#saucyish

[shrimpmandan]

"All kinks are okay so long as they don't hurt anyone and you consent to it" is a largely correct statement that I don't really disagree with, however I think its usage in online discourse has created new issues in the form of people excessively justifying why they think a "harmless kink" actually IS harmful. Like, this has been an anti-kink argument for decades at this point.

"BDSM is abusive, and you can't consent to abuse, so it's harmful. Masochism is self-harm."

"An 18 year old can't consent to a 30 year old, so it's abusive, therefore harmful."

"DDLG and other depictions of ageplay normalize the sexualization of minors, which will lead to abuse, which is harmful."

"People with mental/developmental disabilities are inhibited in the same way people on drugs/alcohol are, therefore they can't consent to anything and we should bring back sex licenses."

"Raceplay, detrans, and homophobia play are inherently traumatizing because it involves your unchangeable identity, and you can't consent to being traumatized, therefore it's abusive and harmful."

I could go on and on. Anti-kink people will ALWAYS find an excuse to stick their noses into other people's business, under the guise of "protecting them". A lot of them don't understand the fact that consent violations are honestly normal, and can be talked through-- or that people can consent to things that you would personally find harmful.

A lot of younger people buy into this ideology because it's deliberately positioned as being a good person.

"I'm not judgmental, I just care about consent and preventing abuse!"

Just saying that a kink "doesn't hurt anyone" isn't enough when these people are deadset that it does.

#saucyish #kink discourse #pro kink

[sadistic-shortie]

found an anthro artist who draws buff, slit-having, nipple-lacking, fucking SEXY submissive male dragons having horrible things befall them and their massive fucking dragon cocks

#artist is kurumiken look them up on e6 PLEASE #saucyish

[shrimpmandan]

On a more positive note, I'd like to just say that all of the paraphiles I know in my personal life-- whether this be the 'big 3' or more generally accepted fetishes-- have been the sweetest people I know. We get characterized by the media as freaks and monsters and ticking time bombs, or simply as having "bad person disorder", but we are people. Living, breathing, functioning people who can laugh, bring joy, and love just as anyone else can.

Whether you're in recovery, coping through fiction, or just don't express it: if you're an anti-contact paraphile, I love you. You're strong as fuck for dealing with all the stigmatization and demonization we have to endure on a regular basis.

#paraphilia discourse #pro paraphile #paraphiles safe #paraphilia positivity #pro para anti contact #anti contact paraphile #pro para #para safe #saucyish

[shrimpmandan]

Convinced that every “how to write smut scenes” guide is written by people who write the most fucking boring smut imaginable

#saucyish

[shrimpmandan]

I think one of the reasons people cling to the idea of all kink being inherently sexual is because, even though Western society is deeply anti-sex, the idea of kink being a sexually deviant activity is still an easier pill to swallow than the idea of it being anything else: a hobby, a lifestyle, a relationship type, a way to wind down after a hard day at work, a form of nonsexual thrill-seeking.

Because even though we can conceptualize adrenaline junkies not doing what they do for sexual purposes, and we can also make that connection for people who like physically intensive sports, we just cannot, for whatever reason, conceptualize the idea of a person enjoying being hit by their partner unless it's for some pointedly sexually deviant reason. This idea that pain, bondage, and power exchange are these explicitly arousing subjects, as opposed to complex, nuanced, and often deeply emotional experiences meant to forge intimacy, trust, and safety in a d/s relationship. People can understand that an adult spanking their child isn't sexual, but the second they're both adults-- it's inherently erotic, explicitly so, and to even imply otherwise would be an utter perversion of what we perceive as appropriate for the public or not. And if it's not sexual, then it's characterized as abusive-- something that must've been forced upon the other partner because it satisfies the dominant's obviously sexual urges, and not anything else. Never anything else.

Kink is not inherently sexual. It's the public that sexualized kink.

#saucyish #kink discourse #kink advocacy #kink education

[shrimpmandan]

Heartbreaking! Proship mutual turns out to be anti-porn and reblogs from radfems, some the fuck how

Anyways, block me if you’re anti-porn as a whole. I understand being against the porn industry, especially when it comes to big names like PornHub with flimsy age verification and a whole host of genuine rape and revenge porn if you look for it. But what I hate about these conversations is they make the problem out to be porn itself, and NOT how careless big porn sites are, and how they directly profit off of abuse/underage/rape porn. (Though it should be noted that even if PornHub and other big platforms didn’t exist, genuinely awful content would still exist. All that would change is making it more underground and even more difficult to find and report-- it’s a double-edged sword.)

Someone posting a video of themselves masturbating? Harmless. A couple posting a video of them having vanilla sex for their audience? Harmless. Kinksters engaging in CNC and other risky but healthy BDSM practices for their audience? Harmless. Porn includes amateur, homemade stuff that people posted for fun, and those people deserve respect and support. You can be in support of porn while still being against actual rape, sex trafficking, child molestation, and abuse. They are not synonymous.

And, flatly, you can’t be sex positive in any capacity if you wholeheartedly and openly agree with the sentiments of SWERFs that porn (and sex work in general) is some inherently vile force, and not just a natural expression of human sexuality that unfortunately has been hijacked by greedy, abusive studios who don’t actually care about their actors or actresses. Sex workers of all varieties deserve respect. Listen to the ones who have been trafficked and abused, and listen to the ones who’ve found sex work to be fun and liberating. Both perspectives matter.

#saucyish #okay to reblog #tw abuse #tw rape #anti swerf #anti radfem #anti anti #kink discourse #proship #proshipping #pro sex work #support sex workers

[shrimpmandan]

DDLG gets so much disproportionate shit even from kinksters it’s absurd. People will think that the sheer idea of a man wanting to dominate a woman is somehow predatory even when it’s a consensual dynamic. MDLB, DDLB, MDLG? Doesn’t bat an eye. People barely acknowledge the other CGL subtypes. Meanwhile saying you’re a daddy dom-- or even a little girl-- will get you lobbed with pedophilia allegations because pedophilia is when man has sex with woman, I guess

#saucyish #kink discourse

[shrimpmandan]

twas skimming in your bio and misread it as "radioactively sex positive" and you know what., I support that

In fairness I WOULD and DO support dangerously radioactive sex. dni if your pussy isn't a biohazard

#asks #saucyish

[shrimpmandan]

on my CUMputer opening up my FAPplications

#saucyish #i think im delirious

[shrimpmandan]

Deadass the majority of “think of the children!!!” rhetoric operates under the blatantly incorrect assumption that kids are just. Devoid of sexuality in any form. The idea that kids don’t have basic bodily functions, or curiosities, or even just the fact that sexual development (on a mental level) begins VERY early. This includes the concept of gender. Conservatives and other sex negative groups heavily rely on the assumption that children are pure beings devoid of sin that are then “corrupted” by the outside world (loss of innocence), as opposed to gender and sexuality being innate concepts present in all children, which is partially influenced by society, and partially influenced by biology.

Most people will tell you that they first started having sexual or kinky fantasies-- as well as masturbating-- either at a toddler or elementary age. Children will start asserting their gender at around 2-3, and is consequently when a lot of (though not all) trans people first realize and voice what is later identified as gender dysphoria. Children can start asking about the birds and the bees at almost any age; I started asking when I was 2. Hell, I was always very curious about human and animal sexuality! While parents in US schools are outraged and clutching their pearls about the fact that elementary aged children are learning about the reproductive habits of seahorses (yes, they’re mad that the males get pregnant, why wouldn’t they be), I was fucking researching that shit on my own volition while I was being homeschooled! I infodumped to my own fucking mother about seahorse sex! Only a few years later I was researching how clams had sex, and slugs/snails, and worms. Cut to present day and my primary special interest is sexology and I want to become a sexologist. It’s almost like I was naturally curious and exploring an undeniable facet of the world that is stigmatized for no reason.

And another thing, of course: accepting that children are sexual also requires accepting the fact that children can commit sexual assault, particularly against other children. COCSA is shockingly common and how traumatizing it is for the kids involved is highly variable. Some people regard their own experiences as simply innocent exploration, while others feel deeply taken advantage of and dirty, or somewhere in-between the two.

Also: “children can’t consent” is honestly kind of a weird/misleading phrase, and honestly kind of depends on ages. Teenagers can absolutely consent to having sex with their peers, for example. A minority amount of under-13 children may also engage in peer-to-peer sexual contact that may not necessarily be classified as COCSA by those involved. However, it is important to note that (for both kids and teens), they may not fully grasp the full ramifications and implications of consent and sexuality (hell, many adults don’t), and under no circumstances can they consent to a much older adult. The reason larger age gaps are less of an issue with adult relationships is because, even if there’s a noticeable gap in maturity, I much more trust the judgment of a 25 year old to gauge the risks of dating a 40 year old, compared to a 17 or even 18 year old. Minors can and often do engage in consensual sex, and a lot of the issues that arise from that come from a lack of comprehensive sex education and heavy stigmatization surrounding sexuality. The amount of teens who genuinely fear being kicked out of the house for getting pregnant is frankly appalling.

That’s another thing. The idea that sex education is sexualizing kids, when sex ed protects kids from potentially being taken advantage of, or at LEAST gives them the tools to tell an adult if they’ve been molested. Don’t tell them their genitals are a “cookie” or a “thing”. Say vulva/vagina. Say penis/balls. Tell them what their body is and does. Don’t tell them that it’s always okay if mommy or daddy touches them there, or if their doctor does. Most sexual abuse happens within families, and I’ve heard PLENTY of tales from doctors offices. If anyone touches them in a way they don’t like and they don’t listen when they’re told to stop, that’s when you start biting and kicking. I don’t care who it is. Most sexual assault is instigated by someone the victim thought they could trust. Instill that survival instinct early. I shouldn’t have to tell you how fucking terrifying it is to have kids be disregarded when trying to warn about dangerous adults, because their parents refused to teach them basic anatomical terms.

I also shouldn’t have to tell you how terrifying it is that school-aged children in Texas can’t ask for period products or learn about periods in some schools because it’s considered to be a sexual topic, or just flatly not mandated for them to accommodate. The only people sexualizing children’s bodies are the ones screaming about how children are pure, innocent beings devoid of any sexuality. Sexuality blossoms around puberty, which can begin as young as 9 years old. Most people recount that their sexual interests and behaviors took root during childhood. Most teenagers are horny fuckers who need to be told how to have SAFE sex, not to avoid sex.

Stop desexualizing the human experience. Stop treating sexuality like a sin or a corrupting force that warps the minds of children, and not an innate facet of most humans that is constantly developing throughout childhood, and even into adulthood. Your child could be LGBT, they could be kinky, they could flatly have an interest in sexuality. It doesn’t just pop up out of nowhere during puberty; it comes to a head during puberty. There’s a difference.

Further reading:

https://www.hopkinsallchildrens.org/Patients-Families/Health-Library/HealthDocNew/Understanding-Early-Sexual-Development

https://www.ncsby.org/content/childhood-sexual-development

Planned Parenthood PDF Link

https://www.healthychildren.org/English/ages-stages/preschool/Pages/Sexual-Behaviors-Young-Children.aspx

#saucyish #tw cocsa #tw csa #sex education #sexology

[shrimpmandan]

What do you think about portraying problematic things in a good light in fiction? As someone who's more of an anti than proshipper, it baffles me when some people call out offensive portrayals of people belonging to marginalized groups but don't care when abuse/pedophilia etc. are glorified in fiction. It's totally fine to explore darker topics in fiction just out of curiosity or to cope with trauma but I think seeing traumatic things that happen to real people being glorified is kinda worrying.

I'd be glad to hear what you think. Have a nice day!

TL;DR: it's a recontextualization thing.

It's important to note of course that what someone finds enjoyable in fiction does not equate to what they find acceptable in real life, not 1-to-1, and it rarely ever correlates. That's not to say it never does, but I'll get back to that.

What I mean by "recontextualization" is that it can be a recontextualization of trauma. "If I portray my abuse as something positive or something that I wanted to happen, or that felt good, or that I was comforted and cared for afterwards-- maybe it won't hurt as much now." You can actually see this in real-world BDSM and the like, e.g. with rape victims using CNC to recontextualize and process their trauma with someone they trust and who cares about them. A lot of trauma victims see it as a reclamation of their sexuality, and you can easily apply this to incest, toxic relationships, and minor/adult relationships being portrayed in fiction as well.

But of course, it's not like you NEED to be a rape victim to have a CNC kink, yeah? 50-60% of women have one, and not all of them are rape victims. Some of them are drawn to the taboo. The power exchange. The "removal" of their autonomy in the context of a roleplay. That doesn't mean those women glorify rape, or think rape is a good thing. It just excites them, whether sexually or nonsexually. Would the same not apply to taboo relationships being explored in fiction-- the good, the bad, and the ugly?

I think you could also apply this to prejudice in fiction, to a degree. There's always this assumption that those types of works-- those involving raceplay, misogyny play, homophobia / transphobia play, and so on-- are written by bigots. Or that the only way you COULD enjoy that content is if you're a bigot yourself. News flash? I'm a bi man and I adore when homophobia is present in fiction. And that could include exploring the perspective of why someone might think homophobia is a good thing, or it being nothing more than a component to some vapid smut. There are PLENTY of minorities who project their trauma with dealing with prejudice into their works, and you can apply that 'recontextualization' argument here, too. A woman who has a misogyny kink as a way of reclaiming her oppression and for the illusion of having her autonomy violated, even though she consents to and has just as much power as her "aggressor" in the fantasy scenario, just as an example.

Of course, this all isn't to say people don't make bigoted or deplorable content for the EXPLICIT purpose of normalizing certain things or causing harm. Propaganda cartoons exist, wrought with racism and sexism and homophobia. There are people who genuinely believe that pedophilia is a good thing, or that BDSM relationships are abusive.

Anti-censorship is not anti-criticism and I feel like that might be where you're confused; you can support freedom of expression wholeheartedly while still critiquing the way something is portrayed in fiction, whether it be something taboo like incest, or something heavy like prejudice. The issue comes in when we accuse ALL portrayals of these things as being glorification. When we throw victims of oppression and trauma under the bus for not expressing their trauma in the "right way", whether it's "too heavy" or "too light-hearted". When we hound authors by immediately assuming malice and hate as opposed to ignorance and an opportunity for growth and education. When we put fanfiction writers who get maybe a few thousand hits tops on most of their works on the same scale as published, best-selling authors.

Yes, these things happen to real people. That's why we write about them. I think I'm pretty much allowed to glorify whatever I want in fiction when I've lived through nearly everything taboo, disgusting, and harmful you can think of. And hell, just because I have a thing for kidnapping doesn't mean I'm disrespecting my mother who was actually kidnapped in the actual real-world by an actual predator. Or is the taboo and traumatic only bad to portray as anything but "100% bad" when it comes to things that make you personally squirmy?

#asks #proship #i hope this doesn't come off as aggressive genuinely! im not mad I actually found this super fun to answer #anyways back to my mini-hiatus #saucyish #tw rape #tw incest #kink discourse

[shrimpmandan]

y'all think that Stickler has ever interrupted 'em while Dice was balls deep in the Devil to bitch about the soul quota and Devil got so fucking pissed about it that he nearly fried Dice's penice off

#saucyish #devildice #the cuphead show

[shrimpmandan]

lobotomize yourself

with a penis??? with a cock???? should i get a hot buff woman to lobotomize my brain with her cock

#anon #asks #saucyish

[shrimpmandan]

Expanding on some of my Thoughts from earlier I feel like a lot of american cishet people end up being more confidently misinformed about sex and sexuality because the sex ed they get is so basic and separated. They assume that because they were taught, that must be all there is to know, right? Why would their school or parents NOT teach them something?

Maybe some of the gaps are filled in by porn or smut. Which, of course, that breeds more misinformation when they don't have comprehensive sex ed to reference. They think saliva is ACTUALLY a good substitute for lube, or that most women can orgasm through penetration and nothing else. They fail to recognize these things as creative decisions, because it doesn't occur to them that they've never seen an accurate, real description of sex before.

LGBT people aren't taught sex ed at all. The sex ed we get isn't FOR us. I feel like The LGBTs end up being more curious about sex because of that fact-- a lot of what we're told just doesn't apply to us. So we look for ourselves, and we find more. We find stuff about safe gay sex, about kink, about being transgender. Cishets are often only told vague shit about being abstinent and using a condom. They assume there's nothing more to it because they're taught about sex purely as an Adult Thing that is Mandatory to know because you Need To Have Children. And I find that incredibly, terribly sad.

#sexology #sexuality #human sexuality #sex education #saucyish #lgbt #i'm just rambling don't take this as like Anything lmfao

[shrimpmandan]

Unrelated additional discourse post: hey. If you’re someone into weird shit (anything you personally think is weird, no matter how taboo it actually is). For the love of all that is holy and unholy and for the sake of your sanity:

Do not fucking throw stones from glass houses.

I cannot count on my fingers how many times I’ve seen kinksters, paraphiles, fetishists, general porn enjoyers, who are into fucking crazy shit either openly or in private, and yet they still have the audacity to throw stones at their ilk. This is about actual judgment and even outright scorn, not squicks or limits, or light-hearted teasing. ACTUAL targeted anger, disgust, and malice with little regards for respecting the other person is what I’m referring to here, just so we’re fully clear.

If you are openly into non-con, I don’t think you’re in any position to judge someone for being into incest. If you’re into gore, you’re in no position to judge someone for liking cub. If you’re into piss, you’re in no position to judge someone for liking feet.

And trust me, the more stones you throw, the more people (regardless of how much they ACTUALLY care about your fetish) are to start pelting you back. And at that point, you’re beyond sympathy-- you reap what you sow, and what you sowed was toxicity and moral superiority where you could’ve been fostering understanding and connections.

Do not throw stones from glass houses.

#saucyish #kink discourse #paraphilia discourse #idk how to tag this tbh #also im saying this as someone who has a lot of the fetishes listed (not all of them fuck around and find out) #and that's WHY i'm so nonjudgmental. it would not make logical sense FOR me to judge shit because I'm just as easily targetable. #and obviously avoiding harassment shouldn't be your only motivation to be a decently respectful person but i can't say i have a lot of #sympathy for people who whine and whinge about ''porn addicted weirdos'' and ''fetish freaks'' #and then they get outed as having a secret inflation blog or something lmao

[shrimpmandan]

Hi, I saw a post you made a while ago about kink not being inherently sexual. I'm open to changing my perspective but I'm not entirely sure I understand since those things are usually tied to each other (pun intended) in the US. Is ddlg vs age regression a valid comparison for sexual vs nonsexual kink?

Those things are usually tied together because it's how the general public and media perceives and portrays kink. I think a lot of people get stuck on the idea of a kink meaning a sexual fetish, but there's plenty of reasons why something could be qualified as a nonsexual kink, just depending on how you define it and what context it's used in.

Maybe it does bring them sexual gratification, however they do not have sex or masturbate during the action. Let's just use spanking as a universal example here: the person is sexually satisfied by the spanking, however you can't really say they had sex, so it could be considered nonsexual on that front alone.

They don't get any sexual pleasure or fulfillment out of the action period, and instead spanking brings them emotional or psychological comfort. For some people, maybe they see their partner spanking them as a show of mutual trust, intimacy, and safety. They might also simply crave the endorphins that come from pain and use that to safely decompress after a long day.

Consensual discipline. Maybe the people involved have a mutually agreed upon dynamic where one partner disciplines the other. As such, they get spankings for failing to do their assigned tasks, e.g. cleaning the house or making dinner. It's more about enforcing the power dynamic, than about anything overtly sexual.

As for DDLG vs. agere... those two things have entirely different contexts. DDLG is a relationship (which may or may not be of a sexual nature!) wherein an older 'paternal' partner helps to take care of a younger 'little' partner. It's a consensual relationship or D/s dynamic that may or may not involve age regression. Agere, on its own, is a headspace. Not all regressors are into DDLG, and not all people into DDLG are regressors. I actually found a really good reddit thread here if you wanna learn more about the differences and overlap between CGL and agere.

#anon #asks #saucyish #kink discourse #kink education