I figured a good showcase on the Pride/Kink discourse currently going on would be to look at well, what does the Kink community itself tend to think about public displays of kink?
I did a quick search on the BDSMcommunity subreddit for this, and chose the top two threads to show up. https://www.reddit.com/r/BDSMcommunity/comments/n57t1g/discuss_ethics_on_exhibitionism_and_exposing/ https://www.reddit.com/r/BDSMcommunity/comments/79htlt/at_what_point_do_you_consider_public_displays_of/ (There are some other threads that aren't related to the ethics of public play like one involving consent on tiktok that I skipped over for that).
The overwhelming majority of kinksters and BDSM participants tends to lean that engaging in play in the public is violating other people's consent. Quotes such as
i dont understand why it's so hard for some people to understand. don't visibly bring your kinks out in public. strangers cant consent and you're exposing your kink to children.
People say don't 'kinkshame', but I'mma shame anyone who ignores the Consensual in RACK and SSC.
Agreed. It's the difference between fantasy and reality. A dom(me) walking their sub, nude, down the street can make for a very hot fantasy, but it should remain just that, unless you control who everyone else on that street is, which seems rather unlikely.
There are a few comments here and there that go the opposite way, for example there is a long comment here https://www.reddit.com/r/BDSMcommunity/comments/n57t1g/discuss_ethics_on_exhibitionism_and_exposing/gx0ebxv/ about whether or not it amounts to a form of sexual assault that while saying they believe it is rude and inappropriate does not necessarily fall under that term
There's also threads like this where the idea is around discreet play and leashes that others are unaware of (https://www.reddit.com/r/BDSMcommunity/comments/n9rimi/discreet_leash_in_public/) that people are okay with.
But the general consensus tends to be based around tends to be summed up well with this
There's a line, of course, where it's kind of silly. Wearing an obvious collar in public, IMO, isn't a problem. Calling someone "Sir" in public is fine. But if you get into things like public humiliation and very obvious and intense D/S dynamics, you have to remember that Joe Nobody walking down the street didn't give informed consent.
Essentially the idea tends to be that as it gets more obvious and sexual (visible leashes, display of sexual organs, more intense scenes) the more that consent is violated. And that's the conclusion I'm going to come to as well for displays of kink at pride. Sexual pride is a good thing, violation of others consent is not, and the Kink communities general views on what violates consent seems to be for the most part rather clear.
I mean the idea is just public areas that people (who aren't you and that you didn't have prior contact or forms of communication with) are in.
Also they keep bringing up this canard of people "waving their genitals in people's faces" -- at public pools, in parades. It's a reductionist and hateful take on kink, making kinksters seem like these monstrous trolls that purely want to make people uncomfortable.
Trust me, we’re not. Currently keeping an eye on them to make sure they do not dig themselves deeper into this line of thought, given that we’ll have to be less lenient if they do.
Basically as you start hurting other queer people, you need to rein your behavior in. Small things like collars or saying "sir" are fine, but more elaborate displays violate consent and hurt others. As a followup as well, there was an interesting example someone gave of how even some of the kink spaces they participated in didn't allow active play in the social areas since the level of consent (and what the consent was towards) is unclear, and that even some of the more kinky folk need a space they can retreat to. https://www.reddit.com/r/BDSMcommunity/comments/79htlt/at_what_point_do_you_consider_public_displays_of/dp25jnm/
There's a mixture really, but I chose the final quote specifically because it was one of the main comments I saw that addressed kink as a spectrum of behaviors/appearance and not just as a singular thing. But that is one of the major problems with "kink at pride" discourse, there's not really any specification of what that means so for some it's as simple as a dude wearing leather or someone being shirtless and for others it's to the extreme of wearing leashes and flashing your genitals both under this same word all dependant on who is saying it.
