So a week or so ago when I was on the east coast, in a moment of extreme weakness, I went to see the Avengers exhibit at Times Square. It was awesome, I somehow charmed a really sweet employee — ahem, operative — into giving me their rad as hell SHIELD beret, I bought Ellen like sixteen souvenirs (okay, two) — but that is not what I’m here about. (Ask me about the Cap t-shirt I got. Please. Oh my god. Ask me.)
What I’m here about is, unsurprisingly, the Captain America portion of exhibit.
The experience is immersive, all set up so you feel like you’re in SHIELD archives or the like. The Cap section includes the VitaRay (complete with a cameo by the salt stains from, you guessed it, Chris Evans’ back sweat), the rescuing-Bucky leather jacket, some seriously exclusive trading cards I Coulson’d all over, the Avengers uniform, and, endearingly, a section where you can test your strength against Steve’s. There’s also a little portion by the VitaRay that explains the changes Steve’s brain went through after they administered the serum. Being the massive bag of science trash that I am, this is where I spent most of my time.
The info graphic basically told me what we already know: that the serum enhances everything you had going for you before. So Steve’s brain is smarter and faster, the neurons have a longer life span, the hippocampus — that’s your memory storage — is nice and healthy; whatever. But then they said that the part of Steve’s brain that increased the most in mass and synaptogenesis was the amygdala. And I promptly lost all control over my feelings.
Cut bc this is about to get really gnarly. It’s science time, kiddos.Bucky has a version of the serum too. So he’d likely be more caring than before, especially when it comes to Steve…
I have way to may feels about the less well explored aspects of the serum. His caring. His already high ability to empathize, what happens when that is kicked up to the next notch? Please see ‘is the the first time you’ve lost a solider / we’re not soldiers exchange with tony.
His ability to remember, particularly feelings / emotions is improved. Can you imagine what that does to someone with his level of PTSD? What his gut reflexes (also enhanced) must do to him on an everyday level?
What about his taste? Not only is he used to non-processed, less chemical ridden food, but he’s far more sensitive to anything being ‘off’. Now imagine a steady diet of army food. Now imagine having to eat four times as much. Now imagine having to eat four times as much when food is scare and your men probably aren’t getting quite as much as they should but you still have to have more than your fair share and Bucky is always pushing a little extra on his plate because you are affected more by hunger than anyone else and combine that with growing up young and poor and not being able to always work and your best friend having to support you both and feeling guilty about eating food then even though you’re sick all the time and he makes you eat anyway and you think there is a chance in hell that Steve isn’t a walking eating disorder?
Oh and that increased loyalty connection with people? Being lost for so long and finally having a home again and a crew and it’s not quite the same but people to protect and that feels good and right and then one day you get on an elevator and your world just *shatters*.
Regardless of it being consensual, BDSM sexualizes violence [normally against women] and you honestly can’t argue that.
I respectfully disagree.
While I understand how some could argue that BDSM reinforces misogyny, and eroticizes power and violence, I believe that between two consenting adults, the interpersonal dynamic of a BDSM relationship empowers both the dominant and the submissive (regardless of gender).
And it has to be consenting if it’s BDSM otherwise it’s just abuse. I know many women who enjoy BDSM because it validates their sexual desires and sexual inclinations, and there’s nothing wrong with having a shared fantasy that can be enacted by two (or more) willing people.
But that’s just my two cents, feel free to feel how you feel; it’s valid either way :3
You just proved my point. If you take away the consent, it’s abuse.
I’m not saying it’s not empowering to the women who partake in it. I question the men who partake in it as a “dom” simply because we need to evaluate where their desire for dominance over women stems from (and most of the time, it comes from misogynistic tendencies, but that’s a different discussion altogether and I’m not going to discuss that on this post). I’m not saying there isn’t more to BDSM than violence or power. I’m not saying I have a problem with BDSM or the people who participate in it.
I’m just saying that BDSM sexualizes violence, which it does, and you can’t argue that it doesn’t.
My two cents. I have several friends in the BDSM community and though I admit that I no longer have that as one of my fetishes, there was a time when I did, though I was always on the fringes, not deep into the hardcore stuff. But I did learn some things, even if there’s a lot I still don’t really understand.
Yes if you take away consent it could be considered just abuse, but at that moment is also ceases to be BDSM. BDSM REQUIRES consent. BDSM is ultimately a trust exercise between the sub and dom and an exercise in control and finding boundaries. It’s not about abuse for abuses sake.
I would also put forward that BDSM does NOT sexualize violence. BDSM is a refuge for those for whom violence is already sexualized. These two sentences do NOT have the same meaning.
I would also note that in my remaining ties with that community, most of the men I know who are part of it… are subs, not doms or a mix of the two depending on the activity at hand.
I think this entire argument postulated by the OP and responder needs more actual knowledge, research and understanding attached to it. And I include myself on that part because like I said, I still have friends in the BDSM community and I was on the fringes of it for a while after my sexual assault. But I still don’t entirely understand everything about it.
And i definitely don’t think that a blanket statement like “BDSM sexualizes violence” is fair or true, and definitely comes from someone with little to no actual experience or knowledge of the subject to which they are speaking.
Okay, but if you say ‘if you take away consent it’s abuse’ then isn’t that actually making the point that the activity is healthy? Take boxing verses punching someone in the face randomly. These two have very little in common, despite a strikingly similar appearance. Or sex verse rape, the ‘only’ difference is consent, and it’s a HELL of a difference.
I’m not saying that people *can’t* have a problematic bdsm relationship or sex life, but I don’t think it’s inherent. I do think that due to society conditioning it behooves M/f couples to take extra steps to insure consent. Of course I also think that F/m couples have other issues they need to pay extra attention to (please see the do-me-sub mentality that often seems to run with male entitlement of female sexuality).
Also in my experience the primary motivation in most bdsm that I’ve been exposed to isn’t violence, it’s power exchange and/or a desired sensation, which can be either mental or physical. To say bdsm is ‘about’ violence is to pull a very small aspect and make it far more important than it actually is.
The big difference, though, is that bdsm done correctly is an amazingly *mindful* experience. The communication, both before, during, and after, not only with your partner(s), but maybe even more importantly with yourself and your own body, knowing yourself, your needs, and being able to verbalize that and work toward those ends? Those are skills that I think more people should have in their relationships. This is the polar opposite of abuse.