A community for discussion, sharing, and critical thinking on kinky topics.
"Advanced" Topics
I came across some FL screenshots today that referred to certain kinks/practices this way -- as "advanced" topics, things you don't do until you've done other things first -- and it got me wondering. On the one hand, I can see how that'd make sense for things that scale pretty linearly... gotta learn how to tie a knot before you can learn how to do more complex/dangerous stuff that involves tying knots. But on the other hand, I'm not sure you can really quantify or draw a hard line between what is and isn't a special kind of risky. Anyway, right or wrong, are there any real-life kinks/playstyles/etc. that you think of as being on a different "level" of any kind? For context, this was from a discussion about warning newbies/inexperienced people away from certain things, specifically on the grounds of them being newbies.




Huh, I wonder if we saw the same article!
Anyway, I would generally agree that most things are going to be continuums or something like that rather than a hard line between one 'level' and another.
But, I definitely think there's very much a thing of 'you need certain knowledge and skills to do this in an ok/proper/safe-r/etc way', and some things take more of this than others. Like, if you want to tie someone's wrist to something you need to know 'don't use a tie that tightens if you pull', etc, and how to make one of those. To suspend someone you need to know a lot more than that.
And like, some kink-areas have their own such 'continuum', but the continuums are also not 'parallel' - the amount of knowledge and skills you need to do the 'beginner' amount of something like needleplay is probably going to be higher than what you need to start doing texture-sensation-play.
(Another way to think about this would be that gaining knowledge and skills in most kink-areas makes you well, more knowledgable and skillful - like, if you've been doing texture-sensation-play for longer, you might have a higher mental store of stuff that can be used, how to use it, pacing, combinations, etc. But, in some areas this is much more also relevant to risk and safety stuff than in others).
I'll also note though that I don't think warning people away from things tends to be a good way of dealing with this - noting the knowledge and skills thing, and the 'continuum' thing, and pointing people toward where to get started and the means to acquire them, is generally a better way.
ETA: another problem that can happen here is when people treat these 'takes more knowledge and skill not to hurt people' things as somehow better or etc than other things. Which they're very much not and etc.
[sex and consent play mention]
Hm! This mostly makes me think of some kinks being more emotionally difficult than others. The issue with this is this is highly individual: for a lot of people, rape play or consent play would be more emotionally demanding than vanilla sex, but for some people it's the other way around.
So, I'd go with a variant on what @Sreda said: say that some kink is, for a lot of people, emotionally difficult. And some explanation as to why, and some examples of people for whom it's the other way around. And lay it all out as suggestions, while reaffirming that shitty things that happen to people in the "wrong order" are not their fault and they still need and deserve care for them.
(Also, the article I saw was also then talking about some d/s stuff, which gave me the thought that the same situation actually totally applies to that - knowledge and skills, this kind of 'continuum' (not necessarily well defined, but it definitely exists). But - I don't tend to see it being treated the same way. Which I definitely want/need to think more about, but like - two things I think I specifically don't tend to see as much are 1) this particular connection between knowledge and skill and risk/safety, and 2) this idea of starting with 'prerequisites' to build knowledge and skill and working up to other things. (Also, on a deeper level, kind of the recognition that there is in fact knowledge and skills going on here).
Which like, our society at large isn't being good at re non-kink relationship knowledge and skills either, in fact...
[cw violation etc, sex mention]
A distinction I think is important is that between 'this has a high chance of you being hurt' (which is never the person's fault, and the thing of primary importance there is support) and 'this has a high chance of you hurting people'.
Like, if I don't know thing X is dangerous, and neither does my partner, and I hurt them, well, I still did that, but that might not be an ethical issue in the same way, might be strongly an educational issue, etc.
But sometimes I do know, or know enough, and it very much is an ethical issue.
Taking advantage of someone's lack of knowledge to get them to let me suspend them in risk-uninformed ways or whatever else would be something wrong i'm doing. (Just like it would be if I used someone's lack of knowledge on sex to get them to have sex with me without a condom where they might not have if they'd been informed). It makes me guilty of violation and shows me to be a dangerous and unethical person.
(And I feel this is an important distinction that the article I read didn't really recognize/acknowledge/note the existence of).
i think it's a shit approach tbfh. it's not effective, it's easy to be felt as condescending even at its most careful, and it's making judgments about other people's capacities and it all smacks of SSC and kink hierarchy.
it's possible to raise risk awareness and enable RACK without framing things as Not For First-Timers and waxing on ad nauseum about how foolish and emotionally dangerous it is to jump into without yourrrrr guidance. (mmmm i know the post you're referring to and i'm bitter.)
harm reduction needs to be accessible and non-judgmental and recognizing that people are into and seeking what they are, whether or not you think they're adequately prepared (so! prepare them! instead! of! moralizing!)
no. exceptions.
yes, provide tips on thinking through (and testing) commitment to a d/s relationship; yes, train people in safe bloodplay, needleplay, fireplay, suspension, bondage, flogging, all the stuff that requires techniques and skill development; yes, teach about aftercare, about signs of drop, about navigating all that stuff; yes, teach about recognizing red flags.
but even 24/7 total power exchange master/slave with a fucking contract, shouldn't be put on some kind of "advanced level" imo, that just makes it all the harder to help folks do it safely.
Generally speaking, there isn't so much a case for something being more advanced than something else in kink (with exception to something like suspension being an advanced form of rope play), but there are definitely levels of what is considered riskier than others. These are things that are easy to do wrong to the extent that someone needs to go to the emergency room. Usually, they are as follows: bondage (yes, one of the most common kink practices is one of the most dangerous. You can thank that little technicality called necessary blood flow), electrical play (possibility of burns and nerve damage), any kind of practice that breaks skin (risk of bleeding out or again, nerve damage), and breath play (I think this one is pretty obvious).
It's not so much that you are supposed to do other things before these ones, it's more that these are things that should be taken slowly and carefully. Do your research and practice on yourself before moving on to other people.
Been thinking about this more again today, mostly because of... I think what @epochryphal called kink hierarchy? And what @Sreda mentioned about equating "takes more knowledge and skill" --> "is Better" & more respectable etc. Because while I don't believe any societal-level mobilization against people for being "too vanilla," I have seen... a certain kind of social pressure crop up where kink is already in the mix. And when you do have some subset of people turning their noses up and acting "kinkier-than-thou," I have to wonder... if positing some play elements 'n such as more "advanced" isn't just fodder for creating that attitude, but can also be an expression of it, as well... as in, if someone prides themselves on their "advanced" kink, and then so many people are also getting into that kink now to where it feels a lot less exclusive and special, I can see how the response to that would be to say "no, you're not ready for this yet."
One of my friends told me to open this comment with "According to FredRx, known douchebag..."
Just this morning we were talking about a class of his and the folks who went recounted how he'd said something along the lines of... don't tie mean just because you can't tie nice, or don't tie mean until you know how to tie nice, something like that. Which seems... reasonable? ...as a skill progression thing.
Only the context in which he was saying it, he was clearly elevating "mean" tying as better and cooler and presumably everyone's end goal. :/
So that feels like a pretty straightforward example of that thing I was just yesterday saying could be a thing to look out for.
eep
And, yeah. Like, 'hurting people in the way you both want it to happen, rather than by accident because you don't know what you're doing it' is indeed clearly important!
But, the critical safety etc skillset there is 'doing this without hurting people by accident'. After that 'how to hurt people with this on purpose' is indeed it's own skillset. But a) so is 'how to use this to make pretty designs' and so is 'how to use this to relax people' and etc and etc. (By which I mean, aside from the other issue, this is treating 'tying nice' as like, some kind of default value that doesn't require its own knowledge and skills, and that's not true.)
And b) And if someone learned that safety skillset and then felt fine with that and what that gave them that would be totally valid and not somehow lesser. And uch/eep that kind of 'hierarchy' thing (er, the one you describe him doing).
mm, yeah, that's definitely a thing. Like, not in all areas I think, but it's definitely a thing.
And, well. This can also very much tie into gatekeeping, and power consolidation/power groups, and, um, well, all sorts of predatory things about 'access' to newbie subs...