Beyond these natalist policies, the GOP is also looking to encourage the strengthening of the family unit, which, in their opinion, means having parents stay at home with the children (we know they mean the mother). 

How are they going to achieve this? By restricting who has access to child care tax credits, of course.

As society swings from the “girl boss” feminism of the 2010s to a more conservative outlook for the future, there has been a surge in social media content idealizing so-called “traditional” gender roles — as in, the submissive woman, in her “feminine energy” at home with the children while her husband (or boyfriend) is hard at work, channeling his “masculine energy.” 

TikTok peddles “Stay At Home Girlfriend” content, where women like influencer Kendel Kay (@kendelkay) make millions of dollars per year creating content that glamorizes the “soft life,” one where their man “pays for everything” so they don’t have to work. (I guess making millions off of content creation simply makes it a great hobby?)

In 2021, YouGov reported that over one third of partnered women are somewhat financially dependent on their partners. I can see how some women might think this would never happen to them. I thought so too.

 It wasn’t until he said, “I think I want to separate,” that I realized how much of my own power and autonomy I had given away, how enmeshed my dreams and projects were in that relationship, and how unstable I would be without it. My mom would later tell me I thought I was building on rock when really my foundation was built on sand. 

Thirty percent of women in the U.S. can’t afford some of their bills. Could I even afford living on my own? I had just recently gotten a full-time job after being unemployed, and frankly, financially irresponsible, for months. Fortunately, I was able to recoup, pick myself up, and put a roof over my head, but that doesn’t mean I’m not currently in debt. 

Call me jaded, but I, for one, will never let a man have that much power over my well-being again.

To be sure, choice feminism tells us that as long as we are choosing to do or not do certain things, we are being good feminists. But I do think decisions can be influenced by society. We don’t live in a vacuum. The media you consume, the political context you live in — we can’t ignore these things. And the more we are aware of these influences, and what is at stake, the better decisions we make.

Do whatever you want. Choose to be a SAHG. But recognize the risks you expose yourself to when giving away that much of your autonomy. Financial abuse occurs in 99% of domestic violence cases and can be a significant reason why victims stay in or return to abusive relationships.

They will continue to glamorize this lifestyle. You will continue to be pushed toward it. And maybe it is something you want. But make sure you look after yourself and your well-being. Have a strong safety net. Build a strong community around you. Just in case things don’t pan out the way you want them to.

I am very attracted to both. I mean, the whole world agrees how hot women are. And men have those incredibly bodies that can just pick you up right off of the floor. Also, both the attention of men and the attention of women feel great, in their own ways. So, I’ve thought a lot about this, and the only conclusion I have come to is- it’s the entitlement.

There’s this entitlement that men have that has always really driven me nuts. When I’m with a woman, there is no feeling of her being entitled to my body – or any part of me, for that matter. There’s this energetic respect that just exists. She knows that it’s my choice, and I know that it’s her choice, and we both know that either of our choices could change at any moment, and that’s completely okay.

I don’t feel that way when I’m with men. I feel that, somehow, just in their general demeanor; seemingly, to them, just by their mere existence, they feel entitled to a piece of me, and it’s not, in fact, my decision, but just their right. Like somehow they earned it because they said something nice a few minutes ago, or they held the door open. It’s like everything they do is in an effort to show you that they have earned that right. To you. To your body. And I don’t believe that anyone has the right to another person or being – I don’t care who you are.

You can see that entitlement spread across their face in a smile or a smirk, and the moment that they don’t get what they feel that they deserve, or what they feel they are entitled to, their whole demeanor shifts – their language their energy – it’s angry. And the ones that don’t get angry, they just seem confused by your denial. Like they don’t understand. Like they can’t fathom how you could possibly deny them this access that they so clearly deserve and have shown you they have earned. Even if you do have sex with them, it feels like there is this shift at some point where I am not sure if I even need to be there. Like, a couple of couch cushions would suffice.

Don’t get me wrong, there’s a part of me that’s somewhat jealous of this unapologetic way of taking up space in the world. But, ultimately, I’m glad I don’t have it. I’m glad that I don’t feel entitled to other people’s time or bodies or energy. My personal experience, and that’s all I can ever really speak to, is that with women this entitlement doesn’t exist. And to be sure, with some men it doesn’t either. And those men are gems – complete and total gentlemen deserving of everything the world has to offer. But, it’s rampant with men as a species. With women, it’s almost always reciprocal and respectful energy. It’s just this communion of shared energy that is somehow consensual by nature. And I think that even of reciprocal respect is pretty important in creating any form of partnership.

“We live in sexually interesting times, meaning a culture which manages to be simultaneously

hypersexualized and to retain its Puritan underpinnings, in precisely equal proportions.”

        -Laura Kipnis, Against Love: A Polemic

This paper’s title was inspired by lyrics from a song “Is It You?” by Cassie. As in any other traditional love song, the speaker expresses their need for “a lover, not a friend” (line 1, my emphasis). The speaker describes certain qualities that they are seeking for in their potential lover. For instance, the speaker says that they look for someone who is “not afraid to say the way they feel about you,” “someone who understands how [they] feel,” “someone to share [their] pain,” and “someone who [they] can cry with through the night” (lines 4, 19, 21). In the chorus, the speaker repeatedly asks whether “you” are the one for them who can fulfill all of these “requirements.” I recall listening to this song when I was in junior high as a thirteen-year-old kid. Funnily enough, back then, I was secretly in love with a boy who was in his final year of middle school. My much younger self seemed to have liked the song without any critical reflection on the lyrics, most likely because I was too preoccupied with relating to the song as someone who was clandestinely fantasizing about having a special, loving relationship with someone I admire. My crush was not viewed in a favorable light by people around me. A lot of my acquaintances treated my feelings as immature and shallow because I was admiring someone that I do not know very well. They believed I could not “truly” love somebody without spending a long time with them to learn about who they really are. A crush was not perceived to be deep and genuine enough to be “love.” Thanks to YouTube algorhythm, I happened to listen to this song again over a decade later, after experiencing many crushes in life. Then, I realized how ludicrous the lyrics are. The spaker is asking this one person, whom they call “a lover,” to take on the roles of a friend, parent, and caregiver—What a ridiculous amount of commitment! Furthermore, I have noticed that such love songs are a type of cultural product that perpetuates the bullshit idea of true and pure love forever stemming from an exclusive, romantic relationship with a lover.

Over time, going through my twenties, I began to question why so many people crave the specialness of a long-term relationship between two, generally heterosexual, individuals. People in South Korea, my mother country, are notoriously curious about other people’s love life. At times, they fail to respect the boundary and ask why someone is not in a romantic relationship when they are old enough to get married. Anyone who is not enjoying a coupledom are, often times, viewed with suspicion, as if they lack attractiveness as a human being or any other key attributes required to be a “marketable” being in the cis-heteropatriarchal romance-centric world.

Furthermore, I found the following to be the most problematic: There is also an implicit hierarchy amongst romantic relationships. I noticed that short-term relationships are frequently regarded as an incomplete or shallow, and have failed to develop into a longer and more meaningful relationships—no wonder why my crush was dismissed as a childish feeling that I would grow out of soon. This series of realizations about romantic relationships caused me to cast doubt on the idea of mature and pure love per se. Along the way, I discovered the concept of amatonormativity. Justin L. Clardy defines this term as “the belief that a central, dyadic romantic relationship that leads to marriage is the ideal romantic relationship, a universally shared goal, and should be pursued above all other relationships” (4). Regarding the ideology of love, there are several naturalized notions concerning sexuality, such as compulsory heterosexuality. Amatonormativity is also one of the romantic ideologies that drives individuals to enter a stable, exclusive dyadic romantic relationship and ultimately form a nuclear family that contributes to capitalist futurity.

Drawing on Clardy’s definition of amatonormativity, this essay seeks not only to dethrone complusory monogamy but also to dispel the myth of “true love”—the belief that humans are designed to seek romantic relationships and only a long-term romanitc-sexual relationship culminating in marriage is the ideal form of coupledom. I argue that such belief excludes individuals who do not participate in (dyadic) romantic relationships, whether they are aromantic, remain single by choice, or for other reasons. Non/monogamies free one from the shackles of the obligation to prioritize romance and marriage in their life, allowing them to value even short-term relationships as opportunities to learn about themselves.

Nevertheless, I would like to note that my objective is not to address non/monogamies solely in a celebratory manner. I admit that even among non/monogamous communities, certain non/monogamous relationships are deemed superior over others, contingent upon the degree of “seriousness” or the level of exclusivity in the relationship. For instance, consensual non/monogamists who practice polyamory, polyfidel, or consensual open marriage may judge those who refuse to engage in romantic relationships but only desire sex such as one-night stands or threesomes as superficial. Nathan Rambukkana criticizes this act of “privileging” certain forms of non/monogamies. He underlines that “polyamory’s focus on the notion of ‘responsible non-monogamy’ does not deconstruct privileged hetero- and mononormative assumptions about non-monogamy in general but instead carves out a space of acceptability within non-monogamous intimacy” (119). In other words, individuals engaging in consensual or “responsible” polyamory may be practicing another form of romantically and sexually exclusive relationship, which could be viewed as an emulation of monogamous marriages. Such interconnectedness between monogamy and non/monogamies implies that non/monogamies are not inherently radical or innovative alternatives to compulsory monogamy as long as they are enmeshed in the ideologies and practices of love that circulate in amatonormative societies. Therefore, pushing back against amatonormativity is an attempt to critique dominant ideologies of love that lie not only in mononormative societies but at the intersection of compulsory monogamy and non/monogamies.

I am going to share one informal interview I had with Elmo (a nickname), who is a twenty-five-year-old art teacher living in the Midwest. They identify themselves as non/monogamist and this conversation provides us with some insight regarding how to view love and love life and how we can go against the amatonormative society’s ideology of true love.

Unruly Love: Conversation with a Non/monogamist 

My conversation with Elmo began by listening to their story of how they became non/monogamous and what was their first experience in non/monogamous relationship like. I asked Elmo when they started to identify themself as a non/monogamist and whether there was any special occasion that drew their interest in practicing non/monogamies. Elmo explains:

Elmo: What led me to identify as a non/monogamist was my experience in a monogamous relationship. I was in a monogamous relationship with a man before for four and a half years, and he wanted a very traditional kind of relationship where we get married and maybe have a family and all of that, and I experienced a lot of feelings of guilt in that relationship, for even having feelings for other people, for having crushes on other people, and I would really get in my head about that, and then on his ends, he was very jealous of my friendships with other men, and I remember him like calling my male friendships like “oh…go talk to your other boyfriends” … he would throw that at me so that relationship ended in 2019, and then, after that, I very quickly realized that I wanted a different kind of relationship. Then, in the next relationship that I was in, I started to have those conversations about, “What do you think of polyamory?” And the next person I was with was interested in it, and it took a totally different approach to relationships than my past partner, and what I really appreciated about this relationship was that I actually liked talking about other people with this person; I liked hearing his stories about other partners and other experiences. I liked telling about mine! And this was like what I haven’t had before, and I think that made us closer as we were able to share more about ourselves. So that was my first experience exploring polyamory. 

This conversation highlights how the traditional monogamous relationship, which ultimately seeks to “settle down” by marrying, may feel restricting to certain individuals. Instead of feeling entitled to keep their partner(s) entirely to themselves at all times, Elmo prefers talking about other people that they have feelings for to their current partner(s), indicating that Elmo is not pursuing exclusivity to make their romantic relationship unique and special but rather asserting that a person’s attraction to multiple people does not diminish their love for their current partner.

Elmo further explains how the practice of non/monogamy helped them change their life.

Elmo: I think it has changed my life by making me more open to the different types of people that I have been having relationships with. Because opening the door to polyamory for me meant that I didn’t have to put the pressure on myself to find a person that could be everything for me. And I can experience these relationships with different people and appreciate them for who they are instead of trying to stress out whether, “Will this be a long-term thing?” or “Are you the right one for me? Can you do this and this and this for me?” But instead, I can be with…just be with them, get to know them, and then just appreciate each relationship for what it is, instead of like trying to find the perfect person …

What stands out in this response is the fact that Elmo has freed themselves from the idea of “long-term relationships” or an obligation to find “the perfect person,” but they have learned to be “open to different types of people.” Elmo’s reponse suggests that giving themselves a chance to start a new relationship should not be bounded by the idea of long-lasting relationships. Possessing the expectation that a relationship will last into the future can be constraining since it forces people to estimate the length of the connection in advance and prevents them from giving it a chance if they believe it will not last long. What matters to Elmo is what they can learn or earn from each relationship, regardless of its length. Focusing on the uniqueness of each person one dates is deeply linked with contesting the belief in “perfect partner.” Elmo’s preferred style of dating recognizes that one does not have to feel entitled to such “a perfect person,” as they can date more than one person with different strengths and attractiveness. The change in life Elmo experienced by becoming polyamorous suggests a possibility of growing into a well-rounded person by gaining a full self-understanding through diverse love experiences with multiple people.

Joey: Could you tell me more in detail about learning to be alone rather than considering a [love] relationship a huge part of your life? I think that part is closely aligned with this project.

Elmo: Ok so, I guess like comparing my long-term monogamous relationship to my polyamorous relationships, in my monogamous relationships, there were a lot of conversations about our role that we’re going to have in each other’s life in the future and will we be able to fufill those roles for each other, and so there were conversations like, “Oh! He’s going to be a doctor. Will I be able to be the type of person who can be kind of a doctor’s wife-kind-of-person and socialize with all of his fancy friends with everything…” Because I have always been a bit more eccentric and loosey-goosey, and so that I can see, there was the pressure of how I was going to mold myself into this future person’s… to be this person’s partner for the rest of my life. And then now, in relationships, I think I’m more focused on things like quality time. [I like] spending this time with this person and just enjoying each other’s energy and being in each other’s presence. And, yeah, we don’t always have so many conversations about the future and how we’re going to… what roles we are going to play in the future and how they are going to play out. But [I am] just focusing on enjoying the time that I have with people. And I think that has also probably taught me to enjoy the time I have with myself too, and just like experiencing the present moment with myself.

Elmo’s experience with a traditional monogamous relationship that posits marriage exemplifies what happens if we decenter traditional dyadic romance from one’s life.      

The point about spending time with oneself is particularly noteworthy in this response. Elmo says that when they were in a traditional monogamous relationship, they often pondered how to play the role of the ideal partner that suits their partner’s material conditions, including his profession and social life. However, as a polyamorist, Elmo is now freed to enjoy the time alone rather than planning the future with someone else. Elmo’s anecdote implies that amatonormative worship of marriage can limit one’s self-formation by confining them to permanent relationship with one person. Non/monogamies, which are not bound by the idea of  “happily ever after,” shed light on the fact that living alone does not mean that the individual is susceptible to loneliness. Rather, the individual can engage in a more independent self-formation without being hampered by the amatonormative relationship’s insistence on perpetual responsibility.   

Joey: Do you feel conflict between your understanding of love and dominant ideas of love? Have you ever tried to manage that conflict?

Elmo: One conflict that I have felt is that the length of a relationship is equal to its worth. So like seeing a relationship that lasts for a decade, that scene is like the top, like what you’re looking for. And then, relationships that last maybe a couple of months—it seems like those don’t even matter. That’s nothing. And what I have found is that relationships lasted even a couple of months taught me so many things about myself. Just being with those people unearthed a different part of myself that I didn’t know existed. And I carry that with me. So the different relationships that I had have all done that. I think because when I get to know someone else on an intimate level, then I also get to know myself intimately, and every person is so unique and different, so that learning happens in a different way with each person, which I really appreciate. So that’s part of how I fight the sort of dominant ideas, like the length of the relationship being [considered important.] What’s important is that I really value these relationships that I’ve had even for short periods of time.

Elmo critiques amatonormative beliefs in “long-term and serious” relationships, which circles us back to my anecdote on crush. Elmo reemphasizes that even though one of the relationships lasted a couple of months, they learned a lot about themselves. Elmo’s emphasis on learning allows us to presume that non/monogamies are more than just about the relationship; they are also about learning about oneself and shaping one’s selfhood. Simply put, self-making through the practice of non/monogamies is a mode of resistance against the amatonormative myth of long-lasting relationships as a true and mature form of love. I would like to conclude the interview section by introducing Elmo’s lovely metaphor:

Elmo: Sometimes I thought about… you know how a cat will want the door open even if they don’t actually want to be in the other room or on the other side of the door? They just want the door open so that they know that they can go into the other room. Like, they’ll stay at the aisle of the door, then you open the door, and then they just stay in the room that they’re in … Yeah, that’s the comfort to me in polyamory. The freedom of knowing that I have these paths even if I’m not actively trying to go down every path.

Even if one identifies as a non/monogamist, they may not practice it right away. However, they can reassure themselves that there is another road they can follow any time if they feel suffocated while living under the pressure of compulsory monogamy—what Elmo refers to as “the freedom of knowing.” The non-compulsory nature of non/monogamies frees one from amatonormative constraints and allows one to unearth previously unknown tendencies and preferences, leading one to a more dynamic and multidimensional love life.

Though this may sound overly obvious and outmoded, my conversation with Elmo, as well as previous studies conducted by other scholars of non/monogamies, prove that love can be practiced in a variety of ways. On that note, I would like to thank all the scholars who have bravely performed research on non/monogamies as a way to combat amatonormativity, despite all the prejudices and criticisms they may have faced for defying mainstream norms. Above all, I would also like to thank my numerous younger selves for always overcoming devastation and confusion caused by seemingly “immature,” “silly,” and “inauthentic” love relationships that they exposed themselves to and landing on this unconventional style of relationship that will lead them to new adventures. If I could travel through time and meet my 13-year-old self, I would tell them that they will have a lot of heartbreaks and they will have a hard time pulling themselves out of the fantasy of love withheld by many other people around them (perhaps that might a bit brutal thing to say to a middle schooler). Nevertheless, I would also give them hope by saying that they will meet a lot of comrades (namely, Foucault, perhaps, a good friend who will torture them when they get into graduate school) who will grace them with knowledge they need to navigate the complex web of amatonormativity and cis-hetero-patriarchy. I truly wish all the best to non/monogamists and their relatas.

Works Cited

Clardy, Justin L. Why It’s Ok to Not Be Monogamous, Routledge, 2023.

Kipnis, Laura. Against Love: A Polemic, Vintage Books, 2004.

Elmo (redacted information). Interview. Conducted by Joey Junsu Hong. 21 March 2024.

Rambukkana, Nathan. Fraught Intimacies: Non/Monogamy in the Public Sphere, UBC Press,

2016.

As a dancer, I find it thrilling to launch my body into space. It is a complex act in which you monitor your weight at each moment, intuit the speed of your fall and anticipate the recovery. All the while, you revel in the sheer joy of being off-balance, off-kilter, wild and free as the air hits your skin. Perching on a diagonal is a defiant act in a world that often asks us to remain complacently in verticality.

Both my husband and I embraced living on the edge – but for different reasons. It wasn’t until we walked through the Garden of Exile in the Jewish Museum Berlin that I understood how chaos shaped his relationship to the world. Designed by Daniel Libeskind, the garden gives the present-day visitor a kinesthetic experience of the disorientation the Jews might have experienced during the Holocaust. Forty-nine concrete pillars are laid out in a square so narrowly spaced that you can only walk through the pillars alone. What you don’t know and can’t see is that the ground below is not level. The slanting ground creates a constant state of unsteadiness as you stumble from one pillar to the next.

As a Jew, born in Berlin in 1932, uneven ground shaped my husband’s world view. Throughout life, he fluctuated between the terror and displacement he felt as a child while walking through broken glass and burning buildings during Kristallnacht to a giddy sense of adventure he experienced as a child while escaping Berlin with his family hidden beneath a pile of coal on the back of a truck. Once in Belgium the family hid in the attic of a pension where guests set their shoes out at night to be cleaned. Already a rascal, he snuck down from the attic and switched all the shoes and laughed uproariously at the chaos in the morning. His aunts and uncles were unable to leave Belgium and were killed in the Holocaust. If you can’t trust the earth, being off balance becomes your norm.

I was raised in midwestern suburbs in a loving environment. At five I became a dutiful student of ballet, struggling with the daily task to defy gravity. I learned to balance bone over bone, creating an illusion of stillness and calm. A product of the 15^th century royal courts, ballet held a high value for verticality because it connected royalty to the gods, creating an ethereal quality of heavenliness.

I was born in 1951 and came of age in the ‘60s fully immersed in the feminist movement, so connecting to royalty and gods was counter to my spirit. Revolution was in the air and I plunged in head first. I encountered modern dance at the University of Utah in 1969 having entered the dance program as a ballet student. One day, I snuck over to a modern dance class and saw dancers flying across the space to wild raucous music, gloriously pitching themselves into the unknown. I found my aesthetic soul that day.

Throwing myself intentionally off balance became the center of my choreographic research. In this I was rooted in modern dance history. In the early 20^th century Doris Humphrey shaped her dances on the principle of “fall and recovery,” a tension between the stability and risk. She famously described a fall as “…an arc between two deaths.”  I always thought she meant between beginnings and endings as well. Mining that arc seemed grandiose.

I was playfully experimenting with the pull of gravity when I met my husband, so I attribute gravity for our spiritual collision. We fell head over heels in love from the very first moment. I offered stability with a yearning for risk, he personified risk and was searching for stability. Falling in love captures the intense eros kind of love we felt during the initial swooning. However, that crazy love could not stop life’s struggles. Build a house on a sand dune with no money? Sure. Start a new career with no prior knowledge or experience? Why not? Adopt a puppy near the end of life? Of course.

Gratefully, my husband never allowed us to fall out of love. He was an incurable romantic from a by-gone era of opening doors and pulling out chairs for ladies. My feminist, bra burning instincts softened as I twirled on the dance floor to Etta James and fell dramatically into his arms. He would dip me so low my head would come dangerously close to the ground and we would laugh at the glorious thrill of it all.

In rehearsals, my dancers and I were able to take risks because we knew how to counter-balance not only our own weight, but each other’s as well, by offering a leg or a back to slide down as we flew in and out of each other’s bodies. Dancing in tandem with gravity gives one a sensation that stasis and thus verticality is a figment of the imagination; each moment requires a unique response to the ever present now. Being on the edge rooted me in the tenuousness of life. Tenuousness seemed important when married to a man 19 years older than me.

Between the ages of 70 and 90, my husband turned a hobby of woodworking into a passionate reality by designing and building not one but two gorgeous homes for us and he filled them with stunning hand-made furniture. At age 85, he would be obstinately perched on ladders, hammering away, singing love songs, completely unaware that his body was beginning to change.

However, we were aging and it was changing both of us. Falling became something less romantic. I can’t remember when I first became more tentative. Perhaps it was simply grabbing for the railing while going downstairs. Careful was once a value we both detested – a sure sign of looming death. We weren’t ready for it.

When he hit his tenth decade, his normally lithe and athletic body began to falter. Multiple issues caused his nervous system to relinquish its job to keep him upright. I collected wheelchairs and walkers, which he vehemently resisted. He would say, somewhat disgusted, “I will look old and frail if I use those things.” Frustrated with his lack of interest in his own safety, I replied angrily, “You are old and frail.” I have regretted that comment ever since because I realized I was mad at him for everything that I loved about him. He was never going to change his wild and free spirit just to stay alive.

He continued to fall, so whenever possible, I slid his 185 pounds gracefully down my leg and onto the floor. Remarkably, he embodied my falling techniques, counter-balancing his weight gracefully to the floor. His frail body lacked the rebound, but remarkably he didn’t break bones. Even with our combined skills, multiple falls meant he became less active and therefore weaker.

He humored me by mimicking a fall, but I could see the dangerous trajectory coming and didn’t find it funny. One day, he moved forward into a fall, reached for me, and stammered, “help me,” but this time I was not close enough to catch him. I watched in horrific slow motion as he stumbled, careening toward a marble table. Panicked. Shortened breath. I saw and felt it all and realized the love of my life and I were relentlessly in a dance with the ending trajectory of Humphrey’s arc.

He finally succumbed to gravity and left this human world.

I step carefully down stairs now, painfully in awe of the earth’s power to spin our bodies and souls, not only into the air and down to the earth, but into other dimensions. For me, the ephemeral nature of life is now not only a practice but a living reality I must accept.

For my love, I imagine a playground in the sky where you can take passionate risks and free-fall to your heart’s desire.

While some domestic violence advocates may use this opportunity to discuss awareness, the conversation needs to include a discussion of how survivors can learn to accept the reality of the situation they’re in. Awareness is about education. Increasing knowledge. While this is important, one can be highly educated about abuse and not be aware that they are experiencing abuse because they haven’t accepted that it could be a possibility. I didn’t accept it as a possibility.

Since I began the PhD program at University of Michigan in September 2018, the university I attend began sending  an online survey to graduate students every year, in an effort to increase awareness,reduce sexual and gender-based violence and to promote healthy relationships in the community. One of the primary things this survey intends to do is to provide students with the skills they need to recognize gender-based violence. The survey goes through the various legal definitions of stalking, harassment, domestic violence, and allows students to select state-specific information. I even learned about a new type of abuse, academic abuse, or preventing someone from receiving an education. Though I completed this 45-minute, two -part survey for more than  three years, I wasn’t aware I had been experiencing abuse in my relationship the entire time. The third time was, if not the charm, the lightbulb moment. “I can’t be experiencing abuse,” I said to myself. “I would recognize it.” But that’s the point. It’s a classic abuse tactic. Abusers make you believe that it’s you and them against the world so that later when the thought comes to your mind that they might be abusive, you dismiss it. They build your trust. And that’s exactly what I did when I thought he might be abusive. I trusted him. I dismissed the idea.

But I shouldn’t have. I was experiencing severe abuse. So severe that I had suicidal ideation. I started drinking heavily to cope. Because I hadn’t accepted that I was experiencing abuse, I attributed my depression to the COVID-19 pandemic. “This pandemic is really hard.” I would say. But I didn’t know I was experiencing the shadow pandemic. Since the COVID-19, there has been an increase in the number of women and girls who experience violence. A research study found that new or increased severity of violence was significantly more prevalent among those who were essential workers, pregnant, unable to afford rent, unemployed/underemployed or had recent changes to their job, had partners with recent changes to employment, and those who had gotten tested or tested positive for COVID-19.

But, after searching online for resources, joining online communities, and learning more about the mistreatment I had been experiencing, I finally accepted that I indeed had been experiencing abuse. And it was then that I made the decision to leave.

Awareness is generally seen as the first step to addressing and improving health outcomes. But, awareness assumes acceptance. It assumes that the person has accepted that this health outcome can happen to me. On average, it takes two years for someone to exit an abusive relationship. I did it in six months. For me, acceptance not awareness, was the catalyst to my leaving.

It can be hard to accept that the people we love–and who claim to love us–sometimes wear masks. It was hard for me. But once I did, and was able to secure the financial resources to leave, I did. So, start the process. If you have even the slightest inclination that you might be experiencing abuse, accept it. Don’t dismiss it. Don’t let the mask hide reality.

My Grandma Sparkly:
“We met when I was 18 and he was 31. He was in the army. Wait, let me start over.

I remember I was at a baseball game with some guy who I can’t remember now. We went to the bar after for drinks–it was the popular place to be at the time. I was friends with the bartender, that’s how I got all the drinks. There were so many people in uniform there, I honestly don’t even remember seeing him. But this is how he told the story: he said that when I walked into the bar, he stared at me, then looked to his buddies at the table and said ‘that’s the girl I’m going to marry.’ He got my number from my friend, the bartender, and called me the next day. I told him I wouldn’t go out with him until he met my mother. So he did. It was 1943. Two years after the war started. Things were different then. If you married someone, you did everything you could to stay together. You worked out your differences and continued to love. Divorce? I never thought of it. Murder? Oh, several times. We were married 53 years.”

My dad, about my mom:
“I fell in love with her strength. After everything that woman went through, she chose to persevere. It took my breath away.”

My old boss, about her husband:
“He sat in front of my in homeroom. He asked to borrow a quarter so I gave him one. The next day he paid me back. No boys ever do that. That’s how I knew. At the dance that week he asked me to be his partner. My best friend cried because she knew he liked me more, and there was nothing she could do.”

Our elderly Italian family friend, to my mom:
“When you’re married…you’re going to fall in and out of love with your partner. Some days you are going to struggle and think it’s going to end. Just remember that everyone goes through good times and bad times. Take a step back, take a deep breath, and everything will be ok. You will fall in love with them again.”

A friend I met while studying abroad:
“There is no perfect person out there. People are so worried about finding a soulmate–they are always searching for the “right” one. But that’s not it. There are going to be two people who make it right.”

My mentor, about his wife:
“We worked together at the New York State Office of Mental Health. Mary hired me, she was my boss. She’s always been the boss.”

My friend from college, about her parents:
“My mom was in the Peace Corps in Thailand and my dad was in the United States. My dad would take my mom’s aunt to the grocery store and he would take audio tapes of the trip. Then, he’d send them to my mom overseas to she could listen. It was so sweet. And, of course, he wrote her lots of letters.”

My friend, about her baby:
“I know that some people think it’s odd that I co-sleep with my baby. But when I wake up next to him, that’s when I feel most alive. Feeling his love, it brings me life and it makes me strong.”

My Grandma Emily:
Grandma: “We met at Big Boys.”
Me: “What’s a Big Boy?”
Grandma: “You know–the drive-in restaurant. He pulled up next to me in the car. I told him my phone number and he wrote it down quickly on the dashboard and then erased it so his buddy couldn’t see it. He’d memorized the number so quickly. He was so good to me, always picking me up and taking me on dates. There was something funny–one time we went out with his work friends from Greece and I got so sick on their alcohol. He drove me to his aunt’s house and I threw up all over the driveway. And it was the first time I had met her.”

A friend:
“Marry someone who wants to marry you. It sounds simple, but plenty of people feel pressured or are trying to make another person happy. Take it from me, someone who is getting a divorce. Marriage is important….waiting is ok. And hey, never getting married, that’s ok too.”

A story two employees told me at a Payless in Austin, TX:
Daniel: “Oh you see, I worked at Payless. One of the other works told me ‘one day, a girl is going to walk through those doors and knock your mustache off.’ I laughed.”
Olga: “When I was little, I had an amazing teacher in Mexico named Norma Robles. Since the kids picked on me and she took care of me, I always wrote my name as Olga F. Robles. Over and over and over. I practiced writing my name that way every day. Later, when I was living with my mom in the U.S., she suggested I work at the Payless Shoe Store. She said a nice man ran the store and gave people jobs who couldn’t speak English.”
Daniel: “So Olga came into the store and I gave her the job. I didn’t know any Spanish and she hardly knew any English, But I knew I wanted to be with her.”
Olga: “He was the wonderful man at the store. And his name was Daniel Robles…..like the name I had been writing all along. I really could be Olga Robles. We believe in fate. We believe that things are meant to be and always find a way.”

There are many different forms of abuse. Most commonly we encounter abuse that is physical, psychological, or emotional (De Bem Machado et al., 2017). However, other types of abuse exist such as economic abuse, financial abuse, and secondary abuse (Younger, 2011)  – the last of these we will address later on in this paper. The most common form of abuse is psychological abuse. This type of abuse is defined as ‘exposing a person to behavior that may result in psychological trauma, including anxiety, chronic depression, or PTSD.’ (Drijber et al., 2012). Psychological abuse consists of bullying, ignoring, threatening or blackmailing ones partner (Drijber et al., 2012). Furthermore, there are two established forms of couples violence that is considered abusive. One is of the occasional outburst of violence, with the other being classified only as ‘patriarchal terrorism’ (Muelleman, n.d.). These differing acts of abuse both constitute forms of domestic violence and are impactful on the victim in a number of ways. 

It can be noted, that to be a survivor of DV is to go through a terrible ordeal. It can be assumed that the survivor will have multiple disparaging outcomes regarding their trauma. Broadly, experiencing DV has been shown to negatively impact ones mental health and overall well-being (Eichhorn, n.d.; Umberson et al., 1998). More specifically, research has shown a correlation between being a victim of abuse and having PTSD, depression, suicidal ideation, psychosomatic symptoms and general psychological distress (De Bem Machado et al., 2017). Beyond this, victims of IPV are shown to have higher rates of alcohol and substance abuse than their non-victim peers (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000 ; Umberson et al., 1998) . Externally, being involved in an IPV relationship has shown to have a negative impact on future relationships (romantic and otherwise) (Higgins et al., 2010). Overall, it can be decidedly shown that being the victim in an IPV relationship has a hugely impactful influence on ones life. 

CURRENT RESOURCES

If there is a silver lining to this stormy cloud, it is that there is an extensive amount of help and resources for women experiencing DV. In 1994, President Clinton signed into law the Violence Against Women’s Act. This movement would go on to donate over 1.6 billion dollars towards women suffering from DV (Hines & Douglas, 2009). There are also laws protecting women survivors in all 50 states (Younger, 2011) . Most recent estimates show there to be over 2,000 domestic violence programs and shelters in place to aid women who are fleeing domestic violence situations (Clevenger & Roe-Sepowitz, 2009). In a recent study, 95% of women who took part in these programs reported that they were mostly or very satisfied with the services they received. Reasons for satisfaction included feeling validated and seen, they were able to hear other women’s experiences, and they received referrals for additional resources (Umberson et al., 1998). It can be well noted here that not only did these women receive care, but that that care was also adequate and impactful on the woman’s life. 

The issue at hand, however, boils down to the idea that all of these services are, at best, geared towards woman victims. At worst, these programs can create alienation with men victims – a community that is already sorely marginalized and forgotten. When discussing intimate partner violence, it is common that the average person will envision a battered house wife. While this is our go to idea regarding IPV, in actuality men are the victims in 25% to 50% of IPV situations (De Bem Machado et al., 2017; Hines & Douglas, 2016; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000). The National Family Violence Survey, in their most recent iteration, found perpetration rates by women to be 12.4 per 100, and by men to be 12.2 per 100 (Muller et al., 2009). The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence estimated that 835,000 men are abused by their partners every year and a male is abused by his partner every 14.6 seconds (Younger, 2011) . Finally, studies show that approximately 1 in 5 men have experienced physical violence in an intimate relationship. This equates to about 19.3% of the population (De Bem Machado et al., 2017). These statistics, while shocking, help draw a picture for us that, not only are males sometimes victims of domestic violence, but the case could be made that they are just as often times the victims as women are. 

LASTING EFFECTS

There are some distinct characteristics that separate abuse perpetrated by men and abuse perpetrated by women. Like women, psychological abuse is the most common form of abuse suffered by men. However, there are additional coercive and controlling behaviors not found in male perpetrated violence (Hines & Douglas, 2009). Secondary abuse, sometimes also known as legal-administrative abuse, occurs far more with women perpetrators than with male perpetrators. This form of abuse occurs when one partner uses the legal and judicial systems in order to hurt their victim (Hines & Douglas, 2009 ; Higgins et al., 2010). What transpires here is that female perpetrators manipulate the legal and judicial systems in an attempt to gain child custody, and enact restraining orders against their victims – often times using false allegations (Hines & Douglas, 2009; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000). The occurrence of secondary abuse can have long lasting, negative impacts on male victims lives. They may lose their children, have restraining orders placed against them – impacting their careers, or even be arrested on false allegations. All of these situations create an egregiously harmful and disparaging situation for male victims. 

Mental health wise, male victims are just as susceptible as female victims. Men who experience IPV are shown to have greater levels of depression, stress, psychological distress and PTSD than their non-abused peers (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000; Younger, 2011) . Emotionally, men report feeling angry, hurt, shameful, and fearful as a result of the abuse they suffered (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000). Ultimately, male victims of IPV are more likely to commit suicide than their female counterparts (Younger, 2011). This could be due to a number of factors, including lack of resources, stigma surrounding their abuse, feelings of shame and a loss of their masculinity, or increased negative mental health outcomes. 

OUTCOMES FOR MALE SURVIVORS

It has easily been established that men experience similar, if not increased, distress as a result of suffering from IPV as women victims. However, they do not have the same benefits as the female survivors as listed above. Of the previous resources explained, not a single one of them catered to male survivors. This, in turn, creates a situation where an already isolated individual is further forced into isolation, shame and guilt for attempting to reach out (Higgins et al., 2010). Men face both external and internal barriers when it comes to reaching out for help (Umberson et al., 1998). Externally, men face issues such as a scarcity of appropriate resources, biases within the legal and judicial systems, stigmatization within the survivor community (De Bem Machado et al., 2017; Hines & Douglas, 2009; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000). Internally, they must overcome feelings of denial, shame, fear of not being believed, and internalized gender stereotypes (De Bem Machado et al., 2017). These factors, and their accompanying repercussions, lay out a detailed and somber framework that makes up the typical male survivor experience. Together, they show that not only have we not taken men seriously, we have gone a step further by, at best ignoring them, and at worst ridiculing them for being victims. 

A hugely impactful external factor that most domestic violence victims encounter is law enforcement. While law enforcement is already well known for not taking any domestic violence calls seriously (Umberson et al., 1998), they take it a step further when it comes to male IPV victims. Many male victims report that police are unwilling to take their report against the female perpetrator ( Drijber et al., 2012; Hines & Douglas, 2009; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000; Umberson et al., 1998). Furthermore, some male victims describe situations where they are ridiculed by the police officers (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000; Umberson et al., 1998). In an egregious turn of events, some male victims are actually arrested as the perpetrator after having called the police out (Higgins et al., 2010; Umberson et al., 1998). This heinous behavior is a contributing factor to the stigmatization and demoralization of male IPV survivors. When they turn for help and they are instead just met with anguish reinforces to these male victims that their pain means nothing and they have no one they can rely on.  

The situation is no better in the judicial system. On their very best day, our justice system shows a limited capacity of being able to understand or even recognize patterns of male victimization. This lack of empathy can at times exacerbate problems for male victims (Higgins et al., 2010). In addition, male survivors of IPV report experiencing a gender-stereotyped approach with their situations. Even in cases where the male victims had corroborating evidence of a violent female partner, they were subjected to harsh mistreatment, including lost of custody of their children and false allegations of abuse (Umberson et al., 1998). The instance in which the courts obvious bias is perhaps most evident is through the procurement of restraining orders. Studies have shown that, not only is there a sex-differentiation of court responses, but these protective orders are given in preferential treatment to women (Muller et al., 2009). This harsh mistreatment of male IPV survivors is just one piece in the puzzle that represents the barriers men IPV survivors must overcome in an effort to obtain justice. 

A reasonable next move for male victims is to seek more informal support. Often times this manifests through the man attempting to contact a survivors hotline. However, this outcome is not one that proves to be beneficial for male victims. When pressed about contacting victims hotlines, 67% of men reported that agencies were not helpful, often times being turned away for services (Umberson et al., 1998). Only 25% of male victims reported being connected to helpful resources (Umberson et al., 1998). In the most extreme cases, male victims were made out to be the perpetrators of abuse and were referred to batterers programs (Umberson et al., 1998). The accumulation of these experiences give us a substantial view into the lives of male victims and their inability to seek care in almost any situation. 

In cases where the legal system is of no use, and helplines have turned them away, male survivors will often times turn to their social support network for guidance and reassurance. In fact, 62% of men share their experiences with a trusted loved one (Drijber et al., 2012). Unfortunately, their reactions are not always ones of positivity. According to male survivors, their loved ones reactions range from support, to surprise, and even to victim blaming (Hines & Douglas, 2009). Often times, loved ones hold a bias towards a gender-stereotyped reaction towards male victims that becomes evident with the male survivors admittance (De Bem Machado et al., 2020). These biases are linked with assumptions regarding the likelihood and plausibility of male IPV survivors. As addressed in the next section, their perceptions of masculinity conflict with the information being provided to them, creating a bias that they then react on (Hines & Douglas, 2009). This requirement for gender norms and the insistence upon masculinity create a scenario for the male survivor where they are forced to choose between the assumed masculinity, and their actual identity as a victim. This creates a turmoil within the survivor where they must eschew either their masculine identity or their identity as a victim. 

INTERNALIZED STIGMA 

Internally, male victims also face a difficult battle encompassing stark internalized stigma and resulting gender-stereotypes. Men often face a variety of emotional factors when they consider reaching out for help. When addressing their emotions surrounding seeking help, men report feeling embarrassed (Drijber et al., 2012), shameful (Younger, 2011), or they feel that they will not be believed by the police or their loved ones (Hines & Douglas, 2009; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000; Younger, 2011). In most normative spheres, it is expected that men will act and react in ways that will reinforce the masculine stereotypes that have been thrust upon us. This will include acting stoic, strong, and overall unemotionally. This ideation spills over into all aspects of our lives – including, as is evident here, male victims ability and confidence in seeking help for their domestic violence situations. This is shown in our research through the realization that men are often told to solve their own problems (Umberson et al., 1998) and that actually seeking care will not conclude in a way that will solve their problems (Younger, 2011). This designation can be so severe that, when asked, many men are not even able to even articulate what has happened to them. Instead of addressing their emotional response to those events (Hines & Douglas, 2009), they will just describe the events that have happen (Higgins et al., 2010). The occurrence of gender-stereotypes and gender norms place these men in such a poor situation that they feel unable to report  their abuse or risk becoming further victimized by the same people being tasked with supporting them. 

The Gender Paradigm

Much of this stigmatization is a result of the presence of the gender paradigm. The gender paradigm, sometimes called the patriarchal paradigm, is a set of beliefs that reside with the ideal that domestic violence occurs due to the presence of the patriarchy and male dominance. This paradigm has impacted all aspects of IPV responses, as it deepens the importance of female victims suffering, while minimizing the victimization felt by male survivors (Drijber et al., 2012). They posit that domestic violence is an example of power and control, with the perpetrator always exercising their control over their victims. To this end, the gender paradigm notes that men are unable to be victims of domestic violence, and women unable to be the perpetrators, due to the overall power imbalance that exists between men and women (Hines et al., 2007; Hines & Douglas, 2009; Younger, 2011, 2). As is evident above, these views can create a situation where it is almost impossible for a male victim to receive any sort of meaningful care and support.

This paradigm, and its resulting societal outcomes, have had a drastic impact on both the external and internal barriers that a male victim will encounter when seeking out resources (De Bem Machado et al., 2017). Externally, we can see the situations listed above where men either do not report their abuse, or they are ridiculed and shamed for doing so. It is exceedingly evident that these services highly support the victimization of women, while ignoring men’s victimization (Drijber et al., 2012). In addition to law enforcement, the judicial system, and DV resources, there is also evidence that this gender stereotype paradigm also exists within the mental health professionals field – further barring male survivors for seeking life saving care (Muller et al., 2009). Research has also shown us that the gender paradigm impacts how family and loved ones view male survivors (Higgins et al., 2010). When approaching loved ones for support, the loved one may in fact react negatively due to internalized biases they hold regarding men and domestic violence. The fact that one that knows us so well can be impacted to the point of disbelieving is just due to out gender truly highlights the power and influence this gender paradigm has. 

Internally, male survivors also face serious stigmatization. Many of these male survivors struggle with the idea that they may be a victim (De Bem Machado et al., 2017; Higgins et al., 2010; Hines & Douglas, 2009) due to the fact that men are commonly associated with being physically dominant (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000). This lack of recognition comes from an internalized stigma that men are unable to be the victims of domestic violence purely due to their gender. They are taught that they must be tough and strong, and that when they are faced with violence from their female partner, they are just expected to take it. Even after expressing their situation, 76% of men reported not seeking help because they did not identify with the label of ‘victim’ (Hines & Douglas, 2009). Furthermore, this paradigm presupposes men to take on the role of being a loyal, loving partner (Hines & Douglas, 2009), not allowing room for any deviance that might result in the female partner being harmed in any way. This gender paradigm, and the gender-stereotyped norms that result from it, create a situation where men are unable to seek resources or support regarding their victimization. The gender paradigm heavily influences our social perceptions as IPV as something that only happens to women and that can only be perpetuated on by men. The end result, as evident above, is a society where men are unwilling or unable to receive care after experiencing domestic violence. 

Toxic Masculinity

As may seem evident, a major concept contained within the gender paradigm is that of masculinity. The idea of gender normed masculinity is at the forefront of what can be considered a major barrier stopping men from reporting their abuse. In some men’s mind, reporting IPV would have an impact on their masculinity, and would remove their power, control and dominance. In fact, when pressed for reasons they didn’t support, many men reported their abuse in ways that are consistent with ‘hegemonic masculinity’, directing their reports on their own power and resistance instead of the victimization they experiences (Hines & Douglas, 2009). To some, the very act of labeling their perpetrators actions may be considered to be emasculating (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000). The desire to not be seen as weak, and to not be labeled as a victim, has a monumental impact on a male victims likelihood to report their abuse. To do so, they must over come years of programming and societal pressure to hold in their feelings and act in a masculine way. 

The occurrence of this gender paradigm exists well outside our psycho social world. It has also reached the world of research and academia. To date, there is little research into the concept of male victim IPV (Hines & Douglas, 2009; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000) mostly due to the gender paradigm that exists excluding its very exsistance. Furthermore, even when researching male IPV, researchers are put into a position where the instruments they have to gather data are either inappropriate or completely inadequate. More broadly, the typology used when surveying subjects may result in differing results, depending on the gender of the victim and perpetrator in question (Hines & Douglas, 2009). The most common surveys used by readers to establish domestic violence situations are The Psychological Maltreatment of Women Inventory, The Measure of Psychologically Abusive Behaviors, Coercive Control Scales, and the Power and Control Wheel (Hines & Douglas, 2009). It is incredibly important to note that all of these surveys were created using only accounts from women survivors.  Taking this into consideration, we can see from the get-go that men’s domestic violence situations are seen as significantly less important than those of women survivors. 

IMPACTFUL PRACTICES

With the inclusion of all this data, it is fairly straightforward that men are not given the same resource and help seeking opportunities as their female counterparts. Presenting this in qualitative research, we are shown that men are often times less likely that women to seek help after experiencing domestic violence (Higgins et al., 2010; Muller et al., 2009; Umberson et al., 1998; Younger, 2011). This lack of researching out stems from a number of societal problems – both internal and external. There are many intertwining parts of this issue, each one being just small aspect and opportunity for impact. As is witnessed here, there are many different ways in which we can revamp and improve the system in an effort to overcome these issues regarding resource allocation.

External Opportunities

First and foremost, we need to identify what the exact issue entails. To take on the entirety of the gender paradigm is a substantial endeavor. However, we will never even make a dent if we don’t recognize where the main issues lie. To do this, it is evident that we need to pursue further research in all aspects of this concept. To begin with, we need to eliminate the usage and existantance of the blatantly sexist survey methods that currently exist, and continue to fund researchers who use a gender neutral approach. From there, we will gain a better understanding of what exactly we can do to help foster a better experience for them when reporting DV. To do so will be to not only recognize their experiences, but to validate them as well. 

From there, we must take a look at our judicial system. Between law enforcement being unresponsive, and the courts obviously gendered stance regarding sentencing, most men never have a stance at having a positive experience when interacting with them. We must make it our duty to strictly enforce gender neutral law enforcement responses to domestic violence. Whether this entails trainings, disciplinary actions, or new policies to be created is beyond the scope of this paper. However it should be strictly noted that nothing within the domestic violence field will change until police and the courts come to respond in a gender neutral way. Slightly broader than this, it is critical that we examine, refine, and reinforce laws protecting domestic violence victims. As stated above, there are 13 states where only women can be considered as a victim of domestic violence (Younger, 2011). By 2023, it is inexusible for such laws to exist for only half of the population. If, at this point, we are still only concerned with half of the populations suffering, well then we have failed as a society. 

Tangibly, it is also of great importance that we allocate some funding to be usable by men’s resource organizations as well. There has, it should be noted, been an attempt at the creation of these types of organizations. There have been a number of grassroots organizations making an attempt at these sorts of resources (Hines et al., 2007). In addition to this, in 2000 the Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men was created (Hines et al., 2007). To date, this is the only DV helpline for men in existence. Barring this, and a few programs that will cater to both men and women, male victims have very little opportunity to receive support. It can clearly be seen that one of the main ways that we can increase support for men would be through the creation of resources specifically geared towards them. To do so would be to allow them the opportunity to seek care in their own way in their own time. 

Now, the creation of these resources and trainings, and the formation of these organizations does not happen within a vacuum. There is, of course, the need for funding. Luckily, the solution for this is a simple one. Federal funding for IPV victims is done through the Violence Against Women’s Act – a notable organization that does substantial good for the population. Their allowance from federal funding comes in at 225 million a year (Muller et al., 2009). By far, this is the greatest funding amount towards DV. However, this organization only helps women, and will turn away an male victim they encounter. If we were to take ever 25% of that grant, and reallocate it towards male domestic violence, we would be able to care for so many more male victims. So, the creation of organizations and resources is paramount towards male success here. To do so, we must begin to federally fund specifically male domestic violence. To do so would be of great benefit to all those survivors. 

Reducing Stigma 

Our mission, to ease the suffering of male victims, is two fold. While it is imperative that we create palpable solutions to this problem, it is also essential that we address the psycho social aspect impacting these men’s experiences. Resources, and trainings are vital, but they will never be of use if gender norms and patriarchal views are what are hindering these men from seeking help. This is, absolutely, a considerable undertaking – and not one to be taken lightly. However, it is drastically influential in the creation of a world without a gender paradigm. Not being an easy task, one might not even know where to start when trying to tackle the gender paradigm. Education, for both yourself and others, is the most accessible path one can think of. Engage in discourse surrounding male DV, the patriarchy, and toxic masculinity. Do not shy away from the hard topics. Instead push forward. If a male friend comes to you seeking advice, to not turn your back on them. Work with them to find the help they need. Doing so will be of their benefit just as much as it is to society. 

Conclusion

Male domestic violence is a very rarely talked about, and even less often acknowledged, topic that, unfortunately, is far too prevalent in our society. External factors such as lack of police backing, poor judicial system treatment, and lack of resources exist. As well as internal factors such as feelings of shame, loss of masculinity, and embarrassment. Considering these together, we can see that male victims are given little opportunity to receive, or even seek out, resources and care for their IPV situations. This is a monumental endeavor that we must all have a hand in if we hope to see it change. We must work together to first off, create a legal and resource system that caters to all genders, not just women. But we also must make an effort to rid ourselves of the gender biases and norms that society has taught us to hold. Working together, we can make this world a safer and more comfortable one for men experiencing domestic violence. 

References

Clevenger, B. J. M., & Roe-Sepowitz, D. (2009). Shelter Service Utilization of Domestic Violence Victims. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911350902787429

De Bem Machado, A., Hines, D. A., & Douglas, E. M. (2020). Male victims of female-perpetrated partner violence: A qualitative analysis of men’s experiences, the impact of violence, and perceptions of their worth. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 21(4), 612–621. https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000285

De Bem Machado, A., Santos, A., Graham-Kevan, N., & Matos, M. (2017). Exploring Help Seeking Experiences of Male Victims of Female Perpetrators of IPV. Journal of Family Violence, 32(5), 513–523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-016-9853-8

Dear, M. (1992). Understanding and Overcoming the NIMBY Syndrome. Journal of the American Planning Association, 58(3), 288–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369208975808

Drijber, B. C., Reijnders, U. J. L., & Ceelen, M. (2012). Male Victims of Domestic Violence. Journal of Family Violence, 28(2), 173–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-012-9482-9

Eichhorn, K. (n.d.). Psychological Consequences on Male-Gendered Victims of Domestic Violence. UC Riverside.

Hines, D. A., Brown, J., & Dunning, E. (2007). Characteristics of Callers to the Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men. Journal of Family Violence, 22(2), 63–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-006-9052-0

Hines, D. A., & Douglas, E. M. (2009). Women’s Use of Intimate Partner Violence against Men: Prevalence, Implications, and Consequences. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 18(6), 572–586. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926770903103099

Hines, D. A., & Douglas, E. M. (2016). Sexual Aggression Experiences Among Male Victims of Physical Partner Violence: Prevalence, Severity, and Health Correlates for Male Victims and Their Children. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45(5), 1133–1151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0393-0

Muelleman, R. (n.d.). Male Victims of Domestic Violence and Their History of Perpetrating Violence. Male Victims of Domestic Violence.

Muller, H. R., Desmarais, S. L., & Hamel, J. (2009). Do Judicial Responses to Restraining Order Requests Discriminate Against Male Victims of Domestic Violence? Journal of Family Violence, 24(8), 625–637. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-009-9261-4

Pournaghash-Tehrani, S., & Feizabadi, Z. (2007). Comparing Demographic Characteristics of Male Victims of Domestic Violence. Journal of Applied Sciences, 7(14), 1930–1935. https://doi.org/10.3923/jas.2007.1930.1935

Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (2000). Prevalence and Consequences of Male-to-female and Female-to-male Intimate Partner Violence as Measured by the National Violence Against Women Survey. Violence Against Women, 6(2), 142–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778010022181769

Umberson, D., Anderson, K. E., Glick, J. E., & Shapiro, A. H. (1998). Domestic Violence, Personal Control, and Gender. Journal of Marriage and Family, 60(2), 442. https://doi.org/10.2307/353860

Younger. (2011). The Effects of Domestic Violence: The Male Victims Perspective [Thesis]. East Tennessee State University.

From the outside, she lives a very typical, boring life. However, away from the eye of the public, she has a secret identity; Dalton lives a 24/7 BDSM life. Dalton explains it quite simply, “He takes care of me and the house and the animals, and I’m basically in charge” (6). Dalton is the dominant one in her marriage, both inside the bedroom as well as in day-to-day life. By taking charge, Dalton also becomes the person impacted if things go wrong, “Overall, however, I set the ‘rules’ and make the big calls. It also means I bear the responsibility for those calls” (1).

What this means, within the context of their marriage, is that her husband is her submissive, taking particular care of her and their household, whereas she gets to make the decisions and shoulder the burden for a lot of issues that arise. Her husband continuously acts in a submissive way that allows Dalton to retain power over him without causing him harm or causing her too much work. She specifically describes their relationship in such that her submissive husband does these tasks around the house and for her personally of his own free will. “We have a few rituals, like he makes my coffee for me every morning when I wake up, but this is what works best for us. I prefer he shows me his submission by doing what’s expected of him without me needing to remind him, or it having to be a huge production” (Dalton 1). These expectations and appropriate acts enable Dalton and her husband to lead lives that they both find fulfilling.

In addition to her relationship with her husband, Dalton takes part in a polycue V relationship (One person in relationships with two people, neither of whom have relationships with anyone else). Her relationship with her partner also involves vast amounts of BDSM play, however in a different way. Most notably, Dalton and her partner engage in ‘switch’ BDSM, where the typical dominating one will in turn become the submissive one. This creates a different dynamic for the relationship that is not present with Dalton and her husband. In many ways, Dalton and her partners relationship does not differ from standard dating relationships. “He’s only a couple of years older than me, and we have several vanilla interests in common, so most of what we do is actually not kinky and more boyfriend/girlfriend. It’s really…that boring” (Dalton 3).

They spend time together, eat meals together, watch movies. However, there are instances where Dalton’s dominating side comes out in full force:

But there’s things like I sometimes have to ‘order’ my partner to let me pay for dinner, because if I don’t, he’d pay for everything. …. Or he insists on always meeting me at my car and carrying my things inside. Or if he’s picking me up to take me to his place for the weekend, he insists on carrying my things out to his car. Things like that. He cooks for me when I’m there. He defers to me about planning our activities. (4)

In many ways this could just be seen as being chivalrous. But there lies an underlying power dynamic that is not always apparent.

Moser once stated that “the lack of understanding of BDSM has led to many misconceptions as well as fear, which may further alienate those who are active in the lifestyle” (43). Into modern day, this holds true for BDSM relationships like Dalton’s and many others. While the concept may be at the forefront of popular culture today, this lifestyle is still drastically misunderstood by large swaths of society. At its most basic of form, BDSM refers to a relationship between two or more people that includes either bondage and discipline (BD), domination and submission (DS), or sadomasochism (SM) (Brown 781). Williams described that, in most cases, BDSM participants take part in a subculture surrounding the identity. In doing so, they attend parties and clubs, form social networks, and develop lasting relationships – all revolving around their BDSM identites (337). Dalton explains her views on BDSM is slightly less clinical terms:

There’s an umbrella. On one end, there’s people who like to play games in the bedroom. Or like to cross-dress for fun or sexy reasons, not because they’re trans. Or people who like to have their ass smacked. People who like to do puppy or pony play, or who are furries. People who will go to a BDSM club on occasion. People who go to a BDSM club on a regular basis. People who live 24/7 as Master/slave. And people who get off on doing flesh hook suspensions. And eeeevvveerrywhere in between. An umbrella of kink. (11)

Ortmann and Sprott described it as an ‘erotization of power’ (11). Researchers who have attempted to further officially categorize where BDSM falls in the wide expanse of human sexuality have run into difficulties as to ascertaining the exact nature of BDSM. However, Moser & Kleinplatz were able to redefine it as either “a sexual orientation, a socially constructed behavior, a lifestyle choice, or any combination of these” (4). Another issue researchers have run into is the idea that BDSM holds different meanings for different people. For example,

Langridge ran into the differing views where, to some, BDSM is just one aspect of their sexual life. While for others, and our main focus during our examination, consider BDSM to be a central part of their identity (377).

Regardless with how you partake in the subculture or lifestyle, one truth remains engrained for all members. Consent. Consent can involve many distinct aspects beyond just an enthusiastic yes. It also revolves around the concepts of hard limits, boundaries, communication, and safe words. All of these are intricate to taking part in BDSM relationships in a healthy and safe way. To some, this level of control and trust are even more erotic than the actual acts taking place. “For some practitioners, BDSM was not only about sexuality. Instead, power exchange, discipline and security were key factors, where the significance of consent is central” (Carlström 408). We will discuss power dynamics later in this paper, but it is important to take note that these relationships, when done correctly, are not able to take place without enthusiastic consent. If anything, BDSM encounters are the exact opposite of abuse; they require trust, communication, and absolute understanding.

When taking note of BDSM relationships, albeit mostly not 24/7 ones, it is important to see just how prevalent they are within our society. In a study conducted by Brown, where 60 articles were reviewed, “BDSM fantasies were expressed by 40-70% in both males and females, with 20% of participants reporting having engaged in BDSM” (780). Another study done by Holvoet et al., which was representative of the country, reported that almost 69% of participants expressed ever having one BDSM fantasy or practice. Of these participants, the majority identified as white, upper class, and well educated (1153). A further study, done by

Wismeijer, consisting of 902 BDSM participants and 434 control participants, found the following:

When looking at the overall characteristics of BDSM participants, when compared to non-BDSM participants, they are shown to be less neurotic, more extraverted, greater willingness for new experiences, and more conscientious. They also exhibited healthier attachment styles. The overall conclusion of the study was that participants in BDSM relationships experience higher subjective well-beings than those in control groups. In the end, these conclusions lead to the idea that BDSM practitioners are characterized by greater interpersonal and psychological strength as well as great autonomy (1949).

By reviewing this data, it is easy to see that those who participate in BDSM relationships can be classified as healthy, whole individuals, and are acting within their own self interests.

The purpose of this piece is not to just give an over-view and case study of BDSM relationships. Instead, it is meant as an opportunity to delve deeper into the identity of self, how it relates to being a BDSM practitioner, and how it is impacted by the ideals and stigmas that society holds. To begin with, I was to address a couple of the concepts surrounding identity and how they relate to the BDSM umbrella.

To start at the beginning, we will focus on the idea of recognition. Weeks argued that there are two moments within sexual citizenship: transgression and acceptance (41). This imparts the idea that there are two moments of recognizing your sexual identity. The first of these is transgression, in which an individual has the first deviant thought. The first thought that they might have desires that are outside of their current comfort zone. The second of these, acceptance, takes place when the individual begins to take part in the activity. To accomplish both tasks leads to a designation of identity towards the individual. For some people, this process is quick and all consuming, as is designated in Carlström’s study:

Another informant, Magnus, remarked: ‘There tends to be a dividing line between those who say they always knew, that even when you were a child and had no sexual experience, you knew. And I belong to that group’. For people with this attitude, the first meeting with a BDSM community is often associated with a feeling of ‘coming home’. To understand that there are others like yourself, or as Magnus put it: ‘to fall into each other’s arms, where there is finally someone who understands’. Many described the feeling as one where ‘everything falls into place’, where you are allowed to be yourself and express all parts and aspects of yourself (409).

The act of acceptance allows a measure of self-identity that one can use to feel included within the community.

Another important aspect of forming an identity involves the imperative aspect of identities being self-defined. The process of identity construction is also rather individualized and often inherently self-defined, so much so that the denial of such a frame of understanding related to identity development eliminates subjectivity, most especially for communities of color (Sheff & Hammers 2018). The formation of identity must be done by the self to have the intended impact in life. BDSM offers an excellent opportunity to be able to do this as it encourages others to search inside themselves to find all the true aspects of their identity.

Dalton postulates quite succulently how important it is that we each define our identities for ourselves, and do not depend on the identities of those around us, “As a society, we need to be able to accept people who and where they are, and realize that it’s not any kind of statement about ourselves if they are a certain way” (10). Dalton further goes on to express to us that it is important for couples and individuals to express their identity within the confines of their relationships, and not try to be someone you aren’t, “I don’t bottom to Hubby. We tried that after I discovered my bottomy side, and it ended badly. LOL Usually with me yanking whatever was in his hand out of his hand and saying, no, that’s not how you do it, let me show you“(5). Finally, and arguably most importantly, she gives us an excellent example as to the end result of positively identifying and expressing your identity when she shows us that she now lives a freer life, “In my case it’s a lifestyle choice. It’s who and how I am. Embracing that part of me openly means I can live authentically and so can my husband” (2).

One last important term to note has to do with the idea that identities are not fixed and, instead, are ever changing. It is important to realize that identities change and develop over time, as part of a constant construction, deconstruction, and reconstruction that individuals go through (Baldwin 174). Once groups have become self-defined, such as BDSM groups, it is impossible to designate the identities formed as fixed, as the community has the ability to reform current ideas or create new ones (Carlström 405). Deleuze and Guattari lead us even down the proverbial rabbit hole when they point out that all of life is ‘becoming’, whereas desire acts as a productive and creative force, consisting of constant change ([1987] 2012). This gives us good prose that our identities are an ever changing and expanding portion of ourselves, with which our sexuality is a distinctive portion. To assume ourselves as ‘fixed’, is to discount all the experiences and relationships we will take part in as time moves on. For Dalton, this expansion within her relationships revolved around the role she played with her partner:

Then, when I decided I wanted to experience bottoming to make me a better top, I talked to him about it, because we already had a relationship and trust bond. And that’s when we accidentally discovered how much I enjoyed bottoming on occasion. But also, that it helped with my chronic pain and anxiety when I did it, too. And we discovered a lot of emotional triggers from the past that I didn’t even realize I still had and were able to work through many of them in a safe way (12).

There’s so much more that could be expressed here concerning formations of identities, but the main point I want to make is that identities are ever changing, and are formed and reformed through a wide variety of relationships and experiences.

Very briefly I want to address two different schools of thought surrounding BDSM and the relationships involved. When viewing BDSM through a psychological lens, we are treated to the information that many people consider those participating in BDSM to suffer from either a mental illness or experienced abuse (possibly sexual abuse) as a child – both of those leading individuals, it’s believed, to engage in risky and possibly harmful sex. However, studies have shown that this is not true. Wismeijer’s results contested this view; if differences in attachment were found, the control group had the lowest attachment scores, whereas the doms scored highest. In addition, the subs scored either similar to or better than the control group on attachment (1950). Another study has shown that there is a lack of support regarding childhood abuse leading to BDSM as an adult. Similarly, a population study performed by Richters, et al., found “no link between psychopathology, abuse, and BDSM” (470). On a more personal note, Dalton relates her experience with mental health within the BDSM community:

It’s not a replacement for mental health care, but I literally know people who’ve regained sexual agency and have had cathartic healing from past sexual trauma due to BDSM. I know people who were into self-harming who have found a safer, healthier outlet because of BDSM (10).

If we’re looking at these studies as a whole, Connolly showed us that “in general, BDSM practitioners have comparable status of mental health as the general population” (94). Further expansion and consideration could be made of the differing theories and psychological models surrounding BDSM individuals. However, for our purposes, we will leave it with the idea that several health care professionals, as well as large parts of the population, believe those that participate in BDSM to suffer from some mental distress.

As we touched on the psychological aspects surrounding BDSM participants, I wanted to also give a brief nod to the sociological perspective and what it believes regarding this situation. One of the most influential theories we can examine for our needs is that of Foucault’s notion of bio-power. As Foucault argues, sexual discourse is one of the principal objects of biopower governmental reason, constituting a crucial factor for understanding human behavior within the context of a focus on somatic phenomena such as birth and hygiene (317). Today, however, sexuality can be considered as:

Not only a type of knowledge belonging to the realm of identity but also a commodity, forming part of the construction of selves and communities within consumption societies. Here, the establishment of diverse structures of selfhood representing various forms of sexual fantasy and desire holds a prominent place about individual citizen identity as an active sexual agent. (Langdridge 673)

Foucault discusses that an individual’s sexual proclivities are one of the main objects of identity that society attempts to control using bio-power. He further goes on to state how sexuality is a commodity of the self – an important and distinct aspect of the individual. He shows us that the individual is an active sexual agent, and must use that to fight back against society and their oppression. This is also expressed in Carlström, where she expresses that we only become ourselves through relationships and experiences, and that finding others like us allows us to become human. She further goes on to state that, jumping off Foucault’s concept of power, it is desire and wanting that makes it possible to create productiveness out of our relationships (407)

As has been expressed throughout the course of this paper, there are many members of society that have negative views of those who participate in BDSM. This disdain can come from professionals, medical doctors, family and friends, or just the general public. Part of this negative press comes from the media and their portrayal of BDSM in popular culture, namely the book 50 Shades of Gray and its grotesque, inaccurate, and harmful depiction of what a BDSM relationship entails. Dalton joins us once again with her viewpoint on the phenomenon, “It’s not “just” about sex. It’s NOT “abuse.” Fifty Shades of Grey is in NO way a realistic or healthy depiction of a consensual or healthy BDSM dynamic. And you probably already know people in the lifestyle” (14). None the less, while this book depicted a very negative portrayal of BDSM relationships, it did do some good by bringing these relationships to the forefront of popular culture. Today we live in a world where to take part in a BDSM relationship is not nearly as taboo as it was a couple of decades ago.

One of the ways we have accomplished this is by using the narrative to push the boundaries of what society deems ‘acceptable’. By doing so, we have gained ground for the acceptance of this lifestyle. The cultural reputation of a BDSM practice is, in part, determined by the way it is presented publicly, especially the extent to which it can be considered acceptable in the context of rules around safety and consent (Weinberg 47). Beyond communities, the dominant discourses of sexology and psychology are bounded by limits of BDSM acceptability (e.g. around erotic asphyxiation), in similar ways to the boundaries adopted by most BDSM websites and books (Downing 124). Here, BDSM discourse, in communities or in the public sphere, determines the boundaries of acceptability and permissibility through a positive argument concerning the need to learn safety behavior (Weinberg 45), and a negative argument concerning the public elimination of non-permissible behavior. In this way, the rights, activities and identity of the BDSM subject are conditioned through the SSC discourse within a practical consent framework (Langdridge 670). By bringing BDSM relationships into the spotlight, regardless of how, we have started to push societal boundaries and shape an environment in which people participating in consensual, safe kinks are not stigmatized by those around them.

Gender roles, and their part within the BDSM lifestyle are another aspect of contention that is often brought up when making the case against those participating. Specifically, the feminist model of psychology, as stated by Brown, puts forth the idea that BDSM is inherently misogynistic, and pleasure from degradation or pain stems from internalized patriarchy (801).

Traditional gender roles have also been demonstrated during studies done that were investigating dominance and submissiveness within relationships and sexual fantasies. Yost and Hunter conducted a survey consisting of 144 women and 128 men who self-identified as being a BDSM participant. The following results were found:

In line with previous research, overall participants were more likely to identify as submissive than dominant. In addition, male-identified participants identified as dominant 37% of the time, while female-identified participants identified as dominant 17% of the time. No definitive scientific data have concluded the reason for the cause of the difference in this preference, though it is likely influenced by sexual schemas that encourage male dominance and female submission (251).

However, those that use gender roles as their main protest towards BDSM relationships have not spent their time doing their research, as there is an expanse of research out there that refutes these claims. A study done by Lammers and Imhoff showed findings that suggest that, for several BDSM participants, BDSM roles can liberate individuals from, instead of reinforcing, gender roles (146). When we look at Dalton’s specific relationship, we can find this to be true as well. At one-point Dalton discusses having her much larger, submissive partner submit to her in public, “No one would ever guess he’s “submissive” to me. And I think that’s even sexier, because it’s like a safe game we can play in public that no one even knows is going on” (2).

These people creating an issue with BDSM relationships also tend to completely disregard the positive aspects that it can have. Herbert and Weaver have recently conducted research that has begun to explore the positive impact that involvement in BDSM has on the community, including an increase in self-acceptance and personal growth, although it is noted that self-acceptance does not shield someone entirely from stigma and discrimination (61). Taking parts in these relationships and communities allow individuals to grow in a safe and healthy environment, while still being allowed to explore new and interesting aspects of themselves. On a more personal note, we can look at what Dalton says she has learned while on this journey:

I’ve learned a lot about myself and negotiation, and how important trust and communication are. I’ve also learned to check myself. But also, that [bottoming] helped with my chronic pain and anxiety when I did it, too. And we discovered a lot of emotional triggers from the past that I didn’t even realize I still had and were able to work through many of them in a safe way (13).

We have explored the issue of BDSM relationships, and their formation on identity, in several ways and through several lenses through the course of this paper. We know the past, we know the present, the good and the bad. So, where do we go from here? What’s next in the world of BDSM and kink communities? I think Dalton phrases it in a very succulent way, “The expectation of a “default” needs to go away. Once people can accept others (consenting human adults) as they are, where they are, and also accept they can fluctuate and change over time in their roles and needs, I think everyone would be a lot happier” (14). Dalton touches on a very important topic here; acceptability. We are in a day and age where we can push for the acceptance of BDSM (and other kinks) within our community. We need to push for actual education on kinks and move people away from being influenced by the media – that’s how we get to the issue we had with 50 Shades of Gray. Education, acceptance, communication. Many practitioners assign shame and guilt to their sexual-identities and BDSM practices (Carlström 408). Dalton expresses a similar view:

I hope it becomes more accepted and understood as a valid and healthy thing. I don’t mean people should be leading each other around by leashes in public (non-consensually exposing vanillas is NOT cool) but there shouldn’t be any shame tied to it. I hope that, like everything else, acceptance becomes the norm. If you don’t like BDSM, don’t have a BDSM-centered relationship (13).

We need to move forward as a society to remove these stigmas surrounding BDSM and kink practices. “Too many people think BDSM is abuse—people on all sides of the political spectrum. Consensual, healthy BDSM is NOT abuse—it’s actually empowering” (Dalton 10). More than anything, we just need to foster an environment where people taking part in these communities are recognized as valid and viewed as just exploring their identity. More than anything, we need to get them accepted. I’m not sure if we will do it, but things are absolutely pointing towards more understanding and better communication. Hopefully we will be able to accomplish these goals.

Works Cited

Baldwin, G. (1991).A second coming out.In M.Thompson(Ed.),Leather folk: Radical sex, people, politics, and practice (pp. 169–178). Los Angeles, CA: Alyson.

Brown Ashley , Edward D. Barker & Qazi Rahman (2020) A Systematic Scoping Review of the Prevalence, Etiological, Psychological, and Interpersonal Factors Associated with BDSM, The Journal of Sex Research, 57:6, 781 811,

DOI: 10.1080/00224499.2019.1665619

Carlström, Charlotta (2019) BDSM, becoming and the flows of desire, Culture Health Sexuality, 21:4, 404-415, DOI: 10.1080/13691058.2018.1485969

*Connolly, P. H. (2006). Psychological functioning of bondage/domination/sado-masochism

(BDSM) practitioners. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality , 18, 79–120. doi:10.1300/J056v18n01_05

Dalton, Tymber. Personal interview. 10 November 2020.

Deleuze, G. , and F. Guattari . (1987) 2012. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia.

London and New York: Bloomsbury.

Downing, L. 2007. “Beyond Safety: Erotic Asphyxiation and the Limits of SM Discourse.” In Safe, Sane and Consensual: Contemporary Perspectives on Sadomasochism, edited by D. Langdridge and M. Barker, 119–132. London: Palgrave-Macmillan.

Foucault, M.1977–1978. The History of Sexuality. Translated by R. Hurley. New York: Pantheon Herbert, A., & Weaver, A. (2015). Perks, problems, and people who play: A qualitative

exploration of dominant and submissive BDSM roles. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 24(1), 49–62. doi:10.3138/cjhs.246749

*Holvoet, L. , Huys, W. , Coppens, V. , Seeuws, J. , Goethals, K. , & Morrens, M. (2017).

Fifty shades of Belgian gray: The prevalence of BDSM-related fantasies and activities in the general population. The Journal of Sexual Medicine , 14, 1152–1159. doi:10.1016/j.jsxm.2017.07.003

*Lammers, J. , & Imhoff, R. (2016). Power and sadomasochism: Understanding the antecedents of a knotty relationship. Social Psychological and Personality Science , 7,

142–148. doi:10.1177/1948550615604452

Langdridge, D. 2006. “Voices from the Margins: SM and Sexual Citizenship.”

Citizenship Studies 10 (4): 373–389. doi:10.1080/13621020600857940.

Moser, Charles. “Sadomasochism.” Journal of Social Work & Human Sexuality 7.1 (1989): 43-56.

Moser, C., & Kleinplatz, P. (2006). Introduction to the state of our knowledge on SM. Journal of Homosexuality, 50(2/3), 1–15. doi:10.1300/J082v50n02_01

Ortmann, D. M., & Sprott, R. A. (2013). Sexual outsiders: Understanding BDSM sexualities and communities. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

*Richters, J. , de Visser, R. O. , Badcock, P. B. , Smith, A. M. , Rissel, C. ,

Simpson, J. M. , & Grulich, A. E. (2014). Masturbation, paying for sex, and other sexual activities: The second Australian Study of Health and Relationships.

Sexual Health , 11, 461–471. doi:10.1071/SH14116

Sheff, Elisabeth & Hammers, Corie (2011) The privilege of perversities: race, class and education among polyamorists and kinksters, Psychology & Sexuality, 2:3, 198 223,

DOI: 10.1080/19419899.2010.537674

Weeks, J. 1998. “The Sexual Citizen.” Theory, Culture & Society 15 (3–4): 35–52. doi:10.1177/0263276498015003003.

Weinberg,J.D.2016.Consensual Violence: Sex, Sport and the Politics of Injury.

California: University of California Press.

Williams, D. (2006). Different (Painful¡) strokes for different folks: A general overview of sexual sadomasochism (SM) and its diversity. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity , 13, 333–346. doi:10.1080/10720160601011240

Wismeijer, A.A. and van Assen, M.A. (2013), Exploring BDSM. J Sex Med, 10:19431952. https://doi-org.proxy.lib.pdx.edu/10.1111/jsm.12192

Yost, M. R., & Hunter, L. (2012). BDSM practitioners’ understandings of their initial attraction

to BDSM sexuality: Essentialist and constructionist narratives. Psychology & Sexuality, 3(3), 244–259. doi:10.1080/19419899.2012.700028

*Takes a deep breath* 

Dear sir,

There are many things I am deep-sighing at right now. Your comment was surprising, disappointing, and unfunny. I have written a range about the transracial adoptee experience, and am thrilled that brave new works of art like Celeste Ng’s Little Fires Everywhere and Nicole Chung’s All You Can Ever Know are bringing adoption—specifically from the adoptee’s perspective—into a more commercial conversation.

That being said, “jokes” are still being made at the expense of transracial adoptees, and hearing you, a POC, passive-aggressively Other another POC, makes me both frustrated and sad.

Let’s start with the subject of the night in question. The comment came at a birthday party, a friend-of-a-friend’s celebration in a tiny bar in Brooklyn. There was a small alcove in the back of the bar, where people gathered with drinks and food, mingling. The space was fabulous, perfect for a party.

A little bell chimed up front, and someone stepped to the microphone.

Thank you all so much for being here tonight, the host announced. To begin, who wants to hear a story about my love life?

He’d had a few drinks; his smile was beautiful, tipsy. The crowd cheered in encouragement.

The host went on to complain about how difficult it was to date in New York. Everyone nodded their heads in agreement—no arguments there.

It’s so hard to find a good Asian man, the host bemoaned. He himself was Chinese. I match with people and we go on dates and something’s always wrong. They work in finance, or something.

More laughter bounced around the room.

Then, on my last date, I thought I had found him: the perfect guy. Cute, Korean, great cook, great ass. I was so excited!

The host smiled, holding a dramatic pause.

And then, he said in a hushed voice, I found out he was adopted. Damn it, universe. So now I’m back at the beginning.

When I heard this in person, at first it didn’t register. It wasn’t until later that I thought, shit, was that really what he said? I said nothing that night, since I didn’t even know this man. It was a celebration, after all; I didn’t want to be that person to start something.

What I wish I’d said: How do you think that man would feel, hearing his existence become the butt of a joke, and worse, being nowhere in sight to defend himself? Though perhaps it was good he wasn’t there—it was just me, another Asian adoptee, who took the offense and ran with it.

Adoptees have been the butt of many an insensitive joke or comment, but when something like this comes from a community you respect and want to be a part of, it hurts more. Other people might make “jokes” and I’ll give them harsh side eye but let it slide because they’re ignorant or just don’t get it, and it’s not my job to educate the world on why XYZ (racism/misogyny/homophobia, take your pick) is bad.

But when it’s your own people, or from people you considered to be your own, and they make a joke at your expense, it’s different. It makes you wonder if you will ever be accepted anywhere.

I can only speak from my own experiences, of course. As a Chinese adoptee I have heard the run of the gamut, everything from “You’re not Asian,” “you’re a banana,” “but you’re so [fill in bullshit adjective] for an Asian,” “”you’re basically white,” to my personal favorite, “I forget you’re even Asian sometimes.”

It’s easy to brush things off when they only happen once in a while from unassuming strangers. But when these comments start to come from those close to you, from friends and even family, it gets infinitely harder to find the will to speak up and say something. 

In my experience, some Asian adoptees are even more curious and driven to learn about aspects of their birth culture, because of the fact that we’ve lacked this information our whole lives. We feel, as the sociologist Sunaina Marr Maira calls it, “a nostalgia for an imagined homeland to which [we’ve] never been.” Transracial adoptees have lived with dual or even multiple identities that few outside the process can truly relate to or understand. We are this and that, we are the lucky ones, we were saved, we were abandoned, nobody wanted us, somebody got us. Does anyone know who we are? Do we ourselves?

Of course, the pendulum swings both ways. I know of an adoptee who took the other extreme, who wanted nothing to do with her birth culture because it was too painful to look back at what could have been. It is moving forward that matters to her, and to focus unnecessarily on the past, on things she cannot change, is moot.

Regardless of how we move through the world, one thing is for certain: as abnormalities in the traditional definition of family, we have been hyper self-conscious of who we are and what we look like our whole life. We have been judged time and again by circumstances beyond our control, and we are sick of constantly having to explain and justify ourselves. 

So please. There is enough shit happening in the world right now. Please don’t contribute by making others feel bad for being different from you, or from coming from a different family situation than you. People of color understand what it means to live in a white America. It is not an us-versus-them thing, it is a compassion thing. It is recognizing that we are all made of multiplicities, and we have the right to share our identities, but should never feel the need to prove them. This train of thought is reductive at best, speaking to the same fabled “authenticity” that shuns Black folk who are not “Black enough” or Native folk that are not “Indian enough.” The Authenticity Olympics will never have a winner, because the game is rigged from the start. The judges are almost always outside of the group they wish to judge, and when they are inside that group, well, that is what I’m trying to shine a light on.

Authenticity means living your truth, and adoptees are included in this. We may choose to express this in outlandish ways or choose to remain private, and either choice should not fear ostracism in the process.  

As he worked long days on set, I stayed in our hotel alone, with no responsibilities: No job, no housewife duties, no one to look after. All I had was time, and that was my opportunity to do something I had been postponing for a while: Starting to write my first screenplay in English.

So I did what my strict self usually does when working on a project: I turned into what I like to call “Sergeant Mode.” I hid my cellphone in the closet, disconnected my computer from the WIFI, and brought out my paper-back dictionary as if it were nineteen ninety-five.

Being born and raised in Argentina, my first language is Spanish, and so, when I write in English, I second-guess myself a lot. Don’t get me wrong, as a naturally anxious person second-guessing myself is something I do on a regular basis, but this time the voices in my head were a little more aggressive than usual.

It took me a couple of days to get “in the zone,” and for me to create this micro-climate, I had to produce an effective schedule. I woke up at seven a.m., had breakfast, and then wrote for four hours in my pajamas. At one, I’d go to the hotel’s pool, and while swimming I would think about my writing: What I liked, what I wanted to change, what I needed to fix. After that, I’d make myself some lunch at our tinny long-stay-room kitchen. Back then I wasn’t a sophisticated cook, so my meals were usually quick and easy, following three variables: Chicken and a salad, soup and a salad, sandwich and a salad.

After lunch, I wrote for three more hours, then plugged into my headphones and went for a walk while listening to “The Writer Files”, a podcast that addressed secrets to productivity and creativity.

It took me around four days to get fully in “the zone” without cheating. That is: Texting, scrolling through social media until my thumb started to cramp, or reading magazine articles that didn’t bring much to the table, such as “Fourteen ways to do your hair in fourteen seconds or less”, or “Super Stars do it too!!: Twenty pictures of your favorite celebrities blowing their nose and cracking their knuckles”,

The moment I had fully reached “Sergeant Mode” and was finally happy and motivated, a phone call in the middle of the day made me lose my tranquility. It was my husband. He knew I had hidden my phone in the closet, so he was calling the hotel room’s line instead.

Whenever he calls me from work, my heart skips a beat, and the voices in my head suggest that the worse has happened: That he broke both legs and is now on his way to the hospital, that he lost an eye, or other thoughts among those lines.

Thankfully, none of the above were right this time. He was calling to tell me that his boss had found a stray dog close to set and decided to adopt it. He couldn’t bring it to work and was worried about leaving it alone all day in his hotel room. So my husband told him that I was going to take it out on several walks during the day, and now he was calling to let me know.

Did this bother me? Of course it did. What would you expect? I was in “Sargent Mode”! This was pricking my bubble.

I didn’t know my husband’s boss very well, but I had certainly heard a lot about him: He was a big-time stunt coordinator who had been in the business forever, and who my husband looked up to a lot. I must say he intimidated me a little. He hopped into our phone conversation and thanked me in advance for my generosity, and I immediately started to feel better. It was nice to feel helpful, after all. I didn’t have much experience in this field, but how difficult could it be to walk a dog?

The next morning my husband left extra early because he had a challenging stunt. He was going to be involved in a typical Western “Saloon Fight” that involved him being pushed onto a window, breaking the glass with his body and falling two stories to the ground. Not that I intend to compare myself to him, but that day he wasn’t the only one to face a challenge. I had one of my own: I was stepping out of my schedule.

After my husband left, I went to meet with the dog, who was adorable, but also huge and strong. How come he had forgotten to mention that detail? He was so tall he barely fit inside his kennel. As soon as I opened the den’s door, he jumped out and galloped towards the entrance.

“Cajun!” I called him, but he didn’t acknowledge me. He was recently named like that, so he didn’t quite grasp that was his name yet. “This is going to be interesting,” I thought to myself.

I put him on the leash, and out we went. Opposite to my typical neighborhood walks, there was nothing smooth nor relaxing about taking this big dog out, as he kept on pulling and dragging me. In order to walk him, I had to grab the leash tight with both hands. I could tell he was a good boy, but he just had zero experience walking on a leash. How could I blame him?

It was a beautiful sunny day, and while we walked, it occurred to me that I could still listen to my favorite podcast, but no. The moment I let go of one hand to take my headphones out of my purse, he pulled extra hard, and I face-planted on the floor. Cajun towed me as if I were waterskiing over the “Weekend at Bernie’s”.

As I started to chase after him, I glanced at a group of vaping teenagers who had apparently seen the whole scene, staring at me, laughing. Did I look that pathetic? As Cajun stopped to pee on a tree, I got a hold of the leash, and we walked back to the room were, with the help of treats and a push, I managed to place him back in the kennel, before heading back to my room to write.

When I sat down at my desk, the words poured out quickly. I was impressed by how well the scene I was working on was now flowing. Maybe stepping out of my comfort zone and hitting my head on the ground was what I needed to put my ideas in order? I once read about a man who woke up from a concussion knowing how to play the piano.

Later that day, I came back to the dog’s room for a second visit. I was feeling confident and victorious since I had finished my scene in record time. “This time I will tame the beast!” I thought to myself. I would walk him on a short leash. I would be in charge. Or so I thought…

I swiped the key to open the door and the light went green, but when I pushed it, it barely moved. Something was off. I looked through the room’s window and then saw it: One side of the curtain pole had fallen, blocking the door. The kennel was open, and the place was a complete wreck: Toilet paper, clothes, bedsheets, and towels were scattered everywhere. It looked like Cajun was having a full-on party in there. I tapped on the glass to get his attention, and he hardly looked at me as he was lying on the bed and chewing on the TV’s remote control, with his tail wagging.

“You didn’t close the kennel right.” Those authoritarian voices in my head were back in action. “You had ONE job, Sofia. And you couldn’t do it right.”

Then, my thoughts were suddenly interrupted by a hotel employee who walked down the hallway. He looked like he could be Latino and was wearing a uniform with a label that read “Roberto.” The signs were there, but I didn’t want to be presumptuous, so I asked him:

“Do you speak Spanish?”

When he replied, “Yes,” I exhaled in relief.

I explained what was happening to him, and he used a key to open another sneaky door to the room. All hotel rooms have sneaky doors, and that day I was thankful for that. As he entered and saw the mess, he decided to make a joke:

“You’re great. Would you babysit my kids?”

But I didn’t have time for jokes. This was a serious matter, and I was overwhelmed. What if my incompetence ended up damaging my husband’s career? I had a couple of hours before everyone came back to the hotel, and I was determined to hide the evidence. With Roberto’s help, I managed to put Cajun back in his kennel, and this time, I made sure to turn the door’s handle all the way until I heard a “click.”

“How much for a new curtain pole?” I asked Roberto.

“You’re fine. We have tons in storage.”

“And how much for a new remote control?” I added as I held what was left of one Cajun had been chewing on for hours.

“Same. It’s a generic one. Don’t worry about it.”

“And the curtains?” I asked, pointing at the chunks of torn fabric on the floor.

“It’s all good. Easy to replace.” God bless Roberto.

Roberto left for twenty minutes and came back with a new remote control, new curtains, and a pole, and I managed to tidy up the place until there was no evidence left.

Then I sat on the bed in alleviation and noticed Cajun staring at me. He didn’t look sorry, but he didn’t look defiant either. He knew I had failed but he didn’t judge me. He was more sympathetic than the voices in my head.