Following Jessica's remark, I certainly hope I didn't offend you in anyway here: I think highly of you. I guess I just don't see things as you do.

I'm definitely not offended! Mostly interested in hashing out meaning and the ongoing "How do YOU see it?" issue. Because I'm, above all else, a geek.

I don't think that alright and customary are synonyms. Also, the opposite of legitimate has a much more negative connotation than "not customary" Not legitimate means that there inherently something wrong, not that it is outside the norm, which I think is what you're saying (apologies for putting words in your mouth), but I think that this distinction is important.

Pretty much. And the use of legitimate here (or, in my case) goes from "it's alright" to "customary". I didn't mean that they're synonyms.

Because I'm, above all else, a geek.

Kinky!

(You see how I use this word?)

(You see how I use this word?)

As "different from the norm"?

As "different from the norm"?

Yes, if you feel the need to handcuff my words. But I wish that people would bear in mind that in most cases, I don't give a fuck about "the norm".

Which comes back to the point that again, the kink is in the mind of the beholder. Most of my friends, if not all of them, are geeks. That, by definition, makes my norm not so normal. Do I distinguish between society's norm and my norm? Yes. But I absolutely do anything in my power to tilt society's norm to my definition of it, handcuffs included.

I don't know enough about what I like to comment on it. Which I don't say to make y'all have a telethon for me, but I've just realized that's absolutely true. Although the pop-culture representation of handcuffs is "Ooh! Kinky!" But is something really kinky when it's a joke on the Golden Girls? Even if it's a bachelor-party stripper losing her key or something.

But is something really kinky when it's a joke on the Golden Girls? Even if it's a bachelor-party stripper losing her key or something.

Don't even get me started on simulacra, baby.

(No, really. I have afk stuff to do, and I'm just waiting to see if my reasoning makes Steph happier).

Hmmmm, is Kinky something always defined by its deviance from societal norms? Or is it something kinked in my own wiring? Not that these are entirely separate. But I do think my own wiring has a kink in it, and not just as it relates to the baseline.

As "different from the norm"?

Yes, if you feel the need to handcuff my words. But I wish that people would bear in mind that in most cases, I don't give a fuck about "the norm".

Okay, how do you define it, in a way that isn't "handcuffing your words"? Definitions are, by their nature, restrictive. I can't define something without it being in some way restrictive.

Maybe if you define it yourself, I'll get what you mean, instead of trying to define what I think you mean and getting it wrong.

Although the pop-culture representation of handcuffs is "Ooh! Kinky!"

See, that's where I went. But I'm thinking I made too big of an assumption.

But is something really kinky when it's a joke on the Golden Girls?

You are, as ever, eminently wise.

But I do think my own wiring has a kink in it, and not just as it relates to the baseline.

Can you explain that a little bit more? Because I think there has to be a "norm" to compare against to define "kinky." Which is not to say that the norms can't change, which would then change the definition of "kinky."

Like the handcuffs example -- in the past, people would probably have definitely lumped them in with other crazy shit (electric play, ass hooks, crucifixion [gah]). But now, it seems, though they're still used as cheap pop-culture shorthand for deviance, in actual sexual practice, they're not so deviant any more.

t edit Okay, and I should say, on the "wiring having a kink in it," I am *totally* wired wrong. I don't doubt that for one second, and I've known it for a very long time. But my "wrong" comes from having something to compare my desires against (i.e., the "norm," such as it is).