Kink or Abuse? It's complicated.

I've had an idea percolating in my head for a while about the issue of abuse within the kink community, and how difficult it is to discern it and call it out. We all know that a lot of what we do consensually for fun in kink would be abuse in a non-consensual context. We also know that abusers can and do hide out in the kink community as a cover for their shady behavior, although ideally they will be recognized and called out for it. (And the truth is, abusers are potentially present in EVERY community). But there is a certain level where people are afraid of saying "your kink is not okay" (and for very valid reasons). It is sometimes hard to judge from a distance whether or not someone's kink is abusive or not, and usually not your business to judge, unless you're a dungeon monitor at a party.

I do have a few things I view as abuse that are considered controversial- beastiality for one, or feeding someone until they're so obese that they can no longer be physically independent. I don't believe that anyone who consents to play that deliberately results in broken bones or damaged organs is really psychologically sound to give consent. Yes, I get that it's their body and they can ask somebody skewer their kidney if they want to. I still maintain that it's a REALLY FUCKING BAD IDEA!

Interestingly, as I was pondering the issue of thinly veiled abuse within my own community, I ran across this article, about an allegedly non-consensual "sex slave" who was tortured and abused by her "master" within the context of the BD/SM community. Without making light of this woman's abuse, I find this kind of titillating journalism both insulting to the victim and incredibly problematic in terms of increasing kink acceptance and awareness. I really wish it was framed more as a case of abuse, rather than "kinky" abuse. Consider the not-so-different kidnapping and abuse case of Elizabeth Smart. Would anyone have considered it acceptable or respectful to use nude photos of her to illustrate reporting on her case, the way they have with the Ed Bagley case? Does the fact that Brian David Mitchell is a FLDS religious wingnut instead of an abusive dominant somehow reflect poorly on the mainstream LDS community at large? (And it's likely that as much, if not more abuse happens in religious communities than within the kink community).

If the allegations against Ed Bagley are true, then he deserves to be locked away for life. But I do have a very real problem with the implication that kinky=abuser in the context of this case. A member of my local community lost her job after becoming a leather titleholder and being outed. What's worse is people who are involved in legitimate, consensual kinky practices are targeted by the law and wind up losing not only their jobs and reputations, but have their children taken away or are committed or imprisoned under misleading charges. (To be clear, I am not implying that this is the case with Ed Bagley.)

So, abuse and kink. It's messy from the inside the community, and it's even messier from the outside looking in. So what the hell do we do about it?