British Dominatrix Serves Only White, Right-Wing Clientele to Convert Them to Socialism

Alright, folks, listen up! We are in the midst of a “pleasure revolution.” But don’t get too excited. In fact, don’t get excited at all. This is a “feminist” pleasure revolution, so for the rest of us, it’s sure to bring nothing but pain. In fact, for Reba Maybury — a professor of political science and a professional dominatrix — the pleasure revolution is literally brought about through pain. Maybury (or Mistress Rebecca to her clientele) specializes in converting “white, right-wing men” to socialism proving, yet again, that pleasure is subjective and “feminists” are seriously messed up.

According to Women in the World, the “pleasure revolution” seeks to create a world in which “women’s sexuality is embraced, rather than stigmatized, by both individuals and society at large.” Author and feminist Stephanie Theobald explains that the goal is for women to feel comfortable “asserting their own pleasure” rather than “men imposing their pleasure on women.” And, apparently (for “feminists” like Maybury anyway), a woman’s “pleasure” is that all men be forced, through sexual domination, to become socialists. Hey, whatever floats your boat… I guess.

Maybury says that her client list is exclusively “white right-wing men” because she is unable to be “even fictionally cruel to any other type of man.” These men come to Maybury to indulge in their fantasy of “serving a powerful woman.” So, in a sense, they are “imposing their pleasure” on her by paying her to indulge their sexual fantasies. But maybe not, because that would be oppressive. But maybe yes, because that’s exactly what they’re doing. But shhh, because this is the “pleasure revolution,” yay women.

Maybury says that she derives her sexual pleasure from “forcing those men to see the contradiction between their love of powerful women and their support for political parties that actively work to limit women’s rights and empowerment.” One wonders if there is any actual sex involved here, or just some sort of naked dramatic reading of The Communist Manifesto. According to Maybury, the way a man can make her happy is if she succeeds at “turning him into a socialist.” Which necessarily means that Maybury is attracted exclusively to white, right-wing men — surely this is a no-no in socialist feminist circles — and begs the question: is she still attracted to them once she has turned them socialist?

We must, of course, take a moment to discuss the men in this situation who pay Maybury to turn them into socialists. For them, surely, this socialist “conversion” lasts exactly as long as their paid-for time slot with Maybury, and not a second longer. We must assume that, upon leaving Maybury’s den of socialist delights, they go back to their regular right-wing lives, demanding dinner be on the table at seven o’clock sharp and raping everybody (or whatever it is right-wing men do). If their fetish is simply “serving a powerful woman” (as Maybury describes), then it probably doesn’t matter to them whether Maybury forces them to become a socialist or a small woodland creature playing the panpipes. They just want to be dominated — hence their visit to a dominatrix.

What does it mean, then, for the “pleasure revolution,” that the man’s sexual agenda is being completely satisfied by a temporary and fictional shift in political affiliation, while the woman’s political agenda is being used as a pornography? I mean, it’s possible I lost the plot somewhere back at “sociology professor and professional dominatrix,” but this doesn’t sound particularly “empowering” to me. Is it just about women like Maybury being allowed to indulge in their fantasies of turning the entire world socialist through sex? Or do they really think they are affecting change?

It’s impossible (for rational people) to deny that preaching that women should be “asserting their own pleasure” and then getting paid to pleasure men in exactly the way they want is a contradiction. And the notion that all men should be “forced” to adopt identical worldviews and political affiliations is frightening and oppressive. But none of this should come as a shock. Conflicting logic, oppressive ideologies, and weird sexual fetishes are basically the three pillars of modern feminism. So, carry on Mistress Rebecca, you’re a true “feminist” warrior.