BDSM is an initialism (a fancy and more precise word than its variant acronym, which is best exemplified by SCUBA, which can be pronounced ) used to stand for Bondage, Domination, Sadism, and Masochism. Technically and linguistically, these words are not traditionally capitalized, but there is a specific reason for capitalizing them here: Their meanings are distinct in the context of the initialism from when the words are used in the vernacular.
What has this to do with the story? Almost nothing, and that is precisely the point. I wrote Borehole Bazaar to be about abuse -- specifically about surviving in an abusive culture -- NOT to be about BDSM. While I am by no means on the deep end scale of that community -- and yes, it is a community and, like any community, has specific rules and cultural norms and all the other things communities have, including localized groups, customs, and cliques with highly specialized perspectives -- I do know enough to feel insulted whenever anyone proposes that the interactions between the characters -- especially Ptielieren and the rest -- are seen as indicative of that community. To clarify and explicate this, I will go through each word and discuss in moderate detail the difference between its meaning in the context of BDSM and the vernacular usage of the word. To differentiate between the two, all words referring to the vernacular will be lowercase -- as is grammatically proper -- while all words referring to the culture and community and lifestyle and ethos of BDSM will be capitalized, which is not grammatically correct but will (hopefully) offer clarity in a literary context.
Bondage
In the vernacular (or common usage for the word), bondage refers to the act of being bound, either -- as those who read about kidnappings and historical pieces set in a certain time or the Deep South are familiar with -- in the form of fetters and ties or -- as those more familiar with writings taking place either in more feudal times or with with the apprentice-master relationship can attest -- to emotional and duty-based bonds to another or to an ideal. It pretty much means “tying someone up” through either physical or spiritual means. This is discrete (one of my favorite homonyms is the pairing “discrete” and “discreet”) from Bondage in a number of ways, but most notably in the presumption of who maintains control. Bondage (capital B) is the act of restraining another or being restrained for the pleasure caused by being restrained. It can and often is said with sexual overtones, but there are two key differences here: the first is, as can be taken from the previous sentence, pleasure, and the second is enthusiastic consent. This will be a recurring theme here (if y’all hadn’t guessed), so please be patient. Bondage (lower case B -- grapheme according to the interwebs… if any linguists out there could confirm that this is another way of saying “lower case,” I’d be much obliged) does not have the primary purpose of being pleasurable. Its primary purpose is to bind and restrict movement for the convenience -- not pleasure -- of the aggressor / recipient (because, in the feudal sense, aggressor might not actually be, well, accurate). Moreover, and this is huge, bondage is designed to remove dissent -- the lack of consent -- from the equation.
Now, earlier I mentioned the idea of “who is in control.” In the BDSM community, the person in absolute control is the Submissive (capitalization used for the same reasons as the rest of BDSM). This may seem odd, but when the idea of consent and mutual pleasure are key components of the definition, it becomes much more clear. The person doing the binding can withdraw consent simply by walking away or saying “I’m done.” It is, therefore, their job to monitor the person being bound to ensure that things have not progressed too far. Generally, a safe word is employed for this sort of interaction, which can range from “please stop” to “ow” to “alligator” (or any other word not typically uttered in a typical sentence) to tapping out -- usually a quick double tap with palm, fingertips, or knuckles and most commonly associated with martial arts -- to simply asking the person doing the binding to stop if certain physiological signs manifest. In that INSTANT, the Bondage stops. It also stops if the person being bound seems to be losing consciousness or in any way seems to be suffering injury. Injury is different from pain or discomfort in that it is something that will last and necessitate excessive healing, and certain degrees of injury are considered acceptable to certain individuals while other degrees of injury are not. The individual doing the binding MUST adhere to a strict code during all of this in order to maintain trust.
In the story, while there are fetters and there is a kind of sick loyalty displayed by some of the individuals, the core concepts of Bondage are absent. Borehole Bazaar is a fantasy study of the effects being stripped of autonomy -- without consent -- over the span of a year. It has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with BDSM. There is physical control and physical contortion to maintain control in the story. There are injuries designed with the express purpose of limiting movement. There are even brief moments of levity and trust. What is lacking is ENTHUSIASTIC CONSENT and GENUINE PLEASURE at the prospect of having movement be restricted.
Dominance
Here, the definitions can be seen to blur in some respects. Dominance (lower-case) is often perceived as dominating another individual or causing them to be submissive to another. In the “dominance theory” of dog training (a thoroughly refuted and scientifically inaccurate “theory” renounced even by its own founder), an “alpha” is dominant to everyone else, a “beta” is dominant to everyone except the “alpha,” and the sequence continues along down the entire Greek alphabet. Yay. Autonomy is maintained in the context of a lesser autonomy than the most dominant figure and in accordance with the permitted behavior range of the most dominant figure. There are TONS of studies on this. Google it. Some are good and some a bunk, but for a general understanding of the vernacular usage of the term, clicking on some ten definition or analysis sites -- especially from scientific journals -- and reading a few paragraphs ain’t exactly a bad route to take.
By contrast, Dominance is about dominating all aspects of another for the mutual pleasure and with the mutual enthusiastic consent of both parties. Again, mutual pleasure and mutual consent are key elements here. Complicating matters further, Dominance in this sense -- but lacking the mutual enthusiastic consent and mutual pleasure of both parties -- is wherein the idea of abuse stakes a whole lot of claim on the word. In this case, it’s not about hierarchy in a larger social sphere with managers outranking supervisors outranking shift leads outranking experienced workers outranking newbies; it’s about controlling another’s actions and displayed thoughts and perceptions. There are other, even nastier, elements, too, but let’s keep focussed with these two concepts. In Dominance, using derogatory language, clapping loudly or snapping at a partner, physically standing taller or bidding the Submissive to kneel or grovel or beg or cry on cue to enact a scene is something that is liberating to both parties, and not all people in the world feel comfortable in either role. Weighing in here, I am a Submissive by nature and inclination. When put in positions to be a Dominant, I am not a happy camper and feel huge quantities of stress. Conversely, causing someone to kneel or grovel or beg or cry or even hear highly offensive language without the opportunity to either remove themselves from the situation or issue a rejoinder IS ABUSE. Enthusiastic consent and pleasure cannot be coerced or forced onto a person without that person then becoming a victim, just as it must never be presumed without confirmation.
The story I wrote is about abuse. It is not about Dominance. Take, for example, the scene during the prolog wherein Fiorie smiles and tumbles for her handler. At several key points, it is expressed that she cannot refuse these behaviors. Moreover, she cannot remove herself from the situation of being manhandled by the goblins. There is ZERO indication that she enjoys having things rubbed into her hair and ZERO indication that she is completely comfortable wearing what she wears. In fact, her handler GROWLS at her when she pouts about putting on the skimpy outfit he chooses for her. In effect, saying that she enjoys being Dominated is akin to saying a prostitute enjoys being Dominated by her pimp. NO. Grudging acceptance and wearing a polite and learned mask to calm and soothe an aggressor is not consent, and it is DEFINITELY NOT enthusiastic consent. Moreover, just the fact that Fiorie is worried about some potential threat -- even that of being left unguarded in that place -- is further evidence that this is not a pleasurable arrangement for her. The entire scene was meant as a foil to illustrate the best case scenario for the actual protagonist -- and trust me, to a survivor, that’s still pretty damn grim. (My apologies if the expletive caused offense, but, artistically, it felt warranted.)
Sadism
Okay, so sadism, by the standards of the vernacular, is simply the infliction of pain upon another for personal, sexual gratification. It is often considered to be a gross perversion in terms of desiring to visit torture and suffering for entirely selfish reasons and a sign of mental instability. The view of this word, in particular and in conjunction with the image of tying someone down, has cast the most negative light on BDSM in general. The absolute first thing that most people ask when I talk to them about Sadism is generally something akin to “how could anyone like that?” The answer, of course, is both simple and nuanced: one size does not, in fact, fit all. Sadism (capital S) can run from compressing pressure points to saying hurtful, deliberately demeaning things to tickling to running ice down someone’s spine to flogging to blood play to integrating piercings and skin hook suspension into a regimen to papercuts and lemon juice to electrocution to enjoying play after the partner has enjoyed a particularly rigorous workout and is physically sore. These are all things that fall under the heading of Sadism. The definition for the word, in terms of BDSM, then, is, as above, the infliction of pain on an individual for the MUTUAL PLEASURE and with the ENTHUSIASTIC CONSENT of both parties.
Now, Sadism is a deeply personal experience. The act of inflicting pain doesn’t necessarily inflict pain, and the rules associated with Sadism are manifold, complex, and should be researched in the context of the BDSM community for any would-be Sadists. Somewhat like how the International Space Station and the moon are both technically satellites, sadism and Sadism are just as ridiculous when compared as synonyms of the same spelling. The basic rules are akin to those of Bondage and Dominance but go a touch further: the Sadist is absolutely responsible for looking after the well-being of his or her partner. This includes (as do the others, but it is absolutely essential on a higher degree in Sadism) a period of bonding and cuddling and care-taking after a session, verifying both the mental and physical health of the partner throughout the session, and specific, set time limits for the duration. These limits are defined by the community and, more importantly, by the partner. Note the use of the word partner instead of victim. Note also that EVERY OTHER RULE is observed in a session involving Sadism. There must be a safe word -- and that word can be “no.” If things go too far, even if the partner is enjoying themselves, the Sadist is responsible for pausing the session. Enthusiastic consent MUST be obtained before EVERY new addition to the scene -- this includes swapping out whips or using new forms of abusive language or even messing with the Submissive’s clothing or hair. Interesting though both are, sadism and Sadism are as similar as the moon and the International Space Station, which is to say that they are not similar at all.
To reiterate, Borehole Bazaar is about ABUSE. It does not even touch the subject of Sadism. There is a scene wherein an aggressor raises his hand and the protagonist kisses and licks this in apprehension and fear of being struck. There is no sense of anticipation in any positive light. There is a bully who clearly takes pleasure from hurting the protagonist. While this may be an example of sadism, it most certainly is not an example of Sadism in the context of BDSM. Resignation and calming behaviors are not consent and, moreover, are not Enthusiastic Consent. This book was not written to be about BDSM. If it were, I would have come right out and said as much.
Masochism
Ah, and here we come into a place wherein I can wax poetic. Masochism (lowercase M) is actually fairly similar to its vernacular cousin masochism. In both, it involves deriving pleasure (usually sexual in nature) from pain, degradation, humiliation, etc. In Masochism, this is paired with the consent of the aggressing partner, which, strangely enough, can be very difficult to obtain. See, not everyone enjoys inflicting pain or constriction or removing autonomy from others, and that is where the common misconceptions arise. In the lowercase variant, what the person or source inflicting the pain wants is immaterial: a pincer or needle or tugged piercing, for example, are, to the best of human knowledge, incapable of giving consent on the grounds that they are, well, not alive. If the source of pain or humiliation is a living thing (for example, a human), then their consent is REQUIRED. Coming home at the end of the day to a partner who does not consent to this role and going through a routine of putting yourself down and declaring that you are not worthy of her or his affection or whatnot can really depress and emotionally scar the victim, in this case the person not who is receiving the pain but the person who perceives him or herself to be the cause of it. Relationship advice: don’t do this without express consent beforehand. It’s kinda a dick move, no matter if the person forcing their desire for emotional (or physical, in somewhat less easily explained circumstances) pain to emanate from another is male or female, and is not how Masochism is defined.
The most common presumption is that Masochists, as defined in BDSM, cannot occupy any role save that of submissive. While it is true that the two are often linked, this is not necessarily always the case. Consent MUST be enthusiastically granted and pleasure or enjoyment MUST be evidenced by both parties. BOTH. It is very easy for someone to begin by saying “yeah, I’m okay being the source of your pain” and then begin to feel uncomfortable fairly early in. Conversely, consent from a Masochist is not a free-for-all. There are limits, and breaching those limits is rape. To give a proper metaphor, Masochism is kinda like learning to swim via playing with someone in the shallows and venturing out into deeper water. If it feels unsafe or panic sets in or what have you, it is the responsibility of both parties to avoid drowning. Withdrawing consent can mean anything from “let’s go back to where my feet can touch the ground” in this analogy to “let’s get out of the lake for an hour or a day or a week or ten years or forever.” As with the other letters and all activities in BDSM, consent can be withdrawn from either party and at any time, but also to the greatest degree desired by the least desiring party. If one wants to play in five feet water and one wants to play in three feet water, then three feet it is. No questions, no debate: Anything deeper than three feet, in this analogy, is rape.
Borehole Bazaar is written to chronicle abuse. Don't get me wrong, the story's pretty darn interesting, too, but thematically it is a tale told of and by a survivor during his initiation and, nearer the end of the series, his beginnings at recovery. Part of the reason that I chose to make the protagonist male was because he’s an elf and in this culture Elvish males occupy roughly the same social status as do modern American females in white collar fields, but, just like the women in this comparison, this lower status and the perpetual, low-level debasement (masochism with the lowercase of this particular posting) it engenders is not a desired aspect of this social convention. The other, and more relevant, reason that the protagonist is male is to desexualize him. The trope that “the woman” eventually begins to like being sexually harassed is firmly ingrained in the American psyche, and this is not a story about gradually beginning to like the fact that enthusiastic consent and pleasure are not part of the greater equation of relationships. Ugh. Gross. No, this is a story about abuse, about how a soul can survive and even thrive -- eventually -- in even these horrible, ugly, damaging condition. The story is about the damage and lingering effects on a person’s sense of identity and self-worth when they stop fighting, about the damage that comes of having to fight, and about the complex issue of developing a platonic relationship with an abuser. It is about learning how to wear a psychological “mask” to avoid bringing harm to yourself as a result of expressing individual emotions. NONE OF THAT IS BDSM.
Romance, Sex, and BDSM
I cannot cover, in a few short paragraphs, this entire subject. It could fill volumes. It could be a Major and a Ph.D. program in a university. I can say that romance and sex are not necessarily intertwined, that romance and BDSM are not necessarily intertwined, and that sex (penetration) and BDSM are not necessarily intertwined. They all can be, though. Finding out exactly what makes a person feel most comfortable in their own skin, acknowledging and embracing the specific tastes and preferences of a partner, going out of the way to facilitate that preference… that can absolutely be romantic. Binding someone, Dominating her or him, even inflicting a consensual quantity of pain, this, while deeply intimate, does not have to actually involve sex or even a lack of clothes. However, any combination of these things, including all three as one, can be absolutely healthy expressions of self-love and of affection for and towards a partner. I absolutely understand the appeal of reading books dedicated to the subject of BDSM, especially in the context of romance. I also understand the appeal of imagining bdsm (note the lowercase) or reading about it, but this is NOT an expression of self-love and affection for and toward a partner. There is no trust and respect in the perverted form of the initialism.
A Final Thought
In no place does my description of Borehole Bazaar include the words BDSM and in no place does my description contain the word romance. It saddens me to think that society equates these words with abuse, just as it saddens me that depictions of seasoned victims in the context of their abusers is perceived as a Sado-Masochistic relationship. I am often at a loss for words when people mention such things because a few lines of text is never enough to explain exactly what the errors with this perception are. I chose to write in a High Fantasy setting because it allows for a universal exploration of a subject without getting bogged down with specifics. This book is proofed by several survivors of abuse and is, to the absolute best of my ability, accurate to that experience. To have it described as something that it is not… I mean, it’s natural for people to have their own interpretation of things, but it still hurts to hear such gross deviations from the intention of this story. If reading about someone immersed in an aversive heavy culture who suffers from chronically being abused is something that is not appealing to read, then there are plenty of fluffy or weirdly twisted stories out there to enjoy. I’d recommend Laurel K Hamilton’s work for dumb fun (not that her books are dumb, mind, but they do link elements of abuse with elements of BDSM with elements of romance, which is loosely how I define books that are “dumb fun) or even my own Tranquil Veins series, the second and third of which should be uploaded just as soon as the cover art is finished.
Additionally, if the subject of BDSM is interesting, then find the local community (or an online group) and ask questions directly. My advice is always to be respectful and to acknowledge that asking certain questions is, by the very act of asking them, offensive. Regardless, if you reiterate that your intentions are good and that you are honestly just trying to understand and if you do your utmost to leave your hang-ups and presumptions behind, it is likely that you will gain a better understanding of the complexities of this subject than just one blog post can provide. If anyone is in one of these online communities and would welcome the chance to shed more light on the subject, please leave a link in the comments section. Conversely, if there is anything written here which is erroneous, or even if a personal question directed at myself specifically is desired, then please let me know in the comments. As always, respectful tones are appreciated in this.
