Ten important features and goals of Objectification, Dehumanization, and Depersonalization (ODD)

This is the second in a series of posts that will deal with fetishes that have been labeled as objectification, dehumanization, and depersonalization in BDSM, which I will refer to as ODD for short. To see more writings on this topic, click the ODD label below this article..

Submissives in a D/s or BDSM relationship who participate in ODD fetishes are trained to exhibit certain distinguishing features, which can also be thought of as goals or objectives in the context of a training regimen.

It is up to the submissive and her Dominant to decide how to weight the importance of each in their consensual relationship, as well as how to structure training so as to accomplish all the mutually agreed upon objectives.

In future posts I will go over each in turn.

1. Instrumentality

The submissive is simply a tool to be used.

2. Denial of Autonomy

The submissive lacks autonomy and self-determination. She can neither select her fate nor act independently.

3. Inertness

The submissive lacks agency, and is by herself non-moveable and unchanging.

4. Fungibility

The submissive is interchangeable with other people (or objects);

5. Violability

The submissive lacks boundary-integrity and her personhood can be encroached upon at will by her owner.

6. Ownership

The submissive is owned and can be bought or sold.

7. Denial of Subjectivity

The submissive's experiences and feelings do not need to be taken into account.

8. Reduction to Body

The identity of the submissive can be reduced to simply her body, or even mere body parts.

9. Reduction to Appearance

The submissive is valued merely in terms of how she looks, with no value attached to any higher intelligence or emotion or personality.

10. Silencing

The submissive is silent, lacking the capacity to speak unless directed to do so.

References:

Langton, Rae, 2009, Sexual Solipsism: Philosophical Essays on Pornography and Objectification, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nussbaum, Martha, 1995, “Objectification”, Philosophy and Public Affairs, 24(4): 249–291.

Basic Guide to Objectification, Dehumanization, and Depersonalization (ODD) in BDSM

Milking the nurse cow

This is the first in a series of posts that will deal with fetishes that have been labeled as objectification, dehumanization, and depersonalization in BDSM, which I will refer to as ODD for short. To see more writings on this topic, click the ODD label below this article.

Some of the more extreme aspects of BDSM are found in a broad range of fetishes that have been categorized as objectification, and which I'll lump into a group (Objectification, Dehumanization, and Depersonalization  or ODD) for the purposes of this post. These range from some less objectionable types of play such as dressing up someone to change their appearance, to more extreme fetishes, such as treating a person as a toilet or a mere piece of meat to be used at will by anyone.

There has always been some confusion about ODD. This is mainly because some of the definitions used are so all-encompassing that they have been ascribed to more than one type of fetish, or the delineation between the types are sometimes vague and you get a range of play that merge from one type to the other with no real distinct boundaries.

This post is an attempt to provide some structure to the various fetish plays that fit into the broader ODD grouping. It is not meant to be a final and unalterable dogma on the topic, but rather a work in progress that can be updated and modified.

Listed below are definitions of the subcategories of ODD and some examples of each.

A. OBJECTIFICATION

Clockwork Doll

This refers to treating the person as a mere inanimate or non-living object, and may include the following types of play, where the person is treated as:

• A living doll or mannequin
• A toilet or various other degrading objects that deal with human waste
• A sushi platter or various other similar objects
• A piece of furniture such as a stool or chair (forniphilia)
• A piece of art such as a statue
• A robot
• A sex toy (e.g. gimps)
• Glory-holes and other similar contraptions such as slut-in-the-boxes where the person is whittled down to a set of functionalities
• Forced transformations into objects

B. DEHUMANIZATION

Pony Girl

This refers to treating the person like an animal or a beast, and may include the following types of play:

• Pet play (dog, puppy, kitten, etc)
• Pony play
• Service pets
• Breeding and Milking (maiesiophilia)

C. DEPERSONALIZATION

Generic slave

This is the least extreme of the various ODD subcategories, and refers to treating the person as if he or she has a different identity or no identity and human rights at all. The amorphous nature of this subcategory means that it oftentimes seamlessly merges into broader role play fetishes, and so in this post I will try to define the term as it applies to ODD.

For our purpose we will restrict this subcategory of ODD to those situations wherein the person is stripped of all personhood or unique personal characteristics, such that he or she is perfectly interchangeable with another physically similar person who can fulfill the same exact role. That is, one can swap the subject person with another person who is physically similar without creating any significant problems or loss of enjoyment/pleasure for the partner(s) or target audience.

As such, this may include such things as:

• Slaves
• Ragdoll and corpse play
• Forced modifications of physical appearance
• Dressing up

As I noted above,  this post is not meant to be a final and unalterable dogma on the topic, but rather a work in progress that can be updated and modified. I welcome any comments and suggestions regarding the topic, and you may get in touch with me via my main avatar in second life, MK (monkeyking2011 resident).

More in the series:

Ten important features and goals of Objectification, Dehumanization, and Depersonalization (ODD)

The Alanis Angels at Alanis Gallery in Xaara

Depersonalization during anonymous sex rituals

Austin Sculptures

1950s Fetish

As some of you may know, I have a 1950s fetish.

I like seeing women in those prim outfits, cooking and baking in the kitchen, serving their men in every which way possible with nary a complaint, and all in all being the proper housewife.

I find the juxtaposition between this prim and proper image and the underlying sexuality of the woman alluring. I find the thought of taking this same woman and savagely exposing the raw and animal slut inside her irresistible - using her to satiate my needs and leaving her soiled and undone, the direct opposite of the apotheosis of the model housewife and mother.

Saying that, I think we all have to be careful about going overboard and actually thinking that the 1950s in America was a better time overall for most people. We have to be careful about separating out the fantasy and nostalgia and fetish elements from the reality of the period. We have to be careful about not looking at the era using rose colored glasses that filter out the vast societal inequalities and unfairness that was rampant at the time.

The 1950s were not exactly the best times for many people in America.

1. Jim Crow laws still had a hold on most of the country, and racism was frequently overt and vicious. It wasn't until the 1960s that most of these laws were assigned to the dustbin of history where they rightfully belong.

2. Domestic violence against women was probably just as widespread then as it is now (no, people were not somehow morally "better" then), but it was not until the 1970s when widespread attention was called to this problem, so the hidden incidences per capita of such abuses could have been much worse.

3. The Civil Rights Act was not in place until the 1960s, which meant people could routinely be discriminated against for their race or gender or sexual preferences without any consequences for the malicious parties.

4. Although women did work outside the home at the time, mostly in menial and domestic type jobs, there were definite barriers to them being able to climb up the corporate ladder or work in certain types of jobs, and in all cases women earned significantly less than their male counterparts.

5. Communicable diseases had a much stronger grip on the nation at that time due to the lack of vaccination and many other health conveniences we take for granted today. For example, polio still routinely killed infants and young children, and in the epidemic of 1952 several thousand children died and tens of thousands were left disabled by the disease.

6. Many of the modern conveniences like cellphones and the internet that we have today were non-existent at the time, and people lived in a world that was much more limited and constraining.

7. People smoked. They smoked a lot. Besides the second hand smoke that intruded on the health of even those who chose not to smoke, the smell of cigarette probably permeated closed rooms and almost everywhere people gathered in large numbers.

8. Mainstream culture was a lot less tolerant of anyone who deviated from the norm than today, whether  it involved the LGBT community or other alternative lifestyles.

In the end, there is nothing wrong with romanticizing that period in time, or looking back at it nostalgically as a simpler era. But it behooves us not to forget the very many negatives that were happening at that time as well.

What Kind of Dominant Are You?

Booyah!

I took an interesting quiz that tries to figure out your dominant type (the corresponding quiz for submissives is here).

I took it without thinking too much about each question, and my personal result seems to indicate I am a sadistic daddy white knight.

1. The Bear Dominant16%
2. The Collector Dominant8%
3. The Daddy or Mommy Dominant68%
4. The FemDomme Mistress0%
5. The Gorean Slave Master28%
6. The Ineffable Dominant28%
7. The Lesser God Dominant20%
8. The Sadistic Dominant84%
9. The Tin Pot Dominant4%
10. The White Knight Dominant52%

The definitions were as follows:

The Bear Dominant.  The Bear Dom is typically a burly gay or bisexual male Dominant who prefers diminutive and youthful gay or bisexual male submissives. Some Bear Doms are attracted to lady-boys and boyish females, as well. They are called Bear Doms mostly for their tendency to exhibit hyper-masculinity and somewhat exaggerated male characteristics such as a muscular or stocky build and abundant body hair. Bear Doms are commonly encountered in the BDSM leather and LGBT subcultures. Best match: The Painslut Submissive / The Little Submissive.

---

The Collector Dominant.  The Collector is focused on building a stable of submissives similar to a harem.  For the Collector, quantity always trumps quality.  In his way of thinking, the measure of a Dom’s standing is how many submissives he can accumulate, without much regard for who, or even what, those submissives may be.   It is relatively common for a Collector Dom to attempt to collar a submissive mere minutes after meeting her for the first time in an online chat room or on a BDSM social network. Best match: The Novice Submissive / The Pseudo Submissive.

---

The Daddy or Mommy Dominant.  Daddy & Mommy Doms find fulfillment in the relationship dynamic that exists between the Dominant and submissive, who is usually referred to asbaby, babygirl, babyboy, little one, or other pet name that reinforces the sub’s child-like status in the relationship.  A Daddy or Mommy Dom craves a sub with the ability to trust absolutely, a spirit of wide-eyed innocence and playfulness, an eagerness for guidance, and no-holds-barred adoration. Best match: The Little Submissive / The Pet Submissive / The Brat Submissive.

---

The FemDom Mistress.  The FemDom is always a dominant female who utilizes a unique combination of force and sexual role reversal.  She may prefer either male or female submissives, and is sometimes referred to as a Domme, Domina, Dominatrix, or Mistress.  A sub-category of FemDom is the FinDom,  a contraction of Financial Dominant.  There is often a significant element of misandry (hatred of men) which may be real or role-played involved in the FemDom Topping style. Best matches: The Painslut Submissive / The Cow-Pig Submissive.

---

The Gorean Slave Master.  A Gorean Slave Master, almost by definition, is a male Dominant who prefers slaves to submissives and subscribes to a highly stylized, authoritarian, and ritualistic way of life described in John Norman’s science fiction novels about the planet Gor.  Goreans typically believe that women are inferior to men and deserve to be enslaved.  Gorean slaves are treated as property, have no rights, and cannot own property of their own.  Best matches:  The Kajira Slave / The Domestic Submissive.

---

The Ineffable Dominant.  The Ineffable Dom is typically a Dominant who has been in the D/s lifestyle for several years or longer and has, mostly through trial and error, learned what does and doesn’t work best in his D/s relationships.  He has consciously explored and borrowed traits and characteristics from the other Dominant categories.  The synergy created with each new partner brings new facets to the Ineffable Dom’s unique (and sometimes indescribable) Topping style.   Best matches:  The Warrior Princess Submissive / The Acolyte Submissive.

---

The Lesser God Dominant.   A Dominant who expects and thrives on the worship of his or her submissives.  This adoration and worship, which can sometimes take the form of highly ritualistic activities and behaviors, has but one purpose, which is the ego gratification of the Lesser God.  It is relatively common for the households of Lesser God Doms to forsake all traditional forms of religion in order to practice their own home-grown religion, with the Dom at its head and subs as followers.  Best match: The Acolyte Submissive / The Domestic Submissive.

---

The Sadistic Dominant.  A Dom who enjoys or becomes sexually aroused from inflicting physical or emotional pain or discomfort upon his partners.  Whether or not his partner is a masochist (someone who enjoys pain) is usually irrelevant to the pleasure that a Sadistic Dom gets from inflicting it.  There is a wide spectrum of sadism that can range from the minimally sadistic yet skilled pain-inflictor on one end, to the abusive or pathologically dangerous extreme sadist at the other end of the scale. Best match:  The Painslut Submissive / The Cow-Pig Submissive.

---

The Tin Pot Dominant.  The TPD is primarily a role player.  He doesn’t consider what he does as a deception; he considers it role play.  For him, D/s isn’t a lifestyle; it’s entertainment.  He sees it as perfectly natural and appropriate behavior, mainly because he believes he is interacting with others who are doing precisely the same thing.  Since he believes that everyone is simply making it up as they go along, he feels pretty confident in doing so himself.  Best matches:  The Pseudo Submissive / The Novice Submissive / The Brat Submissive.

---

The White Knight Dominant.  The White Knight Dom wants to right wrongs, slay dragons, rescue subs in trouble, treat his submissive like a princess, and become King – and he wants to do it all before lunch.  He is driven by a sense of chivalry and altruism that transcends what he considers to be the sordid and tawdry business of self-gratification.  Making you happy makes him happy.  The White Knight lives to find solutions to your problems, but the downside is, not all problems are fixable.  Best matches:  The Warrior Princess Submissive / The Acolyte Submissive.

The uses of the leash

There is something very atavistic about using and seeing a leash being wielded on another person. It calls up feelings deep within us that are raw and slightly out of bounds of normal societal standards.

More than the collar, the sight of the leash by those not in the D/s world brings up feelings that might range from revulsion to confusion, and its overt use is not at all a common sight even in the relatively more liberal confines of SL.

From my perspective as a Dom, the leash has several functions, some of which are utilitarian, some of which are symbolic, and some of which fulfill emotional wants and needs.

1. The leash symbolizes the close relationship between the owner and the leashed. It is a physical manifestation of this relationship, much like the more inconspicuous collar.

2. The leash denotes ownership and protection, a symbolic sign to others around of the special bond between dom and sub, warning them that the leashed person is off limits to others, and that the sub is under the protection of the leash holder.

3. The leash functions as a guide. For example, it ensures that your sub will follow you and not get lost, especially in situations where there are crowds. Or it allows you to guide the sub to areas that you wish them to go.

4. The leash can be used in scene play as a simple prop.

5. The use of the leash engenders positive emotional feelings ranging from pride, to satisfaction, to lust. The sheer pleasure derived from the simple act of holding one's most treasured possession by the hand via the physical existence of the leash cannot be overemphasized.

In second life, most leashes are just one of the many features of the collars in use, and can be rezzed and derezzed at the whim of an owner.

The chat commands to manipulate the leash are one of the most important for any beginning leash owner. It is cumbersome to try to open menu commands via touch, and in truth there are not many commands to commit to one's memory anyway. The leash commands are listed here.

It is also incumbent upon the owner to be aware of various rules and protocols that may need to be observed when using leashes. For example, some sims frown strongly on the use of leashes, and it is not your place to thumb your nose at the preferences of the sim owners or the people who inhabit the sim and may feel that your kinks are being forced on them. You should also unleash your pet before any derezz, and the use of a leash holder prevents the leash from attaching to your center point.

The leash owner may also elect to train their sub on various hand commands to facilitate interactions while leashed. For example, a quick downward pull on the leash signifies that the sub should kneel or assume any of the lowered postures agreed upon with her Dom, while a quick tug upwards indicates that the sub should get up.

In the end though, the leash is an instrument that hinges on the personal one on one relationship between the Dom and his sub, and its role and significance could vary from couple to couple. It is up to you and your partner to attach meaning to this tool, one that will enrich the D/s experience for both of you.

Depraved Monkey says "Leash training..."

...my pet does the dishes...does yours?

Depraved Monkey Says "Sometimes all she needs..."

...is a little gift wrapping.

Depraved Monkey Says "It's only gluttony..."

...if you eat the platter

Kinbaku: You're not broken yet baby, just bent

 

I'll be adding Kinbaku-inspired poses to the Tusk product and will fully integrate Tusk with a newer version of the DM Pussy.

The new pussy will probably be a separate product and be more focused on BDSM related activities than the basic version. For example, wearers of the new pussy will cum helplessly as a pussy leash is attached by clips to the labia and clitoral hood and tagged and played by malevolent strangers. Or the very act of being roped will cause a flood of juices to drip from the aroused and engorged member.

Not broken yet? Shhhhh baby girl....let me bend you just a little bit more.