Just Because A Woman Is Into Kinky Sex, It Doesn’t Mean She Can’t Be Violated

kinkOur friends at TheFrisky spend quite a bit of time examining kinky sex and BDSM. At the helm of this discussion is resident kinkster Jessica Wakeman. Jessica, whom I’ve quoted before when it comes to disclosing your fetishes, especially in the online dating world, never shies away from what fulfills her sexually. She opens up about her experiences and shares each one with her readers.

Yesterday Jessica wrote “On Abuse Within Kink (Or This One Time Some Really Bad Stuff Happened To Me)” for TheFrisky‘s ongoing series “The Soapbox.” If you can’t tell from the title, it’s about an incident with a gentleman asshole she met online with whom she shared some sexual interests. When the date came to an end, Jessica ended up going home with him.

Over the course of the next few hours both consensual and nonconsensual things happened to Jessica. It seems that this gentleman asshole and she were clearly not on the same page, and lines were crossed.

Anyone who’s involved in the BDSM world will tell you that trust is paramount. While there is much sexual excitement in pushing the limits and maybe even crossing them to discover new avenues of what you like, trust is the most important part of the equation. Safe words exist for a reason, and safe words are to be heard and respected when they’re used. But this was not the case for Jessica when she used the decided-upon safe word:

“A safeword is supposed to be for when you’ve reached your limit,” he admonished me.

I wasn’t sure what he was saying.  ”I have reached my limit,” I told him. “That hurts. It doesn’t feel good anymore.”

“It’s not supposed to feel good,” he said. “You’re supposed to use the safeword when you can’t take the pain anymore, not just because you don’t want to.”

Despite this situation, Jessica admits in her essay that she stayed because she was unfamiliar with the neighborhood, and she wanted “penis and vagina sex.” (This confession, naturally, had her ripped apart in the comment section.) When it came to the actual penetration part of the evening the guy came inside her — something she did not want, of which she did not approve, and was merely based on his “assuming” that it was OK to do so. Jessica felt violated, because Jessica had been violated.

A taste for kinky sex does not mean violation; violation, unless consensual, goes against the rules of BDSM. Some of us love to be called “slut,” bent over the table, fucked in the ass, degraded, spanked, whipped, tied up and forced to beg to orgasm, but just because that’s what gets some people off, it doesn’t mean that a violation isn’t possible.

The comments on Jessica’s piece keep growing, and a lot of them are pretty victim-blaming. This one in particular stuck out: “Just because it didn’t go exactly the way she wanted it to doesn’t mean she was violated.”

Really? Isn’t that the definition of a violation?

Jessica, of course, had a response to such an ignorant comment: “This is an extremely disconcerting, even dangerous statement to me making with regards to consent.” Truth.

What it comes down to is that whenever something happens to you that you DON’T WANT, it is a violation. Jessica was violated. No matter what your sexual fetish, or your taste for the kinkiest of the kink, violation is possible and should be regarded as such and not dismissed just because a woman likes to be tossed around and called a “slut” in bed. I’d like to think that as women in the year 2013 we’d be aware of that, but sadly, it seems to be the women in the comment section of Jessica’s essay who are the least understanding of what it means to be truly violated.

Share This Post:
    • Tania

      Urgh, that guy sounds like one of those “doms” you hear about who’ve read “50 Shades of Grey” and think ignoring safewords and consent is what dominating is about. I guess I should be glad I’m super vanilla so I don’t have to watch out for the people who’ve missed the lesson on what consensual BDSM is.

      • gemma

        non bdsm folks can ignore consent as well. we all gotta be careful, guys!

      • Tania

        Oh, definitely, I’m not trying to deny that. I’m just saying on top of non-consent for penis-in-orifice sex, now people into BDSM have to watch out for non-consent kinky times from dudes who (judging by the number of OkCupid accounts I’ve seen referencing it) got their entire idea of BDSM from “50 Shades of Grey.”

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Sirena-Robinson/12434699 Sirena Robinson

      Actually, I don’t think she was violated. What you leave out that I, as a daily Frisky reader, know, is that it was Jessica’s idea for the guy to remove the condom and she never told him to pull out or to ejaculate anywhere except inside her. I don’t defend this man for an instant, but given that he assumed she was on the pill and she assumed he would pull out, in that respect they were both violated. Furthermore, he DID stop when she used the safeword, and just because he complained doesn’t mean he didn’t respect her boundaries by stopping the behavior that she wanted him to.

      Overall, I think she made bad decisions. I think she put herself in a bad situation, and that telling her to suck it up and take responsibility is not victim or slut shaming. I’ve made bad decisions, I’ve been in bad situations. Own it. You got there on your own two feet without anyone making you go, making you stay, or making you have sex. It’s not a violation. It’s bad decisionmaking. Grow up.

      • jacaline

        importantly, however, WHO THE FUCK IS STILL USING THE “PULL OUT METHOD” I feel like I am one of the very few females who knows this is fucking stupid. I’ve kind of ignored all other facts and aspects of her/this article (which kind of makes it off topic, but whatever)

    • Choo

      I didn’t even read the comments here before commenting on Jessica’s article. It’s awaiting approval, so when it pops up I’ll copy it over here. Suffice it to say, I was APPALLED at most of the comments over there. Details to come. Grrr…

    • Boosker

      I’m kind of on the fence with this one. On one hand, she says she felt violated, which is never okay. The guy (based on his reaction to her safe word) is clearly a douche canoe. On the other hand, the sticking point for me is where she is appalled by his assumption that she is on birth control without acknowledging she assumed that he would pull out, even though she didn’t explicitly state that’s what she wanted. If I were a dude, I would assume that if my new lady friend is down with bare-backing a dude she just met, that must mean she’s on some form of BC. Pulling out is not a given unless you establish that’s what you want. If she had said, “I’m not on the Pill. You need to pull out.” Then this a-hole not only didn’t pull out in time and wasn’t apologetic about it, well, I’d be furious. If he didn’t pull out in time accidentally, offered to pay for Plan B, and was really contrite, that’d be a different story. I didn’t comment on the original article or the repost over at xoJane because the writer is already getting plenty of heat. I do honestly feel bad for her because she feels icky about the situation, and I’ve been there. No one makes perfect decisions 100% of the time, especially when it comes to hook ups. I just wish there had been some acknowledgement that the reason this guy is a dick is because of his attitude toward her safe word and his general air of disrespect toward her, not because he assumed he could come inside her.

    • http://twitter.com/ATWYSingle ATWYSingle

      As one of those women in the comments section to which you’re referring, I’d like to respond.

      It would be great if Jessica would clarify this post. The way I read it. there were 3 instances of play – she safeworded during the first and he stopped, they resumed play later for the second scene and she did not safe word, and then they resumed again later in the evening and she safe worded again. The way it’s written, the reader is unable to differentiate between the various scenes. Which I’m guessing was intentional. Rather than act immature and petulant in the comments, maybe she should address the concerns raised.

      Also confusing is when she says that, during the second scene of play, her safewording should have indicated to him to ease up on how he was spanking her. The way it’s written, it sounds like she’s implying that she was safewording during the second scene and he was ignoring it, but I think she’s actually referring to when she safeworded during the first scene.

      In my experience, when things are written like this – where there are gaps in the story and the reader can’t see how the narrator went from Point A to Point C – it’s usually because the writer is trying to avoid revealing anything incriminating.

      I don’t agree that she was violated, especially in regards to how he ejaculated inside her. Like someone else said, you left out the very salient point that Jessica ASKED HIM to remove the condom and never once spoke up about not practicing birth control. Nor did he ask, which makes them both reckless.It is COMPLETELY unfair of people to put all of the responsibility on the man just because he’s a man, which is what is being done both here and over there.

      If you’re going to write about this, then you should really include the whole story. Nobody – male or female – should just be expected to take a story like that at face value.