Domination & Feminism

An Italian art student recently asked for an interview about the art and nature of Female Dominance. The following is a transcription of our exchange.

Q. Who is dominatrix according to you in narrow and wide terms?

A dominatrix is a woman who embodies sexually authoritative qualities, a sexually assertive woman. These qualities include but are not limited to the following

I. Proactively initiating sex and being assertive and commanding in the sex act (e.g being on top and actively f…ing her partners)

II. Orchestrating her pleasure by instructing her partners physically or verbally.

III. Utilizing a wider vocabulary of fantasy, fetish, psychology and performativity to express her own sexuality and create a scene for foreplay and sex.

The last criteria involving fantasy / fetish are important in that it positions the purview of the dominatrix beyond normative sexual intercourse into the world of psychology and spirituality. In that, I believe that a dominatrix can also be both priestess and healer.

Domination can be seen as a sexual orientation in that her very essential nature is driven to be assertive and proactive.

Dominance resides on a spectrum and can be expressed in a variety of ways. It is also important to mention that in the context of what I discuss, we should introduce the terms Pro-Domme & Lifestyle Domme. A Pro-Domme is a dominatrix who has professionalized her craft and knowledge. She has constructed an identity that she plays like a role for the purpose of her life’s work and practice. This performed self may reflect an exclusively sexual desire or be embedded more deeply into other set of needs (financial, psychological, etc.) We cannot discuss any profession without discussing labor and hence financial systems and ideology.

A Lifestyle Domme may choose not to professionalize her orientation and retains her dominance for exclusively personal experiences. So in that way, dominatrix is both a sexual orientation and a professional role and archetype.

Q. Can dominatrix be an agent of change in the society?

Absolutely. The dominatrix, whether operating for her own personal pleasure or in the role of a Pro-Domme operates subversively and inverts the given value systems of her time. Her role is fundamentally one of challenging the given normative status of sexual expression, pleasure, and systemic exchange of sexuality.

Q. Is dominatrix assuming a masculine character in the dungeon, or she goes beyond/out of it?

I interpret this question to mean does the dominatrix extend her realm of dominance beyond the space of sexual play / performance. Again, I would return to the spectrum of how each dominatrix interprets her own dominance. There can be fluidity between one’s role in the sexual space and how one orients in the outside world or it can be fragmented and fraught. I have had experience with both ways of being. This is another relationship between a Lifestyle Domme and a Pro Domme. It is also important to further understand what the ‘dungeon space’ is. It is both a physical space to play and also a psychological fantasy space that lives in one’s psyche. I believe both definitions operate as spaces of Heterotopia, as defined by Michel Foucault’s essay Of Other Spaces.

It also feels important to examine the ways in which we use terms like masculine and feminine in today’s world of evolving gender identity. This is not to negate the historical signifiers of gender. But I believe we can broaden our understanding of possibility when we can locate how we are using language given the larger political and cultural implications.

Q. How does a dominatrix relate to patriarchy?

I believe a dominatrix, whether lifestyle or pro, fundamentally subverts patriarchy by examining the very premise of the sex act. She creates and operates in within an alternate system of logic where everything is intentionally both inverted and exaggerated. That is where her performativity is important, her costume, her vocal inflection, her use of erotic archetype. In her heterotopic realm, she orients herself in a place of governance. She must actively institute a new system of protocols and expectation. This is in response to the world outside where patriarchal systems run the show. So while I suggest she is operating in response, it is important to understand that she is not simply being reactive to it, but rather she interpreting parts of the system for the ultimate purpose of restoration. If that were not the purpose, but simply to articulate those same modes of power she is borrowing from patriarchy, she would only succeed in re-instating patriarchy’s very core.

If domination is about power dynamics, how much can women learn from it in order to change the game in the real world?

Sexual domination is always reflective of larger cultural power dynamics. Furthermore, the exploration of shadow aspects of sexuality is rooted much more deeply than our current political systems. Let us look at ancient mythology, inclusive of the bible. For every Eve there is a Lilith. For every Erishkagal there is an Innana. For all women, examining the shadow aspect of ourselves is necessary for the process of individuation and ultimately for the re-integration of the whole. The erotic archetype of the dominatrix inherently understands this and can teach us.

Q. Why men want to be enslaved by a woman?

To be dominated is to experience surrender, release, a deeper dive into consent and a reflection of one’s own autonomy. It defies rationale and logic and lives in the somatic and psychological parts of consciousness. For men, who have had a history of being dominant, it offers an opportunity to experience receiving what they have been giving. It completes the circle, balances and restores the sacred laws by which peace can exist in the universe. Personally, I believe to understand the full capacity of our psyche, everybody would benefit from experiencing exerting control and surrendering to it in the realm of desire.

Q. Why do sub men want to serve women? What does that service mean to them?

Service means different things to different people. Ultimately, it is driven by the desire to surrender to the will of another, or to re-enact the feeling of surrender. There is a lot of room for negotiation and inversion in that many men perceive an act of selfishness as an act of service. It is ultimately up to the dominatrix to train the man to service her unique needs.

Q. Does the definition of money enriches/changes its meaning in the relation between a mistress and a slave?

The presence of money is critical in understanding the world of domination beyond the play space of the dungeon. This is another important place where we examine the threading between the Pro-Domme and the Lifestyle Domme. Nothing exists in isolation so we cannot look at the dungeon play space exclusively of the greater context within which it operates. So we have to look at larger networks of financial exchange, thus look at capitalism, labor, markets, legislation, technology and visibility. This is a larger conversation.

Personally, and as both a Lifestyle and Pro Domme, I believe in the ethos of a submissive man’s responsibility (and desire) to enrich my life to the most of his ability. Finances are an absolute part of that, but different men bring different things to the table.

Q. Why men want to be feminized? What does that mean to them?

I believe that men want to be feminized to access a part of themselves to bring themselves into a greater and more complete whole. It is in a parallel way that a dominatrix accesses parts of herself by embodying masculine tropes. To identify with and play out these parts allows for greater empathy and understanding. The process of “feminization” means different things to different men and women. This relates back to my earlier point of expanding our understanding and language of what it means to be masculine or feminine. We cannot create false dichotomies or equivalencies such as male = power or female = weakness / submission. We have the opportunity to look at these aspects as textures, flavors and expressions of certain qualities. If we are aiming toward greater empathy building and communication, than experiencing the position of the other allows a previously inaccessible point of entry. Certainly, a man who desires to be feminized by wearing certain things or acting a certain way that our culture has identified with femininity may not fully understand that he is actually seeking release and understanding rather than humiliation and indulgence. The dominatrix is the one who ultimately understands this and uses his desire to transform and educate him. In that way, feminization can be a very subversive act.

Q. What role does shame play?

Shame is an important emotion to learn what we value. A dominatrix explores how shame veils and paralyzes our desire but can also be a healthy boundary in the psyche when understood.

Q. What meaning/value does pain have in the Dominatrix’ realm?

Pain is one way in which the threshold of tolerance and sensation is explored. In my experience, it is critical but small aspect of this practice. In the trifecta of fetishist, submissive & masochist, pain really only shows up in one third.

Q. What is subspace? Is there a domspace?

My definition of subspace is the altered state of mind and body that a submissive experiences as a result of his session with a dominatrix. This altered state is analogous to the experience one might have with hallucinogenic. Once that threshold is crossed, it invites that different logic (the heterotopic logic) to take place where he is increasingly more agreeable, sensitive, and perceptive than in the outside world. It may be experienced as a kind of high. I would define the domspace in that the dominatrix also operates from those heterotopic set of values with the submissive but she is the one holding the space, like a priestess or a guide and cannot allow herself to go so deeply into a state of surrender or release or the session is not psychologically safe.

Q. How can a figure of dominatrix contribute to feminist discourse?

To answer this question, I want to articulate that we cannot discuss the role of dominatrix without folding it into a larger context of sex work. It is critical that we continue to expand feminist discourse to include sexuality and sex work, its history, implication and current policies. The future of feminist discourse depends on our ability to retain space for the polyvocal: the multiple, possibly divergent perspectives of what defines feminism. I often like to pluralize the term to “feminisms” to articulate the diversity. We are now in the phase of Fourth Wave Feminism, with some opportunity to reflect on the previous three movements that have brought us here. While we are the benefactors of so much of the labor of previous movements, I notice a tremendous amount of infighting and faction amongst within movements. Both feminism and sexuality will always invite polemics, hence I believe that we much accept these spaces of discourse as an aspiration to learn and grow rather than to resolve. There is simply too much as stake in being a woman and a sexual being in the world to determine one simple answer.

One thing I hold true is that sex work has been feminism’s greatest champions since day one. Sex workers were of the first women to acquire and manage property, raise families outside a nuclear family structure, create coalitions, and retain the rights and freedoms that civilian woman accessed only many years later. And yet sex workers have been ostracized by all classes and political parties alike.

Let us return to the definitions we outlined in the beginning, of the Pro-Domme and the Lifestyle Domme. In some ways, I believe they are helpful. In others, I want to dismantle them or at least emphasize the importance of their dynamic entwinement. False taxonomies are part of contemporary feminism’s failure.

In my early days of working, I received an angry email from a man accusing me of the perversity of being a Pro Domme. While I had received judgement or threats for the abhorrent nature of my work from jealous boyfriends or prudish girlfriends, this man was upset about something else. You are not a real Domina he wrote in his email. You only do this as an act, a real Domina would never just do this for the money. You are just a fancy actress. His vitriolic note permeated my tender understanding of the very nature of domination and my burgeoning place within it. The words just for the money rang in my ears for a long time. I often wonder the extent that artists, chefs, musicians or many other professions are accused of compromise rather than celebrated for ingenuity and success as are the businessmen and politicians of the world.

This anecdote also revealed one of many forced dichotomies that operates to divide and subordinate women by forcing a homogenous singular identity to our pleasure and our power. This man, who identified as submissive, clearly had an agenda to institute and perpetuate his particular fantasy. For him, a real Domina would express her sexual domination irrespective of financial compensation. But a real Domina determines her protocols for domination according to her own principles, inclusive of demanding financial tribute if she so chooses. This is the agency at the core of a Dominatrix, be it Pro-Domme or Lifestyle. I only now understand the latent misogyny and entitlement that was at play in that email.

Sociologist Vivana Zellizer writes about the exchange of finances and intimacy in her text The Purchase of Intimacy. From a sociological position she examines ways in which sexuality (as one form of intimacy) and resources are intrinsically linked, not fundamentally opposed. She concludes it is ultimately a complex matrix and not a fixed schism. Contemporary feminism would be wise to look to other disciplines, be it sex work or sociology.