Okay, I think we're talking at cross purposes. I did not mean to say that I disclaim the political aspects of kink bingo -- I stand by what we said in that PM in its context. (I was talking about the word "basis" only, which is awkward as well as unclear.)
But the context of those PMs is important. We were contacted by a research who clearly already knew that kink bingo was a fiction community. So we said: Our organization of kink bingo is not just a project in writing kink, it is an attempt to interfere in the discourses that produce the ideas of "kink" and "vanilla". That is, they already knew it was a fic community, and we wanted to explain to them the political implications of that fic community and of writing kink fic, which is what the rest of that paragraph is about. And we put these PMs up unedited, so as not to alter the conversation.
So, while I can sort of squint and see the reading you're talking about, I think it ignores two important things: first, the original context of the PMs, which were written in a space where everyone involved knew that kb is a fic community, and second, that everything we say in the surrounding paragraph is completely true -- and I stand by it -- in the academic language that we were using in the message. I still think that it comes down to that word, "political." This is a definition of political that is fairly common in academic and activist spaces -- we were using the language of the theory we had just referenced to describe what it is that writing kink fic does. When we say "the personal is political," we mean that lobbying and addressing laws isn't the only way to take political action; that being out in my community is a political act, that telling friends not to use heterosexist language is a political act, that speaking about kink is a political act. And in that framework, writing kink is a political act, and discussing kink (as we do) is a political act.
We did not say anything that wasn't true; our community does many of those things you list above. We point to hidden kink practice in television and films (see, for example, the pictures associated with the kink wiki); we point to the prevalence of certain kink practices in Western music (see, for example, the playlist); we push people to reconsider kinks and to reconsider their "eww" reaction to kinks (the project as a whole); we allow and encourage people to write g-rated kink fic (which breaks down associations between kink and porn). All of this is political, and all of this troubles the standard dialogues and discourses about kink.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-09-01 07:33 pm (UTC)But the context of those PMs is important. We were contacted by a research who clearly already knew that kink bingo was a fiction community. So we said: Our organization of kink bingo is not just a project in writing kink, it is an attempt to interfere in the discourses that produce the ideas of "kink" and "vanilla". That is, they already knew it was a fic community, and we wanted to explain to them the political implications of that fic community and of writing kink fic, which is what the rest of that paragraph is about. And we put these PMs up unedited, so as not to alter the conversation.
So, while I can sort of squint and see the reading you're talking about, I think it ignores two important things: first, the original context of the PMs, which were written in a space where everyone involved knew that kb is a fic community, and second, that everything we say in the surrounding paragraph is completely true -- and I stand by it -- in the academic language that we were using in the message. I still think that it comes down to that word, "political." This is a definition of political that is fairly common in academic and activist spaces -- we were using the language of the theory we had just referenced to describe what it is that writing kink fic does. When we say "the personal is political," we mean that lobbying and addressing laws isn't the only way to take political action; that being out in my community is a political act, that telling friends not to use heterosexist language is a political act, that speaking about kink is a political act. And in that framework, writing kink is a political act, and discussing kink (as we do) is a political act.
We did not say anything that wasn't true; our community does many of those things you list above. We point to hidden kink practice in television and films (see, for example, the pictures associated with the kink wiki); we point to the prevalence of certain kink practices in Western music (see, for example, the playlist); we push people to reconsider kinks and to reconsider their "eww" reaction to kinks (the project as a whole); we allow and encourage people to write g-rated kink fic (which breaks down associations between kink and porn). All of this is political, and all of this troubles the standard dialogues and discourses about kink.