Call
Nov
23
2024
Ethics and Raceplay in BDSM

 I recently witnessed an entire room at DomCon expel a single member from their midst. A room full of smiling, apparently docile listeners went from passive and listening to angry and dismissive. Why? The reason was entirely centered around the topic of ethical domination and raceplay.

On that day, I filed into a room filled with other listeners prepared to hear a discussion on navigating the dynamics of trauma in the world of bdsm. Our instructor, a charismatic speaker who had a variety of stories to share with us, told us the story of several of her clients. She stated that in this class, there would be no ending the class if there were triggers and emphasized the importance of taking the time out to care for those triggers by leaving the room if necessary.

She then began to describe a past client who, being of Asian descent, had asked her to call him a “sand n****” and who had also requested that he dress in cultural attire while dancing in front of her. She described another client who was a man of African American descent who had requested a service from her where there was an emphasis on his “big, black, member,” dominating in the situation. She described how she felt when this happened, using the terms above.

During the narration, I sensed a tension in the room; on one hand, there was laughter. On another, there was an uncomfortable silence. To what extent was it socially acceptable to use these terms, play these roles and accept money to do so? Because the speaker who accepted the responsibility of this role was Italian, should she be calling her client the “N” word? Even if he wasn’t black? If he was, should she be using the term? Was Italian white enough to be racist or dark enough to be a person of color? Would that still make it acceptable? If the speaker was in desperate need of money at the time, would that still make it acceptable?

Should the role be off limits due to the speaker’s background? As a person in a position of power in the classroom, did we as the audience have the right to feel discomfort with what the speaker was saying? If we were of color, could we express that discomfort? Were we to be the sounding board for the conscience of others who were white identifying or white passing in the room as to how far the speaker could go? Would we be dismissed or retaliated against if we chose to do so? And at what point, if names were not named, did client confidentiality factor in?

As the speaker continued, I could sense that all of these thoughts were, in some fashion, surfacing in the conscious and unconscious thoughts of those in the room. Some people were still and quiet, others smiling expectantly and laughing along, and other’s faces were turning red.

Nearing the end of her narrative, the speaker stated, “It was healing for his (the client of Asian descent) ancestors and for mine, too. If it is hot, it is healing.”

At this point, an attendee of color, one of a handful in the room, began to speak. She stated that she felt that the actions taken were racist.


At this point, the use of the term, “racist,” received the first collective reaction I had seen across the room. Looking around, the entire room had gotten silent. The words that did not command silence in the room were “sand n****,” and, ”big, black, ****.” Once these words were stated, there was an outpouring of laughter and mixed reactions across the room.

However, once the word, “racist,” was spoken, I witnessed an entire room of spectators begin to feel that the spectacle, the story, that they were listening to, had been turned inwards. They were now being forced to wonder if they were racist for laughing at the words the speaker had used, for continuing to listen, for feeling indifferent, or for being too afraid to say anything.

The person who spoke up continued to voice their thoughts in a way that broke an unspoken social code in the room: their voice was raised. The speaker gave them space to speak, however, the room of people began to stir. The once passive, compliant faces began to change.  Several people began to defend the speaker as the speaker was in the position of power in the scenario.

The crowd only began to stir once they felt that the person’s tone of voice was socially unacceptable.

In the blink of an eye, a very American, very white, social norm was enforced-avoid conflict, maintain a pleasant tone and do NOT openly discuss the dynamics of race. Calling someone a racist means they are not a good person and should not be accepted because a good person cannot be inherently racist.

A room monitor walked to the center of the room and asked the person of color who spoke to leave the room. After they left, the speaker calmly discussed triggers, summarized what she felt had happened and continued the class. The tension in the room subsided-for some-and remained-for others.

At the end of the class most of the listeners lined up to buy the speaker’s course, and I couldn’t help but wonder at how this mirrored a pattern I had seen again and again before. Once a person of color states an opinion in a way that does not comply with the social norms of the environment they are in, or uses the term, “racist,” they are often escorted out, very quickly. The behavior they address is often rewarded and continues, because people in power do not like to be questioned on how, when and where they wield it.

When the class ended, a participant next to me asked me how I’d felt about the situation. At the time, I said what I felt. (This wasn’t the first time I had witnessed an older generation and a younger generation differ on their perspective of what was acceptable when it came to race play. I don’t engage in race play because for me the emotional, psychological and spiritual labor needed increases with each layer of privilege that you don’t have). I needed a few days to process my thoughts.

They mentioned they had felt uncomfortable, and we all left after that with a strange, uncomfortable question on our minds: to what extent are race play and ethics intertwined and, if you are or have been historically in a position of power, is it ever considered ethical or hot to exchange in power dynamics, even when requested by a client, that place you in a position that you would historically  have benefitted from?