This 3-part Venn diagram theorizes “sexuality,” “intimacy,” and “kink” as distinct entities that overlap at certain points. Sexuality contains “masturbation” and “casual encounters,” intimacy contains “cuddles” and “smooches,” and kink contains “non-sexual kink play.” The overlap of sexuality and kink creates “sexual kink,” the overlap of sexuality and intimacy creates “vanilla,” the overlap of intimacy and kink creates “chastity/service,” and the three overlap in the center to create a “full mix.”

There is so much wrong with this diagram and the post it accompanied, but it’s nevertheless worth reading:

mooserrific:

vanillaedge:

From Dishevelled Domina: Kink, Sexuality, and Intimacy

Take home message for me:

As members of a kink community, we are particularly open with our sexual attitudes. We discuss sexual topics that are normally taboo, and we revel in our kink with each other. Why aren’t we so open about intimacy though? Why do we still reserve that for the special at-home times or our semi-private after-care corners?

Intimacy is so important to me, my sexuality, and my kink – I expected the local groups to be a bit more open about that kind of stuff. I expect it to be better represented in the porn field. I find anything without to feel hollow and shallow. I was actually taken aback by how hidden that part of us is, and how absent it is from the public view, when attending local munches even.

Can’t we strive to do better?

I felt compelled to leave a comment:

As a personal exposition, this is probably a really valuable post. Good on you for writing and publishing it.

However, as written, this post has so many problems I don’t even know where to begin to unpack it. So I’ll start with the most glaring problem of all: not once in your entire post do you use the term “BDSM”, instead using “kink” to represent what is so obviously referring to the semi-public BDSM Scene. If you had simply replaced every occurrence of the term “kink” or “kinky” with the term “BDSM,” this post would be an order of magnitude better than it is.

As for further discussions of intimacy, I’ll simply encourage you to at least rethink if not totally drop the term “friends,” and to understand that the BDSM culture’s discourse expresses intimacy as consensual yet violative risk-taking (not happy-feeling-intimacy but scary-feeling-intimacy; think horror movies, not romantic comedies).

So intimacy, counter to your assertion, is actually visibly there at the munches and in the disgusting porn you and I both hate so much. It’s just that the BDSM community’s discourse makes the truly pathetic blunder of mistaking the representation of intimacy (the fashion, the scowls, the attitude) for intimacy itself.

The relationships BDSM’ers have become not with one another, but with their own fetishes.

Most of them love their whips and don’t know how to love the people on the other end.

I was asked to clarify, so I did:

[I]n real life, we have “kink” parties and “kink” munches and we don’t really use the BDSM term all that much.

And you want to be like the munches and parties you dislike…why, weezie? Are you part of this group you dislike? Is that why you write “we”? And if you are, why are you letting this groupthink determine your use of language, which is arguably the most powerful tool for change you have as a writer?

Your behavior seems self-defeating to me, and since I don’t believe you intend to sabotage your own effectiveness, I have to conclude you are instead simply writing without thinking.

How do you differ between the [“kink” and “BDSM”]?

*Sigh.* Read. Think. Watch. (Yes, these are the same links as before.)

I’ve seen SOME very rare moments of (“normal”) intimacy. I’ve seen loving looks, embraces, smooches, cuddles, and everything else I’d expect to see at “intimate” events… I’ve just seen it once or twice. I want more of THAT, whatever that was. :/

Same with porn: Almost all porn is devoid of feeling. However, Dishevelled Domina’s Tumblr Porn is amazing precisely because she hand-picks ones that convey feeling and respect in those intimate moments. I just wish it was easier to find more of it.

Intimacy is presented as scarce for reasons that are larger than the scope of the poisonous BDSM culture, so I would encourage you to forget about BDSM and focus instead on trying to discern intimacy itself. Your question about “where do friends fit in” betrays the fact that your analysis does not actually center on intimacy but rather on the crude representations of it—in this case, the mirage of “friendship” as a stand-in for emotional closeness. In other words, your appraisal falls so short because it suffers from the identical phenomenological misapplication as the BDSM community’s discourse; I think it is laughable at best to analyze others’ legitimate failures (as you have rightfully done to the BDSM community) with a critique that suffers from the same failure as that which you are critiquing.

Forget BDSM, “kinky,” and “vanilla.” Forget “friends,” “lovers,” and “play partners.” None of these words are useful in discerning intimate relations versus superficial ones. Focus on relationships instead.

You seem attracted to more or less the same kind of imagery as I am (I also like Disheveled Domina’s Tumblr), but you aren’t analyzing intimacy objectively, you’re calling the-thing-you-like “intimacy” when in fact it is simply “normal”—your word—manifestations of intimacy. If you continue to fail to recognize that distinction, your approach will at best pathologize non-lovey-dovey expressions of intimacy—expressions that the BDSM community’s discourse emphasizes—because that approach fails to acknowledge that “lovey-dovey” stuff like “cuddling” or “smooching” (also your words) are in no way intrinsically intimate at all.

And after I was asked yet again, I clarified more:

Could you sum up the difference between “kink” and “BDSM” real quick?

Sure, weezie.

“Kink” is to slut as BDSM is to intercourse. Someone who’s “slutty” is simply someone who is more promiscuous than you. Someone who’s “kinky” is simply someone whose sex acts entail less normative behavior than yours.

The term “kink” is used vastly differently depending on whether the person is a practitioner of non-normative sexual behaviors. For example, anal sex is “kinky” to a “sheltered” college girl in Idaho; the same is not true of sex-magic practitioners, for they think “kink” equals BDSM, which is false. (For the most part, so do polyamory community members and, of course, the entire BDSM culture.) Therefore, “kink” is not the same as BDSM. Treating the words as if they are synonyms, however, promotes misunderstanding between the two groups of people commonly, though equally inaccurately, referred to as “vanilla” and “kinky.” Thus, it is a dangerous, self-defeating thing to do.

I don’t yet have the proper vocabulary to be verbally competing at your level. I ask that we instead look at the ideas presented herein, and respond to them. Not the words I use, but the ideas I convey.

As time moves on, my words will get better.

I don’t feel like we’re competing, so it’s telling to hear you say that.

In any event, you know how to reach me when your words “get better.” ‘Til then, good luck on your journey. You’ll hear from me most often when I think you’re doing something harmful to the information landscape of topics I’m passionate about—like using “kink” and “BDSM” as synonyms. It’s not personal, I promise. :)