Support NeoGAF

[CrocMother]

While there is certainly no comparing with the experiences of other gender/sexual minorities in terms of every day danger and threats to their lives, the ease of being able to hide as an asexual person in society is pernicious in its own way.

 

[Exclamation-One]

Ideally? Absolutely!

Descriptors such as "looks male/female" are disingenuous because they are rooted in the gender binary. What about non-binary people? What about gender fluid people? What about gender non-conforming people? What about trans people who haven't socially transitioned?

Does it really take that much effort and time to say "May I ask you your pronouns please?"
Even if so, you don't need to ask everyone their pronouns since in most interactions with people you call them by their names or use the pronoun "you" so... where's the issue?

Sorry, was in the middle of revising my post.

Come again? If someone looks female, "she." If someone looks male, "he." Not sure? "They." If he/she/they are genderqueer and you know them to be, you can simply ask. It's not hard.

However, it's absurd that Ms. Dude-Looks-Like-A-Lady* would get offended if someone refers to her as 'she.'

Are you honestly suggesting someone should ask everyone they meet what pronouns they prefer?

* Yes, I know that song has been used derisively, but I've got a trans coworker (m->f) that appropriates it as a literal power ballad.

99.9% of the people on this planet are clearly identifiable as male/female from birth. I take no issue with someone preferring a different pronoun, but I do take issue with someone being offended because someone referred to them, in third-person with a pronoun, that refers to their physical appearance.

If a male cross-dresser (not trans) got up in arms because I mistakenly assumed "he" preferred "she," I'd laugh and say, "What do you expect? Sorry. Will use "he" from now on."

I feel like I bear some blame for steering the conversation far off-topic, however. My original point was that asexual people should be embraced with open arms under the same umbrella as gay/lesbian/trans/kink-friendly/etc. people.

The community should have empathy for the issues asexual people experience, and asexual individuals should empathize that their hardships are often not as difficult as those experienced by other queers.

While there is certainly no comparing with the experiences of other gender/sexual minorities in terms of every day danger and threats to their lives, the ease of being able to hide as an asexual person in society is pernicious in its own way.

Well said.

 

[Butterfly Witch]

Sorry, was in the middle of revising my post.

No worries but my answer is still just as valid.

If someone corrects you on their pronouns and you still use the wrong ones then they have every right to be offended.

All of it could be prevented by the whole "May I ask you your pronouns please?" question.

 

[Alienfan]

Personal preference.

The flag took flak because people within the community didn't like to be called out on their shit and then people outside the target community decided to butt in for no good reason.

The flag is there to raise awareness. If it sparks discussion then even better. There's really not much else to say about it unless you want to split hairs and discuss personal preferences, which is mostly left to the individual person.

Sure but there was a little more to the controversy than just racist LGBT people. Some people thought the flag was replacing the pride flag (which it wasn't) and got mad, but most of the controversy I encountered was about the designers being more interested in selling a flag than doing anything about the discrimination PoC face in the community - they partnered with a marketing firm which might explain it. Checking the website shows no historical articles about the contributions PoC have made to the LGBT movement, no biographies, not even a single photo of a PoC. It was a really good message, but an poorly designed flag coupled with a campaign that lacked any substance.

 

[Exclamation-One]

No worries but my answer is still just as valid.

If someone corrects you on their pronouns and you still use the wrong ones then they have every right to be offended.

All of it could be prevented by the whole "May I ask you your pronouns please?" question.

Nothing wrong with being corrected. Once I know their preference, I will of course use it.

But acting is if I personally insulted them simply because I mistakenly used what I felt to be an appropriate pronoun is going to be a non-starter with me. It's why I highlighted that sentence from the comic to begin with.

I'm not about to start asking, literally, and without exception, everyone that I meet what their preferred pronouns are. That's ridiculous.

 

[Butterfly Witch]

Sure but there was a little more to the controversy than just racist LGBT people. Some people thought the flag was replacing the pride flag (which it wasn't) and got mad, but most of the controversy I encountered was about the designers being more interested in selling a flag than doing anything about the discrimination PoC face in the community - they partnered with a marketing firm which might explain it. Checking the website shows no historical articles about the contributions PoC have made to the LGBT movement, no biographies, not even a single photo of a PoC. It was a really good message, but an poorly designed flag coupled with a campaign that lacked any substance.

So what you're saying is people should have read into it before having explosive reactions?

Absolutely agree!!

Nothing wrong with being corrected. Once I know their preference, I will of course use it.

But acting is if I personally insulted them simply because I mistakenly used what I felt to be an appropriate pronoun is going to be a non-starter with me. It's why I highlighted that sentence from the comic to begin with.

You know what they say about assumptions right?

I'm not about to start asking, literally, and without exception, everyone that I meet what their preferred pronouns are. That's ridiculous.

Then don't be surprised and take it personally when people correct you.

 

[Exclamation-One]

You know what they say about assumptions right?

...

Then don't be surprised and take it personally when people correct you.

And they shouldn't take it personally when I'm surprised that they're taking it personally.

In any case, this is a moot point. I've never once experienced this sort of confrontational reaction in my life. If I did, I'd behave graciously. But inside, I'd be thinking to myself, "what a self-righteous dick/cunt/dweeb" as appropriate.

Can you respond to my points about asexual folks being included in a hypothetical, friendly and loving 'Queer' community? That's what the topic is all about, after all.

 

[Butterfly Witch]

Can you respond to my points about asexual folks being included in the 'queer' community? That's what the topic is all about, after all.

Asexual folk are part of the LGBTQ+ community. Not much more to say there unless you have particular issues you wish to raise.

 

[Alienfan]

So what you're saying is people should have read into it before having explosive reactions?

Absolutely agree!!

I guess you could say that lol. But the people who need to hear the message won't, so it's up to the campaign to surface that information.

 

[Exclamation-One]

Asexual folk are part of the LGBTQ+ community. Not much more to say there unless you have particular issues you wish to raise.

According to several people in this thread, explicitly and implicitly, they are not.

And if they are, their experiences aren't worth hearing about.

 

[Butterfly Witch]

According to several people in this thread, explicitly and implicitly, they are not.

And if they are, their experiences aren't worth hearing about.

I can't answer for them but yeah.

We can certainly argue that asexual people may have an easier way to hide the fact that they're asexual and thus not as likely to be victims of abuse or violence but it's mostly just being picky at that point in my opinion.

 

[Sai-kun]

THIS.

As a (mostly) straight, cis-gendered, polyamorous person who dabbles in light BDSM, I'd love to stand arm in arm with others in a 'Queer' pride parade.

I'd go so far as to say any sexual/gender expression outside hetero male/female pairings is queer. You like to spank? That's queer! Do you enjoy threesomes, voyeurism or exhibition? You're queer. Have any kind of fetish at all? Queer.

If you are not 100.00% vanilla, you are queer.

When you get right down to it, most people on this planet ARE queer in some form or another.

Thus, the push for 'Queer' rights encompasses most of humanity.

Stop fucking around with acronyms and include everyone - one banner, one flag, one label. Unite.

-



Absolutely. But the handwringing over 'LGBT________+' has got to go. Kill it with fire.

please stop

being kinky doesn't make you queer

 

[LionPride]

please stop

being kinky doesn't make you queer

Aight so it wasn't just me who thought that was weird?

Good

 

[Exclamation-One]

I can't answer for them but yeah.

We can certainly argue that asexual people may have an easier way to hide the fact that they're asexual and thus not as likely to be victims of abuse or violence but it's mostly just being picky at that point in my opinion.

please stop

being kinky doesn't make you queer

Why doesn't it? My understanding of 'Pride' is inclusiveness and to have as large and diverse a community as possible.

It's sort of like Roger Ebert saying "video games can't be art."

I prefer my take akin to Scott McCloud:

(Basically, replace 'Art' with 'Queer', and "Human Activity" with "Sexuality/Identity." Basically.)

Both of you seem to be defining 'membership' or the right to be heard through ranked exclusion rather than all-encompassing inclusion.

 

[EdibleKnife]

Aight so it wasn't just me who thought that was weird?

Good

Correct. Claiming that "weird or unconventional sex" is what makes you queer is ludicrous.

Why doesn't it? My understanding of 'Pride' is inclusiveness and to have as large and diverse a community as possible.

It's sort of like Roger Ebert saying "video games can't be art."

Both of you seem to be defining 'membership' or the right to be heard through ranked exclusion rather than all-encompassing inclusion.

There are 100% straight, monogamous heterosexual couples that like BDSM, spanking/whipping, dressing up, non-consensual roleplay, etc. That doesn't make them queer. Being queer, bi, homosexual, trans are things that are seen as problematic by mainstream society and are victims of social, political and physical violence & oppression because they are things that exist beyond just what goes on in the bedroom.

 

[Sai-kun]

uhhh yeah

if you're straight and cisgender, and not asexual, you're probably not queer.

that's just, like, how words work. your 'replace 'art' with 'queer'' comic sounds so psuedo intellectual.

be as kinky as you want, there's literally 0 things wrong with being kinky and into the scene, but please don't get it twisted and think that somehow that gets you 'in'.

pride is about inclusiveness of queer people. straight people don't need to take pride in anything.

 

[Butterfly Witch]

Why doesn't it? My understanding of 'Pride' is inclusiveness and to have as large and diverse a community as possible.

It's sort of like Roger Ebert saying "video games can't be art."

I prefer my take akin to Scott McCloud:

Spoiler

(Basically, replace 'Art' with 'Queer', and "Human Activity" with "Sexuality/Identity." Basically.)

Both of you seem to be defining 'membership' or the right to be heard through ranked exclusion rather than all-encompassing inclusion.

That's re-defining what Pride was created for and why.

Gay Pride or LGBTQ+ Pride has always been about gender and sexual minorities, their celebration, raising awareness, dignity, building communities and equality rights.

It's not about "human rights for all", it's "hey! we're human too and we deserve human rights as well!" in a society known to openly discriminate, abuse, repress, oppress and commit acts of violence towards LGBTQ+ folk.

 

[Kyzer]

Wouldnt true asexuality be medically diagnosable? Just curious how it works

 

[Butterfly Witch]

Wouldnt true asexuality be medically diagnosable? Just curious how it works

How do you diagnose sexual orientations?

 

[Pepiope]

As far as I know, it's

Lesbian
Gay
Bisexual
Transexual
Transgender
Queer
Questioning
Intersex
Asexual
Ally

LGBTTQQIAA

 

[Poor GRIMES]

Why doesn't it? My understanding of 'Pride' is inclusiveness and to have as large and diverse a community as possible.

It's sort of like Roger Ebert saying "video games can't be art."

I prefer my take akin to Scott McCloud:

(Basically, replace 'Art' with 'Queer', and "Human Activity" with "Sexuality/Identity." Basically.)

Both of you seem to be defining 'membership' or the right to be heard through ranked exclusion rather than all-encompassing inclusion.

Read this:

And here’s the other thing about power. Kink is a way to intentionally engage with systems of power. As a kinky person, you can opt in, you can opt out, you can play, you can exchange, you can give, you can take, you can end it at any time. Power is everywhere, whether or not you’re practicing power play. It is yours to leave or to take. But as a queer person, you can’t opt into or out of those systems of power.

https://www.autostraddle.com/kink-is-not-queer-374216/

 

[Exclamation-One]

That's re-defining what Pride was created for and why.

Gay Pride or LGBTQ+ Pride has always been about gender and sexual minorities, their celebration, raising awareness, dignity, building communities and equality rights.

It's not about "human rights for all", it's "hey! we're human too and we deserve human rights as well!" in a society known to openly discriminate, abuse, repress, oppress and commit acts of violence towards LGBTQ+ folk.

be as kinky as you want, there's literally 0 things wrong with being kinky and into the scene, but please don't get it twisted and think that somehow that gets you 'in'.

pride is about inclusiveness of queer people. straight people don't need to take pride in anything.

My entire point in saying kinky people are "Queer" is that it encourages solidarity - it is anything that goes against the heterosexual norm of a man and a woman being exclusive, and in a very broad sense, for the purpose of making babies. I personally think that's a bit of a stretch, which is why I used the qualifier of 'Basically.'

I am bi-curious. I can look at, enjoy the male form, and enjoy intimacy with men but have no interest in sexual participation.

I am also openly polyamorous - preferring 'open' relationships in the sense that my partner and I can play with others together.

You want to tell me this isn't 'queer' ? Am I under the 'Questioning' because I'm not openly bi?

What purpose does it serve to exclude me from the 'queer' community?

What purpose does it serve to exclude those who identify as asexual?

 

[Poor GRIMES]

My entire point in saying kinky people are "Queer" is that it encourages solidarity.

I am bi-curious. I can look at, enjoy the male form, and enjoy intimacy with men but have no interest in sexual participation.

I am also openly polyamorous - preferring 'open' relationships in the sense that my partner and I can play with others together.

You want to tell me this isn't 'queer' ?

You're queer because of your sexuality and romantic identity. You're not queer because you're kinky

 

[Butterfly Witch]

My entire point in saying kinky people are "Queer" is that it encourages solidarity.

I am bi-curious. I can look at, enjoy the male form, and enjoy intimacy with men but have no interest in sexual participation.

I am also openly polyamorous - preferring 'open' relationships in the sense that my partner and I can play with others together.

You want to tell me this isn't 'queer' ?

You may consider yourself queer due to you being homoromantic but not because you're poly or kinky.

While the BDSM and LGBTQ+ communities have a strong past and are often intertwined, practicing BDSM does not make you LGBTQ+ and vice versa.

 

[Van Bur3n]

I could actually see the feet pride being a thing considering how foot fetishists get ridiculed (or outright considered as deviants) all the time.

Same thing with people who like to get pissed on. So many people do not understand the desire for one drink upon another's piss through sexual expression and so many of those people are quick to judge them based on it. I believe it's about time that they take pride in their piss facial ways and be represented!

Seriously, all of those other colorful flags and representations, fine whatever. But kink shit? That is stretching it beyond what is necessary.

 

[Exclamation-One]

You may consider yourself queer due to you being homoromantic but not because you're poly or kinky.

While the BDSM and LGBTQ+ communities have a strong past and are often intertwined, practicing BDSM does not make you LGBTQ+ and vice versa.

My argument is being 'homoromantic' doesn't seem to fit within the alphabet soup... unless maybe it's under "2 Spirits."

Hence, the argument for proclaiming myself 'queer.' And that said, I can't see any compelling reason NOT to want asexual or people with predilections for kink included under the queer umbrella. Just as you can't turn on / off who you're attracted to, you can't also turn on / off what you are attracted to.

And here's the other thing about power. Kink is a way to intentionally engage with systems of power. As a kinky person, you can opt in, you can opt out, you can play, you can exchange, you can give, you can take, you can end it at any time. Power is everywhere, whether or not you're practicing power play. It is yours to leave or to take. But as a queer person, you can't opt into or out of those systems of power.

This misses the point by a large margin, which is basically this:

Kinky people are outside the 'norm', and that's okay!

Trans people are outside the 'norm', and that's okay!

Asexual people are...

you get the idea.

If so many people are 'outside the norm', that by definition makes them 'queer.'

Having more 'queer' people is more empowering than having less. It's in the very fabric of the culture to proudly proclaim yourself as queer and be accepting, as humanly possible, of anyone who isn't heteronormative.

I think furries are weird fucking people, but that doesn't mean I don't think they should have the same rights under the law as everyone else. I will be the first to admit that I can feel a bit skeeved out bumping into a transgendered person in the restroom (just a reflex, and it passes quickly), but that doesn't mean I don't believe they have the right to use male/female bathrooms as they see fit.

 

[Butterfly Witch]

My argument is being 'homoromantic' doesn't seem to fit within the alphabet soup... unless maybe it's under "2 Spirits."

Hence, the argument for proclaiming myself 'queer.' And that said, I can't see any compelling reason NOT to want asexual or people with predilections for kink. Just as you can't turn on / off who you're attracted to, you can't also turn on / off what you are attracted to.

Homoromantic absolutely fits within the Queer tag. Asexual people are a sexual minority so they are included in the LGBTQ+ umbrella.

Kink on the other hand is different, it's not a sexual orientation nor a gender. It's just kink.

 

[Exclamation-One]

Let me take this a step further.

Imagine two heterosexual men who marry and live together. They have no sexual or romantic interest in one another, but they're best friends and they've just got strong bro love. For whatever reason, they desire to declare to the world that they are partners. Both of them actively seek sex with girls outside their 'marriage.'

I believe that they can fall under the 'queer' umbrella, easily. It is not a heteronormative union.

 

[Sai-kun]

Let me take this a step further.

Imagine two heterosexual men who marry. They have no sexual interest in one another, but they're best friends and they've got strong bro love. For whatever reason, they desire to declare to the world that they are partners. Both of them actively seek sex with girls outside their 'marriage.'

I believe that they can fall under the 'queer' umbrella, easily. It is not a heteronormative union.

thats called being good friends not being queer lmfao

 

[EdibleKnife]

This misses the point by a large margin, which is basically this:

Kinky people are outside the 'norm', and that's okay!

Trans people are outside the 'norm', and that's okay!

Asexual people are...

you get the idea.

If so many people are 'outside the norm', that by definition makes them 'queer.'

Having more 'queer' people is more empowering than having 'less.' It's in the very fabric of the culture to proudly proclaim yourself as queer and be accepting, as humanly possible, of anyone who isn't heteronormative.

I think furries are weird fucking people, but that doesn't mean I don't think they should have the same rights under the law as everyone else. I will be the first to admit that I can feel a bit skeeved out bumping into a transgendered person in the restroom (just a reflex, and it passes quickly), but that doesn't mean I don't believe they have the right to use male/female bathrooms as they see fit.

As already mentioned, being trans goes beyond the bedroom. It goes beyond sexual acts. It involves your relationships and literally how you present yourself to the world. As you just mentioned, trans people have judgment and even the threat of violence hanging over them just from using the restroom. Their entire being is marginalized. Their entire existence is a threat to backward people. You aren't going to convince anyone that liking to be whipped by your partner carries the same weight of identity.

I'm not going to claim that non-conventional sex is a societal hang up. But Pride is about maginalized genders and sexual orientatiens. Not simply fucking and/or who/how people like to fuck.

 

[Poor GRIMES]

This misses the point by a large margin, which is basically this:

Kinky people are outside the 'norm', and that's okay!

Trans people are outside the 'norm', and that's okay!

Asexual people are...

you get the idea.

If so many people are 'outside the norm', that by definition makes them 'queer.'

Having more 'queer' people is more empowering than having 'less.' It's in the very fabric of the culture to proudly proclaim yourself as queer and be accepting, as humanly possible, of anyone who isn't heteronormative.

I think furries are weird fucking people, but that doesn't mean I don't think they should have the same rights under the law as everyone else. I will be the first to admit that I can feel a bit skeeved out bumping into a transgendered person in the restroom (just a reflex, and it passes quickly), but that doesn't mean I don't believe they have the right to use male/female bathrooms as they see fit.

Well, to get this out of the way ASAP. I'm not going to speak on furries being queer or not. I'm not educated enough about the furry community to speak on that nor am I going to sit here and pretend that I do. So I won't be addressing that unless someone that is in the furry community wants to do that.

"Queer" is a very open term that includes non-normatives identities, yes. Within the context of the conversation we're having, we're operating under the definition that "being Queer" is having a non-normative sexual identity. I believe that the "queer" you're using is to refer to those that are simply viewed as "abnormal" within the mainstream. If we use the latter term, then yes you're queer in that sense that you're not seen as normal. But you're not queer in relation to LGBT+ spaces.

 

[Exclamation-One]

thats called being good friends not being queer lmfao

They legally have all rights a married couple have (joint taxes, spousal insurance, etc.). You would declare this as a normal, not queer coupling?

"Queer" is a very open term that includes non-normatives identities, yes. Within the context of the conversation we're having, we're operating under the definition that "being Queer" is having a non-normative sexual identity. I believe that the "queer" you're using is to refer to those that are simply viewed as "abnormal" within the mainstream. If we use the latter term, then yes you're queer in that sense that you're not seen as normal. But you're not queer in relation to LGBT+ spaces.

And apparently, neither are asexual folks.

Screw this thread (in a non-sexual way). I'm out.

 

[Chmpocalypse]

According to several people in this thread, explicitly and implicitly, they are not.

And if they are, their experiences aren't worth hearing about.

Those people are wrong.

 

[Butterfly Witch]

Let me take this a step further.

Imagine two heterosexual men who marry and live together. They have no sexual or romantic interest in one another, but they're best friends and they've just got strong bro love. For whatever reason, they desire to declare to the world that they are partners. Both of them actively seek sex with girls outside their 'marriage.'

I believe that they can fall under the 'queer' umbrella, easily. It is not a heteronormative union.

That would be a QueerPlatonic relationship yeah and that is Queer.

 

[Kase]

Let me take this a step further.

Imagine two heterosexual men who marry and live together. They have no sexual or romantic interest in one another, but they're best friends and they've just got strong bro love. For whatever reason, they desire to declare to the world that they are partners. Both of them actively seek sex with girls outside their 'marriage.'

I believe that they can fall under the 'queer' umbrella, easily. It is not a heteronormative union.

They aren't queer. Just as back in the days when lesbians and gays would marry each other doesn't make them straight because they're in a heterosexual marriage. Your example is just two straight guys marrying each other.

 

[purseowner]

Now we're arguing over whether people who are straight, cis, and slightly kinky should be considered queer?

Oh boy.

 

[Exclamation-One]

That would be a QueerPlatonic relationship yeah and that is Queer.

They aren't queer. Just as back in the days when lesbians and gays would marry each other doesn't make them straight because they're in a heterosexual marriage. Your example is just two straight guys marrying each other.

LOL. Consensus!

 

[Amibguous Cad]

please stop

being kinky doesn't make you queer

People get fired for being kinky, get forced into conversion therapy for being kinky, also have to navigate the closet, albeit in a different way, and generally face a lot of the same challenges as gays and lesbians do. To say nothing of the fact that the entirety of straight kink culture is descended from gay leathermen in the 60s. I'm not really interested in whether or not, in some Platonic sense, kink belongs ontologically under the queer umbrella, but I do know that broad movements are resilient and narrow movements are brittle. If you're getting shit for sex between consenting adults, it only makes sense for us to work together on common goals.

 

[Poor GRIMES]

LOL. Consensus!

I literally woke up and I'm about to go to the gym, but I parsed through this article and found it a decent breakdown of the differences between what being gay is vs. what being queer is. If you want to take a look:

http://www.rebelcircus.com/blog/queer-vs-gay-exactly-difference/

Queer is an open term. There's no consensus within the community of what exactly "queer" is or refers to. So you're going to get people in this thread that uses their personal definitions of the queer label.

Think this article is good too:

http://everydayfeminism.com/2016/03/difference-between-gay-queer/

 

[Butterfly Witch]

Now we're arguing over whether people who are straight, cis, and slightly kinky should be considered queer?

Oh boy.

Right?

LOL. Consensus!

You're literally cherry picking extreme cases that have nothing to do with the point you're making and you expect consistency?


Being poly is not queer, being kinky is not queer.

You don't want me to quote the definition of Queer do you?



Look, it's okay for the BDSM and LGBTQ+ communities to champion themselves separately . While both communities tend to cross over, they advocate for significantly different things.

 

[Sai-kun]

LOL. Consensus!

whoa different people have different opinions, that's wild!

They legally have all rights a married couple have (joint taxes, spousal insurance, etc.). You would declare this as a normal, not queer coupling?

if they're two straight identifying guys, then yeah, I would say it's not queer. I wouldn't say it's normal, but I also tend to not use words like 'normal' when it comes to describing romantic/sexual attractions because it's othering and can be hurtful.

Doing something outside of the norm doesn't make you queer.

People get fired for being kinky, get forced into conversion therapy for being kinky, also have to navigate the closet, albeit in a different way, and generally face a lot of the same challenges as gays and lesbians do. To say nothing of the fact that the entirety of straight kink culture is descended from gay leathermen in the 60s. I'm not really interested in whether or not, in some Platonic sense, kink belongs ontologically under the queer umbrella, but I do know that broad movements are resilient and narrow movements are brittle. If you're getting shit for sex between consenting adults, it only makes sense for us to work together on common goals.

spare me this, please. being kinky doesn't make you queer. you can be both, you can be neither, but they are two separate things.

 

[halfbeast]

Now we're arguing over whether people who are straight, cis, and slightly kinky should be considered queer?

Oh boy.

where's my cuckoldry pride flag?!

 

[pretty done]

It's the 5th flag on this poster

This is really confusing....

Like, there's not even a real difference between their definition for bisexual, pansexual and polysexual. They're essentially all saying the same thing.

 

[Exclamation-One]

Being poly is not queer, being kinky is not queer.

Can I / should I proclaim my sexual kinks (spanking, ropeplay, etc.) at work? I'd think most of society would say no, it's not socially acceptable.

-

And yes, being openly poly is very much a part of who I am - I don't do 'normal' relationships. When I'm meeting someone I'm interested in, I tell them right up front that I will desire other partners.

It means that if my partner and I decide to get married, she needs to be accepting of my being intimate and sexual with other women, whether she's a participant in it or not.

Obviously, I can't talk about this kind of thing at work flippantly. And yes, I have indeed been marginalized / put down for being poly. Quite often.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Can I / should I proclaim my sexual kinks (spanking, ropeplay, etc.) at work? I'd think most of society would say no, it's not socially acceptable.

No because no one should talk about the intimate details of their sexual life at work.

 

[Amibguous Cad]

That's re-defining what Pride was created for and why.

Gay Pride or LGBTQ+ Pride has always been about gender and sexual minorities, their celebration, raising awareness, dignity, building communities and equality rights.

It's not about "human rights for all", it's "hey! we're human too and we deserve human rights as well!" in a society known to openly discriminate, abuse, repress, oppress and commit acts of violence towards LGBTQ+ folk.

So what you're saying is that kinky people should be at Pride.

Read this:

https://www.autostraddle.com/kink-is-not-queer-374216/

Kinky people cannot opt out of the power dynamics in which they can be fired, jailed, or forced into therapy for their sexual activities, either.

Same thing with people who like to get pissed on. So many people do not understand the desire for one drink upon another's piss through sexual expression and so many of those people are quick to judge them based on it. I believe it's about time that they take pride in their piss facial ways and be represented!

Seriously, all of those other colorful flags and representations, fine whatever. But kink shit? That is stretching it beyond what is necessary.

Is no one gonna comment on this? This is why queer kinksters are made so uneasy by this conversation - because it's a hop skip and a jump away from shoving us out of sight to get a cookie from the straights and the assimilationists.

You'll take these guys away from Pride over my dead body.

Look, it's okay for the BDSM and LGBTQ+ communities to champion themselves separately . While both communities tend to cross over, they advocate for significantly different things.

Homoromantic absolutely fits within the Queer tag. Asexual people are a sexual minority so they are included in the LGBTQ+ umbrella.

Kink on the other hand is different, it's not a sexual orientation nor a gender. It's just kink.

Which is it? You can't rely on a bogus oppression olympics claim in one post, and then say it's perfectly fine for kinksters to advocate, they just have different concerns so they should have a separate movement.

spare me this, please. being kinky doesn't make you queer. you can be both, you can be neither, but they are two separate things.

That isn't an argument.

 

[Poor GRIMES]

This is really confusing....

Like, there's not even a real difference between their definition for bisexual, pansexual and polysexual. They're essentially all saying the same thing.

Pansexuals are attracted to all genders.
Bisexuals are attracted to the same and different genders; not all genders.
Polysexuals like multiple genders, but not all genders.

 

[Butterfly Witch]

Can I / should I proclaim my sexual proclivities at work?

Depends on the job. I'd certainly suggest you don't around people who are Vanilla.

And yes, being openly poly is very much a part of who I am - I don't do 'normal' relationships. When I'm meeting someone I'm interested in, I tell them right up front that I will desire other partners.

Okay, that means you're poly, not queer.

It means that if my partner and I decide to get married, she needs to be accepting of my being intimate and sexual with other women, whether she's a participant in it or not.

Okay then you're poly, not queer.

Obviously, I can't talk about this kind of thing at work openly. And yes, I have indeed been marginalized / put down for being poly. Frequently.

Okay that means you've been discriminated against for being poly, not that you're queer.

Just because you've shared a similar experience to queer people, that doesn't make you queer.

 

[Sai-kun]

I don't think anyone has argued that queer and kinky people shouldn't be at pride parades. they absolutely should.

kinky queer people have a place in pride and our festivities. a crowd of cis het dudes who like to get pegged and have their cis het girlfriend step on them? not so much.

 

[Poor GRIMES]

So what you're saying is that kinky people should be at Pride.



Kinky people cannot opt out of the power dynamics in which they can be fired, jailed, or forced into therapy for their sexual activities, either.



Is no one gonna comment on this? This is why queer kinksters are made so uneasy by this conversation - because it's a hop skip and a jump away from shoving us out of sight to get a cookie from the straights and the assimilationists.

You'll take these guys away from Pride over my dead body.

Which is it? You can't rely on a bogus oppression olympics claim in one post, and then say it's perfectly fine for kinksters to advocate, they just have different concerns so they should have a separate movement.



That isn't an argument.

Kinky people can be queer by using one of its definitions. Kinky people cannot be queer by using it in relation to LGBT+ spaces because they're not the same thing, which is what the author of the article and other posters are saying.