initials into your chest; and being offended when you aren’t into it.
It’s just bad form.
People see that things are about money and they stop thinking. Because they automatically assume money can’t be a kink.
Which will forever confuse me. Because on so many levels it seems so obvious that it is/can be/should be. (I’m biased)
After all, money=power. So many kink games are about… (Bueller? Bueller? Anyone?) power. About taking control of another person’s power. About inequality of power. Inequality often arbitrarily assigned by the dynamics of the relationship. Rawr. This is good stuff here.
Also, money= loaded emotional connotations. I’m not sure about anyone else, but for me loaded emotional connotations are fun things to play with. It’s a beautiful spot to explore.
I think that everyone in the world has money issues of one sort or another. I have yet to meet anyone whose relationship with money isn’t fucked up in one sort or another. Or at the very least, complicated.
And much of these complications and fuckedupnesses come from very deep-seated places inside of us related to issues of cultural connotations and family dynamics (who controls the money, money=love, etc etc etc… there are almost innumerable permutations of the ways money very tangibly represents some of the most basic ways we interact from family dynamics). These are places I kink.
Then there is just the basic devotional aspects of it.
The very reason that most people in BDSM communities have such a visceral, primal reaction to financial domination is the very reason I find it so intriguing. It’s taboo. It’s complicated and dynamic and powerful.
Then I look around and see much of the uber-flash-trash exploitation of the fetish and the bdsm world that is obviously completely just someone trying to work an angle where there is money to be made, and I understand a little bit more why there are so many people who think poorly of financial fetishes. And I understand why sometimes I want to invent new words for my kinks so that I’m not in their club.
I think this is, by far, one of your best posts ever. And not only because you called me a miracle worker. :)
I could say a lot about money and kink, but right now I’d actually rather sit back and listen, since my words come from the submissive man’s perspective, and I’ve written so much about that already.
Wow, didn’t predict you’d go in this direction. Excellent points, very well written.
I find it critical that we draw a perspective between the kink and the attitude.
I think that’s a commendable distinction to make. While I didn’t exactly “comment” on Axe’s post (rather, I linked to a short animated film by Don Hertzfeldt), I didn’t stop to think through the scenario. To me it seemed the “knee-jerk distaste” for the woman’s behavior wasn’t because she wanted Axe to buy her a pair of shoes but because she expected him to know what she wanted, and then when he didn’t she turned on him. This was at their first meeting. I just found that . . . unfair, somehow. And it seems a very separate issue from being financially supported by a partner (for surely a partner is someone you love, respect, know well, or have an otherwise significant relationship with) or the scenario you describe with Maymay, which makes perfect sense to me as something pleasurable and exciting.
In any case, you have written a nuanced and thoughtful analysis (as you always do) of the emotional pitfalls money can present. I could blather on about my own dysfunctional relationship with money (we abused each other for years, money and I, alternately spurning and smothering each other), but you’ve given me a lot to think about. I’ll go do that now.
I admit, I am in the knee-jerk distaste camp, but it’s not entirely for the present buying, perse. It’s for the “the way for a man I’ve just me to impress me is to buy me something,” I think it’s dehumanizing for men to be seen as walking wallets (which I think, to an extent, is your point - but IMHO it’s very different to consensually dehumanize a person with whom you have a relationship than to assume the acceptability of said dehumanization as a matter of course.) I associate this attitude, honestly, with women I don’t respect, such as my friend’s roomate. She sees men not as people, but as ways to acquire the things she wants - power, status, entry into certain circles of society - which I find extremely distasteful. Especially since she expects to be valued as a human being while giving none of the same respect to her partners. If everyone was using everyone with open eyes, it would bother me a hell of a lot less.
That having been said, though, there’s more to it, and one of the reasons I miss your writing more on this blog is that when you do write it always stimulates me to write on MY blog about related issues. Which I’m going to go do now, since this is something I’ve been thinking about anyway. I will say that you make me rethink my knee jerk position on this, purely because I respect you so much, but that my knee-jerk reaction is still “UGH”.
One of the things that struck me was this woman’s comment about her time being “worth more than just a cup of coffee”. This implies that Axe’s time wasn’t worth squat, or maybe even had a negative value. If it’s part of a negotiated scene, fine, but if not, then it’s a very personal insult.
I’ve got a bad taste over financial domination partially because 99% of the proponents I come across take an attitude of entitlement or “it’s my place”. In reality, no one is owed any kind of bdsm. In Axe’s example, she definitely had this sense of entitlement; it never even occurred to her to discuss it because she felt it was just a given.
Another reason this gets to me is that I find the spoiled, whiny, selfish, princess-y attitude a major turn-off. I find people like that extremely ugly.
Financial domination also sends jolts of anger through me due to previous bad experiences with vanilla women who tried to treat me as their personal ATM. Basically a nonconsensual scene. And it’s pretty much accepted by society. This most definitely isn’t something I’m into.
If others genuinely get off on this, go for it. But I do think that a large portion of women who do this aren’t into it as a bdsm thing; it’s just an easy way for them to get money. I think that a lot of them don’t really get off on it. They just like money. You’ve seen the types- they post pics of themselves with a middle finger sticking up, with “pay up, loser!” below it. I don’t see that as bdsm.
Don’t get me wrong. If I had the money, I totally would have bought her whatever she wanted despite the fact that she was only interested in my possible credit score.
Axe, I think you got me wrong. What that woman did was unacceptable, and my opinion on that doesn’t have anything to do with your credit score. I’d be angry to hear that you bought her anything, i.e. that you willingly accepted the abuse she was trying to deliver. (And no, not the good kind of abuse.)
And It looks as though your commenters agree with me. The points I made here have now been expressed there many times.
Rona-
This is a combined response to your comment and to your post, which was awesome.
What I’m finding curious from reading your reaction is that I think I somehow gave a different impression here than I intended to. Because I agree with everything you say in your post, absolutely. We have very similar ways of thinking about money and gift giving. And although I do like expensive jewelry, my most valuable gifts are always, always valuable because of the thought that goes into them, not the price tag.
What I was trying to do in my post was not to erradicate the knee-jerk reaction that we all have to the gendered implications behind financial exchanges. I think it’s important that conversations and reactions of this kind continue to fuel a move toward a kind of equality.
I was hoping, instead, to pull out my gift giving/being spoiled kink from underneath all of that crap, and work with it in some sort of ideal future where I can genuinely speak about it as a kink instead of a political statement. But I don’t think that will happen, honestly, ever.
And sorry to jump topics on you a bit, but I’m finding it weird that the conversations about being “spoiled,” both here and in the ever-expanding comments on Axe’s post, women are saying that they like to be spoiled, but not with money. Instead, they’d like to be spoiled with services, fancy dinners, massages, etc. This is a great example of the knee-jerk distaste getting in the way of the kink. Because honestly, how is cooking a fancy dinner (that one must buy ingredients for and spend valuable time on) different than buying a gift? If one has the resources and willingness to do either, how are the two actually different?
The only difference I can see is that at the end of the dinner (or massage, or house cleaning, or tea-service, etc) the women gains an increased sense of satisfaction and comfort, whereas at the end of the gift buying the woman gains an increased sense of satisfaction and comfort as well as a physical object.
Just to adress your last comment quickly since I am typing on my phone…
The difference, to me, is one is spending time and effort and the other is spending cash. The first is hard. The second may only have required rich parents.
(I think I have more comments, but they’ll wait til I’m home. Or tomorrow)
Sue-
What a terrific comment. Thank you. Some responses:
People see that things are about money and they stop thinking. Because they automatically assume money can’t be a kink.
Yes! How strange! And yet, as I alluded to in my response to Rona above, when money is removed or made relatively intangible in such exchanges, it somehow becomes acceptable again.
After all, money=power. So many kink games are about… (Bueller? Bueller? Anyone?) power. About taking control of another person’s power. About inequality of power. Inequality often arbitrarily assigned by the dynamics of the relationship. Rawr. This is good stuff here.
I’m definitely with you here. For me, money can be another level of control that I have at my disposal. In that sense, I find it sexy to be able to order someone to buy me something. (Although, as I explained in my post, I just can’t manage this in a real scene. Too many emotional bombshells.)
I also think that in some ways, money kinks can be about a willingness to manifest one’s adoration into a display of tribute or service. It doesn’t have to be an expensive thing, in the end, so much as an appropriate one. This is the kink twist of ‘it’s the thought that counts.’ It makes me feel loved and cared for when Maymay thinks to buy me gifts. And when he rubs my back, makes our bed, resets my phone for Daylight Savings Time. All of it. Being loved and cared for makes me happy, and turns me on.
Then I look around and see much of the uber-flash-trash exploitation of the fetish and the bdsm world that is obviously completely just someone trying to work an angle where there is money to be made, and I understand a little bit more why there are so many people who think poorly of financial fetishes. And I understand why sometimes I want to invent new words for my kinks so that I’m not in their club.
Yes indeed. I had a hard time writing about this largely because I so compulsively distance myself from this kink. But Id like to not do that as much, because frankly, once the shit is cleared away, the idea is just so hot.
Rona-
No worries! But this is again a distinction of attitude. Why assume that buying a gift only requires rich parents? Buying a gift with consideration and thoughtfulness requires both time, and effort. And in the case of people like myself and May, who earn our disposable income, the money represented by the gift also required time and effort.
And likewise, demanding to be cooked a fancy dinner could be done with the same crappy attitude that Axe encountered. Cooking one could be done with an expectation or sense of pressure.
Why draw a distinction between the results of the service when the attitude surrounding the service is really what makes the scene valuable?
I actually agree with what you just said completely. All of it. Buying a gift can be an incredible expression of time, effort, and affection. However, it can _also_ be a shortcut for spending time, effort, and affection. I didn’t express myself well. Curse typing on the bus!
Oh, and yes, demanding to be cooked a fancy dinner has exactly the same issues in my mind as demanding financial tribute. It’s exactly what you said, the attitude. It just feels like that attitude is somewhat more prevalent in the “financial service” genre than in the “general service” genre.
Neysa-
First off, thanks for the comment! I’m excited to go and actually watch the film you linked to, as I haven’t gotten a chance to do that yet.
To me it seemed the “knee-jerk distaste” for the woman’s behavior wasn’t because she wanted Axe to buy her a pair of shoes but because she expected him to know what she wanted, and then when he didn’t she turned on him. This was at their first meeting. I just found that . . . unfair, somehow.
Completely unfair! Non-consensual! A really stupid attempt at domination. Yes. I think you’re absolutely right there.
But I don’t think the general distaste is entirely to do with the woman’s attitude. I am absolutely sure that part of it is to do with the exchange of money. Witness her being referred to as a “whore.” If she’d been a stupid dominant woman trying to do something like bully Axe into a punching scene (as Sue detailed in her comment on Axe’s post) she wouldn’t be a whore. She’d be an abuser.
What’s important to point out is that her actions were probably not even an attempt at domination, but rather just her pathetic attempt to milk Axe for all he was worth. I don’t think it was a scene or a kink for her, which is why all of this issue-crossing happens, and why we talk about this case as an example of gender politics, an example of dishonest prostitution, etc.
But it is a scene and a kink for me. Yet it can’t be talked about as separate from the automatic negativity of the culture.
This is exactly what roo-roo’s said, as well. (Hi roo-roo!) And one of the reasons I have so many insecurities around the idea of accepting gifts is that I wonder if I’m being honest with myself. I’ve been so ingrained with the idea that accepting gifts or money within a relationship is bad, because it’s just me exploiting someone else in exchange for sex.
roo-roo, I definitely respect your distaste for fin-domming, and I agree with you that a lot of this practice isn’t actually a kink so much as an exploitation. But surely you see that this is exactly the distinction I’m trying to draw? You describe whiney, self-entitled spoiled princesses. That’s entirely attitude. There’s nothing in there about the actual money.
And, final general point: Nowhere in this post did I say that I kinked on the exchange of gifts or money for sex. And the fact is, I don’t. I don’t like to be obligated in that way. I kink on being given gifts. Period, full stop. Without expectations attached to them, much in the way that little countries used to give gifts to bigger ones to show respect and avoid being obliterated.
But the rest of the sentence is filled in for me by cultural stereotypes, whether I like it or not.
Rona-
It just feels like that attitude is somewhat more prevalent in the “financial service” genre than in the “general service” genre.
Definitely. Which is one major reason I don’t claim it comfortably. Too many assumptions of what that says about my attitude.
I like your bus typing.
I’ll keep this short.
I am financially dominated. I work, but I have no money. I don’t touch my paycheque. I have no access to it. I have no say in what is done with the money my employer pays, more or less directly, to my Mistress.
I do, however, have a home, and food, and necessities, and an allowance in the amount that Mistress is content with. I have no complaints about the arrangement at all, which is now four years old. Mistress buys herself personal things quite often, with no input from me. I’m comfortable being “kept.”
I give gifts often. Sometimes from my brain, sometimes from my physical effort. Making a change in my Mistress’ universe is a gift, when it comes from my motivation and not hers.
The sadness is in the automatic association with gift = money. But I agree with Sue, and would add this; Mistress indulging herself, with money she did not physically earn, would offend some. But I insist that anyone is entitled to produce value with their livestock.
“But surely you see that this is exactly the distinction I’m trying to draw? You describe whiney, self-entitled spoiled princesses. That’s entirely attitude. There’s nothing in there about the actual money.”
I understand the distinction you’re making, yes. And you’re right, most of my problem with this is in the attitudes that are so common.
In regard to the money itself, I see that as more of a fundamental relationship issue. Money = labor. And labor is something both people do in a relationship. Both work in some way, whether it’s a career outside the home, being a stay-at-home parent, or some mix. Both people benefit from that labor. When that balance of who benefits from that labor is lopsided, it can cause problems. (Ask any marriage counselor.) This is also why I’m not a fan of the “subs should do all the housework” mentality. Lopsidedness can work, whether it’s housework, sex, money, or anything else. But for others, balance is needed in some facets of the relationship. If I’m with someone who expects me to labor for her but isn’t willing to do the same for me, it’ll be an issue. That’s just me though; I need equality in certain areas of the relationship. Imbalance of power is tasty in some areas, but I don’t want it to seep into every aspect of my life.
It is people like this woman that make me feel awkward about accepting gifts. It is easier now that I am married, one bank account. But I still worry that he thinks I am more interested in the gift itself rather than the thought behind it. I try to keep my requests for material things out of the bedroom. I don’t want him to be confused about the motive behind my desires, sexual or material.
I have to say I fail to understand this:
Yes indeed. I had a hard time writing about this largely because I so compulsively distance myself from this kink. But Id like to not do that as much, because frankly, once the shit is cleared away, the idea is just so hot.
and
It is people like this woman that make me feel awkward about accepting gifts.
What I don’t understand is, if you like getting gifts and you (obviously) aren’t an asshat about it, then why can’t you enjoy your kink?
Why is it that there is such hatred and distaste about this kink? I totally understand the “wow that sort of person is an idiot” mentality. But I don’t understand why an entire kink is handed over TO that mentality. It’s as though everyone says, “wow there are alot of asshats who exploit this kink since they can make money, so we can’t play there anymore.” I think that’s wrong.
Sue-
Why is it that there is such hatred and distaste about this kink? I totally understand the “wow that sort of person is an idiot” mentality. But I don’t understand why an entire kink is handed over TO that mentality. It’s as though everyone says, “wow there are alot of asshats who exploit this kink since they can make money, so we can’t play there anymore.” I think that’s wrong.
Thank you, you caught me out on a thought-process mess, there. Or a lack of clarity. I’m not sure.
I agree with you. I genuinely think this attitude is wrong. It’s wrong, and it frustrates me, but it happens. And I admit, I’m probably just as much a part of the cause as I am of the solution. But I want to be clear that my issues with money kinks, while they may mirror the wider attitude of the kink community, are in the end my own.
I do worry about being exploitative. I don’t think my concerns are valid; I’m sure they stem from money issues that are more deeply seated than just being disgusted by Axe’s story. But what I said there in my comment to you is true. It’s not logical, it’s not healthy, but it’s true.
I don’t know why I can’t just enjoy myself here, as I do elsewhere. I think I personally have too many money issues to force the scene to work. And although it does sometimes work, it also makes me top-drop like (literally) nothing else.
I’ll have to work on it some more. And I see you’ve written about it yourself, so once I’m free of work I’m going to hop over there and hope that I can learn something for your experience :).
I’ll stand by something I’ve said before. I honestly think that financial domination, as a general practice, lends itself to possible abuse more readily than many other activities/types of play. But that doesn’t mean that people into it actually are abusing each other in any way. And you’re sure as hell not. Them’s my unasked for 2 cents.
I like how it does boil down to consent. Obviously someone who is not able to afford certain gifts would not consent to purchase them. Perhaps those with shopping kinks should use a safe word?
And I think that my awkwardness is due to our financial backgrounds. I am from money, my husband is not. I don’t want him to feel that he can’t satisfy my needs, whatever they may be.
I agree with pretty much everything you said. I have no problem with people wanting gifts or being spoiled or any of that stuff. That’s all fine and dandy. It’s that she did it on the first date, then got really upset….and even after he tried to apologize and understand the situation, she just left it entirely. There was no real communication about it beforehand….and there was definitely none after. So yeah, it really is about there not being any real consent….and it obviously left a bad taste in his mouth afterward. It’s frustrating to hear about such interactions.
If you feel like a whore when you take money or a gift of some dude, there is probably a good reason for it.
Toni-
Er. Point a. being a whore isn’t necessarily bad. But cultural connotations make the sex work profession out to be dirty. Point b. My point in this post is that this attitude is a *problem.* I might have a reason for feeling the way you imply. I don’t think the reason is good.
Everyone has an issue with money more or less, I personally have made and lost enough to have a fair amount of disdain for money, I have also been in situations in Africa and Asia where money has lost all value. There is certainly nothing wrong in being a sex-worker, I have known quite a few over the years - decent enough people, but then I was an investment banker trading credit derivatives, so my standards are probably lower than most! I imagine sex work will always be considered dirty by some, maybe most people and I agree that this attitude is wrong.
I think someone else pointed out the expectation that the guy is always paying, even in vanilla relationships is common, it seems odd to me in S&M relationships that the female submissive expects to be financially supported by her dominant partner and that the male submissive feels that he should pay to support his female mistress, but what do I know? Just seems to me its always the guy pulling out the bucks whatever side of the fence he is on. All I am trying to say and its not directed at you is that if something felt unpleasant to me on an emotional level I wouldn’t do it. The days when I had to do things I didn’t want to are long past me.
This was a thought provoking and illuminating post and reading it gave me insight into me. It’s not about money=power=paid services. I think you tapped into a deeper gender/culture/independence struggle that’s new to our society since the rise of feminism.
Very smart post. My distaste runs along the lines of….wow they didn’t negotiate anything, she’s assuming he’s going to fall for what appeared to me, to be a con of sorts. Anyway, the connection to money and power…spot on. It is so easy to gender code money+woman-man paying for things for promise of sex=whore. I suppose I was guilty of thinking about it that way.
Really the parallel runs more to the idea of abuse or manipulation.
I’ll have to think about this some more.
3 Trackbacks/Pingbacks
[...] two (and I’ll quote myself from Eileen’s blog post about gifts): … money=power. So many kink games are about… (Bueller? Bueller? Anyone?) [...]
[...] Eileen’s take on the subject makes me wish there were more Eileens in the world. (Stop hogging her Maymay) [...]
[...] Eileen’s take on the subject makes me wish there were more Eileens in the world. (Stop hogging her Maymay) [...]
Post a Comment