Not sure where else to put this.

And we're gonna keep on disagreeing there. I don't think that there's a way to reenforce structures of oppression via kink but somehow do it well.

 

You can believe what you will. My personal experiences display otherwise.

I did however want to contest the idea that we're not critical about kink. Which is not the case.

 

This is rude, but: if you're going to tell me raceplay/rapeplay/etc. are acceptable and then tell me this site is critical regarding kink, I'm gonna laugh in your face.

 

Oh boy nope not all kinks are accepted. Most of the forum thinks daddykink/cgl/ddlg whatever the fuck you wanna call it is gross. Which is fine!!! But I'm just here like "ok I guess I'll be gross in my corner over here by myself"

 

Again, we're critical of it. We just have very different standards for how criticism is made and what we are critical of. For myself it is not the what but the how which is criticized and looked at. For you it is not the case, but that doesn't mean we're not critical. You're free to laugh in my face.

 

Variations on what constitutes ddlg/cgl/what have you are too broad for me to be able to say That Is Bad. My impression of general forum attitude toward it is "weird, it squicks me, but it isn't Bad."

 

I generally operate under the mindset of what people do in their bedrooms or with their genitals away from the public eye is none of my business.

 

Can I ask what you mean when you say 'critical' and what it is you're critical of?

My impression is: you're critical of someone performing kink on someone that they haven't consented to (ie, unambiguously rape). I'm critical of certain kinks in and of themselves because I don't believe there's a way to engage in them without causing direct or indirect harm.

 

Except kink on the internet is not confined to the bedroom or away from the public eye, or people wouldn't be on the internet criticizing it.

 

That is indeed what I mean. Though not just non-consenting, but also the way in which it is carried out. There's unsafe practices regardless of whether not anyone involved has consented to them. I can consent, say, to having my arm chopped off but that doesn't make it an appropriate practice. That arm is not coming back, however slapping me is just fine and dandy so long as proper precautions are made to not harm me too terribly. Those precautions and the aftercare involved are vital to things like raceplay being done safely. For things with more jarring consequences like the whole decapitation fetish one has to make due with art and roleplay. There's also the matter of "acceptable, wanted harm" versus "unaccpetable, unwanted harm". When I want to do something that involves dancing on my traumas and triggering a panic attack, I engage in that act because I want to hurt. The hurting is, in itself, the pleasurable part of things. Then afterwords I am put back together again and go on with my daily business. However, not everyone wants that sort of shit and stepping over those boundaries is the fucked up part. Not the harm.

So, no, I am still critical of kink, as are several here. We just have different standards by which we criticize.

 

I don't consider that being critical of kink; critical of rape and mutilation/murder, sure.

We have different definitions of what constitutes harm. I think reducing a race or racial oppression to a sexual fetish, or finding racism sexy, is harmful. You don't.

 

It's still criticalness of kink, just not a sort that you particularly agree with. A good deal of us aren't critical in the fashion you are though, no.

And, no, I don't think usage of racism in play is inherently harmful. If anything I think it may well be a healing thing. Via breaking someone in a safe environment, and then helping them put themselves back together again. I can certainly say that that is what having my gender identity maligned and dashed to pieces is for me. My experience displays otherwise regarding whether or not these things are harmful. There's also the issue of how you equate these sorts of practices with necessarily "reducing" something to just a kink. When that's really not the case. It's being made sexual for a time being, yes, but when practiced safely it is done with respect to that person and that issue. Racism, transphobia, homophobia and the like are all very serious matters. And because they are some people go and find people who are willing to play with that in a nice environment that they for once have control over. If the dom is not taking the issue seriously then they are being an abusive prick. The same goes for subs who do not respect the limits of their doms or the real life issues.

Reducing isn't when someone agrees to call me a "girl" and generally abuse me when I'm a man. Reducing is when someone does that and they don't actually fucking care about me, or actually fucking believe the shit they are saying.

 

We have different standards of what constitutes being critical of kink and what constitutes harm. Beyond acknowledgement of that, I am not sure what response you're looking for from me. I don't agree kink exists in a world of its own seperate from 'real life' or from the attitudes people carry outside the bedroom. I don't believe there is an acceptable way to sexualize racism, homophobia, transphobia, or similar structures of oppression. You are not going to convince me otherwise.

 

I simply wanted it understood what it is that I actually believe regarding this matter. I dislike the idea that because I am kinky I am some sort of stupid sex happy fiend who is absolutely ok with everything. Which is exactly how you came off.

I'm not really interested in attempting to convince you, really. Nor do I think I'm capable of doing so.

Basically I want to be a horrible disgusting slut, but I want to be a horrible disgusting slut whose standards are actually understood. As opposed to just being drug through the ground with "because it makes my dick hard it's ok".

 

I don't think you are absolutely ok with everything. I think you are ok with things which I consider harmful on the basis that they are kink.

 

And that is all I really ask for. Because prior to this conversation that did not sound like it was the case in either the original post or your response to ep.

 

Glad the clarification was helpful.

 

And now away with me. I've a date with a severed head (in my irish myth research).

 

Logging off for tonight. If anyone else wants to talk, all I ask is that you don't blow up my thread with 6 pages of discourse while I'm gone. Either wait for response or use PMs, please.

 

for the record, you've done a good job defining your terms so far imo, so thank you and please keep it up! for example, your exchange with Aon re: what being critical of a kink means was a) remarkably civil, b) productive, and c) enlightening, at least for me, and I liked it a hell of a lot more than I do most back-and-forths on that or related topics, since those tend to be either "yeah I agree we're both so right" or "you're Wrong and Bad and I refuse to listen to you." also I feel smug that my theory that most arguments/misunderstandings result from different yet unspoken definitions of key terms has been supported. ;P

yeah, I totally agree about informing yourself about media (/other things you consume) and asking yourself how you're supporting it and whether you're comfortable doing that. what comes to mind for me is my not patronizing Chick-Fil-A; I really like their food, but I really don't like their higher-ups' proclamation that homosexuality is a sin, gays will burn in hell, etc., and tbh I feel uncomfortable in their restaurants 'cause it's an explicitly homophobic environment and to most people I look pretty damn gay (something something gender presentation being confused with sexual orientation). so I don't go there or buy their food.
that being said, would you tell other people they're Badwrong if they, for example, did watch JonTron? I don't mean explain why you don't and try to persuade them to stop supporting him too, I mean telling them that they're Gross and Horrible People Forever because they watch him despite knowing that he supports the alt-right.

solidly agreed on both counts. I'd say there's a healthy dose of (sometimes unconscious) misogyny mixed up in that mess, not just queer fetishization, but then again, what gender dynamics aren't misogynistic. :/

I'm curious, why do you think noncon content in particular is fetishistic? I mean, obviously there's noncon kink involved, but why man-on-man/woman-on-woman kink? (I assume that's what you mean by "fetishization of gay/bi men and women," correct me if I'm wrong.) I can think of some non- or dubcon-themed queer dynamics—off the top of my head, forced sissification, homophobic verbal abuse accompanying the noncon sex, corrective rape, Haha You Had Sex With Me And You're Gay Now, maaaaybe mixed-gender gangbang kinda stuff for bi people (haven't seen that one in the wild, though)—but I wouldn't say all or even most of same-gender noncon involves those, plus a lot of them are especially uncommon in woman-on-woman situations (as is the case for most rapey things, I find). are you thinking of some others, or?
I agree with you on the A/B/O front, inasmuch as I've been exposed to it. I mean, honestly it baffles me?? the whole dubcon heat/irresistible desperate sex thing I understand, I guess, plus the built-in dom/sub dynamics of the alpha, beta, and omega classes, but like the butt-uterus (as I've heard it called) thing??? what??? I can't conceptualize that except as a (say it with me, kids: misogynistic!) re-interpretation of and sexualized focus on male same-sex relationships in particular. (I say "same-sex" here deliberately, seeing as, uh, you don't need a whole elaborate biologically-impossible universe to realize your mpreg kink?? unless you insist on it being a cis man who's pregnant, there are?? trans guys who are capable of pregnancy??? that opens up a whole 'nother can of gender-dysphoric worms, but still. hi, we're a thing.)
yup, it's definitely a combo of content and attitudes. I think the attitude is the most important part, and actually I can't think of a type of content that's fetishistic (iffy, sure) independent of the surrounding attitude, but yeah.

oh, yeah, I make "white/straight/cis/etc. people be like" kinda jokes myself all the time, lmao. again, only around friends I know well or to myself, because people might think they're rude otherwise, but jokes help. I don't think mine are genuinely scornful? they're just irreverent/sarcastic, which, I mean, that's pretty much my tagline. :P
okay, I'm gonna be that annoying "WHAT IF HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIO, CHECKMATE ATHEISTS" guy, but re: asking men not to interact with wlw blogs... what about straight or bi trans guys? I mean, I'm trans and bi, and I relate to some wlw stuff in a "that's what I/other people used to think was happening, I too had the quintessential Crushing on Best Friend But She Is Straight And Just Thinks You're Besties And Wants To Cuddle A Lot experience" kinda way.
also, what constitutes interaction? just reading, or do you have to message or submit, or?

okay so that's a lot of text and questions, and I'm tired and need spoons for other things, and I'm trying not to wall-o'-text you (please tell me if I'm wall-o'-texting you), so at some indefinite point in the future probably I will address the rest of what you said, but for now, that's my two cents. please don't feel obligated to wait for the follow-up before responding, go ahead and do it whenever. :)