Like what, besides literally just the most basic "I like gay" shit is in this case "allowed" at pride because of being "integral" to your sexuality/gender? I deadass just dont understand the logic, if it exists.
Like why is leather "allowed" at pride then, is being a biker integral to your sexuality?(I obviously know the cultural history for leathers association with queer culture, but kink has similar history and associations so this isnt a valid differentiation).
Just boggles me real hard, I know its probably just a bad faith argument but I still wanna find out what the actual possible reasoning is.
That's not what the absolute majority of people arguing in favour of kink having a place at pride mean, kink has a historical place in LGBTQ+ culture and many express or explore their sexuality and gender through kink, thats the argument for it belonging there, just like other historical cultural signifiers are used to celebrate your sexuality and gender without being questioned as "Also being for cishet communities".
But most of this stuff isn't integral to the LGBT+ community. In fact like I just said it comes off as very offensive to argue that it is because it's basically implying that anyone who isn't into it is "less gay" or "less involved in queer history and tradition" or something, when it's actually just a type of fetish that people have across sexualities.
Well that was my original question, what actually is "integral" to the LGBTQ+ community if history and culture is not that? If its just purely "I am gay/bi/trans" then how are you gonna celebrate that aside from literally just stating that out loud or on signs over and over? "Non-integral" signifiers are used constantly during LGBTQ+ celebrations which have varying degrees of exclusivity to being used by our community, its not a matter of anyone being forced to use any single signifier to be "more" gay or whatever.
And trying to use this argument specifically only against kink just becomes hypocritical, since I havent seen it used against any other "non-integral" parts of Pride, every Pride event I've been to has loudly blasted the Village People and YMCA, does that also need to be removed for not being integral to the LGBTQ+ community and not representing every single person? Theres clearly something else going on aside from the integrality or non-integrality of whatever you are targeting.
Yeah, kinda? Not everyone really shares the same histories and culture within the "LGBTQ+" space. There is some amount of shared history like things such as Stonewall or music by/for the LGBTQ+ community, but I don't think "Some of us were into BDSM" counts much, cause well, there are LGBT people into basically every single fetish in the world. I wouldn't say things like foot fetishism is integral to the community but there's certainly a lot of people who were into that historically too.
I mean in that case like I said you'll end up just having to strip like 90% of current Pride stuff away cause its neither integral nor describes every single member of the community, I dont see the difference between "Some of us used BDSM to express our sexuality" not counting but "Some of us used music to express and celebrate our sexuality" being a valid shared history for the LGBTQ+ community, plenty of cishets listen to the village people too and enjoy it.
Again it definitely feels like there is other shit going on than just "this is not integral enough", cause in that case everyone who makes this argument should be absolutely seething at every pride event cause of all the non-integral shit that goes on that isnt just a sign stating literally "I am gay please be nice to me".
Edit: I did actually find some old photos of like the first pride parades including one which is literally just regular dressed dudes with a sign that just says "GAY IS GOOD", I guess this is the ideal Pride parades we have lost.
People being into BDSM is different than "We used it as a way to express ourselves", we know that it's not integral to queer history the way that LGBT focused music and history like Stonewall is due to the fact that cishet people can enter into the conversation of BDSM and kink without a single thing not applying to them the same. That can not be said of the Stonewall riots, or music that talks about dating other men or whatever else.
Again though, how is music "integral" to queer history then, cause absolutely not all or probably the majority queer people then or now are into shitty disco music yet it can still be a cultural signifier for some, and just cause music includes themes of being gay doesnt prevent cishets from talking about being into that kind of music, this just sounds like super forced bullshit to single out kink to me.
And it doesnt even matter anyways since not even Stonewall is universal and integral even if its common between a lot of queer people and communities, if we are talking about stuff that is integral to identity it pretty much can only be the identity itself as experienced internally and through the most general expressions of "I do romance/sex with the same gender" or "I dont identify with my AGAB". Anything outside that cannot be universally shared between all individuals and all communities so how can it be integral to either of those being valid as queer?
No I think it's clearly a bit different, music with gay themes has specific meaning to the queer community that it does not for cishet people. If this was a celebration of particular LGBTQ+ celebrities who were into kink or something that they created with an inherent meaning directly relevant to queer people, this would be different. Most kink expression is not that way, it is quite literally "Some gay people were into BDSM" for the majority of the argument which means nothing to me.
deleted by creator
Leather pride flag was appropriated for blue lives matter flag.
:acab:
Basically this, thank you.
Removed by mod
Damn I was thinking about going to pride in my “👁 ❤️ 💩” shirt
Just sounds like policing specific expression and deciding that kink isnt special enough to be valid as queer expression when queer people use it to explore and express their sexuality and gender, there absolutely can exist a specific meaning to those queer people who engage in kink and fetishes that doesnt exist for cishets in the same way. To decide otherwise is just denying peoples right to define their own experience and expression, in my view.
And I'm not about to start explaining in detail my own explorations of gender and sexuality through kink to prove this shit either.
Removed by mod
nah, go fuck off, you're literally the only person in this debate that has policed other peoples gayness and transness and comparing kink to "sexual violation" is extremely fucking reactionary.
Removed by mod
No, genuinely fuck off, I'm amazed you havent been banned yet for this dogshit.
You dont get to accuse me of being a cop about other peoples experiences of being gay when I havent spent a single letter on this thread denigrating anyones credentials of being gay or trans for not engaging in kink, while you have spent the thread doing nothing but that in regards to removing all queer expression from queer people engaging in kink in a way they explicitly experience as and consider part of their queer identity.
You have done nothing but strawman other people and bring in shock value by bringing up scat or implying there is sexual violation going on, go fuck yourself with this bad faith bullshit.
Removed by mod
Stop dodging the fact that you flat out lied about me policing other peoples sexuality, you do nothing but fucking strawman people and now you are doing it again by accusing me of taking away consent, I have not made any kind of statement or mention of that, you are accusing me of being reactionary and supporting sexual harrassment, I have done nothing of the sort, go fuck yourself, I dont wanna see you in my inbox again, next time I see you better be in the modlog you piece of shit.
Removed by mod
deleted by creator