Can Kink be Nonsexual?

[MagziGirl13]

This is a huge debate right now, so I figured I'd get some perspective from the kink community. I personally see that there are asexual and sex repulsed kinksters, so I believe that kink can be nonsexual.
Edit to add: I mean nonsexual as not causing arousal. Like can someone enjoy kink just because they enjoy the action or the physical or mental feeling of it? Or is arousal required?

 

[nina]

Kinks as in bdsm can be non sexual for example service subs.

Here's a discussion thread on the topic

Non sexual bdsm

A lot of attention is focused on the sexual aspects of bdsm both here and in many other forums but I am curious to know how widespread the non sexual aspects of this are among our members. Mostly these involve submission sometimes humiliation and often pain too but are not focused on tits or...

www.kinktalk.com

 

[nina]

To add to my above post, if you think about kinks in terms of D/s and submission, the focus is on pleasing the Dom(me) and the acts done for that as well as derivation of the end pleasure can be non sexual.

However, kinks as in fetishes as I understand it may always have some sort of underlying pleasure derived that is related to sexual arousal

So yup would like to know what others feel about it?

 

[andrei]

What exactly is non-sexual?
If non-sexual means simply no sex act, then many fetishes can be considered non sexual. Including wearing a chastity cage.

Otherwise: can nudity be considered non-sexual? Yes, in art. Can shibari and any bondage practices be considered non-sexual?
Or thinking of what Nina said: maybe anything generating arousal can't be considered non-sexual. Then all kinks become sexual related.

But maybe someone has his fetish, like loves hugging fluffy stuffed bears, collecting shoes or something, these can be non sexual "fetishes" but they are not called "kinks".

 

[nina]

Right, so what comes under kinks?

Wikipedia defines it as "In human sexuality, kinkiness is the use of non-conventional sexual practices, concepts or fantasies. The term derives from the idea of a "bend" in one's sexual behaviour, to contrast such behaviour with "straight" or "vanilla" sexual mores and proclivities. "

By this definition anything kinky like @andrei said is sexual by default.

But then would we call power exchange dynamics kinky or only partly kinky after excluding the non sexual parts in submission?

 

[andrei]

I am trying to think of a situation where dominance is not sexual related.
In a vanilla relationship dominance exists, but not sexual, not close to be seen as a kink. Maybe my closest approach was when my wife was pregnant she became too demanding and I kind of loved the situation, I wanted a mistress. I wasn't aroused by this but felt just happy to help her in anything she asked, like helping with her shoes, etc, sometimes I was imagining being dominated. But if I compare to a kink I would still definitely say no.
Maybe someone could point out a strict example of non sexual dominance as a fetish. Then we can slice it to what part of it is arousal and what part is happiness.

 

[nina]

The overlap is definitely difficult to segregate. I agree that the wider dilemma is are we talking about kinks being one of the dimensions in a D/s or can D/s also completely exist independent of any kinks. The former is common but is the latter possible?

 

[andrei]

maybe we can get back to our childhood where there was always an alpha kid in the group. Way before discovering our sexuality, dominance existed in a form like that kid was always taking the leadership in a wooden sword history fight or something. I remember my submission to be accepted in the group. This is a primitive dominance training that we felt later in our life.

 

[nina]

Edit to add: I mean nonsexual as not causing arousal. Like can someone enjoy kink just because they enjoy the action or the physical or mental feeling of it? Or is arousal required?

Sorry to digress your thread and thanks for further clarification.

I think it is possible to enjoy certain actions, sensations etc eg. smells, in a way that is non conventional and may not always cause sexual arousal. They are called fetishes but whether they can also be called kinks depends on how you define kinks. Would like to know what others think about it...

 

[Doctor Pervert]

This is a huge debate right now, so I figured I'd get some perspective from the kink community. I personally see that there are asexual and sex repulsed kinksters, so I believe that kink can be nonsexual.

It's an interesting topic and I guess from the initial reaction perhaps a little confusing.

@nina used the wiki definition that kink is per se non-conventional sexual activity. This would seem to automatically preclude all non-sexual behaviour as a kink however when we examine this more closely that's not the case.

If we agree that asexuality is broadly accepted as a sexual orientation, i.e. lack of interest in sex is in fact a recognised sexual orientation then things look somewhat different. However this doesn't make asexuality of itself a kink, in fact it must be recognized simply for what it is, an orientation that some people have.

Following this logic we then arrive at the situation where we have people with no interest in sex still being attracted to kinks that other sexually oriented people enjoy. And so in this context I would say, most certainly yes, asexuals will enjoy the aspects of many kinks that work for them.

As mentioned by both @nina and @andrei there are a bunch of things that can fall into this category.
A lot of bondage can be done in non-sexual ways, clothed bondage is in fact quite common, can be both intricate and engaging and most certainly is a kink. There are also many kinds of D/s situations that can be entirely non-sexual based including punishments and/or humiliation aspects such mouth soaping, line writing, corner time and so on. I'd also put a lot of fetish wear in this same category for while it certainly can have sexual uses many enjoy it simply for the way it looks or feels to wear.

Given that I'd suggest it seems obvious that if you're tying someone up be it for sexual purposes or not just about everyone would call that kinky.

 

[EliKleine99]

In my opinion and experience, yes.
On the personal experience front: my husband and I engage in kinks non-sexually. It is generally a matter of context, based on the kink in question, our reasoning for each. However, none of ours specifically with each other are sexual (not for the purpose of nor resulting in sexual arousal or stimulation). A lot of it is, for us, centered around emotional or mental intimacy.

 

[Merlin]

Can kink be non sexual? If we go by definition... kinda no, as "kink" is a "non conventional sexual practice"

Taking it a bit more wide though , as others said , of course.
A dom/sub dynamic is about control (for example), sexuality, while often part of it, is in no way necessary for it

 

[Instructor411]

Edit to add: I mean nonsexual as not causing arousal. Like can someone enjoy kink just because they enjoy the action or the physical or mental feeling of it? Or is arousal required?

The way I understand your premise, you're looking for an other reason than arousal.
I would say catharsis an emotional relief or maybe therapeutic to cope with past experiences. To find a safe and structured place. More on the level of behaviour and spiritual than "just" animalistic.

Of course depending on your school of thoughts everything might be rooted in some form of supressed sexual desires.

 

[silentloveslave]

Furniture fetish time!
Not going to lie, I'd make for a wonderful chandelier

 

[FadedxDharma]

I believe that there can be nonsexual kinks. While they may be rooted in suppressed sexual desires, as the Instructor stated above, they can still outwardly be seen as nonsexual.

 

[StormyDungeons]

Ok im just finding this and have enjoyed the reads = thanks guys for participating with veiwpoints.

I now want to toss something into the fray. There are varied types of arousal. We equate sexual arousal by reactions by our body parts, and yes that is common arousal.

However, there is also PSYCHOLOGICAL AROUSAL.

This is where erotica, sapio sexuality, and pseudo sexual themes come into play.

The reality is = THE HUMAN MIND IS BY FAR THE BIGGEST SEX ORGAN, but most neglect this aspect.

Example= cross dressing.

For centuries there are people who perform onstage in drag for a living. Some are very good. We celebrate really good female impersonators. So what is the persons sex arousal in that?

Many forms of bondage are not actually sexual but are sensual deprivation for inner seeking and discovery. There are those who find this by climbing K2, and others bound, gagged, and locked inside a cage.

If just merely getting off was the only end result to any of this, it would be a sad day indeed.

Just food for thought.

 

[munjay]

It's an interesting topic and I guess from the initial reaction perhaps a little confusing.

@nina used the wiki definition that kink is per se non-conventional sexual activity. This would seem to automatically preclude all non-sexual behaviour as a kink however when we examine this more closely that's not the case.

If we agree that asexuality is broadly accepted as a sexual orientation, i.e. lack of interest in sex is in fact a recognised sexual orientation then things look somewhat different. However this doesn't make asexuality of itself a kink, in fact it must be recognized simply for what it is, an orientation that some people have.

Following this logic we then arrive at the situation where we have people with no interest in sex still being attracted to kinks that other sexually oriented people enjoy. And so in this context I would say, most certainly yes, asexuals will enjoy the aspects of many kinks that work for them.

As mentioned by both @nina and @andrei there are a bunch of things that can fall into this category.
A lot of bondage can be done in non-sexual ways, clothed bondage is in fact quite common, can be both intricate and engaging and most certainly is a kink. There are also many kinds of D/s situations that can be entirely non-sexual based including punishments and/or humiliation aspects such mouth soaping, line writing, corner time and so on. I'd also put a lot of fetish wear in this same category for while it certainly can have sexual uses many enjoy it simply for the way it looks or feels to wear.

Given that I'd suggest it seems obvious that if you're tying someone up be it for sexual purposes or not just about everyone would call that kinky.

I would like to point out a common misconception about asexuality from someone who is acespec, this misconception being that we ace people are not interested in sex and/or are repulsed by it.

While this might be the case for some of us, most really don't care or are actually interested in it and want to partake in the activity. What asexuality really is is the lack of sexual attrattraction. Think of it as being hungry; most people experience hunger and act on it, but you can still eat without being hungry (hope this made some sort of sense lmao).

Now, as i already said I'm asexual myself, but by definition i do believe most kink to be sexual at it's core. Nevertheless that doesn't mean it all is like that. Kink can be used as a tool to deepen the connection between two or more people as it strengthens the trust they have in each other and stimulates healthy communication and boundary-setting.

I would like to pose as an example; me and my QPR frequently engage in kinky activities just as a way to explore ourselves in a safe environment and get to know the other person better. We are strictly platonic partners, meaning we don't do anything romantic nor sexual with each other, yet kink is almost always present in some sort of way.

I hope this made some sort of sense aaaaa sorry for any grammar/spelling mistakes, english is not my first language and I'm still learning about all this<3