Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

retiredshared2 wrote (edited )

The BDSM consent writeup is relevant here, I think, and should cover that base.

I had to have this conversation with a BDSM couple who came into my coffee shop once, her on a leash at two o’clock in the afternoon in pretty skimpy, fetish-y clothing. Basically, what I said was, “I am a huge part of your scene right now. The look on my face, my words, my thoughts, my feelings, they’re what’s fueling the very scene you’re playing out, so how are you going to tell me that everyone involved is consenting? You didn’t ask for my consent. I didn’t fill out a negotiation form. You don’t know my background, my history, my kinks, or my safeword, but you come into my place of work and expect to play out a scene with me without even asking?”

She was mortified. He tried to argue with me, but couldn’t continue once I said, “I do not consent to being part of your scene,”

The other people at pride haven't yet consented. You can't wear fetish gear for that reason. However, we also shouldn't be 'clean'; that's what lead to the alienation of the gay community that forced the Stonewall riots that pride marks anyway.

5

[deleted] wrote (edited )

2

retiredshared2 wrote

Sexual and romantic minorities also include asexual and aromantic groups, and to stress sex, especially for groups that hasn't consented, you would thus be excluding and alienating them. I'm all for sex positivity, and an advocate of such, but consent is always and will always be central.

1

[deleted] wrote (edited )

2

retiredshared2 wrote

oh no that's not what I meant

I was just using that against their argument with the fact that wearing fetish gear would thus discount other minorities, alongside your point of consent. I've agreed with you for the mostpart in this thread, including with that.

1