Yesterday I spoke briefly about mistaken understandings of the word “kink”.
Generally, when most of us here “kink” we typically think “any kind of sex beyond bedtime penis-in-vagina missionary-position intercourse that’s preceded by kissing with maybe a little fellatio or cunnilinugus thrown in, and that’s followed by resuming everyday activities such as brushing your teeth and going to sleep.
That’s not a very useful definition of “kink.” For one thing it’s a “negating definition,” an “anything-but-this” one. Actually that right there should be a bit of a flag — if we can only define something by what it’s not then, well, by definition we don’t have a very good idea of what it is! Ok, so what is it?
Well, it’s a metaphor derived from plumbing (though it’s also used in wiring and fence-building.) A kink is a constricting flaw in a pipe or hose. Since it’s an awfully nice day out today I decided to illustrate the point with a garden hose.
Illustration #1 is an un-kinked garden hose. The hose is laid out in a straight line with the faucet wide open. Water gushes out unimpeded.
Not kinked, see the full-size image here.
Illustration #2 shows the same garden hose with a kink in it. Notice little water is coming out of the hose even though the faucet is still wide open. A kinked hose is blocked, effectively damaged, and unable to function properly.
Literally, non-metaphorically kinked, see the full-size image here.
Illustration #3 shows the same garden hose, unkinked, but laid out into sinuous, sensuous loops and turns. This time the hose is not laid out straight, but since there are no kinks in the hose water still gushes out of it unimpeded.
Not straight, not kinked, and still fully-functional, see the full-size image here.
And here’s the deal. In photo #3 the hose isn’t laid out in a utilitarian straight and narrow line, but that doesn’t make it kinked, not at all, at all. It’s working just fine, thank you. In fact, unlike its previous straight-line configuration you could say it’s working beautifully!
A “kinked” hose is the only kind of hose that can’t fully fill whatever it is you’re trying to put water into. The curved, rolled hose with its relaxed twists and loops, though not straight and missionary-style utilitarian, is just as capable of full filling whatever is needed.
So, now that we understand the metaphor let’s reapply it to sex. Now we can understand that just as a kinked hose is un-full-filling, “kinky” sex is nothing more than unfulfilling sex. And we can confirm Madame X’s suspicion about kink. The curved and rolled sex she enjoys, with their relaxed twists and loops are not kinks, as she correctly notes, because she finds them fulfilling.
All this, I think, supports my contention that
...kinky [is] any behavior you feel compelled to engage in even though you don’t enjoy it. This much more limited definition would apply both to, for instance, the pedophile who’s deeply ashamed of his behavior, or someone with a same-sex orientation who feels obliged to form sexual partnerships with members of the opposite sex, or someone with no sexual desire at all who feels they have to have some kind of sex with somebody. And since Madame (and most other people) appear to enjoy their “kinks” very much, those things aren’t actually kinks at all.
Two more genuine kinks: If you’re giving in to your partner’s demand for sex then that’s kinky even if it’s missionary/man-on-top/lights-out sex. (If you’re only acquiescing then it’s still kinky, by the way, even if you wind up having an orgasm. Especially if you resume feeling bad, or worse, about it after.) Another sign of kinkiness, by the way, would be when you do the “walk of shame” the next morning and you really feel ashamed! The point is it’s a kink if it’s something that makes you feel out of integrity before or afterwards whether you’re experiencing arousal at the time or not.
In fact, I’d like to argue that if you really feel constrained to have sex only as described up at the top — “bedtime penis-in-vagina missionary-position intercourse that’s preceded by kissing with maybe a little fellatio or cunnilinugus thrown in, and that’s followed by resuming everyday activities such as brushing your teeth and going to sleep” — then you may be dealing with a few kinks of your own!
Submitted by 725 (not verified) on Sun, 2006-04-23 19:24.
I guess I don't know that I agree. I always placed "kink" in the category of "outside the accepted norm".
For example, growing up I personally learned about sex-intercourse, manual stimulation, orgasm, being in love, the various regular positions such as missionary, woman on top, side to side, from behind, oral.
Kink was the stuff outside that from handcuffs to whatever. It, for me, was "outside".
So, that's kind of how I still think of it. Anyway, its useful to me to think of it that way.
XO
[Ok, so I'd like to challenge you a little on that, Goose. "Inside and outside what I grew up with" are perfectly acceptable distinctions, of course. But, veering sharply into the food issue, for me that would make Mexican, Chinese, Indian, and Thai cuisine in the "kinky foods" category. On the other hand, my children's favorite meal -- black mushrooms and fried tofu with an oyster-sauce-based sauce -- is comfortingly familiar to them. Bringing that back to sex, I'm not *that* much older than you but I was raised on the "anything but intercourse is kinky" model, with some moderation in my late teens (with the advent of, for instance, The Joy of Sex) when masturbation and cunnilingus were added to the "normal" category. Fellatio, however, was absolutely kinky, especially for feminists and their sympathizers. And chances are your children and mine (theyh're roughly the same age) will have their own inside and outside standards. (Wanna bet they won't think spanking is kinky? Especially since I doubt any of them will associate it with corporal punishment?) Anyway, while inside and outside of familiarity are totally fine for me, I'd feel more comfortable with a more universal definition for kink and I think mine -- something you feel compelled to do that you don't enjoy -- meets that criteria. The one downside, as Madame X notes, is that we sort of enjoy the idea that some of the things we do for pleasure are a little transgressive. I don't know what to say about that except that, for the most part, all we're really transgressing are arbitrarily (and often recently) drawn lines in sand. (Oh I hope that makes sense.) --fl]
Submitted by 725 (not verified) on Mon, 2006-04-24 05:02.
Okay, let's see. How do I use the word "kink"...
Well, I make my own lingerie alot of the times. And if I'm designing a corsette, the fabric fights with me alot. I like to use upscale materials and alot of them are tougher to sew and embroider and the like. And the corsette pattern is especially tricky. So sometimes I huff in exasperation to my boyfriend that there's a kink in the fabric. He usually laughs and carries on ignoring my frustration.
Also, if I've lathered him in massage/aphrodisiac oils and his neck or back are really tense, I can usually feel the knot with my hands. And I might ask if he's got a kink in his neck (because sometimes if he can't feel it, we don't want to mess with it too much!)
Another example is when Boyfriend comes to me with a peculiar idea. Like "let's try a sex swing sometime, babe," for instance. Sometimes he says something like that and I raise my eyebrow and say "gosh golly gee, you hot man you, that idea has some kink-potential"...or not. But I might squeal in delight and say "what a kinky idea"
Also, I like to plan hot nights for him and I. And sometimes, they just go off with a whole mess of hitches. Let's say I was doing a hooker night. The lingerie is red and is fits divinely. The decor is in order. The erotic note and ribbon are in his underwear drawer for the next morning. The meal is waiting in the fridge for when we're ready. But I'm too short for the life of me to screw a red bulb into the light above the bed. So I might make an emergency call to a much-trusted and much-taller girl-friend and declare that there is a kink in the plan.
I think we have covered every sexual manner in which I use the word "kink" properly. Or improperly.
[Wow, that's a great set of examples. To be honest I don't *object* to the use of the word kinky when we really mean fancy, but as you point out every other meaning in your list is an instance of something going *wrong* and that's what I wanted to challenge. It sounds like you and your partner enjoy thinking about things like sex swings and role playing but since I can't think of anything that's wrong with that except that it's more interesting and (it sounds like) more enjoyable than strictly utilitarian sex would be. In other words it's not *literally* kinky, it's only non-utilitarian and as illustration #3 shows, non-utilitarian isn't the same thing as (a literal) kink. :-) Thanks, RS. --fl]
Submitted by 725 (not verified) on Mon, 2006-04-24 05:57.
Hi figleaf,
While I agree that your definition has universal and unambiguous understanding, I think that it won't sit well with the BDSM community. :)
"Kinky" there tends to be shorthand for "into some flavor of BDSM" - and most would say they thoroughly enjoy what they are doing! It is definitely being used in the anything but "just intercourse" vein you describe above. But being used proudly, and pervasively.
Don't know that that helps clear things up at all!
[Oh it makes total sense but, as you note, it's used in *defiance* against real (or imagined!) standards of "normal" people. Which, in my opinion, conflicts with the sex-positive value that people should learn to be more relaxed and enjoy sex in all its diversity. (And the problem with *that* is that if everyone followed that advice then "kinky" people would be faced with one of two problems: accept that they're normal after all, or seek out even more radically alternative practices in order to retain their "kinky" distinctions.) If I can be personal for just a moment (forgive me if I'm crossing a line) I think that if the consensual, enjoyable BDSM you're drawn to acknowledged to be normal then there'd be no need for you to feel alienated from your congregation. But objectively BDSM is no more physically violent than, say, field hockey and not as psychologically aggressive as, say, competitive gymnastics -- both of which are considered normal. Know what I'm saying? The social benefits of distinguishing one's self from "normal" are pretty small while the social and psychological costs are much higher. Unnecessarily high, I think. Thanks, Jane. --fl]
Submitted by 725 (not verified) on Mon, 2006-04-24 05:58.
I like to think of kinky as that which my mother would feel compelled to do but wouldn't enjoy (but I would!). Anything I would feel compelled to do? I'd just call that icky!
:)
[I'd point back to the person who felt one qualifies as a gourmet for using French onion soup mix in meatloaf. Is "underexposed" is the same thing as "non-kinky?" Also, given how private people tend to be around their children, how certain can you be that your mom wouldn't have enjoyed it if someone had been able to make her and your dad comfortable enough to try it? (And yes, thinking about your mom or mine with floggers and Monk's rope makes me want to cover my ears and go "la la la la." But while that would be a problem for me it wouldn't be one for theirs. And besides, our children may believe the same thing about us.) Thanks, Goose. --fl]
Submitted by 725 (not verified) on Mon, 2006-04-24 07:24.
I usually think of "kinky" as "into some flavor of BDSM" and "vanilla" as "not at all into BDSM." I'd have no objection to ditching both words (and "kinky" does have all sorts of other meanings), but I suppose then a different vocabulary would be needed to distinguish those people for whom BDSM is a turn on from those people for whom BDSM is a squick (if only because there are so many of both groups, and they don't pair off well with each other as lovers).
[I think the issue is that "kink" isn't limited to BDSM. Consider that until quite recently fellatio was considered very kinky. Now it's evidently so routine many people consider it only a waypoint to "real" sex. It's possible that within the BDSM community "kink" has a more exclusive meaning but to outsiders I think it's far less clear a distinction. As for reference, I'm inclined to say why not "I'm into BDSM" or "I'm not into BDSM?" I know that in the BDSM community people will say, for instance, "I'm not into needle play" and everyone knows what that means. That construction scales well which is good because "BDSM" encompasses an *extremely* broad, and sometimes mutually exclusive set of preferences. Thanks, Lynn. --fl]
Submitted by 725 (not verified) on Mon, 2006-04-24 16:11.
Well that's the thing. I can't think of any way that I would use the word "kink" to describe something that I feel compelled to do but do not enjoy.
Except maybe if Boyfriend's next idea were relative to anal sex or a threesome. Either one of those I might call "kinky," I suppose.
[It's always totally fine to disagree, RS. I'm sticking to my story but I don't expect everyone else to jump for it. (Not right away, anyway.) Thanks! --fl]
Submitted by 725 (not verified) on Mon, 2006-04-24 22:06.
"Consider that until quite recently fellatio was considered very kinky."
See, there's an example of how there's actually a continuum. Dan Savage is now saying that blow jobs come standard. I can imagine a continuum where one could place them:
1) "Comes standard" - anyone who refuses to do this is considered weird.
2) Neither weird to like it, nor weird to refuse it.
3) Pretty weird to do, but, hey, different strokes for different folks, it's not actually wrong if both people agree.
4) Downright wrong, bad, degrading, or whatever.
There's a lot of stuff I really wouldn't like to see wind up in the "comes standard" category, because people should be able to dislike it and opt out of it, without a lot of pressure about how inhibited they are. But there's plenty of stuff that I don't want to "come standard" that I don't have any problem with people doing that both want to do it.
[Oh brother! I *heartily* agree that saying anything comes standard is motion in the wrong direction. Not least because "comes standard" a) creates pressure to do something people may not yet feel comfortable with b) turns a treat into an assumption and c) devolves it into something that's taken for granted. Since I've said in the past that I don't think even kissing and holding hands "comes standard" and, even more forcefully said that I think it's a problem that "sex comes standard" just because you're married -- because some people are still clearly not ready for it even then -- then I'm definitely going to balk at making intermediary forms of sex a requirement under any circumstances. Or, to make a long story short, saying anything "comes standard" negates any possibility of saying no and if you can't say no... Thank you, Lynn! --fl]
Submitted by 725 (not verified) on Tue, 2006-04-25 03:45.
I think in the bdsm world kink means 'other than vanilla'. It is a way to define self in relation to other (as we all do, I suppose) ie: "we are unlike you - We're kinky and you're not". I can't imagine that many people involved in bdsm would openly even want to identify themselves in the same category as vanilla sex people - even though both may enjoy the sex as much as each other.
Once upon a time there was no such thing as homosexuality, just different sex acts. The term homosexuality came later, mostly to describe some kind of pathological condition - and then 'gay people' were born. Now it's a movement, a community, a way of life and an identity - and so many more things. I guess in that sense kink has simliar connotations in terms of identity and community.
Essentially though, if bdsm and vanilla people both enjoy what their doing - then there is actually very little that separate them. I think there's sometimes a holier than thou attitude that goes on between bdsm and vanilla sex (especially on the part of bdsm) "we're kinky and you're not. we're sexually free and you're not" - but really if both sides are enjoying the act equally then neither are repressed. In this sense the hose notion holds.
[Thanks, M. I don't actually mind if "kinky" people want to maintain a pretence of exclucivity against "norms." (Well, ok, I do and besides I'm pretty sure it's a form of false exclucivity that could turn into a race as more and more people discover -- or acknowledge -- that floggers, fellatio, "fetish" wear, and the like are fun. With the possibility that "kinksters" will have nothing left but felching to distinguish themselves from everybody else.) Anyway, while I don't mind such fanciful notions, I still don't believe the word "kink" actually means what people think it means. --fl]
Submitted by 725 (not verified) on Tue, 2006-04-25 09:35.
Very interesting post and comments... Guess my first thought was "since when is kinky a negative thing?" I just don't see kink as something that I feel compelled to do but feel guilty/squicky after. I haven't felt guilty about sex since I was a catholic teenager just starting to masturbate. I can see your point in that if kink is negative, than any flavor of sexuality that is consentual is positive. Guess I have some pride in being a kinky person, which I define as open to new sexual experiences.
Love the picture, BTW. The curve of your cheek... very nice. And what are you holding?
[I'm holding the little camera remote. It's small enough that I'm usually able to palm it before the shutter clicks but not always. As for the word "kinky" I think it's totally, totally fine on it's own (in marketing terms it's even got the right snappy sounds when you pronounce it.) What I *really* have a problem with is the idea that there's a sharp line between the larger but largely ordinary realm of sexual behavior we label "kink" and the very narrow realm that's deprecatingly called "vanilla" or normal sex. And one reason I blog is because I'm committed to the idea that most "kinky" sex is actually pretty normal and that the strict Victorian-missionary-originated limitations that are currently considered "normal" sex are actually... well... kind of kinky! (It's sort of like arguing that ketchup is the only "normal" condiment and everything else is gourmet.) And yes, this crusade is also along my similarly motivated positions on the words "feminist" and "slut." Thanks, Kitty. --fl]
Submitted by 725 (not verified) on Thu, 2006-04-27 20:30.
Hmm. I almost feel like the marginalization a kinster endures for the sake of their kink is even MORE marginalized here!
Compulsive behavior? Does not enjoy it?
Well, at least you inspired me to put some thought into it! I think I'll extend these thoughts at my own place, which was getting boring, anyway.
D.
[Hi Digger. I don't want to marginalize anyone. Quite the opposite. I'm instead arguing that nearly all of what we fancy as "kinky" is actually pretty normal when put in the broader perspective of what's enjoyable, consensual, and non-injurious relative to other recreational and vocational activities we undertake without comment. Also please don't automatically assume I place a negative judgment on the little corner of sexual activity I want to retain the word "kink" for. I don't enjoy flossing my teeth and I feel compelled to do so, but that doesn't mean I think there's anything wrong with doing it. I do happen to think there are sexual practices that people feel compelled to undertake without enjoying them in the long run. Consider practicing chastity or celibacy when one has a high libido because Dr. Phil informs your peers that this is the standard. Or giving blowjobs you'd rather not simply because Dan Savage informs your peers that they now "come standard" on dates. Both of those practices are highly kinky if you ask me. --fl]