Your Anti-Kink ‘Decolonization’ Is Still Centering Whiteness
A response to the flawed claim that kink and BDSM are rooted in colonialism — and why this argument harms decolonial goals.
When social media activist declared BDSM “the kink of empire” via the Instagram account @decolonizing.love, they reduced millenia of global erotic power play to a colonial footnote. This perspective, which entirely dismisses all pre-colonial kink practices, inadvertently reveals a central flaw: Boella’s ‘decolonial’ critique of BDSM paradoxically remains centered on white European history.
By framing all power play as inherently oppressive and deriving from European colonialism, such arguments risk erasing rich and diverse Indigenous erotic traditions that have long celebrated — and continue to celebrate — ritualized dominance, sensation, and consensual struggle.
This approach is not merely historically inaccurate; it exemplifies a colonial mindset cloaked in decolonial language. Let’s dismantle the underlying myths.
MYTH #1: The White Gaze of ‘Decolonizing’ Kink
The assertion made in the post states:
“BDSM replicates colonizer characteristics like love of domination and bondage.”
TRUTH: Colonialism did not invent domination or power dynamics; rather, it appropriated and distorted them. Historical evidence from diverse cultures predates European colonial expansion, demonstrating complex systems of power dynamics. For instance, the Aztec “Flower Wars” involved ritual capture, the West African Yoruba tradition reveres the dominatrix goddess Oya, and Japanese samurai formalized rope restraints (hojōjutsu) centuries before French colonizers reached their shores. To attribute the origins of these diverse practices solely to colonial characteristics is a significant historical oversight.
MYTH #2: The Marquis de Sade ≠ The “Father of BDSM”
The post continues with the assertion:
“The father of BDSM was a French aristocrat, the Marquis de Sade, who used to drug women… So the origins of BDSM can be traced back to a misogynistic, patriarchal figure from colonial France.”
TRUTH: Sade was a literary figure, not the architect of a sexual movement. His writings, such as Justine, documented his violent fantasies and philosophical provocations, but they do not represent the origin of BDSM as a subculture. BDSM, as it is understood today, emerged centuries later, drawing from various cultural streams including psychoanalysis, queer resistance movements, and feminist reclamation of sexuality.
Ironically, the same colonial era that produced Sade also saw the rise of theories, such as Freud’s 1889 conceptualization of BDSM desires as “degenerate.” This pathologization was used to justify the criminalization of queer and Indigenous sexualities (e.g., banning aboriginal and tantric ritual practices as “savage”) and to promote forced “cures” for perceived masochism through methods like electroshock and hysterectomies.
The contemporary anti-kink rhetoric, which frames BDSM solely through a colonial lens, inadvertently mirrors aspects of Freud’s colonial-era framework. Where Freud saw “perversion,” this argument posits “colonizer mentality.” Both perspectives unfortunately erase agency by ignoring pre-colonial evidence of kink and presuming that all expressions of power play must derive from or reference whiteness.
Furthermore, by focusing exclusively on figures like Sade and Foucault, this critique replicates the very Eurocentrism it claims to oppose. A truly decolonial analysis would necessitate de-centering European narratives and incorporating a broader understanding of global sexualities, including practices like Tantric maithuna or the Wodaabe Gerewol.
MYTH #3: The Respectability Politics of “Soft Sex”
The post’s claim that:
“Sex is for connectivity, not power… Can you make love or you only know how to fuck?”
TRUTH: This assertion, at best, risks embodying classist and racialized respectability politics. The demand for a sanitized, “soft” form of sexuality echoes Victorian-era moral policing, which historically targeted and suppressed Black, queer, and working-class sexual expressions. To imply that colonized people need to conform to such norms to achieve liberation is a problematic proposition.
Many Indigenous cultures never divorced power from pleasure. Examples include Māori ta moko (tattooing as a sacred experience often involving pain), Sufi whirling rituals (achieving ecstasy through intense physical exertion), and Igbo wrestling (eroticized combat). These traditions illustrate how intensity and meaning have been deeply intertwined in diverse cultural contexts. When kink is summarily dismissed as ‘white,’ whose complex history is being erased?
MYTH #4: Liberation Isn’t About Limiting Desire
The personal perspective shared in the post states:
“Reversing roles with the colonizer isn’t evolution.”
TRUTH: Marginalized kinksters often transcend simple “reversal.” For example, Two-Spirit leather dykes, Black femme tops, and disabled dominants are not merely mimicking oppressors; they are actively re-writing power dynamics on their own terms, asserting agency and redefining narratives of control and submission. In the kink and BDSM space, numerous accounts document how trauma survivors utilize controlled power exchange as a means to reclaim their agency and facilitate healing. Research consistently indicates that consensual, negotiated power exchange can be a beneficial modality for trauma recovery. Denying such pathways potentially harms those who find empowerment through these practices.
The crucial distinction here is that a critique of coercion is entirely separate from a condemnation of consent. The former is a necessary ethical imperative; the latter, however, risks being puritanism rebranded.
Toward a Truly Decolonial Perspective:
Rather than dismissing or silencing diverse perspectives, a more robust decolonial approach requires:
- Engaging with Global Erotic Histories: Move beyond Eurocentric frameworks by exploring the rich histories of power play in cultures worldwide. Research practices like Danmyé (Martinique erotic wrestling), Calonarang (Balinese dominance theater), or Yamurikuma (Amazonian gender role reversal ceremony).
- Listening to Marginalized Kinksters: Actively seek out and amplify the voices of marginalized individuals and collectives within kink communities. Their lived experiences offer invaluable insights into the subversive potential and cultural diversity of BDSM.
- Focusing on Systemic Oppression: Direct energy towards dismantling actual oppressive structures, such as capitalism’s commodification of sex, which arguably causes far more societal harm than consensual, negotiated kink practices.
True decolonization should expand, not shrink, our understanding of erotic expression and human desire, moving beyond rigid colonial binaries. The pertinent question is not ‘Is BDSM colonial?’ but rather, ‘Why do certain critiques, claiming a ‘decolonial’ stance, continue to center whiteness in their analysis?’
