When I first begin reading Venker’s opinion articles on Fox News, I find myself positively exhilarated. “The battle of the sexes is alive and well”, she writes in her first article.
“Women aren’t women anymore”, she writes.
Kinky, I think. What does that make me, a person who does, in fact, identify as a woman? Master? Dog-trainer? Prison guard? Oh, baby.
From that point on it is clear to me that Venker isn’t writing about heteronormative perceptions of love and marriage; nor is she even conscious of the pro-cis-gendered lens through which her article speaks.
No, Suzanne Venker is giving EL James a run for her money, writing quite possibly the cleverest under-the-rug BDSM fiction since the poorly disguised Fifty Shades of Chicken. She is simply using the tools in her toolbox. As a woman who “lives in St. Louis, MO, with her husband and their two children”, Venker has a unique and powerful perspective that allows her to discuss kink with a subtlety that defies even the unique perceptive abilities of Fox News.
From that point on it is clear to me that Venker isn’t writing about heteronormative perceptions of love and marriage; nor is she even conscious of the pro-cis-gendered lens through which her article speaks.
No, Suzanne Venker is giving EL James a run for her money, writing quite possibly the cleverest under-the-rug BDSM fiction since the poorly disguised Fifty Shades of Chicken. She is simply using the tools in her toolbox. As a woman who “lives in St. Louis, MO, with her husband and their two children”, Venker has a unique and powerful perspective that allows her to discuss kink with a subtlety that defies even the unique perceptive abilities of Fox News.
Sometimes, though, perhaps too subtle…
“In a nutshell, women are angry”, she writes later on in the aforementioned article.
Oh, I think, obviously assuming the nutshell to which Venker refers is actually one of many cock-and-ball torture devices such as the ball crusher or the testicle cuff. Of course, she seems to be getting her gender assignments mixed up. I might have suggested “With a nutshell…” which would eliminate confusion and clearly identify the woman in this particular scenario as the dominant partner. (Remember, we're talking cis-gender here.) Not everybody is as educated on the nuances of consensual sexual torture as I am. Perhaps it is her mad attempt at metaphorical complexity that causes her mix-up (or it could be a rogue editor). Unfortunately, as later analyses will show, this slip of the tongue may be the love child of her inexperience and discomfort with this hitherto unexplored sexual adventure.
I must say, though, that I am impressed with the prose she manages despite the internal confusion. She writes, “[women have] been raised to think of men as the enemy. Armed with this new attitude, women pushed men off their pedestal ([insert some distracting bollocks about feminism here]) and climbed up to take what they were taught to believe was rightfully theirs.” The use of the word “raised” encourages the reader to presume that this is, indeed, a consensual act arranged in advance between two adults (well done, Suzie). Beyond that, the metaphorical imagery of the climb is absolutely tantalizing. At this point, I think each person is responsible for his or her interpretation of the text. (I, for instance, might choose to imagine this woman as a prisoner climbing up a ladder to take the power from the prison guard… perhaps not so black and white as I originally suspected! Oh, how the tables have turned!)
The thing that tips me off to her extreme discomfort is the fact that Venker automatically assumes the natural next step is for dom to become sub (“All [women] have to do is surrender…” and blah, blah, blah). She’s clearly still experimenting and hasn’t found her place yet in the community as she writes this article.
In the piece published just a few days later, it would seem she’s found her footing. “In other words, surrendering to your femininity means to put down your sword. It’s okay if your guy’s in charge. It’s okay if you don’t drive the car”, she writes in her follow-up piece.
In other words, Mr. Venker found the nipple clamps.
Unfortunately, it seems her third article marks the end of her explorations in the exciting world of BDSM. Unhappy as a dom, unsatisfied as a sub, the Venker matriarch puts away the family tools (and stops playing naughty with the family jewels) for good. “The battle of the sexes is over. And guess what? No one won”, she writes in an unfortunate public admission of defeat. “Why not try something else on for size? Like this: men and women are equal, but different. They’ve each been blessed with amazing and unique qualities that they bring to the table. Isn’t it time we stopped fussing about who brought what and simply enjoy the feast?”
Well, at least they’ll always have oral.
Disclaimer: I do not claim to be an expert in Suzanne Venker, her family, or her published works (and I would be positively tickled if she could be so kind as to avoid such claims regarding myself, my gender, my desires, my sexual orientation, my romantic orientation, or my humanity). I do not claim to be an expert on BDSM, either, and if I have spoken out of turn or wrongfully against any persons engaged in the BDSM community, I ask that they please graciously inform me of my mistakes and allow me to fix them.
“In a nutshell, women are angry”, she writes later on in the aforementioned article.
Oh, I think, obviously assuming the nutshell to which Venker refers is actually one of many cock-and-ball torture devices such as the ball crusher or the testicle cuff. Of course, she seems to be getting her gender assignments mixed up. I might have suggested “With a nutshell…” which would eliminate confusion and clearly identify the woman in this particular scenario as the dominant partner. (Remember, we're talking cis-gender here.) Not everybody is as educated on the nuances of consensual sexual torture as I am. Perhaps it is her mad attempt at metaphorical complexity that causes her mix-up (or it could be a rogue editor). Unfortunately, as later analyses will show, this slip of the tongue may be the love child of her inexperience and discomfort with this hitherto unexplored sexual adventure.
I must say, though, that I am impressed with the prose she manages despite the internal confusion. She writes, “[women have] been raised to think of men as the enemy. Armed with this new attitude, women pushed men off their pedestal ([insert some distracting bollocks about feminism here]) and climbed up to take what they were taught to believe was rightfully theirs.” The use of the word “raised” encourages the reader to presume that this is, indeed, a consensual act arranged in advance between two adults (well done, Suzie). Beyond that, the metaphorical imagery of the climb is absolutely tantalizing. At this point, I think each person is responsible for his or her interpretation of the text. (I, for instance, might choose to imagine this woman as a prisoner climbing up a ladder to take the power from the prison guard… perhaps not so black and white as I originally suspected! Oh, how the tables have turned!)
The thing that tips me off to her extreme discomfort is the fact that Venker automatically assumes the natural next step is for dom to become sub (“All [women] have to do is surrender…” and blah, blah, blah). She’s clearly still experimenting and hasn’t found her place yet in the community as she writes this article.
In the piece published just a few days later, it would seem she’s found her footing. “In other words, surrendering to your femininity means to put down your sword. It’s okay if your guy’s in charge. It’s okay if you don’t drive the car”, she writes in her follow-up piece.
In other words, Mr. Venker found the nipple clamps.
Unfortunately, it seems her third article marks the end of her explorations in the exciting world of BDSM. Unhappy as a dom, unsatisfied as a sub, the Venker matriarch puts away the family tools (and stops playing naughty with the family jewels) for good. “The battle of the sexes is over. And guess what? No one won”, she writes in an unfortunate public admission of defeat. “Why not try something else on for size? Like this: men and women are equal, but different. They’ve each been blessed with amazing and unique qualities that they bring to the table. Isn’t it time we stopped fussing about who brought what and simply enjoy the feast?”
Well, at least they’ll always have oral.
Disclaimer: I do not claim to be an expert in Suzanne Venker, her family, or her published works (and I would be positively tickled if she could be so kind as to avoid such claims regarding myself, my gender, my desires, my sexual orientation, my romantic orientation, or my humanity). I do not claim to be an expert on BDSM, either, and if I have spoken out of turn or wrongfully against any persons engaged in the BDSM community, I ask that they please graciously inform me of my mistakes and allow me to fix them.
No comments:
Post a Comment