Alex, can i just clarify something, are you referring specifically to black people or to any other ethnic groups? i only ask because over here in the UK, you'd be shot at dawn for using the term 'coloured' as it's considered to be VERY un-PC. i appreciate you're NOT from the UK, but you can imagine what it was like for me to read your initial post!! (Imagine little gasps, wincing and widening of eyes, and you'll get the idea!).

So, anyway, were you using to the term coloured to mean black or ALL ethnic groups? i don't think some ethnic groups are under represented in BDSM (asian, for example) but if you meant black people specifically, then, i would generally agree (based only on my own experience). The only possible theory i can come up with is that some black cultures were already historically considerably more relaxed about sex and sexual promiscuity than white ones (i am not stereotyping, i am basing this view on some level of indirect personal experience)...and i have wondered over the years if victorian white prudish ancestory has essentially led to an increase in kinkiness in the first place. Whereas if a culture was already more laid back and relaxed i would question whether kinkiness would thrive so readily.

This is all pure conjecture, and the question of whether kinky behaviour flourishes more in a controlled or uncontrolled societal and ethical environment is not one we could easily answer, but it's a possibility all the same.

On another note, i had a friend who was involved with a jamican man for a number of years, he also had seven other regular partners, he apparently saw nothing wrong with this (maybe there wasn't anything wrong with it given that even after he told her this AND that he had children with them all, she still didn't give him the boot despite all her whinging), but whether there was anything wrong with it all not, maybe the very notion (and acceptablity, to him, at least) of having numerous different women, all of whom he would say he was very fond of, was slightly 'dominant' in the first place. i don't want that to sound like all dominants do or should have numerous subs, obviously, but i'm more making the point that his behaviour was already distinctly alpha male as it was, without the introduction of DS into the equation.

An interesting point, and one that you're brave to bring up.

sl