Staci Newmahr's "creative representation" - my responses

As noted previously in one of my very emotional posts about her book, some of the "creative representation" passages (where scenes from her field work were retold) in Staci Newmahr's book "Playing on the Edge: Sadomasochism, Risk, and Intimacy" did not sit well with me as representations of real life encounters, even though I simultaneously recognised that they would be incredibly hot if I read them in a piece of erotic fiction.

In her podcast interview with The Female Voice on 8th April, Newmahr said that when she showed her prelude passages to vanilla friends and asked, "Are these hot?" they said no, and said that they needed to know that she wanted it, and was okay in them - the interviewer suggested that "they needed permission to like it." In some ways, I think my reaction was similar to those of the vanilla friends.

I feel as though, both for my own mental wellbeing and as part of my responses in general to the book, I want to talk next about what made me react in the ways that I did to these scenes.

If you take any of the following as a criticism or disapproval of the way that Newmahr and her topping partners played then you have misunderstood me. All of this is written in the spirit of "Your Kink Is Okay, It's Just Not My Kink". It is not, really, about Newmahr's play at all, but about my own, and my approaches, what goes on in my head and stuff about me. Newmahr's book has become something of a lightning rod for freaky shit in my brain, so here it is again.

I shall attempt to give a brief overview of each scene and explain what got me jittery about each. I shall go through them in the order they appear in the book, but will not try to relate them to any points made in the book, because I intend to do that more when I write about the chapters themselves.

INTRODUCTION:

An impromptu wrist-and-arm bondage demonstration ends up being a full-scale scene on-stage. The top "managed to steer the conversation toward the topic of rope"; Newmahr reports "not particularly liking" the idea, but being curious; After the initial demo, the top "interprets" a demonstration of the remaining mobility as "either a challenge or an invitation". A further escalation to the scene on-stage, which stops when Newmahr expresses a wish to stop.

This, being the first such scene in the book, was also my first introduction to the ways in which I was going to respond to Newmahr's creative representation scenes. Newmahr says she did not understand the "hoopla" about bondage. I, on the other hand, have something of a very powerful love-hate relationship with the idea of being tied up, which means I both powerfully "get it", and also powerfully reject it. I think for me as a bottom, bondage is the single most powerful "headfuck" there is, or at least, that I am willing to go to.

Newmahr's reported reticence therefore resonated with me on a different level from that reported by her (my first clue, really, that I was going to be reading these in sympathy rather than empathy, but I didn't spot the difference until I came back to look at this scene again). I was putting myself into the scene in her place. This ended up being what happened with every scene in the first read-through.

Putting this together, I would have stopped the scene before it got to the more public display stage. I might very well have stopped it at the first sign of escalation. I would have felt the need for clear boundaries of just how far I was willing to take it in this instance, and anything further would be taken as a violation of trust (and trussed! – sorry, can't resist a good pun).

Obviously, it was a very safe scene for Newmahr; reading that as soon as she expressed "that's enough", the scene ended and she was released, made me feel more connected with the scene because obviously, it suggests that had she wanted to stop sooner (i.e. at the point(s) I would have wanted to stop) then it would have.

That's me as a bottom in that scene.

As a top, I do not engage in a whole lot of intricate ropework; it's not a skill I have made a huge effort to acquire – just enough to bind someone safely in my own home and then do consensual sadistic things with them. But I think I would have been quite similar in my approach if I had those skills. One difference would be the manner in which I went to the stage – Newmahr describes being dragged by the hair, but I would have sought a safe handhold on the ropes as the means to drag the captive bottom into the public light. This is more to do with my own issues with public spaces, more of which in a minute, and thus allowing the bottom an opportunity to say clearly, "no, I am not ready for this to be public." My understanding from reading the book is that the situation is that Newmahr and her partner in this scene knew each other well enough to know that it was okay to make this step.

CHAPTER 1:

Less of a scene, the key point is that a friend sharing a hotel room woke early and the heavy chains he'd worn to bed woke everyone else sharing the room. "She told me not to take them off" is his excuse.

Obviously, not much to write about here. I am nervous about involving others in activities as "bystanders", especially when they may not be able to give or withdraw consent for such involvement. However, this room of three kink-involved people can be expected to be understanding of the situation (although, as it happened, inconvenienced by it). This scene directly related more to illustrating the topic of the chapter than as a stand-alone "play" scene.

CHAPTER 2:

A knifeplay scene, in which first a demonstration of how like a knife a plastic card can feel, and then a demonstration of various other (actual) blades.

Cutting and needle play are my two absolute worst kinds of pain. I hate them and never find them fun as a bottom, and in fact, I consider them a hard-limit. As a top, I am also very nervous around cutting play because I do not feel I have the knowledge to do it safely, so I won't do it. Scratching, on the other hand, is super-hot. (I had a top demonstrate a metal claw on me at a munch once and it was sooooooo sweeeeeet – but that was a problem because she wouldn't do it again, because "you enjoy it too much!" meaning she couldn't get her sadism thrill from it!)

When I read this scene initially, I did not know whether or not it was a cutting scene or a scratching scene (placed into context by other information in the book, it is obvious it has to be scratching, and knowing what I know about safety rules anyway, I should have known that). Like bondage, knives are a major headfuck for me. On the other hand, this scene was described with lots of information about consent and Newmahr's own reactions to the knives. That meant in this scene I was in a much more "empathy" mode than "sympathetic". I was feeling her (reported) feelings instead of focussing on my own.

CHAPTER 3:

End of a 2hr long scene. After a check-in ("good… sleepy") and a light tease, the top starts slapping her really hard. Later, she doesn't remember how the scene ended but finds herself incoherent and overtaken by giggles. "I lay there feeling relaxed – drained – trying to get back into my own head."

This is where we get away from my personal "headfuck" things and to something where it is the style, rather than tools, of play that mess with me. Newmahr has told me that the top in this scene was one with whom she had a very good connection indeed, so as noted above, nothing I say here is a reflection on how they play except to illuminate for myself how I play, and no judgement is made about what worked for them.

That said – as either bottom or top, "sleepy" for me would be a signal that it's time to stop. The sudden change of gear from teasing and laughing to violence would have seriously messed me up as a bottom, especially after just expressing that I was sleepy or tired. Newmahr writes that she felt something akin to fear: "I wasn't clear-headed enough for worry. I was on edge – not quite needing to run, but wide-eyed and vigilant. I had no idea what he might do next." That was her reaction, but my own would be that amplified a thousand times over and turned into blind panic and/or retreat into myself, and I can imagine in such a situation forgetting to safeword or that I could.

Flipping it and asking, "What if I'm the top?" is curious because almost every step is something that I have done, or would do, and feel okay with it – except that first one, of carrying on after hearing the word "sleepy". The teasing would have been part of the bring-down after the session, and certainly not the beginning of a new round of playing. The headfuck thing of switching gears suddenly: done that. The type of teasing: done that. Seeking to generate that wide-eyed "not-quite-fear": done that. All of it is a part of my repertoire and I can't think of anything I would have done differently, except for stopping right at the beginning of the scene that's described!

I believe that Newmahr's partner in this scene knew her well enough to understand where she was at, and what "sleepy" meant in that context. He would have had all kinds of information based on her bodily responses, what had already gone on, expression, tone of voice and so on, that don't come across well in the printed word. So his judgement to continue in that way is completely outside the scope of this. I am saying what I would do, not what anyone else should do.

CHAPTER 4:

Playing in front of a different set of people, flogging, then a HEAVY impact flogging, followed by singletail whipping. Description of feelings being, "The act of absorbing the blows was all-encompassing."

I have issues with public play that are down to various insecurities in my nature, and being primarily an introvert. Although I am open about some things, I have also been described as a very private person. Newmahr described the invitation to play being a very direct one, and I would have welcomed that in the setting described. I think it's in the chapter before the one linked to this scene, that there is a discussion of "wanting it but not wanting it". As a bottom, the feelings that Newmahr describes under the heavy flogging (delivered with nine floggers all bunched together at once!) are something like that for me: I want to feel it, but would have to be pushed – forced – to get there, because I don't want it.

There isn't a lot for me to say about "what if I was the top" here, because it seems to be less about the decisions and more about the toys and techniques used, which is a matter or repertoire and not style.

CHAPTER 5:

After initially noncommital because "I haven't seen you play before", sees him in action, then agrees to play for a bit. After trying his toys, a "struggle" scene, after testing his strength is stronger than hers, simply surrenders.

This is possibly my favourite and most easy to relate to. Everything seems to be based on clear boundaries and understanding (e.g. "I don't play with someone I haven't seen play"). I was a little troubled by the arrogance that I felt was implied in one top's initial reaction: "You haven't seen me play?" and probably as a bottom I would have been disinclined to agree to play because of that; but there was a different interaction with the top with whom Newmahr eventually played. (Twice on reading through this scene, I missed that there were two different tops and that she only played with one of them!) The other difference here is purely on style: as a bottom, if I'm being held in place I don't want to fight it. Not because I think I might escape (unless I was really panicky, I probably would find it hard to put enough effort into it – this also goes for when I am holding someone down!) but because I want to give myself to being held. I would not struggle, and I think I would feel uncomfortable with being expected to.

Topping, the struggle scene probably played out in my favourite way. In fact, as noted before, if a sub does not eventually surrender then I can go a bit weird and withdrawn. Newmahr's exact words in the description were , "'Okay, you win,' I laughed." That easy "equal-but-surrendering-anyway" thing is really good for me.

CHAPTER 6:

Relaxing with someone, sounds like she's in "top" mode with him. Top she knows well approaches, asks her to close her eyes, he uses a new pain toy on her, she describes a very intense pain response. Her (apparent) bottom partner objects as this interrupts what she was doing with him. Second application, "The hurt seared me, scared me - it was a panicky, desperate hurt." After more applications, "I can't... I can't", he replies, "sure you can." - explains it's a "fid".

Moves on to knife play, a very sharp knife with small cuts. Knife to the throat. Allows her to open her eyes, and slices the back of the blade across her throat at the same time (so it looks with just-opened eyes as though it was actually cutting her)

This is where I started to find the descriptions freaking me out a little. I want to be clear: this scene is the sort of thing that I find INCREDIBLY hot when I read it in fiction. But here, there was the knowledge that it's a representation of something that really happened, and I was immersed in my sympathetic responses to Newmahr's scenes.

So the first issue I had was the start of play. In discussing edgeplay, one of the things that Newmahr discusses is playing on edges of consent, such as, "Scenes ... in which tops attempt to defy negotiated limits in an in-progress scene, take a non-negotiated action that cannot be revoked once taken, or begin a scene during a moment or in a place that is not understood by the bottom as 'scene space.'"

When I read the scene, I felt as though this scene transgressed on the basis of "a place that is not understood by the bottom as 'scene space.'" More particularly, I would have felt in a mind space that was not conducive to bottoming. The existence of some non-scene-delineated top/bottom interaction and non-play discussion already taking place, with Newmahr apparently in a toppy role, said to me, "this is not a 'scene space'."

I can pinpoint exactly the point at which I safeword in this scene. It is the second application of the fid. The one that Newmahr describes as, "The hurt seared me, scared me - it was a panicky, desperate hurt." The initial interruption, "I have a new toy to try on you," is interesting. I would go along with it. But the second one (and I think part of it is not the description of the pain, but of where it as placed - the temple) would feel like an unwelcome intrusion, changing the rules without negotiation or consent. At that point, I say, "Enough! You showed me it already, now let's go back to our conversation." If it gets to a third application, I scream "RED!" and shut down, all interaction with the top at an end.

Obviously, given what I have already said, the knife play part of the scene is going to cross boundaries for me - cutting being a hard limit. Every step is described as the top using force to get what he wants. Because I am reading this on the page and Newmahr skips over a longer play with the fid, I hit it with the feeling of intrusion and violation from that part of the scene still fresh in my mind. And knifeplay is, for me, already a headfuck. The way it is described, the first application of the knife is by placing it against Newmahr's throat and asking if she can feel how sharp it is, then moving to apply small nicks and cuts elsewhere, before the "grand finale". I would have safeworded at that point, regardless of how well I trusted my partner, because the headfuck would be too much. The testing of that trust would be too far. Even given that level of trust, I would need them to stop. So - safeword.

As a top, I have pushed gently at issues of "scene space" and similar boundaries of consent/non-consent - and am willing in various ways to do so further. The first thing is that I would have interpreted the situation as "not available for play" at the start. Assuming Newmahr had been alone, or not apparently interacting in a top/bottom type way with someone, then my approach would have been similar in terms of introducing the fid. I am assuming that the top read her well in continuing. It would probably be based on non-verbal cues that I would have made my decision. I would probably have checked in after the second application (the verbal response from Newmahr was, "Jesus! What is that?") I would have stopped at the third application, where Newmahr says she whispered, "I can't ... I can't ..."

The interesting thing is, I would push past that "I can't" reaction if I had used the toy on a bottom before; or if I was very confident that she wanted me to do so. (See my desire to be pushed or forced to go to a particular place, mentioned in the flogging scene from Ch. 4) The main things that would stop me here, are the fact that it's a new toy for the bottom, and that it is a public space and that she had been doing something else before I arrived and not looking for play.

Playing with the "life/death" edge, in particular in the area of breathplay, is something I have done. Fear in my partner is (or was, anyway) a big turn-on and playing with that has been very hot. While I don't play with knives much (although I could conceivably play with them as a threat toy, which is the main purpose in this scene) the type of situation of the knifeplay element here is possible. The first point that is different is that I would not have done it immediately after a different kind of play. The second difference is that I would have wanted the session in which it happened to have been explicitly negotiated as something a bit more "extreme" than usual, where something (though no specifics - that would spoil the fear element) would be pushed hard.

I think that this is about my limits as a top as well as my limits as a bottom. The scene as described transgressed both for me, but obviously for both participants it did not transgress theirs.

CHAPTER 7:

Playing in private. Breathplay, and a razor blade

Again, cutting = hard limit for me. By now, it's understood that Newmahr is okay with this kind of play! Since I would not be doing it, I won't waste time talking about how it would be different for me.

Breathplay is something I am not sure I can play with as a bottom, but I am terribly curious to know what it is like as a bottom. I felt jittery about this scene more because of the elements that Newmahr introduces: "I also realized that I had not really known him very long ... that no one else was here... I felt a quick flash of real and unambivalent panic." And, "About a dozen misogynistic cultural scripts flashed through my mind, vying for my attention."

Given the specific nature of my crisis over some of Newmahr's ideas about SM, it should be obvious that these points key pretty deeply into the insecurities I had (note that I read this scene originally before I had that panic, but my responses were as I report them here). For someone who play(ed) with fear as part of my BDSM, it seems odd that this should unsettle me. But there are two reasons, I think. The first is that as a bottom, I do not like playing with fear - anticipation of owwiness, and the particular flavour of fear that goes with that, yes - but fear about a partner, even fleetingly, would be a big bad NO for me. If I am ever going to be a bottom in breathplay it will be with someone I trust so deeply that I will not fear at all. The second is that as a top, as mentioned, it's about those specific issues I had. A negotiated scene of "I want to play with this fear of the serial-killer monster" is hot (like my interest in rape roleplay/"forced fantasy" scenes), but it felt here as though she had not gone in expecting to feel this or to play with it. Like many of the scenes, this one is the sort of thing I love(d) to read in erotic fiction, but would need to manage significantly differently in real life.

Again, this is about where my limits and edges are, so I am satisfied that Newmahr and her partner in the scene knew what they were doing and were happy with it in the end.

CHAPTER 8:

A hard play session. Reaches a point where, "Something happened to me. I forgot that I had agreed to this. I forgot that this was research. I forgot that he was not going to harm me, that we were in a club filled with people, that I could stop him with a single word." Kicks out. She starts to fight him off. Despite his extra strength, she refuses to submit. Club owner breaks it up. Afterwards, "he put his arms around me and held me close."

This scene received special mention in the podcast, with the interviewer saying, "It took me many years trying to get to that headspace, and you got there in 4!" Treating it as a good thing. Newmahr has said specifically that this was a top with whom she had a special connection, so I trust that connection for them here, but she had not told me this before I read the scene. At the time, I felt like I had read an account of something that was experienced as interpreted as abuse.

I think, as a bottom, the headspace in the scene is one that I never ever want to go to, and there are reasons for that deep in my personal history, that I am never ever going to discuss publicly such as on a blog. Suffice to say, if I ever got there, it would almost certainly be a very very Bad Thing.

So, what about as a top? I don't know. I think - I hope - that I would have read that kick as more than playful, more than an invitation to play. I believe that I would have understood that something was not quite right and stopped everything. A check-in at the very least, "Are you okay?" As noted above, when topping I don't really have it in me to put my full strength into holding a person down, and I have never really fought hard except when I felt my life or bodily integrity were under threat, so if it got to the "fight" part of the scene then one of two things happens: first, she might actually win. Second, this does (link NSFW, trigger warning for violence). (It should be noted that the "red beast of fire" is not the same monster that freaked me before, even though it probably does have a role to play in my sadism. It is not as specific as that, and as I note in that piece, the "red beast of fire" is a part of all of me and is also not a monster. At most, it might be the light source that casts the shadow that mingles with the story to produce the phantom of a monster.)

That's a little bit more extreme than I want to deal with most days. So that's why I would probably break off all play and check-in with her as soon as the bottom kicked out.

***

My chief purpose now in re-reading these scenes and saying "what would I have done differently?" or "where would I have safeworded?" is to remind myself in the wake of my breakdown that I do have boundaries, and that I am quite passionate and definite about some of them, not just as a bottom but as a top as well. It's proof to me that the monster does not exist. That the shadows cast by the "red beast of fire" are just shadows, nothing more. That the idea that there is a monster is just a story that I was told and learned to believe when i was too young to know any different.

Another purpose was to re-read them in the context of the extra information that I now have, having finished the book and heard the interview, and having exchanged messages with Newmahr herself. This context changes the meanings of some of them for me, and helps me to engage empathetically with them instead of sympathetically. Knowing in advance what they are illustrating, and the ideas that Newmahr developed out of such experiences, changes the way I perceive the accounts.

Finally, I had felt uneasy about many of them when I read them first (i.e. before I encountered my breaking point) and I still wanted to work through those specific feelings. Again, part of this was about reasserting my own sense of my boundaries and limits, and part of it was trying to re-read them in an empathetic way (which was helped, as mentioned above, by having more information to go on). It is always difficult to square "Yeesh! How could anyone be okay with that!?" with "Your Kink Is Okay, It's Just Not My Kink". Understanding more clearly the relationships that Newmahr had with her play partners in the scenes (either by putting them in context with other scenes and passages from the book, or from information that Newmahr had provided in other sources) helped to say, "I can see how it worked for you, even though I do not think it would work for me." I could own my unease without having to project it onto the participants.