More visibility for 'kink' - this is so disturbing.

[Novina]

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/feb/09/kink-anthology-book-fear-shame

"In the meantime, despite its increasing visibility on social media and dating apps, kink is still generally thought to be unfit for the public eye. Unfit for children, especially, as in the recurring argument that kinky attire should not be visible at Pride parades, which echoes the old, bad argument that any signs of queerness should be kept out of sight of minors. But consider what it might do to a person, whether child or adult, to primarily see one’s sexual desires represented in the flattened form of a punchline or stock villain. To see and hear, in the books and shows and movies that can constitute much of our experience of the world, that one either doesn’t exist, or shouldn’t."

The 'k' are borrowing language from the lgb to push for more visibility, even wrt children.

Honestly, do what you like - with, or without, consenting adults in private - I don't care. But I do not consent to being part of it if you bring it into public life. This determination to get children involved, as if it's good for them, is a huge red flag.

This is one reason I can't stand the queer theory approach of blurring, or transgressing, boundaries. Yes, some boundaries have been bad and needed challenging, but others are there for very good reasons.

@jj1968

Proponents of Blanchard's autogynephilia theory, of whom there are several on mumsnet, sadly do.

Gratification disorder is real. Very young children often masturbate. Their feelings can get wrapped up in childhood experiences and then form kinks in adulthood. It is perfectly plausible that a young boy could form an arousal towards dressing up in silky feminine clothing and then carry that into adulthood.

I'm sure Louis Theroux did a documentary about the bizarre and specific kinks and fetishes that people have, often rooted in formative experiences.

Not really sure why you're hijacking this thread to talk about trans stuff anyway @jj1968. The post is about the infiltration ok "K" into the alphabet soup of identity politics.

I think there is a degree of conflation implied between the visibility of relationships and the visibility of practices.
People should not have to hide any signs of who they are attracted to, or have a relationship with, from people of any age. Children will not be damaged by seeing same-sex, multiple-partners, or whoever, holding hands, getting married, etc.
Yes it was wrong that homosexual, bisexual, polygamous etc people were castigated for their relationships.
However, I have no desire to be subjected to the details of what anyone gets up to sexually, whether it's a kinky fetishist or my straight next-door neighbours.

Edit - by people I mean ofc consenting adults having relationships

Many people's eventual sexual proclivities are formed in childhood, and sometimes some kind of upset or trauma can disrupt normal sexual development. However, that is irrelevant to the fact that adults should not ever think it is appropriate to share their own sexual kinks or fetishes with children!
Some foster carers or youth workers may report that abused children display unusual sexualised behaviour. This does not then give adults the right to treat these children as though they are somehow consenting adults, or that it is ok to inflict adult sexuality on children.
People who pretend they do not understand the difference between childhood and adulthood frighten the shit out of me.

Some foster carers or youth workers may report that abused children display unusual sexualised behaviour

And is something that social services discuss (and provide support for) with prospective foster carers and adoptive parents.

People who pretend they do not understand the difference between childhood and adulthood frighten the shit out of me.

And need their hard-drives examined.

To me "kink shaming" is an oxymoron because the whole point of a kink is that it involves "shame" otherwise it's not a kink.

Good point. As another pp said, it's giving them what they want.

in a 2017 report from the popular dating app OkCupid, 71% of 400,000 OkCupid members said they were into kink.

I followed the link to this, it lead to another link that was dead as the author had deleted the article.

So frankly there is no evidence for the statement whatsoever.

Do the Guardian even bother to check these things?

It literally takes two minutes

Dear guardian: what if kink-shaming is someone's kink?

@zanahoria

in a 2017 report from the popular dating app OkCupid, 71% of 400,000 OkCupid members said they were into kink.

I followed the link to this, it lead to another link that was dead as the author had deleted the article.

So frankly there is no evidence for the statement whatsoever.

Do the Guardian even bother to check these things?

It literally takes two minutes

They're relying on 99% of the readers not fact checking.

I stopped reading the article when she started complaining that everyone who partakes is portrayed as a billionaire. Armie Hammer anyone?!

I genuinely don't think people realise that actually no one gives a shit who or what you have sex with. As long as its in the privacy of you own home, everyone partaking is happy with it and no one gets murdered as a result, crack on.

It does seem very much so that people just want to use their sexuality as a way of gaining attention. People are surprised when they find out I'm bisexual. I don't have sex with anyone in public, why would people I don't have sex with need to know who I am having sex with?!

I love how they publish this article, don’t allow any comments, then have a box pop up asking me to support them financially- in order to write more of this utter shit that hurts women.
Fuck. Off.

Well quite. The sooner The Guardian puts a paywall up that means there is even less point in clicking on their nasty, half-arsed journalism, the better. Go for it, lads. See how many women are desperate to read your shite if they have to pay to be called uptight bitches.

"Kink" is destroying sex lives. The normalising of extremes, any celebration of violence, of objectification, of disconnection between humans, contributes to a society of misogyny and contempt for the "finer" feelings of respect and love. Celebrating the "power of the penis" is vile and feeds straight to men's belief in their superiority.

Can we campaign for kink to be less visible?

@Beefcurtains79

I love how they publish this article, don’t allow any comments, then have a box pop up asking me to support them financially- in order to write more of this utter shit that hurts women. Fuck. Off.

Well exactly. I imagine if people were allowed to comment the author would have well and truly had their arse handed to them.

As most people in this thread including those who participate have said, this is nothing to do with kink. Nobody really cares what you choose to get up to with like minded adults, this is transgressing boundaries that exist for obvious and important reasons.

@Onlineshopperforever

I stopped reading the article when she started complaining that everyone who partakes is portrayed as a billionaire. Armie Hammer anyone?!

I genuinely don't think people realise that actually no one gives a shit who or what you have sex with. As long as its in the privacy of you own home, everyone partaking is happy with it and no one gets murdered as a result, crack on.

It does seem very much so that people just want to use their sexuality as a way of gaining attention. People are surprised when they find out I'm bisexual. I don't have sex with anyone in public, why would people I don't have sex with need to know who I am having sex with?!

When people fight to be accepted and then are accepted, it quickly becomes boring. They like being seen to be unusual, on the fringes. As you say, it's all for attention.

This is Queer Theory in practice. Dr Em explored the link between QT and paedophilia in detail in a series of articles.

Here's the first: uncommongroundmedia.com/the-trojan-unicorn-queer-theory-and-paedophilia-part-i

QT's basic premise is breaking down all boundaries, including those that protect children from abuse.

Is there an ombudsmen you can complain to for press articles? I cant read this articld alongside 'keepung children safe in education part 1' and not hear massive alarm bells.

Most of the time I've seen someone complain about being 'kinkshamed', it's because they've been behaving inappropriately sexually and someone's called them out for it.

This to the power of a million.

I would really like to find out how to complain about this too. Bringing children into kink has crossed a huge boundary for me.

@Primitivo1

I would really like to find out how to complain about this too. Bringing children into kink has crossed a huge boundary for me.

Same, I think a mention to the Baroness is in order too. Can someone send the article to her?

Anyway not really interested in this thread,

No, I’ve noticed discussion around safeguarding children isn’t really your thing.

ANYway, on the subject of the thread, people who advocate for children to be exposed to adult material on the streets of cities are no different to those who advocate for children to be exposed to adult material on the internet and should raise multiple 🚩 🚩 🚩 , be investigated, and kept well away from children.

www.theguardian.com/info/2014/sep/12/-sp-how-to-make-a-complaint-about-guardian-or-observer-content

How to make a complaint.

I feel a bit wretched to be honest. I may be straight but I’ve always advanced the argument that homosexual love should be in no way taboo. I have always advanced the view that two men or two women holding hands in public or kissing, should be no more noteworthy or unacceptable than when straight couples do it.

I have had the argument thrown at me that this will lead to all manner of sexual fetishes and kinks being visible to children and always held that this wasn’t likely at all, and not the argument at all.

It seems I was very wrong indeed. There is good reason we keep sex away from children, and I apply that evenly across the spectrum including heterosexuality. Children lack the experience and maturity to place these things in their proper context, and emotional development/management is far more the priority for them. Inflicting this aspect of the world on them too young is very wrong.