What about kink attraction?

[aceidk]

I read on your website that it is common for the ace/aro community to divide attraction into five different categories: sexual, romantic, sensual, platonic, and aesthetic.

 

Besides sexual attraction, I believe I have felt all of them individually and combined: I felt romantic attraction without sensual attraction, aesthetic attraction without any of the others, only platonic, platonic and aesthetic, and so on. However, another attraction that I sometimes feel and sometimes don't is kinky attraction. I've been part of the fetish community for several years, and, as a submissive, I sometimes feel comfort and pleasure--or at least desire--submitting to different persons. However, I'm not sure if this attraction is related to the others in any meaningful way--I sometimes feel kinky attraction to people I only feel platonic attraction for, sometimes romantic+kinky, sometimes just kinky, sometimes others but not kinky, and so on.

 

Is it thus possible that there is a 6th attraction? I don't believe it is the same as sensual attraction, as I sometimes feel a need to cuddle/kiss/ be intimate with someone I would not be interested in engaging in kinky activities. In a way, it feels like this kinky attraction is my replacement of sexual attraction, but it has nothing to do with genitals, with their body, with their hotness, or with penetrative sex.

 

Any thoughts?

[Puck]

First, welcome to AVEN! I hope you find it's a good resource for you

 

Hmmm, I haven't heard of it as an attraction, but that is an interesting idea.

 

My gut is feeling like it would fall under sexual attraction, but I could be wrong. I mean, the definition of a fetish is that one cannot get sexually aroused without whatever the fetish is being involved, so kind of does take the place of what one's sexual attraction is based around (though, of course, a kink would be different from a fetish). If one wants to be kinky with another for the express reason to get off, I don't see that as much different to sexual attraction. As you mentioned, people feel sexual attraction towards people they are platonic with, sometimes they feel romantic with their attraction.... Also, people want to do acts with different people; Personally, I know people I would cuddle with but not kiss, but both acts still fall under sensual attraction even if I don't want to do ALL the sexual-attraction-related things with that person.

 

However, if one wants to get kinky with someone but doesn't get aroused by it sexually, perhaps there is a case for that. Like how with sensual attraction, one wants to cuddle with another for the joy of cuddling, not as foreplay to sex or any other reason. So my gut is feeling that if people feel kink attracted to someone and it has NOTHING to do with sex, then it would be a separate attraction. However, I'm pretty sure you can't have one without the other, you can't have a kink without feeling sexually aroused by it, and so it wouldn't be separate.

 

Those are just my thoughts, happy to discuss if people disagree

 

Also, feel free to pop over to the Kink/Fetish thread if you want to connect with other folks on here that enjoy such things!

[aceidk]

Hello and thank you for the warm welcome!

 

3 hours ago, Puck said:

 you can't have a kink without feeling sexually aroused by it, and so it wouldn't be separate.

 

 

Hmmm, so you'd define sexual attraction as something strongly connected to sexual arousal? I'm rather new to all this, but my understanding was that sexual attraction is connected to sexual orientation and sexual arousal is connected to sex drive, while maintaining little connection between sex drive and sexual orientation.

 

What is your definition of sexual attraction? Reading the definitions on this page (https://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/69810-what-is-sexual-attraction/) it seems like most definitions are very sex-centric, which does not apply to non-sex-kinks.

 

I noticed that the definition can become both vague and ambiguous when examined closely. For instance, on the AVEN wiki, sexual attraction seems to be connected with "sexual contact", but I'm not sure if physical contact is a prerequisite for sexual contact--some kinks (domestic servitude, for instance) are not contingent on physical contact. Other sources seem to define sexual attraction in terms of "contact involving genitals" (https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/4b/d7/88/4bd788af2e830d5f3e7c281c43e05418.jpg), so it is hard to escape the implicit sex-related connotations that seem to come with sexual attraction.

 

Also, this discussion here (https://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/77893-how-do-you-separate-kinks-from-sexual-attraction/) seems to be very relevant to this topic, though it does not seem to have ended in a very clarifying manner.

 

What are your thoughts on this?

 

And many thanks for your help!!

[Puck]

31 minutes ago, aceidk said:

Hmmm, so you'd define sexual attraction as something strongly connected to sexual arousal? I'm rather new to all this, but my understanding was that sexual attraction is connected to sexual orientation and sexual arousal is connected to sex drive, while maintaining little connection between sex drive and sexual orientation.

Yes, I do believe they are strongly connected in the sense that being aroused by someone would suggest that you are attracted to them. It could be argued that you are not attracted to that person specifically, rather attracted to an action in some cases, but if that is that case then one would probably be attracted to ANYONE doing those actions, and not a specific person.

 

That all being said, remember that arousal can occur without attraction. That's what people mean when they say sex drive and orientation are different. For example, women often feel aroused due to their cycle, but they weren't aroused by a person. This gives them a stronger sex drive for that time. Men often have 'wet dreams' where they were aroused during the night but not due to attraction. Those are just two examples, there are some that bridge the sexes and so forth.

 

So it's all connected, but these elements are not perfectly in sync which is why you can have cases where people are aroused not by attraction and so forth.

 

1 hour ago, aceidk said:

What is your definition of sexual attraction? Reading the definitions on this page (https://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/69810-what-is-sexual-attraction/) it seems like most definitions are very sex-centric, which does not apply to non-sex-kinks.

Remember that no one on here is an expert, so sometimes those threads are more about the exploration/discussion of the concept  You can of course learn from them, but often people come to conclusions counter to AVEN's definitions or dominate culture's definitions and so forth.

 

AVEN's definition (from this site's front page) is: "Desire to have sexual contact with someone else, to share our sexuality with them"

 

My personal definition is something along the lines of: "Noticing someone and wanting to engage in sexual acts with them" (Note, I use the term "noticing" because it's more than just "seeing" someone. One might notice mannerisms or how someone thinks or any other thing about someone and that's what makes them feel attraction)

 

Both those definitions cover kink because kink acts, in my eyes, are sexual. Even if it's not straight PiV, if you want to engage in activities that lead to one getting off, that's a sexual activity in my book. So, for my personal definition, one would notice someone and want to, say, chain them up because that is sexually pleasing. That, to me, is sexual attraction.

 

1 hour ago, aceidk said:

I noticed that the definition can become both vague and ambiguous when examined closely. For instance, on the AVEN wiki, sexual attraction seems to be connected with "sexual contact", but I'm not sure if physical contact is a prerequisite for sexual contact--some kinks (domestic servitude, for instance) are not contingent on physical contact. Other sources seem to define sexual attraction in terms of "contact involving genitals" (https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/4b/d7/88/4bd788af2e830d5f3e7c281c43e05418.jpg), so it is hard to escape the implicit sex-related connotations that seem to come with sexual attraction.

I guess I would disagree with that jpg, I think sex can happen without genitals touching. An easy, non-kinky example is oral (genitals don't touch though are obviously involved). Another one is phone sex, where people aren't in the same room but I would still say they are participating in sex and have sexual contact, it's just vocal contact. I think "sexual contact" as a term is broad enough to allow for many options. So even acts that aren't I'll say "traditionally" sexual are still sexual if someone is getting off on them.

 

You might also have to explain to me domestic servitude, because I don't know all that is involved. Is it similar to foreplay in that, even if there is no direct contact, it's still something leading to both getting aroused which will lead to more sex acts? Are both the dom and sub getting aroused by servitude? Does it lead to more? Or are both getting off purely by it? As far as I'm concerned, if there is any getting off happening (especially if it is mutual, consensual, and planned like such kink play often is) I'd consider it sexual contact.

 

1 hour ago, aceidk said:

And many thanks for your help!!

You are so welcome, always happy to let others know what I have learned or at least how I think about things  I really hope it helps you on your journey!

[aceidk]

49 minutes ago, Puck said:

Yes, I do believe they are strongly connected in the sense that being aroused by someone would suggest that you are attracted to them. It could be argued that you are not attracted to that person specifically, rather attracted to an action in some cases, but if that is that case then one would probably be attracted to ANYONE doing those actions, and not a specific person.

 

But what if one is willing/interested to participate in kink activities only with specific people, but this in itself is not arousing for them, but rather a gateway to comfortably engage in kinks and then the arousal comes from the activities themselves?

 

49 minutes ago, Puck said:

My personal definition is something along the lines of: "Noticing someone and wanting to engage in sexual acts with them" (Note, I use the term "noticing" because it's more than just "seeing" someone. One might notice mannerisms or how someone thinks or any other thing about someone and that's what makes them feel attraction)

 

Hmm, so not necessarily experiencing sexual arousal? For instance, if you notice someone and think "that person seems fit for my taste and I would like to engage in kink-related activities with them" but you don't experience an immediate sexual urge or arousal--this seems to fit in the definition, so would you say it is sexual attraction?

 

And, please, my sincere apologies for dissecting this in so much detail--I'm curious to understand more, but I seem to have trouble putting together a framework of defined terminology in my mind.

49 minutes ago, Puck said:

I guess I would disagree with that jpg, I think sex can happen without genitals touching. An easy, non-kinky example is oral (genitals don't touch though are obviously involved). Another one is phone sex, where people aren't in the same room but I would still say they are participating in sex and have sexual contact, it's just vocal contact. I think "sexual contact" as a term is broad enough to allow for many options.

 

 

 

I completely agree!

49 minutes ago, Puck said:

You might also have to explain to me domestic servitude, because I don't know all that is involved. Is it similar to foreplay in that, even if there is no direct contact, it's still something leading to both getting aroused which will lead to more sex acts? Are both the dom and sub getting aroused by servitude? Does it lead to more? Or are both getting off purely by it? As far as I'm concerned, if there is any getting off happening (especially if it is mutual, consensual, and planned like such kink play often is) I'd consider it sexual contact.

1

I'm sure there's many forms of domestic servitude, but, for the type that I'm familiar with, the sub does domestic duties such as cleaning, washing, and whatnot for the dominant's household. The sub is often aroused by this, and the domme may or may be (she may simply need work done; see: http://servants4u.co.uk but note that it's NSFW.) In all instances, it's consensual and both are aware of the underlying kink. In most cases it doesn't lead to more i.e. it's not meant as a bridge to other activities, but rather an activity in itself--if it leads to more, it's not necessarily related to the domestic servitude act.

 

49 minutes ago, Puck said:

You are so welcome, always happy to let others know what I have learned or at least how I think about things  I really hope it helps you on your journey!

 

It definitely helps, thank you so much for sharing your precious wisdom! It seems to me that asexuality is such an obscure topic that most knowledge is concentrated in the community rather than in academic labs, so your experience is most valuable!

[aceidk]

Just to introduce an additional perspective from a similar thread I created on /r/asexuality (https://www.reddit.com/r/asexuality/comments/6h46os/what_about_kinky_attraction/):

 

Quote

I mean, I've felt sexually attracted to two people in my lifetime, as opposed to the dozen or so I've felt kink-attracted to. For me the two are very divorced - nothing takes me out of my kinkster headspace faster than sexual nonsense, lol, and kinky stuff introduced during sex has a tendency to ruin that experience too.

For some people kink definitely falls under their sexual attraction umbrella... but I don't think that's something that holds true generally - because bdsm doesn't require any elements of sexuality to be bdsm. IMO kink attraction is in a gray space between sexual attraction and romantic attraction, or at least it is to me, because I want a long-term [play] partner to share these intimate [nonsexual] experiences with - but it's not a romantic partner and it isn't a friend, these aren't casual experiences or like life-bonding ones either.

 

I thought the perspective of someone who experienced both attractions may be valuable to the discussion!

[Frac]

That's interesting! Sounds like a very specific subgroup of sexual attraction to me, but if it's useful for you to differentiate the two, there should be no problem with it (though I do disagree with making up "kink orientations" that could follow this train of thought). I can see how someone might have both conventional and less conventional sexual attraction, like wanting to have sex with redheads but also wanting to do BDSM stuff with dominant people, or something. Doesn't mean they wanted to do BDSM with redheads or the opposite, though.

 

I don't experience "kink attraction" myself, even though I have kinks, but I find that I hate mixing my kinks and prefer to enjoy them separately. Hence why I understand why someone would think that kink and sex mix like oil and water. It's a matter of preference.