Different cultures within the community

Are there different cultures within hetero BDSM? I tend to think there are at least two: Maledom/femsub and Femdom/malesub. First of all, of course they have a lot in common. Probably eighty to ninety percent of their basic cultural patterns are exactly the same (albeit maybe slightly different in their format and presentation). However, there are a few basic differences that in my opinion make them different (mind you, I am not advocating one is better than the other, just different). So where are these differences?

First of all there is a difference in social acceptance. For example, the more or less general assumption is that men can take better care of themselves when it comes to security risks. Hence, a submissive male is generally seen as "less vulnerable" when compared to female submissives. To a certain extent that is true. Male sexuality in general is more open and men are much more used to share their sexual experiences and thoughts with others than women. Men are - more than women and again generally speaking - more used to things like masturbating, exploring their sex organ and the sex organs of others and are more likely to talk about this to others and experiment. Hence they have an advantage when it comes to taking risks and coping with vulnerability. This, by the way, should not be taken as a statement that the male submissive actually is or feels less vulnerable, because this is probably not true.

Another main difference is in the difference in sexual experience. The male experience simply is a more physical one, whereas the female experience is much more mental. This brings about differences in attitude, play forms, safety issues and interaction as well as a couple of cultural differences such as the fact that female submissives are much more receptive - and have a different attitude towards - fantasy.

Female submissives have other cultural differences, such as the conflict of roles (mother, career person, central function in the household/relationship and submissive) which is much more dominant to them then it is to male submissives (and usually much more of a problem). And to many there is the female (social) masochism and role-stereotyping in general (that is not good, but still very much "there").

By the way, here a nice example of similarities as well since this is something the lesbian world also has substantial problems with.

Male dominants - as opposed to their female counterparts - also have many differences, such as their own role conflicts (men aren't supposed to beat women and are brought up that way - in many cultures men still aren't supposed to show their softer sides, hence many have never learned how to do that). And, simply because the subs are different, the dominants are different.

There probably is a long list of other differences, one that should for example be considered is the fact that as a result of the widespread commercialization of the Femdom world, it is a lot easier for male subs to at least find a format to live out their fantasies than it is for female subs.

Is it functional to recognize such differences? I think it is. Not in an effort to conveniently cut up the cake in very tiny pieces in order to find sufficent similarities to determine one specific group, but in an effort to try and identify the differences and address them. Like brothers and sisters are part of the same family, they have their own specifics wants, needs, dynamics and interactions and understanding each other better starts with identifying and understanding the specifics of the other, identifying where differences and where similarities are. Just as it often is very counterproductive to address certain problems by only using either male or female logic (ultimately the combination of both is what usually produces result) it is not very productive to try and push everyone "into the same corset" when it comes to defining cultures. Understanding that there are similarities AND differences is what will eventually establish a better understanding of the entire group.

General significance

Finally, does all this have a relevance when it comes to educating and informing the outside world? Again my opinion here is a positive one. Why? Because the outside world is constantly mixing up different aspects of the different cultures, which does not help the debate nor the education. For example, whenever I am asked to participate in a television program, talkshow, do an interview or whatever on BDSM my first question for the journalist/producer will be "what BDSM?" That usually - apart from it being a very effective way to delay the entire production for a considerable period - leads to a fundamental discussion during the production phase about what the show/interview/documentary is supposed to achieve. That will automatically - usually - lead to a better understanding by the journalist(s)/producer(s) involved and will improve the quality of the end product as well as well the quality of future products by the same producer/journalist. I will do exactly the same when preparing a presentation in any other format and - for example when it comes to informing law enforcement people - one simply has to identify and explain the different cultures because the officier involved will have to be able to judge individual situations in real life and a gay scene is something that is usually totally different from a hetero scene in the first place (not to mention the cases where a male is in fact an abuse victim).

Bottom line: if we want to inform and educate others (which is I think what most of us - latent or not - want or would like to see happen) the first question to ask is: what do we want to inform and educate them about?