A contemporary expansion of Hal Fischer’s second aspect of gay culture: intervention of a semiotic mode within kink communities – EROS Exhibition
Introduction
Hal Fischer first published ‘Gay Semiotics’ in 1977. The collection of photographs and accompanying essay describes Fischer’s findings from his research on different semiotic modes used in the American gay community at the time (Fischer, 1977).
His work helped to popularise the hankey code system. Where a different colour hankey denotes a different sexual activity, the wearer is looking for (Raúl Cornier, 2019). Which is still widely used today.
As ‘Gay semiotics’ was published 45 years ago, and as laws and westernised culture has evolved it allows for some interesting critique and expansion.
The project named ‘EROS’ was created as a contemporary extension to Fischer’s work on different kinks and fetishes. The word ‘Eros’ comes from the Greek ‘God of love’, and ‘(in Freudian theory) the group of instincts, [especially] sexual, that govern acts of self-preservation and that tend towards uninhibited enjoyment of life’(Eros, n.d.).
The EROS project aims to shine light on modern mainstream fetishes and highlight the importance of the objects used for them. In a way which creates a sex positive atmosphere and dismantles the Submissive / Dominant binary shown in Fischer’s work. As well as cultural stigmas associated with kink.
Figure 1 Fischer.H, Street Fashion Jock, 1977. (Cherry and Martin, 2015)
Cultural stigma
This chapter will explore potential sources of stigma that surround the Kink community and the importance of creating artwork which challenges it. This will provide context for later chapters which discuss Hal Fischer’s work and its relevance in the creation of the EROS exhibition.
Firstly, it is important to draw attention to when the act of being homosexual was made legal in the USA and the UK. It was in 2001 when the age of consent for gay men was lowered to 16 to match that of heterosexual intercourse (Regulating sex and sexuality: the 20th century, 2022). Whereas it was not until 2003, when the supreme court ruled that sodomy laws in the US are unconstitutional (Milestones in the American Gay Rights Movement | American Experience | PBS, 2022). Twenty-six years after ‘Gay Semiotics’ was first published.
It can be unclear what the difference between Kinks, Fetishes, Paraphilias and Paraphilic disorder is. Robert Weiss PhD, LCSW explains, ‘fetishes are nontraditional sexual interests or behaviors (kinks)’ and,’ paraphilias are fetishes that have escalated in ways that have resulted in negative life consequences’ (Weiss, 2017).Whereas the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders – Fifth Edition (DSM-5) states, ‘The term paraphilia may be defined as any sexual interest greater than or equal to normophilic sexual interests’ (Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 2013). However, the DSM-5 acknowledges a differentiation between paraphilias and paraphilic disorders where a disorder cause ‘clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of functioning’ (Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 2013). This overlap of terminology does not make understanding the difference between a kink or a disorder very accessible and allows for damaging associations with innocent activities, having negative impact on people’s lives.
This is exasperated when the medical field juxtaposes illegal acts alongside private and non-harming kinks. The DSM-5 lists 8 paraphilias which have the possibility to develop into paraphilic disorders. Pedophilic disorder (sexual focus on children), voyeuristic disorder (spying on others in private activities) and exhibitionistic disorder (exposing genitals to others) are all illegal acts and involve more than one person and importantly without consent. These are described alongside sexual masochism disorder (undergoing humiliation, bondage or suffering), fetishistic disorder (using non-living objects or a particular affinity for a non-sexual body part) and transvestic disorder (engaging in sexually arousing cross dressing). Which primarily take place in private with consenting adults. This proximity to non-consenting illegal activities allows for negative connotations to develop when a distinction is not clearly described or understood (Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 2013).
Dr.Weiss also plays into this negative association when explaining the difference of terminology. ‘Consider as an analogy the difference between a casual drinker, a heavy drinker, and an alcoholic’ (Weiss, 2017). His comparison of kink in varying degree of extremity / activity to drinking, which is usually seen to be negative, attaches negative connotations to any form of fetishised activity, regardless of regular day impact.
In their ‘Hooked’ publication, the artist Rick Burger presents a range of photographs depicting the sexual act of sounding (insertion of artifacts into the urethra) and cock and ball torture (CBT). The images gradually become more explicit and the activities more extreme. There is nothing in the work to suggest that the subject experiences any negative impact from his kink activities in a social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning like Dr. Weiss’s alcohol analogy would suggest. The image titled ‘split’ (Fig 2) shows the subject has had surgery on their urethra to further their fetishised play. This would suggest the extremity of the activity had a positive impact on sexual pleasure and every day living oppose to a negative one.
Heteronormativity has helped to create stigma around kink activities and culture. ‘As a consequence of the heterosexual assumption and the problematizing of nonheterosexuals, sexual minorities often remain invisible and many individual heterosexuals are unlikely to critically examine their own sexual prejudice and its underlying assumptions’ (Herek, 2007). This assumption that anything other to the ‘hetero – norm’ deserves further scrutiny and the possibility that it may be problematic can be seen in the DSM-5 when it describes transvestic disorder as it refuses to acknowledge the LGBTQ+ community and those who do not conform to the ‘standard’ gender binary, with or without sexual gratification. Ignoring people of the LGBTQ+ community undoubtably causes harm.
The suggestion that wearing the opposite genders clothing for sexual gratification is closely linked to a phycological disorder is an example of how heteronormativity holds power over the ‘other’ through terminology. As Michel Foucault writes, ‘power’s hold on sex is maintained through language’ (Foucault and Hurley, 1998). This is one example of how heteronormativity allows fetishised stigma to continue and highlights the importance of creating Queer artwork to challenge it. If allowed to continue unchallenged, heteronormative biases, like binaries, they will continue to create stigma and harm to minority communities. This is what EROS attempts to do.
Figure 2 Burger.R, Split, 2017. (Denker + Schneider Art Gallery 2017)
Critique of Hal Fischer’s ‘Gay Semiotics’
In the original document only 14 pages out of the 54 has connections to the kink community. It has been over four decades since the publication of ‘Gay Semiotics’ and changes in culture now permit for an extension to Fischer’s work.
Figure 3 Fischer.H, Street fashion basic gay, 1977. (Cherry and Martin, 2015)
Figure 4 Fischer.H, Archetypal media image leather, 1977. (Cherry and Martin, 2015)
Fischer’s work on ‘Gay Semiotics’ provides an insightful and rigorous description of the visual clues gay men at the time wore to denote sexual preferences. The image titled ‘Street Fashion, Basic Gay’ (Fig 3) depicts a man wearing casual street clothes with labels clinically dissecting the figure, pointing out key artifacts the figure is wearing. The individual objects do not appear to hold any homoerotic connotations though when collated together they create a narrative.
The section of Fischer’s work that allows for great expansion is his depiction of the leather scene. The photograph titled ‘Archetypical media image leather’ (Fig 4), which displays a person in leatherwear, does not isolate items of clothing or accessories using labels like the ‘every day’ photographs. Despite many of the artifacts are only displayed in this one image. This gap allows for a critical extension.
Fischer’s kink related photography lacks visual information. The work ‘Bondage Device Cross’ (Fig 5) is a photograph of a bondage frame with a drawn outline of a figure showing how one would be tied to it. Arrows labelled ‘restraints’ point to parts of the frame, though no means of restraint are depicted. This may be because of heteronormative stigmas and legal pressures prohibiting the correct or full display of the device. Perhaps, it may have been construed as pornographic.
Figure 5 Fischer.H, Bondage Device Cross, 1977. (Cherry and Martin, 2015)
Figure 6 Fischer.H, Sadism & Masochism 1977. (Cherry and Martin, 2015)
These pressures are also seen in several other of Fischer’s pieces. The photograph labelled ‘Sadism & Masochism’ (Fig 6) show a couple, one holding a flogger (leather impact instrument) with his arm around the other who is wearing leather wrist restraints. The flogger is loosely held and is stationary, emphasising the non-use of the item. Also, the leather restraints are not tightened around the subjects’ wrists and appear to be easy to slip out of. These subtle signs show a great effort has been made to make the images acceptable culturally and not to depict anything that could be considered as pornographic.
However, Fischer uses the description adjacent to the work to explain what would happen in private, ‘S&M activities demand structured role and playing a high level of communication between partners. In this case the M, clad only in leather jock strap and padded restraints, anticipates a whipping. The bare chested S prefers the anonymity of the hood and obliges his partner with a whipping from his specially selected cat-o’-nine-tails. While all this takes place in an atmosphere of good, clean fun, a lack of communication between the S and M can result in bodily harm’ (Fischer, 1977). The wording here, ‘obliges’, ‘specially selected’ and anticipates’, adds the sexual narrative the image is forbidden to describe. It also emphasises the need of consent during kink activities.
The ‘S’ and ‘M’ here refer to sadism and masochism but can also refer to ‘Slave’ and ‘Master’ which have the opposite initials. This binary reflects ones seen in heteronormative society. ‘A binary world normalizes an identity dichotomy … if one trait is identified with one of these gender identities, the pitfalls of the dichotomy lead to assumptions that the opposite trait must be true for the “opposite” gender’ (Mathews, 2020). The use of binaries (male / female) can be seen in the perceived fetishised Submissive (Sub) / Dominant (Dom) relationship. This inflexibility and segregation using this classification is bias and does not fully communicate the subtitles of contemporary fetish culture, something which EROS aims to critique.
These cultural influences can be seen in other work which has been inspired by Fischer’s ‘Gay Semiotics’ like the music video for the song ‘House of Air’ (2017) by Brendan Maclean (Fig 7). The video is predominantly filmed in colour and in a classic early 1980’s style mirroring Fischer’s work. It includes the superimposed labels isolating specific items.
‘House of Air’ is less affected by cultural norms. It displays more extreme versions of ‘normative sex’ which directly or indirectly involve genitalia at the core of the fetish. For example, oral sex, Fisting, Urolagnia (Play involving urine) and Coprophilia (play involving feces). This more explicit expansion of Fischer’s work shows less concern about external factors, and its acceptability in society.
Despite this, the sexually explicit content is limited to acts using the body and any mention of fetishes which use specific artifacts are neglect of attention, like in Fischer’s original work. The black and white scene labelled ‘submission’ (Fig 8) depicts a person in bondage and does not include labels to name any items being used. There is one short 9 second scene labelled, ‘Bondage’ which does include the labels ‘restraints’ though does not go into detail about what kind. Though, the other scenes in the film do, primarily items which are not kink specific, like sports socks, which may be used in a variety of different fetishes. With the exception to vegetable shortening, used in fisting. This is perhaps to distance from the paraphilic disorder, fetishistic disorder described earlier.
Maclean’s work is affected by UK law. In a behind the scenes video documenting the creation of the music video, they show a deleted scene which appears to have included ‘whipping’. In the UK, ‘consent is not a valid defense for committing bodily harm’ (Lehmiller, 2020) and includes BDSM practises. Presumably this scene was cut from the video because it goes against the UK’s laws.
‘House of Air’ is a more explicit expansion of Fischer’s work but mainly concentrates on kinks involving solely the body. Both Fischer and Maclean touch on different kinks which rely on different objects briefly and without proper depth in comparison to other entities.
Figure 7 Maclean.B, Fairbairn.B and Eccleston.K, House of Air, 2017.
Figure 8 Maclean.B, Fairbairn.B and Eccleston.K, House of Air // behind the scenes (uncensored), 2017.
EROS
The EROS project, ongoing, is an exhibition consisting of 7 photographs which depict overlapping contemporary mainstream fetishes and the display of the artifacts used in the images. Inspired by Fischer’s work, this project’s purpose is to create a safe space for education and ignite sex positive discussions. As well as to emphasise the combining of specific objects which are used in fetish play. With the intention of dismantling kink associated stigmas and overall creating a sex positive atmosphere.
Figure 9 Asbury.R Eros 1 - 7, 2022.
Mainstream kinks were chosen and layered as subjects for this project to challenge cultural stigmas against fetish. Popular kinks like Chastity, Medical Play, Gunge Play and Looner (affinity to inflatable objects) are depicted all of which are not mentioned in Hal Fischer’s work or the ‘House of air’ music video. This legitimises the activities as fetishes and encourages discussion and creates an atmosphere of inclusion.
The main part of the project is the display of the artifacts used in the photographs. The exhibition proposal outlines a floor plan of tables where the artifacts used are to be displayed and labelled. This layout allows for the viewer to walk around the objects and appreciate them at a close distance. This draws attention to each object individually and their fetishistic significance, something which is not seen in Fischer’s work. The photography is to primarily provide context to how the objects are used. This is also the reasoning behind not including labels directly onto the images, as to not distract from the colourful physical objects.
All 7 photographs have been edited to be monochrome. This was Inspired by ‘Gay Semiotics’ which all photographs are black and white, and the ‘house of air’ music video which shows all kink related scenes in black and white also. This decision for the EROS photographs allows the artifacts to be the focal point of the exhibition and is a representation of how of fetishes, their intensity, and kink relationships are not all binary, black and white, but also many shades of grey in between.
Each photo is titled 1 – 7 in German. The images have nondescript titles unlike Fischer’s do, this is to not assign the described fetishes to a particular role, for example, Submissive or Dominant, Top (active role during intercourse) or Bottom (passive role during intercourse). This is to challenge the presence of binaries, as in practise sexual roles are not so easily defined.
The ratio of the images (1:1) allow for a contemporary appearance. The square shape is reminiscent of social media posts and is subtle salute to the online presence of fetish communities.
All seven scenes are portrayed by the same subject. This is to show how people may take part in more than one kink, even several at a time. Adding to the positive atmosphere by confirming the fluidity of kink activities and preferences.
Like work produced by Stefan Thiel, (Fig 10) the images have been constructed to provide a narrative on how the objects may be used during kink activities. The poses of the body in relation to the objects give movement and context on how they are likely to be used. For example, ’ZWEI’ (2), the kneeling position suggests the subject would move by means of crawling and in ‘SECHS’ (6), reclining and basking in their activities.
The exhibition space could potentially be used as a vessel for teaching. A meeting place for guest lectures to provide talks and to collectively erode the stigma around sex positive thinking and fetish play.
Figure 10 Thiel.S, Tom + Christian +LC4, 2011. (Waanders dekunst 2019)
Conclusion
Hal Fischer’s ‘Gay Semiotics’ is highly significant in today fetish culture. The 45 years from its original publication allows for critique and expansion. The EROS project expands on Fischer’s work, by bringing other mainstream fetishes to the forefront and singling out artifacts associated with them. As EROS is still ongoing, it has the potential to be developed further and include other lesser mainstream kinks. With the goal of promoting sex positive education and to challenge related stigmas. As Artist Rick Burger says, ‘I’m interested in marginalized realities, I like those voices to be heard. So many people are judging without knowing what it’s all about’ (Burger, 2017).
Bibliography
2013. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing, pp.685 - 705.
Burger, R., 2017. Hooked. schoneberg: Dencker + schneider art gallery, pp.1 - 18.
Fischer, H., 1977. Gay semiotics. 2nd ed. los angeles: cherry and martin, pp.1 - 54.
Foucault, M. and Hurley, R., 1998. The will to knowledge. London: Penguin Books, pp.86 - 91.
Herek, G., 2007. Confronting Sexual Stigma and Prejudice: Theory and Practice. Journal of Social Issues, [online] 63(4), pp.905-925. Available at: <https://spssi.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2007.00544.x?saml_referrer> [Accessed 2 May 2022].
In: collins dictionary. n.d. Eros. [online] Available at: <https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/eros> [Accessed 3 May 2022].
Lehmiller, J., 2020. Consent is Not a Defense: The Legal Ruling that Criminalized Consensual BDSM in Britain - Sex and Psychology. [online] Sex and Psychology. Available at: <https://www..com/blog/2020/1/13/consent-is-not-a-defense-the-legal-ruling-that-criminalized-consensual-bdsm-in-britain/> [Accessed 4 May 2022].
Maclean, B., Fairbairn, B. and Eccleston, K., 2017. http://houseofair.info/video.html. [video] Available at: <http://houseofair.info/video.html> [Accessed 1 May 2022].
Mathews, K., 2020. Dangers of the Binary. [online] Reporter.rit.edu. Available at: <https://reporter.rit.edu/views/dangers-binary> [Accessed 2 May 2022].
Pbs.org. 2022. Milestones in the American Gay Rights Movement | American Experience | PBS. [online] Available at: <https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/stonewall-milestones-american-gay-rights-movement/> [Accessed 3 May 2022].
Raúl Cornier, J., 2019. Hanky Panky: An Abridged History of the Hanky Code | The History Project. [online] Historyproject.org. Available at: <https://historyproject.org/news/2019-04/hanky-panky-abridged-history-hanky-code-0> [Accessed 15 April 2022].
Weiss, R., 2017. Kinks, Fetishes, Paraphilias: Definitions and Treatment Options. [online] Psych Central. Available at: <https://psychcentral.com/blog/kinks-fetishes-paraphilias-treating-issues-with-non-traditional-sexuality#2> [Accessed 4 May 2022].
www.parliament.uk. 2022. Regulating sex and sexuality: the 20th century. [online] Available at: <https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/private-lives/relationships/overview/sexuality20thcentury/#:~:text=In%201967%20the%20Sexual%20Offences,heavier%20penalties%20on%20street%20offences.> [Accessed 2 May 2022].