The normalization of kink

[Emily Lake]

This is a topic that has been rolling around in my head for a while. During my lifetime, there's been a significant shift from viewing kinks and fetishes as something that some people do in private, to seeing them presented as normal sexual behavior.

Generally speaking, I don't have any objection to what consenting adults do with each other, and I don't believe that people should be shamed for their kinks or fetishes. I also, however, don't think that anyone should be exposed to those kinks and fetishes without their express consent. To me, that is a violation of sexual boundaries. As an example, my nephew is a 'pony boy'. His sexual proclivities are heavily invested in role playing as a horse with bit and bridle. I don't care that he gets off on that... but I also don't think there's any reason that I should know about it. I definitely don't think it was an appropriate topic for a mixed-age family gather, which is where all of us had the 'privilege' of finding out about his sexual practices. I don't generally have discussions about my own kinks, especially with people who haven't specifically asked about them. I understand that some people may be made uncomfortable by my personal and private sexual practices, and I don't feel that I have any right to impose that on them. I liken it to pornography: I don't care if you (or I) enjoy watching porn... but I don't think it's appropriate to have it on TV running during a neighborhood party.

Two decades ago, I found the idea of people forcing their kinks into public to be confusing and weird. Ten years ago, I found it distasteful and inappropriate. Now I've begun to view it as disturbing and potentially dangerous.

That's not to say that kinks themselves are dangerous. The majority of them aren't. It's making them public and treating them as either normal, or as characteristics that need to be protected that I find to be a problem.

There's a lot to unpack in here, so I'm going to break this into a few different posts.

 

[Emily Lake]

Topic 1: Sex Education in School

When I was a kid, sex ed in school was almost exclusively focused on STIs, pregnancy, and anatomy. It was about health. Over the years, additional content has been added. Some of it I think is a good addition: methods of birth control and STI prevention, acknowledgement of masturbation, emphasis on consent. Some of it however, I think has gone astray.

In an effort to prevent young people from feeling ashamed of their natural sexuality, sex ed has expanded to include anal and oral sex in quite a bit more detail, as well as things like pornography, slapping, choking, spitting, and bondage.

My observation from talking to many younger people across Millennials and Gen Z is that this has sent a fairly mixed message. It affects boys as well as girls, although I believe the greater impact is on girls. What I've gleaned is that it creates a situation in which young people have a right to theoretical boundaries, but they're expected to not enforce those boundaries.

As an example, most young people now view anal sex as 'normal sex'. The majority of girls, however, don't enjoy it and don't get pleasure from it. But they feel that it's expected of them - that if they wish to have sexual relationships with a boy, they are expected to engage in anal sex as well. While they've been told in class that they aren't 'required' to do anything they don't want to do, they've also been told that anal sex is a natural normal part of a healthy sexual relationship. This sends an implied message that if they're not into it, there's probably something wrong with them.

The same holds true for other practices, like watching porn while having sex, slapping and rough play, choking and breath play, etc.

 

[ZiprHead]

The same holds true for other practices, like watching porn while having sex, slapping and rough play, choking and breath play, etc.

Do you have some citation that this is widespread teaching in sex ed classes?

 

[Emily Lake]

Topic 2: The public facing of kink

Pride Parades are probably an area where we're all aware that kink has been incorporated into public display. The leather daddies have been there since way early on. Over my lifetime, however, it has expanded. As homosexual people have gained acceptance and equality, the shift has become more toward kink than simply same-sex attraction. It's become fairly common to see furries and diaper fetishists on parade, as well as bondage and various S&M practitioners. You see people whose sexual proclivities involve role-playing as animals showing up in costume on public streets.

It doesn't stay to Pride though. It spills over. Consider the more and more common occurrences of "Drag Queen Story Hour" in schools. Is Drag a fetish? Technically no... but it's hard to argue that it isn't highly sexualized, when the basis of drag is the hypersexualization of female characteristics. Drag is as much a caricature of women as minstrel shows are a caricature of black people. If adults want to perform in or attend Drag shows, I think that's great. I think that's a fair bit different than bringing the Drag show to children though. Over the past few years, there've been several instances of Drag performers at those Story Hours behaving in an inappropriate manner with respect to kids.

This normalization of kink also showed up recently with the "rainbow dildo butt monkey" incident. The group, Mandinga Arts, was commissioned to provide costumes for a children's reading event, intended to encourage kids to read more. Some of the costumes were benign... but one of them as a man in a rainbow monkey costume, which left his nipples and butt cheeks exposed, and included a large dildo dangling between his legs. Several parents were unhappy with this, which I find completely understandable.

Mandinga issued an apology, saying "Our lack of judgement in the choice of costume is one we deeply regret" and that "Although the monkey was well-received at carnival events with a mixed audience, it was entirely unsuitable for a children’s event and should never have been used." I appreciate the apology, but I'm also aghast that the inappropriateness of the costume didn't occur to then prior to showing up at the event.

To me, this kind of a 'mis-step' is an easily foreseeable outcome of efforts to normalize kinks and fetishes as publicly appropriate content.

 

[Emily Lake]

Topic 3: Paraphilias as Identity

More recently, I've come across some instances of people arguing that several paraphilias are "sexual identities" and as such, they deserve protection and 'equal rights' although I confess I have no idea what rights are at issue here.

I've come across furries as an identity a handful of times over the years, but lately that has extended to include age play and bestiality, which boggles my mind.

Is Kink a Sexual Orientation?


Loving Animals: On Bestiality, Zoophilia, and Post-Human Love

LGBTQ…Z?

The Kink Kontroversy

 

[Keith&Co.]

That's not to say that kinks themselves are dangerous. The majority of them aren't. It's making them public and treating them as either normal, or as characteristics that need to be protected that I find to be a problem.

So, that IS shaming them for having a kink. Seriously, saying this is something that MUST be in the closet is saying they should be shamed if someone else knows about it.

But that's old thinking. Society is progressing. When i was little, it was okay to be a breast man or an ass man (Rodney Dangerfield: People tell me, "You're an ASS-man!"), leg man. But it was not okay to be anything but heterosexual. And discussion of 'positions' was mostly closeted, if it wasn't missionary, it was deviant.

Then, gaysexual came out of the closet, lagged slightly by bisexual. They're not going to let anyone else decide if they're supposed to be ashamed of their personal nature.

And that openness is progressing to 'kinks' and fetishes. If you're into something, why be ashamed of it? Why hide it? Except if the interest involves committing actual felonies...

I think a really big part of it is the internet. Long ago, nerds needed to use fanzines and conventions to find like-minded people, now there are internet communities for people to share an interest in amputee gay dwarf porn. And getting a chat room full of people to tell you you're NOT wrong, NOT a freak, NOT to be ashamed of enjoying a good midget-mud wrestle... That should affect how you approach the real world.

 

[Keith&Co.]

In an effort to prevent young people from feeling ashamed of their natural sexuality, sex ed has expanded to include anal and oral sex in quite a bit more detail, as well as things like pornography, slapping, choking, spitting, and bondage.

Probably due to all those studies where kids were admitting to oral and handjobs but defending by the belief 'it's not sex.'

That was their generation's version of my generation's out-of-ignorance claims like 'virgins can't get pregnant' and i was told several times that you stick a penny in before sex, and if it came out such-and-such a color, she had THIS kind of VD, and that color meant THAT VD, and if it came out clean, so was she.

I really do believe this serves the kids' interests in multiple ways. Taking the mystique out of it makes their choices more rational. If your parents say nothing except that it's 'icky' or 'sinful' but all your friends insist that it's fun, you're going to make an emotional choice. If you've been shown line diagrams, it's no longer 'forbidden fruit.' Just 'forbidden.' Also, i would really rather have had an adult explain sex to me when i was a kid, not another kid known to all by the moniker 'Llama fucker.' Might have been less screwed up for my formative years f they had. He actually had a color chart for pennies-to-VD diagnoses. I was about 20 before i realized he was more than likely a virgin....

My observation from talking to many younger people across Millennials and Gen Z is that this has sent a fairly mixed message. It affects boys as well as girls, although I believe the greater impact is on girls. What I've gleaned is that it creates a situation in which young people have a right to theoretical boundaries, but they're expected to not enforce those boundaries.

As an example, most young people now view anal sex as 'normal sex'. The majority of girls, however, don't enjoy it and don't get pleasure from it. But they feel that it's expected of them - that if they wish to have sexual relationships with a boy, they are expected to engage in anal sex as well. While they've been told in class that they aren't 'required' to do anything they don't want to do, they've also been told that anal sex is a natural normal part of a healthy sexual relationship. This sends an implied message that if they're not into it, there's probably something wrong with them.

So, i would say that the only solution to that is MORE explicit sexual education, not less. Maybe get a hooker into class to explain what does and doesn't give her personal pleasure, and why some things cost a lot more money than others.
And what she says no to when the clock isn't running....

 

[Keith&Co.]

Is Drag a fetish? Technically no...

Um....where do you get that idea?
A 'fetish' is something that you cannot achieve sexual satisfaction without. ANYTHING can be a fetish. You might have been in an elevator with someone who has an elevator fetish. So some people in drag may get a kick out it, some may not.

but it's hard to argue that it isn't highly sexualized, when the basis of drag is the hypersexualization of female characteristics. Drag is as much a caricature of women as minstrel shows are a caricature of black people.

I think you're blurring boundaries, here. Exaggerating female traits for the purpose of, say, parody,is not the same as hypersexualizing female characteristics. If part of the Drag Queen's costume is not a phallic object she's fellating or something explicitly connected to coitus, i'm pretty sure she's not "hypersexualizing" anything.

I think that's a fair bit different than bringing the Drag show to children though. Over the past few years, there've been several instances of Drag performers at those Story Hours behaving in an inappropriate manner with respect to kids.

I'm gonna have to see some citations, here. Because i've seen a LOT of terribly judgmental people who think that simply dressing in drag is 'behaving in an inappropriate manner.' And i'm still wondering about your 'hypersexualization' claim. Most Drag queens i've seen, the word 'sexual' isn't in my top ten immediate reactions.

... a rainbow monkey costume, which left his nipples and butt cheeks exposed,

So, nothing you wouldn't see at the beach?

and included a large dildo dangling between his legs.

Nothing you wouldn't see at a zoo.

Several parents were unhappy with this, which I find completely understandable.

So,due to the strong and immediate reaction, i'd say this doesn't qualify as 'normalization' of anything, nor have you shown it to be a 'kink.'

To me, this kind of a 'mis-step' is an easily foreseeable outcome of efforts to normalize kinks and fetishes as publicly appropriate content.

What makes you think this is kink-based? WHen they retired the costume, did the performer end up in a petting zoo molesting the sheep?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Implicit in your position is the idea that kinks are shameful.

The problem comes when people realize they have certain kinks and think something is bad about themselves. It's the same problem that drives a lot of gay teens to suicide.

If you have a kink you have a kink. It should only be relevant to potential bed partners. I have no interest in knowing your kinks, but neither am I bothered if I find them out.

Sex ed should address the reality of kinks and discuss which ones are unsafe to engage in. There's no need to go into details, people who have a kink can go look up information.

 

[Emily Lake]

Keith & Co, I genuinely have no idea if you're serious or sarcastic.

 

[Keith&Co.]

More recently, I've come across some instances of people arguing that several paraphilias are "sexual identities" and as such, they deserve protection and 'equal rights' although I confess I have no idea what rights are at issue here.

So, if you don't know the rights in question, you can't really take a position on them? Right?

I've come across furries as an identity a handful of times over the years, but lately that has extended to include age play and bestiality, which boggles my mind.

Well, again, I knew i was a boob man almost fifty years ago. I wouldn't exactly call it an 'identity' but if they're handing out tags at a party, that one would fit more than some others.
I also have other interests which i know not everyone shares, but i have found online community with like-minded people.
Age PLAY is make-believe. It's consenting grownups having sex with consenting grownups, though one of them is acting as something different.
I have no idea what you might have against the practice.

Bestiality, Hebephilia, zoophilia, pedophilia, all involve partners that cannot give consent. Kinda easy to isolate the difference between these and 'between consenting adults' practices.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Keith & Co, I genuinely have no idea if you're serious or sarcastic.

Pretty serious right now, actually. Let's go with that.

 

[Emily Lake]

Keith & Co, I genuinely have no idea if you're serious or sarcastic.

Pretty serious right now, actually. Let's go with that.

Alrighty. On a serious note...

Do you allow for any distinction between:
1) Not shaming people for having kinks
and
2) Not approving of sexual practices being a public topic
and
3) Not approving of kinks and uncommon sexual practices being taught to children as normal?

I don't care if people have kinks, provided they're consenting adults. But I don't think they should be a part of public life, no more than I think a discussion of my favorite positions and the dildo I like best should be a part of public life. Furthermore, I don't think that any of that should be framed as 'normal' for children.

I mean, do you really truly think that having an adult person in a costume that involves a large dildo is appropriate for an event aimed at young children?

 

[Keith&Co.]

Keith & Co, I genuinely have no idea if you're serious or sarcastic.

Pretty serious right now, actually. Let's go with that.

Alrighty. On a serious note...

Do you allow for any distinction between:
1) Not shaming people for having kinks
and
2) Not approving of sexual practices being a public topic
and
3) Not approving of kinks and uncommon sexual practices being taught to children as normal?

I don't care if people have kinks, provided they're consenting adults. But I don't think they should be a part of public life, no more than I think a discussion of my favorite positions and the dildo I like best should be a part of public life. Furthermore, I don't think that any of that should be framed as 'normal' for children.

I mean, do you really truly think that having an adult person in a costume that involves a large dildo is appropriate for an event aimed at young children?

I don't think we can go any further until you clearly define what you mean by 'normal.'

 

[Toni]

When I was a kid, sex ed in school was almost exclusively focused on STIs, pregnancy, and anatomy. It was about health. Over the years, additional content has been added. Some of it I think is a good addition: methods of birth control and STI prevention, acknowledgement of masturbation, emphasis on consent. Some of it however, I think has gone astray.

In an effort to prevent young people from feeling ashamed of their natural sexuality, sex ed has expanded to include anal and oral sex in quite a bit more detail, as well as things like pornography, slapping, choking, spitting, and bondage.

My observation from talking to many younger people across Millennials and Gen Z is that this has sent a fairly mixed message. It affects boys as well as girls, although I believe the greater impact is on girls. What I've gleaned is that it creates a situation in which young people have a right to theoretical boundaries, but they're expected to not enforce those boundaries.

As an example, most young people now view anal sex as 'normal sex'. The majority of girls, however, don't enjoy it and don't get pleasure from it. But they feel that it's expected of them - that if they wish to have sexual relationships with a boy, they are expected to engage in anal sex as well. While they've been told in class that they aren't 'required' to do anything they don't want to do, they've also been told that anal sex is a natural normal part of a healthy sexual relationship. This sends an implied message that if they're not into it, there's probably something wrong with them.

The same holds true for other practices, like watching porn while having sex, slapping and rough play, choking and breath play, etc.

I know that a lot of people will disagree with me, but the fact that today (as in my day which was before your day) girls are feeling pressured into doing things they don't really enjoy or want to do and are being made to feel guilty or ostracized if they don't argues very strongly for the need to strongly discourage sex among teenagers who simply are not emotionally mature enough to be able to effectively stand up for much less advocate for themselves. No matter what signals their bodies are sending them.

And......I think that the risks to fertility and future sexual health of having 20 or 30 or 50 or 100 or more sexual partners in a lifetime are riskier than what we are acknowledging. In my youth, STDs were all curable with a dose of antibiotics. Now, there are more strains of antibiotic-resistant STDs and include viruses which are not cured by antibiotics because they are viruses and some which are particularly nasty-HIV being one.

I know I know I know I know I know.

But kids--and I do mean kids--12 years old and younger--are somehow believing that intimate sexual contact is necessary for any sort of social life and that it is a precursor to an actual relationship with (usually) a boy. They simply are not ready. Even if they can spit out every fact in every sex ed class there is, they are not ready.

This has nothing to do with kink, per se but I'm still saying it.

Shit, even I recognized that the fact that girls had easy access to birth control pills in the early 70's removed the most powerful 'valid' injunction against sex the girl wasn't ready for: fear of pregnancy.

As far as what kids are and are not being taught in sex ed classes, based on my kids (now all young adults) experiences, it still was pretty much the biology part, the health part. Maybe things have changed since they were in school. But I'd be very surprised if kids were being taught about kink per se. I would even be surprised if they were taught that sex with a person of the same sex/gender was fine and more than surprised if the education went into details. At least around here, school boards tend to be very, very conservative.

 

[funinspace]

Keith & Co, I genuinely have no idea if you're serious or sarcastic.

I have a serious Keith fetish, always have to read his prose in order to....

Please check the second box; repeat, please check the second box




More seriously: My son's sex ed must have been quite pedestrian some 15-17 years ago...

 

[Jarhyn]

I find this whole thread abjectly insulting from at least one particular angle. Then, for she perfect and eternal oracle of the knowledge of Lake, the Lady of Lake, I suppose concessions must be made.

The fact is, people have a right to know how to operate their bodies sexually, and to do so as they see fit.

Interestingly, it is possible that we live in a world where animals can give consent. I don't think the reality has ever sufficiently happened, or been recognized, nor been operated properly so as to be truly acceptable even once in history. It is not something that is, at any rate, impossible.

It is still stupid, and probably emotionally reckless. If we don't teach that, how and why it is emotionally reckless, then we will see as many young folks fucking dogs. If we teach this perhaps we will see less.

People deserve to know how to safely stick things in their butts. Safe instruction on this must be universal, so that it is not determinable through who seeks information that information is sought.

People deserve to know that masturbation at a young-ish age IS normal, that most everyone does it, and that some.do not do it, and that is fine too.

Privacy of interest, the right to privacy is only possible through uniform public education.

Age Play, and related communities, are based around the idea that only adults may give consent, so they do live out their fantasies with adults. As Kieth points out, they do that while pretending otherwise.

Some cursory education in such things would prevent embarrassment, ensure privacy, and probably protect a lot of younger folks from grooming and predators in the space.

I would recommend such topics for college-level health and human development, though, for things like age-play.

Education on middle aged predators would be pretty useful at 17-18, however.

Education on the fact that masturbation is normal, and good sexual education in general, delays onset of sexual activity.

I think I'm going to watch this for a while though to see how apoplectic Emily gets over people liking things she doesn't like, and not them not accepting her stinky "but" in the middle of an otherwise pretty alright-thus-far OP.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Interestingly, it is possible that we live in a world where animals can give consent. I don't think the reality has ever sufficiently happened, or been recognized, nor been operated properly so as to be truly acceptable even once in history. It is not something that is, at any rate, impossible.

Oh, yeah. First thing dolphins do when we teach them enough language to communicate with humans is ask for a hand job.
And what researchers do to get answers is between them and their funding. But LEGALL, we do not allow children or animals or the mentally incompetent to enter into contracts, give consent, or take responsibility for their own orgasm.

I suppose i must append "...yet." to this statement.

 

[Jarhyn]

Interestingly, it is possible that we live in a world where animals can give consent. I don't think the reality has ever sufficiently happened, or been recognized, nor been operated properly so as to be truly acceptable even once in history. It is not something that is, at any rate, impossible.

Oh, yeah. First thing dolphins do when we teach them enough language to communicate with humans is ask for a hand job.
And what researchers do to get answers is between them and their funding. But LEGALL, we do not allow children or animals or the mentally incompetent to enter into contracts, give consent, or take responsibility for their own orgasm.

I suppose i must append "...yet." to this statement.

Yes, you must. This is why I go into the discussion of still stupid, emotionally damaging, and otherwise problematic, with a focus on whatever education leads to less young people molesting animals.

I'm not going to exactly demand people not give handjobs, but I mean, they're getting solicited for an old fashioned by a complete stranger... I wouldn't give some human hobo a handy, why would I give an aquatic hobo one? Fucker might as easily drag you down and just rape you. Or do that the next time you jump in.

Gross.

"Do what you want, but do it to yourself until you're well educated in consent and harm reduction."

 

[Trausti]

Is it just about the sexualization of children and the push to normalize pedophilia?