Scan barcode
A review by kingofspain93
Nine and a Half Weeks: A Memoir of a Love Affair by Elizabeth McNeill
5.0
in her afterword to Nine and a Half Weeks, the author's daughter writes that she is proud her mother "found the inner strength to leave her lover and the abusive situation their affair had become." this was something I heard prior to reading the book, that it was "just about abuse." not only does McNeill never once use the word "abusive," but her memoir ends with her wondering if she will in fact ever find another lover who will make her feel hot again.
it seems like McNeill had a very strong submissive dynamic that included a desire for both bondage and pain, and that the man she writes about was the first person she encountered sexually who knew anything about how to meet those needs. I think that, having apparently not realized the extent of her own dynamic and the fact that others experienced it, McNeill probably considered her experience with the man a one-off that could not be replicated or pursued again. it's possible, too, that when he did behave unethically it was indistinguishable from the rest of their sex because she didn't have language to describe good versus bad doms.
I read this because it was referenced in SM 101: A Practical Introduction. Wiseman wrote that his motivation for writing that book was to educate the many, many people who wanted to practice BDSM but whose only resources were, at times, a single experience that they would ask their next lover to replicate, or word-of-mouth descriptions of bondage or domination that they would attempt without any idea of the safety measures required.* in short, he wanted to raise awareness about the fact that BDSM can be and generally is practiced safely and ethically. in short, Wiseman wrote his book for exactly someone like McNeill, who had one BDSM relationship that was very often exactly what she wanted, at many other times unethical and not what she wanted, and who was left doubting whether she could ever have the kind of sex that worked for her dynamic again because she had no language for what she had experienced. I'm not sure if, after Nine and a Half Weeks got published, McNeill was ever contacted by members of the BDSM community; I hope she was. clearly it had an impact, given that Wiseman was writing about it ten years later.
finally, there are three or four points in this book where I think the man behaves unethically, sometimes extremely. that said, I think that much of the time he was ethical, and attentive to McNeill while she was bound and while he was causing pain as much as when he was pampering her. it might be useful to point out that I think that what would have outraged audiences in the '70s (the infliction of pain during sex, bondage, a man devoting himself to a woman's care to the point of feeding her and dressing her) is probably slightly different from what would outrage people now (the lack of verbal consent). most often, the man starts or stops a sexual encounter not because of anything McNeill does or does not say, but because he is paying attention to her body language and thinking about her dynamic needs and limits. according to McNeill ("I loved it. I loved it, I loved it, I loved it, I loved it.") much of the time this works for her. sometimes, it doesn't, and this is where a dom's ability to read their sub's body language needs to be complemented by a word or signal the sub can use to end the encounter. any attempt to reduce the relationship in this book to the categories of "abusive" or "not abusive" necessarily excludes much of what actually happens, and I would be extremely wary of anyone who made such an attempt.
while I think the man was an unethical dom for a few reasons, the danger of uncritically labeling this an abusive relationship is that it paints all BDSM as inherently abusive AND suggests that the only consent that matters is verbal. it's worth pointing out that these are both anachronistic to the 1970s; neither the language of consent which is commonplace now nor the vocabulary of BDSM were widespread. to say that McNeill's relationship, which she adored, was abusive is a bold claim which goes against her experience of it and her own description of what we could call consent, which in her case was largely non-verbal. similarly, it is a liberty of me to use BDSM terminology to describe the relationship, and I do so with the understanding that this book is now representative of BDSM relationships in media even if it was not to McNeill when she wrote it.
I'm giving this book five stars not because I think every aspect of their relationship was ethical or because I think their exact relationship is something everyone should emulate. everyone's relationship, whether they are BDSM practitioners or not, will look different. I'm rating it so highly because it was fantastic reading for thinking about my own ethics, because I enjoyed how much McNeill enjoyed having good sex and being treated lavishly, and because it problematized how quickly I jump to use the word "abuse" for relationships where the women themselves would not use this word. essentially, sex is complicated, and it's good to think about it because it's better to recognize how intricate sex is and be ethical than be sloppy and unethical. on top of all of this, McNeill's writing is strong, interesting, and unaffected. I'm planning to read her memoir about exploring her grandfather's past (or something, I'm don't really care) not because it's related to BDSM but just because I liked her writing.
*as always, it's worth noting that BDSM is an amazing practice and community because while all sex requires people to understand their own values and behave ethically, BDSM foregrounds ethics and value choices in a way that is often taken for granted in other kinds of sexual experiences where consent is expected to be the only sexual ethic (and even then if you're lucky).
it seems like McNeill had a very strong submissive dynamic that included a desire for both bondage and pain, and that the man she writes about was the first person she encountered sexually who knew anything about how to meet those needs. I think that, having apparently not realized the extent of her own dynamic and the fact that others experienced it, McNeill probably considered her experience with the man a one-off that could not be replicated or pursued again. it's possible, too, that when he did behave unethically it was indistinguishable from the rest of their sex because she didn't have language to describe good versus bad doms.
I read this because it was referenced in SM 101: A Practical Introduction. Wiseman wrote that his motivation for writing that book was to educate the many, many people who wanted to practice BDSM but whose only resources were, at times, a single experience that they would ask their next lover to replicate, or word-of-mouth descriptions of bondage or domination that they would attempt without any idea of the safety measures required.* in short, he wanted to raise awareness about the fact that BDSM can be and generally is practiced safely and ethically. in short, Wiseman wrote his book for exactly someone like McNeill, who had one BDSM relationship that was very often exactly what she wanted, at many other times unethical and not what she wanted, and who was left doubting whether she could ever have the kind of sex that worked for her dynamic again because she had no language for what she had experienced. I'm not sure if, after Nine and a Half Weeks got published, McNeill was ever contacted by members of the BDSM community; I hope she was. clearly it had an impact, given that Wiseman was writing about it ten years later.
finally, there are three or four points in this book where I think the man behaves unethically, sometimes extremely. that said, I think that much of the time he was ethical, and attentive to McNeill while she was bound and while he was causing pain as much as when he was pampering her. it might be useful to point out that I think that what would have outraged audiences in the '70s (the infliction of pain during sex, bondage, a man devoting himself to a woman's care to the point of feeding her and dressing her) is probably slightly different from what would outrage people now (the lack of verbal consent). most often, the man starts or stops a sexual encounter not because of anything McNeill does or does not say, but because he is paying attention to her body language and thinking about her dynamic needs and limits. according to McNeill ("I loved it. I loved it, I loved it, I loved it, I loved it.") much of the time this works for her. sometimes, it doesn't, and this is where a dom's ability to read their sub's body language needs to be complemented by a word or signal the sub can use to end the encounter. any attempt to reduce the relationship in this book to the categories of "abusive" or "not abusive" necessarily excludes much of what actually happens, and I would be extremely wary of anyone who made such an attempt.
while I think the man was an unethical dom for a few reasons, the danger of uncritically labeling this an abusive relationship is that it paints all BDSM as inherently abusive AND suggests that the only consent that matters is verbal. it's worth pointing out that these are both anachronistic to the 1970s; neither the language of consent which is commonplace now nor the vocabulary of BDSM were widespread. to say that McNeill's relationship, which she adored, was abusive is a bold claim which goes against her experience of it and her own description of what we could call consent, which in her case was largely non-verbal. similarly, it is a liberty of me to use BDSM terminology to describe the relationship, and I do so with the understanding that this book is now representative of BDSM relationships in media even if it was not to McNeill when she wrote it.
I'm giving this book five stars not because I think every aspect of their relationship was ethical or because I think their exact relationship is something everyone should emulate. everyone's relationship, whether they are BDSM practitioners or not, will look different. I'm rating it so highly because it was fantastic reading for thinking about my own ethics, because I enjoyed how much McNeill enjoyed having good sex and being treated lavishly, and because it problematized how quickly I jump to use the word "abuse" for relationships where the women themselves would not use this word. essentially, sex is complicated, and it's good to think about it because it's better to recognize how intricate sex is and be ethical than be sloppy and unethical. on top of all of this, McNeill's writing is strong, interesting, and unaffected. I'm planning to read her memoir about exploring her grandfather's past (or something, I'm don't really care) not because it's related to BDSM but just because I liked her writing.
*as always, it's worth noting that BDSM is an amazing practice and community because while all sex requires people to understand their own values and behave ethically, BDSM foregrounds ethics and value choices in a way that is often taken for granted in other kinds of sexual experiences where consent is expected to be the only sexual ethic (and even then if you're lucky).