To think someone's sexual predilections reflects on their broader character?

[MonTuesWeds]

Just that really. I feel like I came of age in a time when we were encouraged to believe that someone's 'intimate preferences' were just that, and that they were completely isolated from that persons wider self and personality. I just don't think that's true though. I suppose I'm wondering two things here, firstly if IABU I'm thinking this now but secondly - am I the only one who has felt the pressure not to judge someone on what 'they're into' providing it was always fully consensual.

All of this.

I don’t think that’s silly at all. Many people (women) have ended up doing things they aren’t really happy about to make their partner happy. I’m hardly alone in consenting to something and hating it but not really knowing how to back out again. It can take a lot of confidence to advocate for yourself properly (we see it on here constantly and that’s just saying no to dinner plans - not feeling the immense pressure to please a partner).

And I will add that ‘safe words’ are completely irrelevant when it comes to choking. Even signalling can be difficult to make that clear and understood.

Thanks for clarifying (I think, based on your replies?) that you don’t find the idea of a man pretending his sexual partner is a baby while having sex with her / him (or yes, a woman pretending her sexual partner is a baby while having sex with her / him) is creepy as long as she consents.

I am absolutely baffled as to how you can hold that opinion, and find it a troubling one to say the least, but it is obviously your right to do so.

I would describe an adult of either sex pretending to have sex with a child / baby as ‘creepy’.

I would describe an adult of either sex pretending to be a child / baby being raped (because that’s what sex with a child / baby would be, obviously) as incredibly vulnerable.

Yes, sometimes people are push overs and people pleasers. It doesn’t logically follow that all people engaging in kink are people pleasers and doing things they don’t want. It’s important that you feel comfortable and safe with your kink partner, and that you make them feel the same way, so that both of you know you can object without consequence.

It can also take a lot of confidence to tell your partner you have a kink and want to engage in it with them.

When you can’t speak in a scene, it’s vital to establish a cue that’s extremely difficult to miss and is out of place with the scene, just like safe words are completely out of place.

Some kinks cannot be participated in safely.

There is no safe way to strangle someone, for example.

https://ifas.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/There-is-No-Safe-Way-to-Strangle-Position-Statement-September-2024-5.pdf

I don’t disagree. Some people have fetishes for cutting off body parts and/or being cannibalized; there’s no safe way to do that. Someone else brought up feederism— obviously harmful.

Personally I like a hand on my throat without any actual strangulation going on (because actual strangulation makes me panic) because I like the idea that my partner could do that if they wanted to. It gives a little thrill, but also establishes intimacy in a way, because you’re trusting your partner not to actually harm you.

Agree. It is so unbelievably grim. This is a part kf
thst man’s personality.

Do you think there aren't men on this thread? That's very naive. They love a MN sex chat. Drawn to it like ducks to bread.

So if it quacks like a sexual libertarian...

The thing is - how would a 'dominant' man know for absolute sure that his submissive 'partner' were truly consenting from a position of strength, stability and self-worth?

They can't.

And they don't care. That's part of the thrill. It's the whole fucking point.

They're sadists. They only limit it to the realm of sexuality because they'd be arrested otherwise.

How would any man or woman know for absolute sure their partner is fully consenting and into any kind of sex?

Still patiently waiting for the anti-kink (and anti-sex tbh) crew to acknowledge that dominant women exist? Or are we just going to be called mentally damaged, like submissive women.

We are truly back in the days when any sexual desire at all was seen as evidence of deviancy and derangement in women. Please just stop pretending this is any sort of "feminism" or that you have women's interests at heart at all.

This (and completely vanilla penetrative sex without a condom is higher risk than most bdsm activities). How do you know (say) that your partner isn’t just consenting to sex because they want financial stability/ a baby / to stay married?

I’m financially self-sufficient, successful in most areas of my life, not looking for marriage or children with someone and articulate and quite assertive about my desires. I have non-bdsm options for sex if I want them (as do most women). No one could be certain that my sexual preferences aren’t borne out of some kind of trauma / self-esteem issue but I don’t think they’d be unreasonable to believe me when I state my consent to something. But a good dominant partner will also put the brakes on if they feel that something will be too much for you, even if you’re asking for it.

OK Socrates, I guess we can never 'know' anything.

But if that's the argument you're relying on to prove you're not an abusive cunt for wanting to hurt women, it's all a bit QED innit.

How do you know (say) that your partner isn’t just consenting to sex because they want financial stability/ a baby / to stay married?

Exactly. There are enough threads on here where women have said as much. That's where maintenance sex comes from. That must be soul-destroying and not in any way an 'expression of love'.

This is such a poor argument - because it happens in situation A we shouldn’t care or talk about it happening in situation B.

Women agreeing to vanilla sex they don’t want does diminish the idea that women also agree to kink that don’t want.

You brought it up. How could OH genuinely know whether I’m consenting to (our fairly vanilla tbh) sex every single time and it’s not because it’s out of duty, fear of abandonment, low self esteem etc?

And there is a feminist train of thought that considers all PIV sex as problematic (well they use harsher words). While I don’t agree, I understand the logic/reasoning behind it and the argument is the same.

Of course they do.

But men being dominated by women don’t risk the same kind of harms when it happens the other way. I said a few pages ago that I don’t know of any of situations where a women ‘choking’ a man during sex has resulted in his death or causing serious life-changing injuries. It’s not about ‘feminism’. It’s about genuine risk and power imbalance that is never really ‘corrected’ when it’s a woman dominating.

In relation to the OP, I also truly find it hard to believe that a man who will willingly cause harm that has a chance of death to women doesn’t have misogynistic thoughts in day-to-day life.

And regardless of the dismissive ‘consent’ hand-waving, yes I’d struggle to believe that anyone who fantasises and role plays with their partner pretending to be a baby to have sex with them isn’t seriously fucked up.

That’s not the argument though. The argument is that no woman can actually want any kind of kink (what exactly are we talking about here, some people are giving more extreme examples, some like OP find anal and oral problematic too) , so much so that consent isn’t enough and questionable (always)or that if they do want it, there’s something seriously wrong with them so they’re vulnerable so their consent doesn’t matter anyway.

Sorry who on this thread has claimed that no woman can actually want any kind of kink?

I don’t think anyone has said no woman wants any kind of kink.

Yes, I understand both your points.

But in a situation where one person gets pleasure from inflicting pain or fear on another, the question 'can we ever truly know whether someone is consenting to anything at all' is so low in the logical hierarchy of questions raised that its deployment reveals its function, which is to obfuscate the analytic truth that the person in question is a sadist.

@anytipswelcome @StormyPotatoes you’re right , I massively extrapolated. The comment was only in regards to doms and subs. My mistake. However, why doesn’t that apply to other kind of kinks? In fact, no one has been willing to say what kinks are acceptable for women(or men) and what can they genuinely consent to.

Well, OP think it’s just PIV sex as an expression of love. At least she was honest about it.

What’s silly is pretending that no one can see and name a dodgy dynamic when they see it.

Once upon a time I was into hair pulling and a bit of biting(neck only). It did involve pain , in any other scenario it is painful and abusive.Was OH a sadist when he followed my cues (verbal and nonverbal ) to keep doing it? Did he stop being a sadist when I stopped liking it so it didn’t happen again? Will he be a sadist again if I get into it again?

Atm my “thing” is back scratching, sometimes quite forcefully. Is it “normal”? Probably not, don’t hear it often or at all.Is it kink? Is it sadism on his part? Am I broken ?