The great philosopher Wittgenstein pointed out that language
doesn’t work like calculus. Words don’t
have exact meanings. Language is
fundamentally poetic and metaphorical… rarely is it rigorous and literal. (Literarily “leather” is just the hide off a
dead animal, right?) Recently, my Owner
and I have been talking about “leather” and “the community”… and I think there
was some underlying confusion in the conversation b/c we were using the words
(like a lot of people do) in different ways.
I don’t want to imply that either one of us is right or wrong… but I
just want to explore what it means to me
to be “leather.”
The best statement on this I have yet seen is Boymeat’sspeech at South Plains on “The Future of Leather”… so I will borrow heavily
from it. In his speech, Boymeat started
by pointing out: “In September, guest
columnists from all walks of life posted pieces on Leatherati.com trying to
answer the age old question – “what is leather?” And no matter how many essays
you read, you never really had the answer.”
Presumably b/c there is no “the” answer.
Okay… well let’s just, for the sake of argument, start w/
the traditional leathersex image: gay guys in old-style motorcycle gear cruising for rough sex via the hanky code in biker bars.
Let me quote a section of Boymeat’s speech:
“So does leather still
live and breathe?
"Let’s look at the
evidence against – the leather bar, dying in some places and dead in others.
Recon and FetLife… rising in its place… The art of the cruise replaced by the
art of the instant message or the tweet. The space where all are welcome vs.
the secret place that you had to be in the know to find.
"That’s what everyone
says these days.
"Now let me tell you
what I see.
"I see evolution.
"I see leather as a
world of sexual outlaws, doing what outlaws do. I see a history of people
looking around at the world they are in, deciding what parts of it they liked
and what parts they didn’t, and building their own lives with their own rules
and their own protocols all with the intent of one thing – to get off. Whether
getting off physically, or emotionally, or spiritually, or some combination of
all of the above….”
My own interest in “leather” is largely as an armature
mythologist. Myths (and rituals) create
the paradigms through which we view the world… both personal myths and
collective, cultural myths. “Leather” is
partly about joining a tribe and having a mythology – complete w/ “Great Old
Ones” in form of the legendary (more fable than fact) Old Guard – and rituals,
costumes, rites of passage (i.e. earned leather… or earned ink), transformative
experiences (hook pulls or cuttings or floggings or whatever)… all of which adds
up to give one a different paradigm through which to view the world.
I use “leather” as a term basically synonymous w/ “urban
aboriginal” or “modern primitive.” Or
Boymeat’s term: “sexual outlaws.” It has
to do w/ sex. It has to do w/ tribalism
(a loose, somewhat anarchist, community… or, really, network of
mini-communities – i.e. tribes). And it
has to do w/ following your own heart (or libido) in the face of what “good society”
tells you that you should be doing… whether your thing be S/m, D/s, bondage,
gear-fetishes, swingers, group sex, sexual role-play (littles, puppies…),
gender queer, polyamoury… All that taboo stuff!
So, what about the (protocol heavy) M/s dynamic? From reading Geoff Mains’ 1984 book Urban Aboriginals (and he was there,
first hand, in the gay leather scene in the 70s and early 80s), the M/s
relationship was actually rare! Most of
the men he profiles only enter D/s relationships during a scene (while
playing/having sex), but not as an ongoing structure. (Of course, some were into M/s 24/7.) Most of the men he profiles are switches. (Some were not.) And resistance play seems to have been pretty
common in that community… men would wrestle and fight to see who would be “on
top.” This is a very different picture
of “leather” than you would get if you just think of some of today’s high
protocol (stick-up-their-butt?) Masters.
The scene Mains described was a lot rougher, less structured, more
anarchist… and primal! The play too, I
get the impression, was a lot more hands-on… less flogging and more punching
and bighting.
For Mains, the underlying theme of leathersex is an open
embracing of our animal (primal) side.
It’s about being a human-animal… dominance orders… sex & aggression…
pissing to mark your territory.
Embracing, not denying, our instinct-system and our animal biology is,
in large part, at the core of the leather mythology… at least, for me.
Okay, then… so what is the “community?” I agree w/ Boymeat. It includes Fet and Recon. Munch groups.
Kinky karaoke night at The Roux.
Bars like the Eagle and the Woodshed.
Education groups like CAPEX, party groups like Dominion, cons like
Frolicon or SELF, dungeons like LF and the Warehouse, and swingers’ clubs like
the Estate. Yes, there are big differences
among these different segments of the “kinky” population… but that’s why I
think the analogy of “tribes” is so helpful.
And even back in the 60s and 70s, there was no uniformity among
different “leathersex” tribes. It’s
always been mixed-up… diverse! We are
outlaws and rule-breakers, after all.
One final quote from Boymeat:
“Leather is not the
fabric of your clothing…Leather is not your protocols. Leather is not Master
and slave, or hard core SM… Leather is
not the rules you keep... Leather is not your gender, or your sexual
preferences, top, bottom, Dominant, submissive...
"Leather is all of
those things and then some. Leather has no gatekeeper; it has no board of
directors, no leadership committee, and no dictionary definition. Leather is in
the hands of the individual, the sexual outlaw, meeting up with other sexual
outlaws and doing what feels right to them at that time.”