Log in

No account? Create an account

The Toybox

people for the conservation of limited amounts of indignation

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
admin post from daily-deviant; interracial as a kink? really?
Admin Post from the mods of daily_deviant.

Short version: removal of term, reversal of earlier stance, etc.

ETA: the below cut was more than I thought it would be. So it's less mod-actions at this point and more the concept of kink defintion.

This is vague--thoughts. I'm not sure it's even organized enough to be considered meta.

1.) I'm glad they made the reversal. Full stop.

2.) I'd like it far more if I hadn't read the mod's comments here. Not taint so much as--reading it with an eye that tends to be more cynically inclined.

3.) Yay reversal!

4.) I'm still not entirely comfortable. This could be just me, though, and not a particular judgement on this or any post.

5.) Clarifying. Well, a little. What makes me wary is not that they didn't know the word's history. Got that. Not that they didn't do an instant reversal. Though I wish they had, since knee-jerk sometimes can be a really *good* thing. I'm not even sure that they were *that* slow--all the idiotic comments prove a little known subtheory of relativity--the stupider something is, the slower time goes.

I seriously, seriously do not like the idea of interracial as a kink in fandom. I just don't. As a general fic topic--got it. Kink. Associating that with interracial relationships feels wrong. I can't quite articulate at the moment, due to all the headdesking last night, but it feels fundamentally wrong. A fic prompt on sga-flashfic that encouraged exploring interracial relationships wouldn't--I think--ping me quite like this. But--the concept of it.

Granted, at the time of the protests going around lj yesterday, it would have deflected from the issue at hand, so I'm glad it didn't--much. On one hand, it is a separate issue, but on the other--it's there now. It's a labeled kink and both my initial knee-jerk (are you *kidding me*?) and my secondary think-through to see where I was getting the squeamish vibe and if it was a.) reaction or b.) something that would have bothered me if miscegenation had never re-entered my active vocabulary--and it's yes. Yes, that does bother me. It bothers me in less of a "Jesus, that is some stupid there" and in the way of "Are you seriously stating that the act of having sex and/or procreating with another human being is kinky when there is a difference in pigmentation?"

Which I'm perfectly aware is simplifying the issue, yes. Just go with it for the sake of argument.

I think the question that occurs to me at this point is, is that so common in general that, should the kink term have *been* interracial, there wouldn't have been a blink of any kind? Or would the reactions have been considered oversensitivity? If zvi_likes_tv or witchwillow or liviapenn or pretty much anyone had stated that the concept of a prompt fetishizing race was perhaps a bad idea, would it have hit this level of discussion?

We lost the word, but the concept is alive and well and *there* now. And under any other word, I'm find it very, very hard to swallow. And by that, I mean, no. I don't think it's acceptable as a listed kink. I cannot, *cannot* find it any less *wrong* and *not* something that I can think of as anything other than obscene. Jesus, I'm using dramatic language. But it just is.

6.) One day, as group, we are going to *have* to discuss tone. So far, it only comes up when people are pissed. Granted, that's when we notice. But it's got to be covered one day when there's not a more important issue at large, because frankly, it's distracting. Yes, the message is always, always more important than the messenger. It does not matter if the messenger is your archenemy or your best friend.

Secondary to this: when we are beyond the message moment and into the aftermath. Tone can matter. During, disregard it if possible; and trsut me, it is not only perfectly possible, but pretty much expected. But that does not and has never meant that you can't take umbrage from it, be annoyed by it, and *after*, not during, set up ways for yourself in how you think a message should be spread. Just don't let *that* ever be a defining factor in how you view an argument. It's short-sighted, it's ridiculous, and it can and *does* fuck up an otherwise important discussion.

(Note: I didn't find zvi_likes_tv's original post all that incendiary, to be honest. Though I could have lived without 'honky' being reintroduced into my active vocabulary. I don't think I've heard it since The Jeffersons went off the air. But, even considering subject matter and passion involved, it was fairly clear on what the problem was, why, and provided clear context. Liked.)

I still want a pony.

What's interesting to me is that I didn't find the concept that some people might find interactial sex to be kinky surprising. But then-- *koff* I have cruised porn sites.

The concept itself is troubling yes, but I remembering thinking about it way back when I was a young internet addict being surprised at every corner. "It might relate to the fact that for a long time, and still is to a certain extent, illegal and/or highly frowned upon."

I'm not excusing it, but I'm also sort of a little "how much can we help what turns us on?".

I mean-- think about what we drool over and how many people would find that surprising. Etc.

I'm not trying to say we should just let it pass-- no I think that's not quite right either-- but I'm not sure why anyone is surprised that something that was for a long time considered taboo-- might now be labeled a kink.

personally, it doesn't *always* bother me - and this is circumstancial. When someones, even hypothetical, says "I have a thing for _____" and it's a generalisation (geeks, jewish girls, catholic priests, japanese otakus, frenchman, etc), it's kind of a kink, as kink opposes to squick, as kink for "turn on" and not so much for "deviance/perversion" (because we must not forget that kink, and especially so in porn-positive and sex-positive areas like fandom, carries both these meaning, adnd it is important to differentiate between both). In that reading/meaning/tone, a racial "kink" is not offensive to me, personal buttons, for the win - rape is one fo mine, and it's not much more politically correct, right? But then the objectification that happens is happening anyway through generalisation, there - by which I mean, in "I love geeks", each unique geek is simplified to a set of caricatural, not-even-mentioned overarching characteristics of hus 'type', and that is objectifying as well as "I have a thing for black girls" (even though yes, a whole history of oppression makes the second statement more loaded. still.).

But interracial as a kink presented in a way that suggests the existence of someone going "Oooooh, I really have a thing for interracial pairings, it's sooo hottt all that DEVIANCE" - well, that hits me hard, in the same way that porn-for-men catering to all your "Japanese teen sluts!!11" can be offensive - that is to say, often. :/

So I'm not saying I have a set opinion there, I guess. I'm just.. thinking out loud. um. sorry.

(Deleted comment)
"Interracial" is actually a not uncommon kink, speaking descriptively--you can find plenty of porn specifically marketed as such. I'm not entirely comfortable with it, but much of what turns us on isn't what we would call desirable in real life, so I would tend to judge it on a case-by-case basis.

Well. *frowns* Yes and no. Yes, I know it is, in general, a kink, and very, very few make me twitch in quite this way. I suppose it would have to be judged on a case by case basis, but it doesn't change my knee-jerk on it. It doesn't feel right.

Of course, the same could be applied to incest kink, which doesn't make me twitch in quite the same way. I'm still not quite able to define the why one I pass with a handwave and one just stops me short, but it's there.

Well, a simple comparison of the first and second posts makes it pretty clear that either (a) some mod stepped way, way out of line in issuing the first post or (b) their explanation in the second post isn't, shall we say, entirely consonant with reality. But for the purposes of dealing with them as fellow-fans/mods, I am not sure it matters much to me what they need to say to cover their embarrassment. If they were friends, it would be a different matter.

True. With someone I knew, this would be an issue. It just, to me, makes the large public post kind of a reverse coda of some kind and confirm the original opinions, which teh admin, while reversing, doesn't necessarily show they realize the actual problem.

I can see what you're saying here-- from my pov, I find it hard to think of "interracial" as a *kink* without thinking of what that means in terms of the actual mainstream genre of "interracial porn," which is usually based on racist tropes, and is usually White/Other, with "Other" defined as some hideous racist stereotype meant to play to a white audience's subconscious fears or disgusts...

But then, like you said, if you think of it more as a *prompt* or a *topic* then it gets a little fuzzier. Because, the other thing is, it's Harry Potter, and the idea of race and "racial purity" and "blood traitors" *are* a major theme in HP-- so it's kind of understandable that fic writers could take an prompt like "interracial relationships" and come up with some interesting stuff.

Of course, it would help if it seemed like people weren't just interpreting "interracial" in the porn-genre meaning of the term, as "White/Other" (with "Other" being, variously, people of color, sentient magical creatures, or animals.)

I think it also would have helped if the mods had been more careful with their definition of "interspecies"-- yes, it gets a bit fuzzy with magical creatures involved, and with characters like Hagrid and Fleur who *are* part-"creature"-- but I think it would have helped if relationships between humans and *animals* weren't included in the same definition as interracial relationships.

In a lot of fandoms, an interracial challenge would be fascinating, assuming that it contextually didn't relate itself to kink--though yeah, that's going to show up too. This is one of those I can't--hmm. It really is context in this case, to be honest. If this had been a posted theme to, madeupname comm as a fic challenge, I'd probably check out the fic before I did any major twitching action. Or just ignore the stories that focus on that.

My objection, in this case, *is* the concept of it as a kink prompt, because of the background of that kink. As an idea or prompt to explore? That sounds good. As a fetish, a celebration of omgsexbetweentworaces, it just hits every wrong vibe I have.

should the kink term have *been* interracial, there wouldn't have been a blink of any kind?

Possibly not. I've seen it mentioned in a few places that they had homosexuality as a kink for another month, which is about as common as interracial relationships, and it doesn't seem like anyone batted an eyelash over classifying that as a kink.

I dunno, do enough people write slash fic solely for the porn and the pretty boys getting naked together that everyone thinks of it as a kink, in that it's something that turns them on, whereas fic with characters of colour is more about the characters?

I don't really know where I'm going with that, and I suspect I've wandered off the point I was trying to make, so I'll shut up now.

Part of it I think is that they're not using kink with its actual meaning intact, but more like "this gets me hot and isn't neccessarily accepted by the mainstream".

As opposed to the phrase "my kink" which really only refers to what gets you hot and is actually far closer to the actual meaning of the word which is "something NEEDED to help get you off".

Contrast in coloring is a kink of mine, because of the visual interest (or mental visual interest, when I'm picturing it in my head). That probably covers a number of interracial relationships. The thing is, I'm using kink to mean "turn-on," not "deviance," and I wonder how many people, including the mods, are using it to mean that, despite "deviant" in the comm's title.

It's--hmm. I think it was nailed above when Livia was talking about porn cliches, and Ami about the idea of deviance--to me, it pings too close to the "deviant behavior" concept of kink, not the fandom-wide "this turns me on". A lot of it is definition of how to set the--hmm. Define the terms?

I'm going to accept that this is going to come off badly and say that my visual contrast kink includes skin tone. Not just the Teyla/Sora type, but the golden undertone/blue undertone of most television pairings. It extends even more into Hurt/comfort, which has a huge visual aesthetic around blood and bruises and how they show up against the character's skin. I think visual contrast is pretty.

I really can't see how that falls under interracial as a kink, though, especially considering that's nine/tenths of romance novel description (her milky skin agaisnt his sunbronzed chest).

So what is the deal with daily_deviant? I've seen a lot of angst over it on my f-list, but I can't seem to find the reason for it. So whats up?


Short version--use of miscegenation as a kink prompt.

First off, it's weirdly appropriate that this discussion come up in Harry Potter, and ironic as hell that the mods don't or didn't get it, after reading a series largely based on one "race" attempting to gain power over and subjugate another "race" and to protect the "purity" of a "race".

Words have historical context. That's part of their nature. A very reasonable request was made for a change in terminology. Terminology that is, in fact, more mainstream than "miscegenation". They should have just done it. But it's not like replacing the term fixes everything.

Kink involving people having sex with different skin color is fairly common. It's not the aesthetic that makes people twitchy. There's a fair bit of art based on that aesthetic, though it is often controversial.
It's the connotations race has well beyond skin color. Which is a sort of blindingly obvious comment, but perhaps necessary. When someone says that they have an interracial kink, are they referring to an aesthetic appreciation? A reflection of a power relationship? What exactly do they mean?

Hmm. Before now, I never categorized teh color-contrast thing with interracial, and I still can't quite--get those into the same mental place. I'm not sure if I should disclaim that specifically, because it never linked up race to me since color variation occurs across the spectrum of human ethnic groups. It's the deviancy clause that's making me twitch the hardest on this one.

(Deleted comment)
Oh yeah. I cannot imagine how to open a post about tone and *when* to make it an issue and when not to, and when to damn well ignore it, because--well, examples needed.

I liked her post a lot.

This whole discussion has been fascinating for me for 2 reasons. One is the whole inter-racial as kink thing (the other, ftr, is appropriate etiquette on what do when you're called out as doing something racist or sexist or whatever)

A few years ago, I knew a guy. Charming, successful, white law student, and I never liked him. Couldn't figure out why he pinged for me as creepy, but I warned friends off him without being able to give any sort of reason. He never said anything offensive or sleazy, always civil although we didn't agree on most things. Anyway, one day, he's had a few, and he says something that makes me realize his last few girlfriends had all been Asian. I ask a few more questions, and came to the realization that he wants a nice, traditional family, with good old family values, which is something that is just not the cultural norm with white girls any more. Asian girls are quieter and listen to him more, and are more committed to their husbands when they get married. The lower divorce rate proves that. He even said something about Asian girls having more respect for their men, which is something that was important to him.

As you can imagine, I kept right on warning friends away from him. But after that I could better explain why.

Inter-racial, as a kink, as something you seek out, squicks me. Because a lot of the time, it's about power. If you want meek & subservient, go Asian. If you want primal animal sex, go black. If you want a mistress who won't cause trouble, pick someone who'll be seen as a gold-digger if they ever ask for more. Someone poor. An immigrant. Someone with low credibility. Because white middle-class women are too uppity these days.

If you're seeking out sex partners of other races because they'll have less power than you, that's fucked (& bordering on predatory). Getting off on "going native" because it's dirty, because you're slumming it, also very problematic. I don't want to judge anyone else's kinks, but there are some very scary racist (and often sexist) undertones, which can for me just translate to getting off on the power of white privilege.

I realise that's only one aspect, and it's a lot more complicated than that & I'm certainly not saying that that's what's going on in all or even most inter-racial relationships. But it's a big reason why eroticizing racial stereotypes and then using a member of that ethnic group to fulfil those fantasies really resonates as fucked for me.

Hi. I think I'm done ranting now. What's your take?


That is *nice*.

I realise that's only one aspect, and it's a lot more complicated than that & I'm certainly not saying that that's what's going on in all or even most inter-racial relationships. But it's a big reason why eroticizing racial stereotypes and then using a member of that ethnic group to fulfil those fantasies really resonates as fucked for me.

Ooooh. You know, I love that I posted about this and people responded with their thoughts. I need to think about that for a bit (the power aspect of it). Because yes. I just can't articulate it.


I like your brains. I also like the brains of everyone who has commented to this journal. Sadly, I am far less articulate after a long day of cat herding at work, and cannot hope to aspire to such exalted lofty heights beyond an, "Ooh, that's brilliant! I totally agree!"

Hell, I'm not really articulate on this one. I just wish we had more precise terminology for some of it.

Cat herding. *Sighs* Yeah.

I seriously, seriously do not like the idea of interracial as a kink in fandom

As a heterosexual female that gets the best kicks reading fictional homosexual male porn... I see that kinks are usually handling different social taboos. (though in fandom, people can have kinks like "happy marriage"..) Kinks are based on the reaction of "Whoa!/different/unknown/a bit scary". So this way, seeing interracial relations as a kink makes the status of interracial relationships as different/unknown even stronger.

On the other hand, slash really is a kink. It's the same kink as the lesbian porn for hetero men, although wrapped more nicely with a cherry on the top. So fangils' slash entusiasm could be seen as the same kind of faschination towards the different/unknown as like with the interracial kink.

So in my oppinion, it would be contradicting to have a "right" to feel uncomfortable and see the kind-of-racist fear of the unknown in interracial kink and *not* see slash kink as putting homosexuals on pedestial, differencing them to "unfamiliar them" and away from "familiar us".

As a possessor of a slash kink, which many outside fandom would see a really bad and disgusting one as the kinks go, I don't think that I, personally, have the right to feel uncortable about "mild" e.a. common porn kinks like interracial, homosexuals, midgets or pregrants. I can feel that "I don't know this" or that "this is not my kink", but feeling uncomfortable, of judging that kink? I don't think so.

Well. In the threads above, the point is made on the concept of deviancy in kink.

I guess the question asked is it a turn on because it's the governor's white daughter and that black pirate theirloveissodeviantandwrong. So to speak. Not that I'm asking you that. But there's a line--it's fuzzy and misty, granted--where it's "I like to read about interracial couples because it's deviant/wrong/outside the norm and those things are hot."

It *is* a case by case basis, but I do think in that case, feeling extaordinary uncomfortable is not exactly out of line. I feel equally uncomfortable with the idea of homosexuality in the same category of kink. Is it a blurry line? Hell yes. But I feel fairly comfortable making a judgement call when it's tripping toward the deviancy definition of kink. I can't consider that a particularly terrible place to draw my lines.

Under the reasoning/description given, would that mean I'm in a kinky relationship just because my partner is Columbian (and of color)? I would have thought the lesbian factor gave it the kink, silly me.

Also, this is the only pony I have [see icon]. Sorry. Feel free to borrow if you would like. Threnodyjones gifted me with it.

That is an awesome, awesome pony.

Boy, language is slippery and messy.

Maybe the word we need is "fetish"? There ought to be some word describing "I really love women with long hair/kidnapping fantasies/black-white sex" without saying that it's wrong to do so. Of course, "fetish" has its own baggage.

In real life, I say "Uh, I just like dark guys. It's a Thing." But somehow I don't think "Things: black/white, open-toed sandals, Flying Spaghetti Monster" will work as a fic notation.

Honestly, the terminology is impossible. *grins* Especially since fandom itself co-opted so many words and added (or subtracted, or changed) the meaning.

I've wondered about fetish a lot in how fandom uses it (this is so random, but you're the second person to mention that one and it's been hovering randomly in my head now, gah). The clinical def seems far more--strict--than we tend to use it.