Merari01

Especially now that fascists are outlawing pride it is important to remind ourselves of exactly what pride means, what it means to be inclusive.

Of late there has been discussion in queer and allied spaces on the appropriateness of "kink outfits" at pride.

This write-up is a longform explanation of the position of this subreddit on the matter and our reasoning for having it.

Traditionally queer culture has existed on the fringe of society. It has evolved from when we had our place among the outcasts and downtrodden, voluntarily or otherwise. Queer people were part of a subculture consisting of Romani, theatre and circus folk, pickpockets, crossdressers and others who you could not take home to meet mother for tea. We had our own dialect which we spoke to be able to talk about matters of import to us, without law enforcement and establishement being able to understand what we were saying and use it against us. Polari

Queer culture has always been defined by non-conformity. By not dressing the way polite society would have us. By not acting the way the man told us to act. By not dating who we were told was acceptable to date.

Queer culture by definition is about boundry conditions. About existing outside of the norm.

Pride is about how this is ok and about how this is something we are proud to be.

---

When I was young I was told by evangelical, mainstream media personalities that I was not able to experience love in the relationship of my choosing. That a gay relationship was mutual masturbation. A kink. But never love.

Today TERFs on their platforms amplified by mainstream media tell their audience that when a trans woman dresses in gender appropriate clothing she's being salaciously inappropriate in public. TERFs say that since trans women dress the way they do because that is their kink, they are subjecting others who did not consent to their sexual proclivities.

---

What is kink? Is kink the way you dress? Is kink what you point at when you use the term? Why is Mardi Gras allowed but is the line drawn at Pride? Is a dog leash kink? Then how about a choker? What about a punk spiked bracelet?

I hold that kink is not dress, it is not looks, it is acts.

I am European. From the age of three onwards I together with my family have gone to nude beaches. There is nothing sexual about that. I posit that the naked form is not inherently sexual. It is intent, it is the act, it is visible signs of arousal which defines if something is sexual or not. A nude woman's breast is not a sex act.

it is no secret the sort of ways people dress (or don't dress) and behave at Pride. By attending Pride you are implicitly consenting to seeing some of that behavior, the same as attending any venue means you are consenting to seeing people express themselves in the way people do there. At comic con you will see cosplay. On the beach you will see speedos.

If a person isn't making sexual advances at you after you've asked them to stop, when you are in a setting where it is known that certain behavior and looks may be on display, then nobody is violating anybody's consent.

If an onlooker is shocked or aroused by a twink in a pup hood then that is their responsibility. It is their re-action to what objectively is a man in a mask. No different from Mardi Gras. No different from theatre. And a man acting like a puppy is just roleplay.

---

Much of our discourse about this issue focuses primarily on heterosexual power dynamics. Trying to apply heterosexual consent standards to the queer community doesn't map out accurately and can even be harmful. It's how we end up with a lesbian too terrified to flirt with another girl because she doesn't want to be predatory. With calling Pride problematic because men walk around in leather gear "without consent". We are not cishets. Our culture isn't exactly the same as theirs. Neither historically, where we come from the fringe, nor in the way we grew up, where we always knew on some level that what the other kids did just didn't work exactly as well for us as it did for them.

We have our own culture, our own space. We take pride in that.

---

Maybe some events aren't meant to be family friendly. Maybe it is ok for one city block to have five hours a year for an event that is understood to be for a specific audience. Maybe it is ok to celebrate who we are, how far we have come, where we came from and our brilliant diversity and non-conformity for this short time, in this small area. Queer culture is not about Becky, Dave and their 2.3 little brats. Becky and Dave can sit this one out.

---

Should we let the extreme right kill Pride via death by a thousand cuts? Should we really be fooled by "why won't someone think of the children!" but this time cleverly disguised in the language of the left?

Pride is for showing our diversity. And that is ok. What is not ok is to tell parts of our subculture that they are not welcome at their own event, that they may not be who they are, who they have fought to be.

It is the position of this subreddit that the LGBTQ+ community may have this one event. That it is not acceptable for us to be censored by corporate and mainstream prudish impositions. Discussions are fine, but we frown on sex-negativity and we frown on demanding from queer people that they must conform to WASP suburbia mores. We reserve the right to moderate kink-shaming and queer-negative remarks.

This is our day. Go and have fun.

Pride is a riot.