A real-life comment, a grounded response, and the work of building legitimacy beyond legacy systems.
Recently, I received a strong critique in response to a post I made in a kink science group about Therapeutic BDSM™. The commenter came in swinging with a polished and authoritative tone, arguing that what I’m doing is a danger to trauma survivors and a misrepresentation of care. According to them, unless a healing model is approved by the APA, ACA, NASW, or another institutional body, it lacks legitimacy. They framed Therapeutic BDSM™ as irresponsible, unregulated, and ethically risky, without ever asking a single question about the actual model, the structure, or the process.
This interaction is not new.
It reflects a familiar pattern: when someone builds something outside of dominant systems, and especially when they do it with clarity, integrity, and traction, the immediate response is often not curiosity, but control.
Let’s break this down.
1. Legitimacy Isn’t Bestowed, It’s Built
Every therapeutic model we now recognize as valid began somewhere outside the box. CBT, EMDR, Brainspotting, Somatic Experiencing, Rapid Resolution Therapy – none of them started with institutional endorsement. They started with observation, real-world application, and years of practice before gaining academic traction.
Therapeutic BDSM™ lives within the broader modality of Self-Reconciliation Therapy™, a trauma-informed framework I developed after 10 years of clinical practice and 6 years of doctoral research. It is structured. It is collaborative. It includes clinicians, pro practitioners, and educators, all operating within clearly defined roles. It exists alongside therapy, not instead of it.
I am also an active member of the APA’s task force exploring the healing potential of BDSM, and have presented this work as a CEU-accredited training through CARAS. This is not fringe experimentation, it is grounded, community-informed, and in motion.
2. Regulation Matters, But So Does Reality
Yes, licensure and regulation play an important role in protecting the public. But regulation does not always guarantee safety, and lack of it does not automatically indicate harm. Many of the most marginalized people are not adequately protected by the systems meant to serve them. So what happens when those people seek healing in the spaces between formal care and embodied community? Are they to be left unserved?
That’s why I built a framework that lives in the gaps, not recklessly, but intentionally. With scope clarity, feedback loops, clinical partnerships, and evolving ethics.
3. This Wasn’t About Concern. It Was About Control.
What struck me most was not the disagreement, I welcome challenge. It’s that the critique arrived as declaration, not dialogue. There were no questions. No curiosity. No inquiry into the actual protocols, intake process, documentation standards, or community response. Just pre-formed conclusions rooted in the assumption that anything outside of institutional control must be unsafe.
This isn’t about race alone. It’s about classed access, proximity to power, and performance of authority. It’s about how legitimacy is often treated like a gated resource, not something one earns through practice and refinement, but something to be bestowed by those who feel entitled to guard the threshold.
The irony? Much of the work being labeled as risky is far more ethical and transparent than legacy systems are willing to admit. Because I do host info sessions. I do collect data. I do revise the model based on real-world input. And I am actively researching Therapeutic BDSM™ through practitioner and client-based inquiry.
This isn’t a static idea. It’s a living, breathing system. And I’m not building it to prove anything. I’m building it because it’s needed.
Curious about the comment in question? Here it is…
“There’s a serious issue here that needs to be addressed for the sake of ethical clarity, especially for those navigating trauma and seeking legitimate care. Let’s be clear: no regulatory board in any jurisdiction certifies BDSM as a therapeutic modality. “Therapeutic BDSM™” is not a recognized treatment under the APA, ACA, BACP, NASW, or any licensed body in mental health care. You can’t trademark a term, wrap it in clinical mimicry, and call it a healing intervention, especially when you’re targeting trauma survivors. Being kink-informed as a licensed therapist is ethical and important. But marketing BDSM itself as trauma treatment, especially while creating invented credentials and training unlicensed practitioners to ‘facilitate healing,’ is not innovative. It’s reckless. The language on your website, “triangulation,” “collaborative case planning,” “client-centered goals,” “malpractice insurance,” presents the illusion of regulated clinical structure. But without oversight, licensure, or scope compliance, it’s just branding dressed up as therapy. Consent doesn’t count when clients don’t fully understand what they’re consenting to. And documentation doesn’t legitimize trauma work done outside of licensure. This is exactly the kind of trauma-irresponsible model that confuses the public, destabilizes ethical kink-aware therapy, and ultimately risks real harm to the very people it claims to help.
Whew. There’s a lot there, tone included.
Here’s my response:
Thanks for the comment and for checking out my website. I am actually no longer using the term “triangulation” and have since updated it to “tetralogical.” I appreciate this comment because I know there will most likely be others similar, so let’s get to it.
First, let’s clarify: Therapeutic BDSM™ is not therapy and is not presented as such. It’s a trauma-informed, somatically based intervention created to support individuals who resonate with BDSM as a potential healing modality. It’s delivered collaboratively by clearly defined roles, including clinicians, pro practitioners, and educators, each operating within their respective scopes.
We don’t claim licensure where none exists. We don’t blur professional lines. In fact, our vetting, training, and ethical frameworks exist specifically to prevent the very issues you raise: blurred boundaries, unethical dual roles, or misinformation about what is being offered.
As for the claim about “invented credentials”, aren’t all credentials invented? Regulatory boards, licensure systems, CEUs, they were all created by people who decided to standardize care in a particular way. What you’re seeing here is not a lack of legitimacy, but the birth of a new professional standard in a space that has gone unregulated for too long. Innovation always looks suspicious to those loyal to legacy systems.
Also, I’m well aware that the APA, ACA, NASW, BACP, and whoever else haven’t formally sanctioned BDSM as a treatment modality. But that doesn’t mean the conversation isn’t happening. The APA has an active task force exploring, amongst other things, the potential healing applications of BDSM, and I’m a member of it. So while it may not be codified (yet), there’s professional interest, dialogue, and exploration happening at the highest levels.
And speaking of formal recognition, I’ve already presented Therapeutic BDSM™ as a CEU-accredited workshop multiple times, the latest through CARAS (the Community-Academic Consortium for Research on Alternative Sexualities). So while it may not fall under the institutions you prefer, those with a deep understanding of this field do see value in this work.
So no, it may not look like the models you’re used to. But it’s also not pretending to be. It’s an intentional, structured, ethics-forward model for those who resonate with kink as a path toward healing.
You say it’s reckless. I say it’s responsible innovation.
If you’d ever like to engage in conversation rather than assumption, I’m open. But let’s not confuse discomfort with danger. Especially when what’s actually being built here is safer than the alternative: people navigating healing in the shadows with no support at all.
Best, Doc
Final Thoughts
The back and forth continued with more of the same, but… Gatekeeping in the name of ethics is still gatekeeping. And while it’s easy to critique something you don’t understand, it’s much harder to build something new with integrity, and stay rooted in transparency while doing so.
Therapeutic BDSM™ is not here to mimic therapy. It’s here to offer a structured, community-informed pathway to healing for those who find themselves at the intersection of trauma, embodiment, power, and play.
And if that makes people uncomfortable?
That’s part of the point.
Recent Comments