“Sexuality is more innate, while fetishes are more acquired from social grooming.”
i mean, sure, it’s easier for me to point to quite a lot of things that may’ve sparked realizations or latent interests. (all those movies with damsels tied up in distress, yeah?)
this just seems to be another instance of “kink is added flavoring” and “you can’t change your orientation but you can change your (Problematic) kinks”
why is this considered a separate level of desire? not just a separate-ish, sometimes-interwoven Thing, but a whole different Level? more surface level, more malleable.
i mean. i get that it’s because specific acts are easier to, yknow, Do or Not Do — whether because of not/knowing about them, or deciding not/to do them for moral/practical/other reasons
but i just. this comes back to legislating morality against Kink Specifically and not sexual practices in general.
like so often, saying “hey don’t! fetishize race! or trans people!” gets turned into this… litany about fetishes and kinks, not sexual preference
it’s weird. it’s like divorcing the Unassailable Orientation (bc protect gay ppl), from everything else which becomes “kink.” if you state you only–not even date, Are Attracted To–people with X trait, and X isn’t a clear gender group that fits an orientation label, then it’s…a kink..? (slash bigotry of course. but usually framed as a bigoted kink. why????)
honestly. it seems to me like all of this is sanitization of orientation, and shoving everything complicated and not politically useful/aligned into “kink” (and trashing it constantly)
meh. this is all limited by my white grace kinky perspective ofc. i should read some qpoc kink dialogue, i strongly suspect it’s infinity times better
also, remind me to write about hypersexuality/kink (and come up with some kind of word for hyperkinkiness)