They have to realise they're giving credence to the arguments that were literally just being used against them before gay marriage was legalised in the US, right? I'm not even necessarily against...
“Calling to make pride ‘kid-friendly’ implies that celebrating sexuality and kink openly is bad. Normalizing these things is a GOAL of pride.”
They have to realise they're giving credence to the arguments that were literally just being used against them before gay marriage was legalised in the US, right?
I'm not even necessarily against or for people showing open displays of whatever in public or at Pride, but...I can't help but feel this line of argument is counterproductive.
I'm not sure what Kink/BDSM/Leather have to do with being gay. Sexual orientation is an immutable part of who you are just like your sex or skin color. The things that turn you on in the bedroom...
I'm not sure what Kink/BDSM/Leather have to do with being gay. Sexual orientation is an immutable part of who you are just like your sex or skin color. The things that turn you on in the bedroom are your personal preferences. It's fine to be proud of them and we shouldn't judge people for liking different things, but I don't think they have anything to do with LGBT pride.
It's not always about sex, is the thing. They're often lifestyles. Furries are an easy example of this. Wearing a fursuit in public is not a sexual act, it's a means of self expression that's a...
It's not always about sex, is the thing. They're often lifestyles. Furries are an easy example of this. Wearing a fursuit in public is not a sexual act, it's a means of self expression that's a symbol of belonging to a community. Wearing a collar with your day clothes is similar in BDSM. It's not a sex thing, it's a visual indicator of belonging to a community that generally indicates having a Dom or Master. But the wearing of a collar itself isn't about sex.
Where the overlap between kink and LGBT is, is something I think the owner of The Crucible in DC put quite well:
Botsford, the 70-year-old owner and operator of The Crucible, the District’s only private kink club, explained that his two-room club is a space for anyone interested in BDSM, no matter their sexual orientation or gender identity.
“It’s important because you’re almost outcasts, and when you find like-minded people, it’s eye-opening,” he said. “We’re really close to being a family. When you walk in, everyone says the same thing: I’m home.”
That whole thing with leaning hard into respectability politics and playing up the idea of the harmless normal gay man in a suit and tie may have helped accelerate certain political aims like gay...
Exemplary
That whole thing with leaning hard into respectability politics and playing up the idea of the harmless normal gay man in a suit and tie may have helped accelerate certain political aims like gay marriage, but it did so by throwing a lot of people under the bus. That strategy, regardless of if we think it was the right way to go or not, was just asking for the "I like gay people, but I hate faggots" attitude (including the milder, more common versions of it). That's fucked up, and maybe more than ever we have to correct things for those "faggots" instead of pretending we all benefitted equally.
There are queer people who are flamboyant open "deviants" and there are queer people who dress and act conservatively, fitting straight ideals perfectly. Moving forward has to be for all of us, and you don't get that by only focusing on the easy to swallow pills. Don't think we're "normal" because we're just like everybody else, think we're normal because we can expand what "normal" is. Or maybe that being "normal" isn't super relevant, especially not to how we should be treated.
Beyond that, the idea of policing who we are for an event specifically for celebrating and being loud about that is just awful.
Because "normal" people don't have kinks? I personally love the current atmosphere of Toronto Pride; ass-less chaps, doms+subs, and all... and would hate to see it get turned into some...
Because "normal" people don't have kinks?
I personally love the current atmosphere of Toronto Pride; ass-less chaps, doms+subs, and all... and would hate to see it get turned into some Milquetoast, prudish, kid friendly event. It's supposed to be a celebration of who we are, not about closeting ourselves all over again for the sake of PR. Fuck that.
I get the impression is that the idea is that kinds and gay pride shouldn't be so closely tied to kinky sexual expression. It lets those kinks act as a proxy for detractors to attack gayness as a...
I get the impression is that the idea is that kinds and gay pride shouldn't be so closely tied to kinky sexual expression. It lets those kinks act as a proxy for detractors to attack gayness as a whole. Instead it would be better to have seperate demonstrations that celebrate gay pride and sexual expression of kinks and culture.
That being said, the two things do seem closely tied within the culture and to some extent we want to express that. Even if it's not the most pragmatic thing.
Easier, maybe... but do you really think LGBT-phobes are are really going to stop using that "sexual deviance" BS as an attack vector just because Kink elements are removed from Pride? I honestly...
Easier, maybe... but do you really think LGBT-phobes are are really going to stop using that "sexual deviance" BS as an attack vector just because Kink elements are removed from Pride? I honestly doubt it would make one lick of difference, so we might as well embrace it, IMO.
There's a massive overlap. If you go to your nearest private kink club you will undoubtedly find a higher proportion of LGBT's than exist in the population as a whole. That's what I've noticed...
There's a massive overlap. If you go to your nearest private kink club you will undoubtedly find a higher proportion of LGBT's than exist in the population as a whole. That's what I've noticed anyway.
That isn't to say us queer folk have a monopoly on kink, or that cishets don't take part, but there's definitely a shared culture between the two.
Here's the thing though...they're not "normal". The data for this varies wildly (because of differences by country, by definitions used, by cultural hesitation around self-reporting, etc) but the...
If you're trying to get people to think homosexuals are normal people
Here's the thing though...they're not "normal". The data for this varies wildly (because of differences by country, by definitions used, by cultural hesitation around self-reporting, etc) but the percentage of LGBT people is maybe possibly somewhere between 1% and 10% (or higher, or lower, if you use different definitions).
The point of Pride isn't "gay people are normal", it's that being not-normal is not only acceptable, it's something to be proud of.
If we confine Pride to be only the uncontroversial, socially acceptable ways of being LGBT, then we're missing the whole point of Pride.
I think of Pride like the civil rights movement. I believe about 15% of the population is black, and there have been a lot of parallels with the civil rights movement. The civil rights movement...
I think of Pride like the civil rights movement. I believe about 15% of the population is black, and there have been a lot of parallels with the civil rights movement. The civil rights movement wasn't won by people pushing the more flamboyant aspects of black culture to the front of the stage. Those people wore their Sunday best, and they did so for a reason. Most of the gay people I know are literally just normal people that happen to be gay.
They have to realise they're giving credence to the arguments that were literally just being used against them before gay marriage was legalised in the US, right?
I'm not even necessarily against or for people showing open displays of whatever in public or at Pride, but...I can't help but feel this line of argument is counterproductive.
I'm not sure what Kink/BDSM/Leather have to do with being gay. Sexual orientation is an immutable part of who you are just like your sex or skin color. The things that turn you on in the bedroom are your personal preferences. It's fine to be proud of them and we shouldn't judge people for liking different things, but I don't think they have anything to do with LGBT pride.
It's not always about sex, is the thing. They're often lifestyles. Furries are an easy example of this. Wearing a fursuit in public is not a sexual act, it's a means of self expression that's a symbol of belonging to a community. Wearing a collar with your day clothes is similar in BDSM. It's not a sex thing, it's a visual indicator of belonging to a community that generally indicates having a Dom or Master. But the wearing of a collar itself isn't about sex.
Where the overlap between kink and LGBT is, is something I think the owner of The Crucible in DC put quite well:
There's an aspect of community and camaraderie between the two groups, often with much overlap.
If you're trying to get people to think homosexuals are normal people then the kink won't help anything.
That whole thing with leaning hard into respectability politics and playing up the idea of the harmless normal gay man in a suit and tie may have helped accelerate certain political aims like gay marriage, but it did so by throwing a lot of people under the bus. That strategy, regardless of if we think it was the right way to go or not, was just asking for the "I like gay people, but I hate faggots" attitude (including the milder, more common versions of it). That's fucked up, and maybe more than ever we have to correct things for those "faggots" instead of pretending we all benefitted equally.
There are queer people who are flamboyant open "deviants" and there are queer people who dress and act conservatively, fitting straight ideals perfectly. Moving forward has to be for all of us, and you don't get that by only focusing on the easy to swallow pills. Don't think we're "normal" because we're just like everybody else, think we're normal because we can expand what "normal" is. Or maybe that being "normal" isn't super relevant, especially not to how we should be treated.
Beyond that, the idea of policing who we are for an event specifically for celebrating and being loud about that is just awful.
Because "normal" people don't have kinks?
I personally love the current atmosphere of Toronto Pride; ass-less chaps, doms+subs, and all... and would hate to see it get turned into some Milquetoast, prudish, kid friendly event. It's supposed to be a celebration of who we are, not about closeting ourselves all over again for the sake of PR. Fuck that.
I get the impression is that the idea is that kinds and gay pride shouldn't be so closely tied to kinky sexual expression. It lets those kinks act as a proxy for detractors to attack gayness as a whole. Instead it would be better to have seperate demonstrations that celebrate gay pride and sexual expression of kinks and culture.
That being said, the two things do seem closely tied within the culture and to some extent we want to express that. Even if it's not the most pragmatic thing.
Easier, maybe... but do you really think LGBT-phobes are are really going to stop using that "sexual deviance" BS as an attack vector just because Kink elements are removed from Pride? I honestly doubt it would make one lick of difference, so we might as well embrace it, IMO.
There's a massive overlap. If you go to your nearest private kink club you will undoubtedly find a higher proportion of LGBT's than exist in the population as a whole. That's what I've noticed anyway.
That isn't to say us queer folk have a monopoly on kink, or that cishets don't take part, but there's definitely a shared culture between the two.
Here's the thing though...they're not "normal". The data for this varies wildly (because of differences by country, by definitions used, by cultural hesitation around self-reporting, etc) but the percentage of LGBT people is maybe possibly somewhere between 1% and 10% (or higher, or lower, if you use different definitions).
The point of Pride isn't "gay people are normal", it's that being not-normal is not only acceptable, it's something to be proud of.
If we confine Pride to be only the uncontroversial, socially acceptable ways of being LGBT, then we're missing the whole point of Pride.
I think of Pride like the civil rights movement. I believe about 15% of the population is black, and there have been a lot of parallels with the civil rights movement. The civil rights movement wasn't won by people pushing the more flamboyant aspects of black culture to the front of the stage. Those people wore their Sunday best, and they did so for a reason. Most of the gay people I know are literally just normal people that happen to be gay.