xssve
Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline
|
In my experience, kink labels fall more into the ideal category- there are naturally dominant people, but kink specifically has to do with sex, not leadership per se, although leadership can be an aspect of it - powerful people are often kinky people, while at the same time in the opinion of the public, kink is probably more often than not interpreted as a character flaw - more politicians lives and careers are ruined over sex scandals than corruption - you can come back from a corruption scandal, a lot harder to come back from a sex scandal.
Anyway, for this reason possibly, maybe others, kink labels typically describe more interpersonal traits than public traits, it's who you are in private, whichis why you occasionally get people who wish to wear it on their sleeve complaining about it - nothing wrong with that, it is also fashion ins a sense and in the appropriate subculture, it's acceptable, possibly even encouraged, but overall, it remains a subculture.
Statistically in fact, the Janus report indicates that roughly 15% of the population identifies as kinky, which includes the whole gamut - slightly more men than women, but the figures are actually pretty symmetrical.
Given that the Janus report was written before kink came out of the closet with the internet, I would consider that a relatively stable figure, although it might be higher at the moment due to it's being more fashionable.
In any case, regardless of how it's promoted, it seems to remain very firmly in the realm of interpersonal peccadillo, i.e., a private identity, vs a public one, and this seems to apply even to semi-public figures in the lifestyle, as it is termed.
So much for the big picture, on the interpersonal level, it probably compares to other interpersonal quirks, vegetarianism or veganism, what kind of movies you like, whether you read, and what, etc., etc., i.e., it describes a particular aspect of your personality:it has no institutional meaning, because it isn't an institution, although because we are human, and humans are know to to institutionalize things, there is always somebody trying to institutionalize it.
So far though, no, and ceterus parabus, discounting the Calvinist reaction formation that waxes and wanes with the election cycle, it has roughly the same level of social meaning as whether you prefer Italian or Chinese.
If you want to discuss particular identity labels, then we'd have to try to break that down, it's been tried, the problem with that is, the act of breaking it down is in itself, uncomfortably close to institutionalization, i.e., when you're done there are pre-formatted roles, and no room for individuality, as Switchblade suggests above.
And, in this age of conformity to media/ad agency values (Note this list does not mention a dripping, gaping cunt, a beady gaze of psychotic depravity, and a little drool in the corner of your mouth), kink is, in some respects, that last mile, the one area of your personality that isn't subject to public review or approval, although of course, that too is a human obsession, i.e., the "twue" debate.
|
RE: Kink Identity Labels (Serious thread- please don't ... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread