HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018539.jpg

2.49 MB

Extraction Summary

3
People
1
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Essay / article / manuscript page (evidence)
File Size: 2.49 MB
Summary

This document is a single page (Bates stamped HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018539) from a larger production, likely seized evidence or a file printout. The text is an essay or article discussing the sociological and psychological distinctions between BDSM and sex, mentioning legal issues for dominatrixes in New York City and the author's personal experiences with polyamory and jealousy. While part of a production likely related to the Epstein investigation (given the prompt context and House Oversight stamp), the text itself is a philosophical discussion on sexuality and does not specifically name Epstein or his associates on this page.

People (3)

Name Role Context
Author (Unidentified 'I') Author/Narrator
Discussing personal experiences with polyamory and BDSM.
Unidentified Partners Partners of Author
Partners who were sexually monogamous but allowed BDSM with others.
Wise Friend Associate
Quoted regarding social constructs and one-way streets.

Organizations (1)

Name Type Context
House Oversight Committee
Indicated by the Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018539' at the bottom.

Timeline (1 events)

Unknown
Conversation with a wise friend about social constructs.
Unknown
Author Wise Friend

Locations (1)

Location Context
Mentioned in relation to dominatrixes and legal safety regarding BDSM laws.

Relationships (1)

Author Romantic/Sexual Unidentified Partners
Text mentions 'couple relationships where we were sexually monogamous'

Key Quotes (4)

"One-way streets are a social construct. That doesn't mean we should ignore them."
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018539.jpg
Quote #1
"among consenting adults, there is no 'should'."
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018539.jpg
Quote #2
"As long as 'vanilla' people are afraid of 'BDSM'... as long as 'BDSMers' are afraid of being seen as 'sexual'... everyone will be bound by these oppressive standards."
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018539.jpg
Quote #3
"Those particular partners felt jealous and threatened by the idea of me having sex with another man, but they didn't mind if I did BDSM with another man."
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018539.jpg
Quote #4

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (3,322 characters)

possibly be BDSM! Because I'm not a BDSMer! Because BDSM is dirty."
But we shouldn't necessarily blame people for this instinct to reject and categorize: the instinct is one that comes from being scared and oppressed... because the social penalties for "getting it wrong" are high. Remember, those New York City dominatrixes thought they were "safe" from the law as long as BDSM didn't count as sex. But as soon as someone decided BDSM "counted as" sex, those dominatrixes were arrested.
It's just one more example of how sexual stigma for "different kinds of sex" is constantly intertwined. No type of consensual sexuality can express itself freely until people agree that "among consenting adults, there is no 'should'." The Romans, those ancient imperialists, used to say: "Divide and conquer." When consensual sexualities are scared of each other, we will continue to be conquered. As long as "vanilla" people are afraid of "BDSM"... as long as "BDSMers" are afraid of being seen as "sexual"... as long as the social penalties for being a "slut" or a "whore" are incredibly steep... as long as sex workers are stigmatized and criminalized... everyone will be bound by these oppressive standards.
* * *
The Embodied Side of BDSM versus Sex
Although Part 1 was all about how the divide between "BDSM" and "sex" is often nonsensical, or purely political, or socially constructed... that doesn't mean that the divide does not exist. I once had a conversation about ignoring social constructs with a wise friend, who noted dryly that: "One-way streets are a social construct. That doesn't mean we should ignore them." Just because the outside world influences our sexuality, does not mean that our sexual preferences are invalid.
Some polyamorous BDSMers have very different rules about having sex with outsiders, as opposed to doing BDSM with outsiders. For example, during the time when I was considering a transition to polyamory, I myself had a couple relationships where we were sexually monogamous -- yet my partners agreed that I could do BDSM with people who weren't my partner. Those particular partners felt jealous and threatened by the idea of me having sex with another man, but they didn't mind if I did BDSM with another man. Maybe the feelings of those partners only arose because they categorized "BDSM" and "sex" into weirdly different socially-constructed ways... but those partners' feelings were nonetheless real, and their feelings deserved respect.
And there are also unmistakable ways that BDSM feels different from sex. There is something, bodily, that is just plain different about BDSM, as opposed to sex. I often find myself thinking of "BDSM feelings" and "sexual feelings" as flowing down two parallel channels in my head... sometimes these channels intersect, but sometimes they're far apart. The BDSM urge strikes me as deeply different, separate, from the sex urge. It can be fun to combine BDSM and sex, but there are definitely times when I want BDSM that feel very unlike most times when I want sex.
The biggest political reason why it's difficult to discuss this is the way in which we currently conceptualize sexuality through "orientations": we have built a cultural "orientation model" focused on the idea that "acceptable" sexuality is "built-in," or
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018539

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document