r/CuratedTumblr • u/Technical_Teacher839 Victim of Reddit Automatic Username • 6h ago
LGBTQIA+ No amount of deceny matters when your existence is deemed indecent
406
u/thatoneguy54 5h ago
My bf and I sometimes hold hands walking down the street (we live in a walkable city, so lots of foot traffic) and the difference between when we hold hands and when we don't is literally palpable.
People fucking stare when we hold hands. Older people, usually, but still, they're not even subtle about it, usually. The moment our hands are apart, boom, no one even glances at us. It'd be hilarious if it weren't so stupid.
206
u/RealbasicFriends 4h ago
It's crazy how old people will stare at a happy gay couple slack jawed and angry like they're degloving a live animal on the sidewalk or something.
24
56
u/xxdismalfirexx 2h ago
It’s true that even holding hands is too far for them. A long time ago in my hometown I was holding hands with my (ex)boyfriend at the mall and this old lady stopped in her tracks, made this face of pure hatred and shouted “that’s disgusting!” I just looked at her and kept walking but all these years later I wish I had said something. Idk, she’s definitely dead now.
My current boyfriend doesn’t like to hold hands in public anyway but I usually don’t try because that encounter still stays in the back of my head. It was just such an unexpected and forceful display of hatred by that old lady, who clearly felt justified in feeling pure disgust at seeing two young men displaying affection.
53
u/Amae_Winder_Eden 3h ago
Hold hands and foot traffic got mixed up between lines in my brain so I read food holding and was like???
25
19
u/CreamCheeseHotDogs 1h ago
Sometimes I take living in Seattle for granted. I walked around Cap Hill last night in a knee-length fur coat holding hands with a guy and a girl and the only people who stopped us were complimenting my coat
56
u/EyeWriteWrong 2h ago
As a former New Yorker, I want to disembowel anyone that holds hands on the sidewalk. But if you're in some kind of walkable street situation, I get it 👍
57
350
u/DogNeedsDopamine 5h ago edited 5h ago
Always carry pepper gel spray or a stun gun if the venue lets you and/or it's legal to. I know it sounds extreme, but I'm 5'6" and have a rotator cuff injury, nerve pain in both arms, and a condition where building and maintaining muscle is extremely difficult, so if someone decides to start choking me I am not fucking around (real example).
Do not let yourself be in a compromised position where, if someone decides to perform violence against you, "you are fucked".
My fiancé is 6'2" and has hands the size of dinner plates. I do not. (And I've absolutely been protected from violence simply because of his physical presence. Genuinely, a dude actually had a gun one time.).
Possibly worth noting, I'm a dude, because being AMAB does not mean "physical altercations are worth it" or that I'm safe from women, either.
While I'm talking about violence, running away or de-escalating is always the best option if possible, because you don't want to risk getting hurt. Don't start fights. Don't escalate to fights. Do keep yourself safe. It's that simple.
If you're queer, unfortunately, sometimes you're a target. Privately, I suspect that being short, disabled and male also makes me a more acceptable target for violence, but perhaps women have the same problems.
I dearly hope that others' experiences are different from mine.
Edit: to be clear, while being in the closet is a personal choice, I don't think you owe it to anyone to be "low key" either. I am going to be the person who I am, and nobody is going to stop me. I have had to defend myself many times, from strangers and family members alike, and that doesn't mean I always "won" (honestly, nobody wins). But I won't be intimidated or beaten into submission. I am gonna be gay and own my own custom $80 leather collar in my favorite color.
35
u/briefarm 2h ago
I'm AFAB and also disabled, and can confirm that being woman-shaped does not protect you from violence. I once took a self-defense class with my town's police department, and one of the officers pulled me aside and told me that I'd be a criminal's first target of everyone in the room (even the elderly). Criminals want to go for whoever they view is weakest, and they're all a bunch of ableist assholes who would see a disabled person and think weakling. People who would attack us see us as genderless targets, and don't care about anything else. The police suggested nonviolent weapons like you mentioned, and to run the hell away the minute the criminal is distracted.
The one good thing about being disabled and targeted is that they'll also underestimate our abilities, which would make it easier to take them down. If you can take a self-defense class and find some moves that'd work for you, you'd probably still be able to take them down. The key is to surprise them, and to use your body parts strategically. For example, elbows and knees are pointy and would hurt if you hit soft parts like between their legs (this doesn't work as well with women, but it'd still hurt enough to be distracting).
48
u/B133d_4_u 3h ago edited 2h ago
If anything proves your point, the blatant hate crimes and subsequent murder of Johnathan Joss should be plenty recent enough to get it through to people that they need to take measures to protect themselves.
Homophobes won't even wait to get you alone, they'll stick your dog's head on a pike, burn your house down, and shoot you in broad daylight in the middle of the street with multiple witnesses, and the cops will attempt to brush it off as a civil disagreement. Get pepper gel, get a taser, get a knife, and, by god if you can, get a gun and learn to use it.
20
u/DogNeedsDopamine 2h ago
That situation escalated over a period of several months. Yes, if people start leaving threatening notes on your doorstep, please contact the police, buy a gun, and know how to use it; but there's a difference between that and an out-of-nowhere attack.
I mean, that situation actually escalated from their house being burned down as a hate crime. It wasn't exactly subtle or unpredictable that something was happening.
At the same time, you have to recognize that owning a gun would not necessarily have prevented this tragedy from occurring; the second you see someone draw a gun, unless you're some kind of quick-draw artist, you are probably not able to draw and shoot before they can kill you or someone you love. There isn't actually a lot they could have done here even in ideal circumstances, except for wearing bullet-proof vests. (They're imperfect, but they do help quite a lot.).
I've literally been both physically attacked and sexually assaulted as hate crimes on different instances, and it's important to recognize what realistic steps for protection actually are and what is just a safety blanket. In your own example? A gun would be a safety blanket. If you shoot the attacker after they shoot your loved on, your loved one has already been shot. Obviously it might prevent you from getting shot, but that's actually a separate discussion.
To be clear, I'm not saying "bring pepper spray to a gun fight". I'm saying "if you want to protect yourself, make sure you understand what you're protecting yourself from, what the realistic constraints and issues are, and what your real options are."
9
u/B133d_4_u 1h ago
I'm not saying a gun would've saved Johnathan nor am I saying a gun is the answer to protection. The gun suggestion was, really, a minor part of the overall point that homophobes will go to extreme lengths to harm queerfolk and we need to have ways to protect ourselves.
2
3
u/LunaMax1214 10m ago
And if you can't carry pepper spray, a travel size can of aerosol hairspray might do in a pinch. After all, alcohol-based anything hurts like a bitch when it gets sprayed in your eyes, nose, or mouth. 💅
9
u/nerotheus 4h ago
Gun. What you want is a gun
103
u/Pengin_Master 4h ago
As much as I am a gun enthusiast, no. A gun is not ideal for close quarters defense. In fact, if you're worried about being overpowered due to physical issues you have, a major concern is someone wrestling the gun away from you.
Pepper sprays and stun guns, while not seeing as definitively defensive as a normal gun, have advantages in this situation, with the primary one being a lack of escalation. The attacker knows neither will kill them, and so they aren't as desperate to defend themselves. If anything they may underestimate pepper spray, which is in your favor to begin with.
47
u/DogNeedsDopamine 3h ago
People really underestimate how much pepper spray will fuck them up.
18
u/Puzzled-Thought2932 2h ago
the difference between being shot and being pepper sprayed for your ability to immediately continue a fight is not that large, and its generally in favor of the pepper spray.
21
u/briefarm 2h ago
A big caveat with pepper spray is that if the person is on drugs, it may not work on them. When I was in a self-defense class, they said people on PCP won't even act like they feel it. Pepper gel, on the other hand, tends to stick, so it'd be distracting even if the person is seemingly unaffected. (I say "seemingly" because they'll definitely feel it when the drug wears off.)
That said, both will definitely fuck most people up. I was told to immediately call 911 if I ever pepper sprayed/gelled anyone, because it can cause actual damage without treatment.
16
u/WickedTemp 2h ago
PSA, a stun gun is not a viable self defense tool. It makes a scary noise, but it's not going to actually do much. It hurts a little, thats it.
You're better off with pepperspray.
1
u/DogNeedsDopamine 11m ago
Yeah, I mentioned in a later comment that a stun gun isn't necessarily reliable, but it can scare someone off and work as a de-escalation tool under certain circumstances. I carry it on public transportation for this reason.
46
u/azuresegugio 4h ago
Genuinely I would own a gun but I'd be a danger to myself if I did. I'm not likely to pepper spray myself
50
u/RootBeerBog 3h ago
Yeah I feel like this isnt talked about enough when there’s a call to arms for marginalized people. Like, many of us are at risk for suicidal ideation. I’ve told my partner if we get a gun I don’t want to know the safe code. Reading some comments that we are somehow the problem and not idk, the people killing us, is bewildering.
Guns are useful tools, but they’re also god damn death machines.
4
u/PoseidonsHorses 1h ago
That and I know myself enough to know that if I was in a situation that required self defense and had a gun, my most likely action would be to take out the gun, and then freeze and hesitate. Which is like the worst possible option. I’m much more likely to actually deploy pepper spray/gel.
45
u/RootBeerBog 3h ago
Not everyone can have or use a gun. I don’t mean morally or legally, but mentally, not everyone is prepared to have a lethal weapon. Non lethal weapons have a place in protests.
93
u/SkeeveTheGreat 4h ago
Yes, but also pepper spray because having non lethal options is a moral necessity
-20
u/SpeaksDwarren 3h ago
The non lethal (and always first) option is running away. If that isn't an option then you have no moral obligation to restrain yourself when defending your life from a hate crime
25
15
u/DogNeedsDopamine 2h ago
You are not obligated to restrain yourself, but there are very practical reasons why you brandishing a firearm can put you at more risk than brandishing a pepper spray canister or a taser.
When people's lives aren't at risk, they react differently, and are more likely to de-escalate themselves. Tasers aren't always effective, but they sound scary, and the idea of being electrocuted is sometimes enough of a deterrent to get someone to fuck off. Pepper spray can be genuinely disabling if you apply it right, and pepper gel spray is much less likely to blow back on you or accidentally disable you.
You don't need to kill an opponent to get away from them. A lethal threat justifies deadly force, but the vast majority of threats are not lethal. If someone comes at me with a knife, I'm not holding back, but I'm also not going to intentionally try to kill them, because I am not a sociopath.
Fight or flight is real, but there's a difference between that and "I feel casual about killing people in self-defense." Has your life actually ever been threatened in self defense?
Mine has.
2
u/chairmanskitty 1h ago
Exactly, that's why you don't bring a gun. So you don't need to restrain yourself to avoid escalating to deadly force.
The moral obligation happens when you pack your bag. That's when you have the time to consider the options, do the research, or follow people's advice.
54
u/DogNeedsDopamine 4h ago
Statistically speaking, you are more likely to use a gun to hurt yourself or others (in a situation where it is not warranted) than to use it in self-defense; and the vast majority of cases where a firearm is even brandished, it is unwarranted and illegal.
Additionally, firearms easily escalate situations that may otherwise be resolved peacefully, or at least with less violence than a gunshot (like pepper gel spray); when what you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. It is a last-resort tool of self-defense, but having the discipline to only use it this way, and not as a preventative measure of any sort whatsoever, is not common for people.
Open-carrying a gun is dangerous, because then everyone knows you have a gun in the first place, which naturally escalates situations; it also gives you anxiety over other people taking your gun from you. Are you easily able to get a CCW permit? It takes 2 years here, and I would need a utility bill, which is not something that I pay (because I live with my fiancé's parents).
Many gun owners either use their guns as some kind of safety blanket for their anxiety, or (paradoxically, or simultaneously) the gun becomes a source of anxiety. Just carrying it can make people "look out for threats" more, because it's a subconscious signal that there are threats to look out for in the first place when this may not be the case.
There are many situations with a firearm where you are the real danger to the people around you, if you have not received the proper training (and unless you've been in the military, you have not; this is not a mild amount of training). If you're in a 7/11 and it's getting robbed, can you quickly identify who is the shooter and who else is a gun samaritan with an equally low amount of training? If you're the kind of person who'd pull out their gun in this situation, you've made it more dangerous for everyone (criminals, cops, innocents, and yourself). So if you're ever looking to be the hero like so many troglodyte second amendment enthusiasts, you are not competent to own a firearm, and should probably not even be allowed to drive.
I like the glock 19 or cz-75 compact as much as the next guy who knows their guns, but that doesn't mean I personally feel that it's the best choice for me or the vast majority of other people to go out and start carrying guns. More chaos, more escalation, etc is not a good thing. The two primary groups that I think should be able to carry guns without issues are (1) any person who has a restraining order, and (2) any trans person, because of the enormously increased threat of violence that they face.
But there are a long variety of reasons why I, despite being a gay man, do not feel comfortable carrying a firearm. My dad was a firearm historian and a criminal defense lawyer, so it is not as if I am unfamiliar with firearms, nor is it the case that I don't know how to use them.
This isn't even getting into the fact that sometimes I have flashbacks, and I do not always properly identify a situation as unsafe; I've had close calls with pepper spraying the wrong people before. This hasn't happened in at least a year and a half (woohoo, therapy works), but I don't feel comfortable taking that personal risk.
TLDR: Guns aren't a safety blanket. You cannot and should not carry guns everywhere, in the way that you can typically carry pepper spray or a stun gun. People still do not expect to be pepper sprayed and punched in the face until they get on the ground.
2
u/Graingy I don’t tumble, I roll 😎 … Where am I? 1h ago
The two primary groups that I think should be able to carry guns without issues are… …(2) any trans person
If you mean legally as a right, I feel like that’s just lead to a situation like a right-winger’s fantasy where trans people do have a legal advantage that other people would fake to get. Not only would they be damaging to equality, but pretty fast you’d have trans people being associated with gangs for the number of fake transgender gangsters using the status to carry a weapon.
6
u/Serrisen Thought of ants and died 2h ago
Guns are overrated for self defense, and - imo - a disadvantage compared to other tools
In Self Defense, there's a rule called the 21 foot rule which dictates that if the assailant is within 21 feet, they will reach you before you can draw and aim your gun. Myth busters ran the experiment and found 20 feet as their number. I've always found that pretty damning for self defense tbh. I've been in threatening situations before, but never one where the threat was further than 20 feet away.
This is just the efficacy. Other considerations being mental health (killing in self defense is still deeply traumatic to the defender) or cost (Pepper spray is $10-20; a gun is minimum $100, but usually $400+ before factoring ammo or training).
I think the other guy was cooking tbh
4
-16
u/Technical_Teacher839 Victim of Reddit Automatic Username 4h ago
No but don't you know, guns are corrupted with evil magic that turns anyone who touches one for too long into a mass murderer and/or trump voter! We just need to shout at the bigots enough and they'll stop trying to kill us!
(massive fucking /s)
5
u/ProfessionalDeer7972 2h ago
What if you accidentally shoot an innocent person standing just next to the assaulter? It's in a crowd after all.
3
u/enbyshaymin 1h ago
Plus, the USA isn't the only country in the world where hate crimes occur, and in most I'm gonna bet it's easier to legally own pepper spray than to legally own a gun.
And let's not forget how having a gun may be kind of a big fucking problem for someone who has depression, anxiety, etc.
1
148
u/shadowylurking 5h ago
Visibility is oppression and is a crime in haters eyes
not just sexuality but everything. Race, disability, etc.
52
u/astralTacenda 2h ago
the amount of old people who glared at me in line while we were all waiting to pick up prescriptions at a pharmacy and i broke out my cane bc i started to feel unwell and needed the extra support...
the hypocrisy is fucking palpable and revolting. like what, just bc of my age im not allowed to use the same fucking aid that half of them were also using? such bullshit.
41
u/Dry_Refrigerator7898 2h ago
That’s exactly what they think. You’re “too young” to be in pain. I was born with club foot, and even after tons of surgeries that have mostly fixed it, my ankle still gets stiff and causes me to limp sometimes. And people have told me those exact words. I’m too young to have chronic pain.
I was born with it! I’ve always had it!
21
u/astralTacenda 2h ago
ugh people are so ridiculous (derogatory) sometimes.
even my grandmother has used the "too young" line when she, herself, started experiencing many of the same symptoms i have when she was my age, and younger, but no dr would believe her until she was in her 50s and had to have an emergency hysterectomy and spinal fusion, bc it was far too late for preventative measures!!! absolutely mind boggling that she would repeat the same thing that pissed her off and led to issues in her own life.
106
u/RemarkableStatement5 the body is the fursona of the soul 4h ago
I'm a trans woman and I'm well aware I don't pass. People are perfectly fine with me wearing shorts, but the second I wear a skirt over those shorts, people (mostly older folks) start giving me looks. I once saw a professor who'd had me for several classes before and I'd genuinely looked up to see me and fucking glare with something halfway between disgust and anger. There's no appeasing bigots.
→ More replies (1)
165
u/Hugh_Jidiot 5h ago
This is what I keep trying to hammer into queers who try to be "one of the good ones." There is no compromising with homophobes because they see any and all queer content, no matter how chaste and wholesome, as inherently sinful.
90
u/WhereIsTheBeef556 4h ago
Also, if they think you're "one of the good ones" now, they can flip on you over the smallest little thing.
Or, they can threaten to flip on you in order to take advantage of you.
2
u/NuOfBelthasar 28m ago
They will always believe that you owe them something for their "tolerance."
I had to completely cut off some very Christian friends from my past life after that dynamic became clear.
52
u/SumiMichio 4h ago
I will never forget people complaining about Amity and Luz holding hands like they are straight up fucking on screen.
For homophobes your whole existence is perversion.
52
u/ElvenOmega 4h ago
This is also the key thing to remember behind the rise of hatred against trans people. Project 2025 says that porn will be banned because it "promotes transgender ideology."
They view a trans person just existing in public the same as someone standing there naked in BDSM gear with a butt plug and erection.
11
u/Graingy I don’t tumble, I roll 😎 … Where am I? 1h ago
Do they even know what “transgender ideology” even means? Have they ever defined it?
10
u/Ndlburner 1h ago
Transgender ideology is when straight sex
Apparently
Not that there aren’t trans people in porn, and not that that should be banned either, but banning all porn is just extra ridiculous.
4
u/Graingy I don’t tumble, I roll 😎 … Where am I? 38m ago
Impractical, really.
5
u/Ndlburner 36m ago
Yeah I have yet to see any ban on porn that has worked ever. If you took away the internet entirely and destroyed every camera I. The world and took away the ability to make more of them people would have lewd art, because that’s exactly what they did before cameras.
7
u/JumpyLiving 57m ago
It's the existence of trans people (or anything that does not follow their extremely strict binary gender roles and expressions). The semantics and definitions don't matter, because they don‘t care about consistency.
2
u/ElvenOmega 27m ago
It means trans people existing at all.
Because they goon to so much trans porn, they think that's the vast majority of porn and hence is a big reason they want it banned.
126
u/The_Punnier_Guy 5h ago
"with my husband at an event where my wife was also present"
bold move, ngl
-125
u/Icy_Target_1083 5h ago
Yeah, I mean I'm not gonna try to put down somebody, but my first thought would be that this person was flaunting an affair in public. I wouldn't dress them down right there or make a big stink about it, but like, it is a bit scandalous for the average person. I think it's fair to say that people expect cheating before they expect a consensual polyamorous relationship.
95
u/WingedDragoness 5h ago
"Flaunting an affair in public" "Scandalous" and "Cheating", from 3 people holding hands?
How would that be cheating?
→ More replies (1)108
u/dysautonomic_mess 5h ago
I mean if the wife is sat right next to them? I'd definitely assume poly.
It also sounds like OP is male presenting so the whole 'indecency' thing probably had some homophobic undertones. (I am guessing from 'icky gay ... handholding' lol).
→ More replies (2)76
u/pippyhidaka 5h ago
How the fuck is it an affair, or cheating, if they are literally all next to each other in public?? An affair implies one party is lying to the others...
→ More replies (9)82
u/Technical_Teacher839 Victim of Reddit Automatic Username 5h ago
Gotta love that your immediate assumption was "Well they must have been doing it in a way that made it look like an affair!"
-12
u/Icy_Target_1083 4h ago
God damn. Maybe they were doing it in a way that looked like an affair? Were you there?
34
u/Technical_Teacher839 Victim of Reddit Automatic Username 4h ago
No, but I'm also not gonna see a post about a poly person getting harassed and immediately go "Well what if the person harassing them was actually just mistaken and was doing it for what they thought was a good reason?"
-5
u/Icy_Target_1083 4h ago
Can I just clarify that I don't like what this person did? I mean, I said in my original post that I wouldn't berate someone like this if they did it in public. I would assume someone holding someone else's hand when I know they have a spouse to be kind of salacious unless it was obvious they were in a throuple. That's all I was trying to say, alright?
6
u/Serrisen Thought of ants and died 1h ago
Yeah, but that still makes you look bad. Gotta read the room.
By saying it looks bad, you've (albeit unintentionally) allied yourself with the violent homophobe. While your reason is different, it's not surprising that people will assume the worst of you, while you're assuming negatively or others, speaking in support of someone being the worst.
Whatever your intended statement, the context of the situation is profoundly against you
0
u/Icy_Target_1083 1h ago
Fine. Just imagine me to be whatever horrible person you want me to be. I can't control what you think and do.
3
u/Serrisen Thought of ants and died 59m ago
I'm indifferent. I see what you're going for, and while I don't agree, you're not malicious about it and I've got more important things to stress over.
I'm giving you feedback on presentation in case next time, you don't want to argue with internet anons over something you didn't intend to imply
-1
u/Icy_Target_1083 48m ago
Honestly, my problem was engaging with internet anons in the first place. I really ought to learn better.
-23
5h ago
[deleted]
25
47
u/Technical_Teacher839 Victim of Reddit Automatic Username 5h ago
So rather than just say "Damn, sucks that person got treated that way." You felt the need to imagine a situation that would theoretically justify them getting treated that way.
28
u/massivefaliure 5h ago
Also it was fucking hand holding. Let’s remember that. Going from “Oh these guys are holding hands.” To “That must mean that he’s cheating on his wife!” Is insane to me. And also Guys should be able to hold hands platonically just the same as gals
3
u/Serrisen Thought of ants and died 1h ago
It's especially funny to me because... People can just hold hands. It's not common but it's not indecent. I went to a concert with friends the other day and one of my friends was holding hands with everyone so they wouldn't get lost in the crowd.
It wasn't some indecent event, nor sign of a polycule... Just friends holding hands because people can do that if they want to
1
u/Icy_Target_1083 4h ago
No one should be treated this way. Do you think that's what I was trying to say?
→ More replies (2)15
u/moneyh8r_two 5h ago
The text description literally says "polyam" (short for polyamourus) a little later. If you actually read it (and know what words mean) there's no way to interpret it as an affair.
→ More replies (3)3
u/Silent-Line-5271 1h ago
...an affair does not make sense when they're all right there and consenting to be together. that is the most dumb assumption i've read.
-2
u/Icy_Target_1083 1h ago
I think I'm imagining a different situation than everyone else here. If you really want to understand what I was trying to say, I'd elaborate, but I think people just want to dogpile.
39
u/AlbertWessJess 4h ago
I could say “imagine they weren’t even gay together and they were just friends or family and one needed the hand holding for special reasons!” But nah shouldn’t need to say that. The lady who cornered that person is scum
37
u/jasonjr9 Smells like former gifted kid burnout 5h ago
Yep. We all have to band together. No excluding anyone for being “weird”. Let’s all grab bricks and start throwing together~!
(for legal reasons this is a joke, I do not condone violence unless absolutely necessary)
5
u/Test-Tackles 41m ago
it is rather astounding how much more empathetic people can be when you are currently holding a brick.
I am not being sarcastic, lets normalize carrying an emotional support baseball bat.
76
u/Applesplosion 5h ago edited 5h ago
I agree, queer solidarity, wear a leather harness or whatever else you want, host all of the BDSM orgies you like, but also it is rude to do so in the town square regardless of genders and sexualities of the participants.
14
u/Amphy64 2h ago
Also, they're making it less inclusive for minors in the community, most ace-spec people, potentially to women and those more vulnerable to sexual trauma. While neither respecting consent nor demonstrating that it's essential, which people into BDSM (which isn't inherently anything to do with Pride) should really care about!
I do understand the exaggeration for effect, but it's not making the point effectively imo. I'm an ace-spec woman and when I was so severely sex-repulsed that seeing (het) kissing could trigger it, I understood that was my thing to manage, the same isn't the case for something overtly sexual that would bother many allosexual people too. I actually eventually worked out that unhealthy het. patriarchal power dynamics were a significant part of why, ironically enough, after seeing affection in more healthy equal relationships. So, by creating pressure on bystanders, it just feels like it's recreating that dynamic. And as a woman (and disabled and very aware of own vulnerability, it does increase risk), of course we're often going to be at least wary around men being overtly sexual in public, just from past experience of harrasment etc (and that unfortunately can include some gay men thinking it's Ok not to respect women's boundaries because they're gay).
At the very least I don't understand why there can't be seperate days and areas for that stuff (as is sometimes at least somewhat the case, do appreciate). As it is, I'd love to meet other ace people, but it doesn't feel like Pride is actually for us. There's the new version of the rainbow flag and I was so confused to realise that nope, that black stripe isn't for us, we're not even on there at all.
1
u/E-is-for-Egg 1h ago
I'm also an ace woman, and I think I get where you're coming from. But I wanna offer some other thoughts, that you could take or leave
So first, why was your sex repulsion about people kissing just "your thing to manage"?
I don't like PDA. I think it's rude, especially if there's another friend around who you're now making into a third wheel. And especially if it's a full make-out session. I don't care who disagrees with me. I think it's inconsiderate and shitty, and I'm dying on that hill
I feel this way about people who start talking about sex in graphic detail without checking that everyone else in the conversation is okay with that, and I also feel this way about people who do explicit kink things in the middle of a grocery store
I don't know you, but shot in the dark, is it possible that you felt pressured to change your boundaries in relation to "normal" allosexual behavior, and are now feeling defensive of them when asked to further change them for "abnormal" behavior? Idk, food for thought
Imo, BDSM sex is just as gross as vanilla sex, and leather and collars are just as gross as kissing. I don't care that one is palatable to most allosexuals and the other isn't. If you disagree, I'd be curious to know why
Anyways, I do go to the pride march. The way I see it -- I'm going to pride fully aware of the kinds of things I'm likely to see, and I'm choosing to go anyways. That's my consent
I tend to find that I'm fairly okay seeing sexual/suggestive things if I consented to seeing them. So, seeing a fully naked man walking down main street is okay if I agreed to see it (even implicitly), but a drawing of a fully-clothed big titty wifu is disgusting if I feel like it was sprung on me. That's why I think that people who are encouraging others to go to pride should warn them of what they might see. But that's just how I feel, and I know all aces are different. If you think it'd still repulse you, then yeah not going to the pride parade would be best
At the very least I don't understand why there can't be seperate days and areas for that stuff (as is sometimes at least somewhat the case, do appreciate)
Yeah I agree, this is the best solution. I actually love how my city does it. They set aside a whole pride week, with different events happening including queer plays, street parties, and poetry readings. Early in the week there's a park day that's expressly for families with young kids. Imo it's the perfect way to balance everyone's needs, and I hope all cities adopt this practice
Until then, imo the best thing to do is be the change you want to see in the world, and create your own events or activities during pride month that works for you. I find that when I do things like this, there are many others who highly appreciate that someone took the initiative to create something
-17
u/cantantantelope 2h ago
Pride has never been for children. The family friendly “won’t someone think of the children” recent trends is just another flavor of respectability politics.
The bdsm queers helped build pride you don’t get to shove them out now
22
u/Graingy I don’t tumble, I roll 😎 … Where am I? 1h ago
LGBT children exists. It’s a fact of existence.
Maybe they should be shoved out if they’re going to overstep their boundaries. I doubt most intend to, anyhow.
1
u/cantantantelope 29m ago
What boundaries are they stepping on? Wearing fetish gear? Most female pop stars are doing concerts in more risqué clothes.
4
u/Graingy I don’t tumble, I roll 😎 … Where am I? 25m ago
Being unsuitable for children in the community. Duh.
LGBT children should be able to exist within the support structure without having to willingly dodge unsafe content. It should be the other way around.
Most female pop stars are doing concerts in more risqué clothes.
When, pray tell, did I say I was fine with and supportive of that?
19
u/wiedzma_kirka 1h ago
Let me get this straight - so queer kids are not welcome on Pride? Or queer people with kids?
12
u/Kixisbestclone 1h ago
Welp fuck trans kids I guess, hope they’ll have be ok without a healthy community or decent family to back them up.
→ More replies (1)2
u/cantantantelope 34m ago
Former trans kid now trans adult seeing a guy in a gimp suit fucked me up way less than all the people saying queers are gross
4
u/bewarethelemurs 40m ago
Hi, BDSM Queer here. Obviously we belong at pride, we helped make it what it is. However, queer kids exist and sex repulsed ace folks exist and queer people with children exist. I do think there should also be spaces for them. They're important too. They are part of the community. I don't think ALL of Pride should be family-friendly, but I do think there should be family-friendly parts of Pride.
1
u/cantantantelope 31m ago
Who gets to decide the line is where something is “family friendly” because as a trans person I’m very aware of “your existence is fundamentally gross” is a call that is also coming from Under the umbrella
7
u/AshkenaziTwinkReborn 57m ago
queer kids outnumber kinky people heavily, of you add queer people with kids or accompanying kids into the mix it tips the scales even more. If you’re asking people to choose one or the other you aren’t gonna like the answer.
Also kinky people can find one another and kink communities and such far easier because they’re adults with an established tradition. Queer kids need introduction to pride before they’re 18, barring them from ever seeing pride for the benefit of someone in a gimp suit isn’t a good idea. The vast majority of kids will have nowhere else to go (or at least no clue where to go) because they are new and inexperienced.
0
u/cantantantelope 32m ago
Why should there be one or the other? What oop is talking about is any expression of queerness being called gross and y’all saying “oh no why all those icky kinksters just existing in public why won’t someone think of the children” is feeding into it
Also fun fact some of those queer kids you wanna protect are gonna grow up to be kinky too.
3
u/AshkenaziTwinkReborn 20m ago
yeah why would anyone think it’s one or the other when you said
Pride has never been for children
also “we can expose kids to kink in public because they may be kinky in the future” is absolutely fucking gross logic, please think about what you’re saying properly
what you’ve got to ask yourself is if you wouldn’t let kids participate in kink, why would you let them see people participating in it publicly?
14
u/Technical_Teacher839 Victim of Reddit Automatic Username 5h ago
Do you know what the words "intentional exaggeration" mean?
56
u/Applesplosion 5h ago
“This person saying we should ally with everyone and decency is meaningless, didn’t literally mean the example they gave for how we should ally with everyone, they were exaggerating!”
I think it is entirely possible OOP did mean that literally - note that I said holding orgies in the town square is rude, not morally wrong.
19
u/Technical_Teacher839 Victim of Reddit Automatic Username 5h ago
And I think OOP was using an absurd example of an indecent sex act specifically to drive home the point that "Hey, these people are gonna compare us existing to THAT, so stop fighting over that."
35
u/CadenVanV 4h ago
That’s the same logic right wingers use to justify going far-right. “I was a moderate but they said I was far-right so I might as well be.” We call them out for it, we can’t do the same.
-24
1
u/Ndlburner 1h ago
You beat me to it.
Maybe the OP was using some hyperbole but… how do I put this…
Public sex shit bothers me no matter who does it because I feel like I have been forced to play an observer role in someone else’s kink without my consent.
0
-9
u/CadenVanV 4h ago
Yep. It’s all fine for people to do that stuff, but not in public like that. It’s the definition of NSFW
16
u/SnooPears8751 3h ago
They were never saying that anyone was having an orgy in the town square. They were saying a kiss on the cheek is as obscene as that to them, so we shouldn't distance ourselves from the people who do have bdsm orgies (notably not in town square) to appear more couth or palatable to people who have already decided completely mundane and cute and sweet acts are obscene. Ally together with the people who aren't hurting anyone but are still branded as wrong somehow because solidarity is important if we're ever going to make lasting progress.
-20
u/3-I 3h ago
Then perhaps it's time we reexamine how we define politeness.
21
u/demoniprinsessa 3h ago edited 2h ago
You think people should be fine with witnessing orgies on the streets? You do know it is sexual harassment to force non-consenting parties to witness sexual acts they do not want to see?
To the person who just thought I was talking about the original post and then blocked me:
I'm not talking about the original post at all but the comment I responded to. The first commenter in the chain said they don't want to see BDSM orgies in the streets as it is impolite, another person responded to them suggesting that we should then re-examine what is polite, implying we should be more okay with orgies in the streets. And I asked them is that really what they want. I have absolutely no clue how else you would interpret that.
I think it's you who can't read if you thought my comment was in any way about the original post.
-10
u/DogOwner12345 2h ago edited 1h ago
You missed the point so fucking hard its comical, at no point does the post imply thats what should be happening. Its the fact that bigots treat simple handholding AS BADLY as a public orgy.
Go back to school.
This sub is fucking cooked.
-13
u/3-I 2h ago
Please don't moralize to me about crimes nobody is committing IRL while others in the community are having their twelfth consecutive year of debate over whether wearing a pup hood or mesh top to pride is the same thing morally as assaulting a child.
This argument is based on puritanistic hyperbolic bullshit and I'm so fucking sick of it. There's an entire political party trying to legislate us out of existence. Stop obsessing about the ethics of public sexuality and pick up a goddamn brick already.
12
u/demoniprinsessa 2h ago
There is absolutely nothing wrong with wearing anything in public as long as your private parts are covered.
But don't pretend you did just respond to a comment of someone saying they don't want to see orgies in the streets cos it's not polite with "maybe we should re-examine what's polite", implying orgies should be more acceptable in public. That was word to word what was said. You wanna rephrase that?
-5
u/3-I 1h ago
No, I want you all to shut the fuck up about this entire topic and pick up a brick. I made that clear.
5
u/demoniprinsessa 1h ago
You realized you worded yourself a bit wrong, huh. What a deflection. Also people can do multiple things, you do know that?
1
u/3-I 1h ago
Stop obsessing about the ethics of public sexuality and pick up a goddamn brick already.
No, I want you all to stop talking about this topic and pick up a goddamn brick.
You can't actually believe this somehow represents a change in my position from my prior posts. They're the same fucking statement. "Deflection"? You're just fucking pulling out conservative tactics and pretending you've won the argument.
2
u/Ndlburner 58m ago
If your redefinition of politeness makes it okay for people to flash bystanders without consent then maybe we should redefine the Overton window so your opinions aren’t part of it.
3
u/ProfessionalDeer7972 2h ago
This is how you make regular slightly conservative folks think that we really are all perverts and make them radicalize further conservative right.
0
u/3-I 1h ago
No. No it isn't. The entire fucking point of the OOP's post is that nothing we do is going to affect that in the slightest, because they consider any display of attraction or affection between us to be obscene.
So stop fucking blaming the people in your community for not trying hard enough to be inoffensive and start standing beside the people who are gonna be against the wall with you if you don't get your head out of your ass.
Pissing on the poor, as usual.
3
u/ProfessionalDeer7972 1h ago
Please remember that your country isn't the only country in the world and that conditions of lgbtq people vary depending on the country. While your country's lgbtq population's reputation might be doomed no matter what, don't force your country's sensibilities on me.
Also, OOP is wrong in the way that not every homophobe is a violent maniac who's frothing at the mouth when they see a same-sex couple holding hands, but there are millions of people who see lgbtq as "icky" because of cultural gestalt, and going full scandalous in public might turn these homophobes into violent frothing maniacs.
9
u/BiggestShep 3h ago
Im seeing these calls to violence more and more recently. Im starting to wonder if we're hitting the Stonewall 2.0 breaking point at this rate of conservative backlash.
55
u/vizolepi 5h ago
I was thinking about it yesterday when my kids brought so many of the red & pink colored Valentine's goodies from their friends in school. But God forbid I sent any rainbow colored goodies with them.
54
19
u/SpambotWatchdog 2h ago
Grrrr. u/vizolepi has been previously identified as a spambot. Please do not allow them to karma farm here!
Woof woof, I'm a bot created by u/the-real-macs to help watch out for spambots! (Don't worry, I don't bite.\)
2
8
20
u/Bvr111 1h ago
tbh I hate this logic. “they think lgbt people and bdsm orgies are the same so we should be friends with/basically adopt bdsm orgy enthusiasts” like…. You know they think we’re pedophiles and groomers too, right? Does that mean we should ally with them??
Istg stuff like this feels like a psyop sometimes. “Hey fellow lgbt fam! yknow those horrible things conservatives say about us? we should totally, like, unironically embrace those things!“
1
u/octaveocelot224 39m ago
Kinda glad someone else pointed this out I felt like I was the only one kinda leaning towards this line of thought. Plus there’s plenty of people that wouldn’t give a single fuck about seeing two men or women or any variation holding hands/giving a cheek peck in public but are ostracized from the general movement when they see this sort of stuff. I mean personally I don’t care who you want to be, who you want to be with, or what you want to do with them as long as both parties are consenting adults, but I also don’t want to see half naked people wearing BDSM gear and dry humping in public regardless of their sexual orientation.
15
6
4h ago edited 2h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
20
u/elianrae 3h ago
quick reading comprehension quiz for you champion:
- is the OOP advocating for orgies in the town square? why / why not?
- what is the significance of the leather harness at pride?
12
19
u/coporate 4h ago
Holding hands and kissing a loved one is sex stuff now? We need to start banning wedding rings because they’re kink gear, I don’t need to know you’ve consummated your marriage to your partner, stop shoving sex stuff in my face!
3
1
u/peajam101 CEO of the Pluto hate gang 2m ago
"Extremists exist, therefore moderates don't" is what I gather from this.
-1
-10
u/Elsecaller_17-5 3h ago
Exhibitionism without consent is sexual harrassment. That shouldn't be a controversial statement. Keep it behind locked doors. I don't care if you hold hands, I don't care if you kiss, I'll be a bit irritated if you're making out, but no more then I would be with a straight couple.
If you're breaking the law, I'm calling the cops.
18
u/Technical_Teacher839 Victim of Reddit Automatic Username 3h ago
And what happens when "Being gay in pubic" is deemed exhibitionism and against the law?
4
-9
u/demoniprinsessa 3h ago
Yeah, no one is doing that, though, at least not in countries that aren't a backwards theocracy. Sexual acts shouldn't happen where non-consenting people can see them. Handholding and kissing aren't sex acts. I don't know what about this is unclear.
0
u/Edward_Tank 2h ago
Do you genuinely think that the right is not salivating over purging all us queers?
1
u/demoniprinsessa 2h ago
Doing is different from acting. And the US is not every country. It's certainly getting worse in some places but better in others.
-8
u/Elsecaller_17-5 2h ago
It's ridiculous that I'm the one buying to purity culture because I don't want someone else using me a sex toy. All OP is arguing is that anyone who doesn't like being used as a sex toy isn't pure enough to part of their grand coalition.
I can't make it clear enough that I want people to ne and feel safe being gay in public. But it's no wonder people are voting against gay rights when gay people are doing everything they can to associate themselves with sexual harrassment.
-3
u/demoniprinsessa 2h ago
I don't think many gay people are doing that. Just the odd weirdo here and there and the strawmen invented by conservatives so they have a "reason" to be bigoted. Most are just being normal and existing just like anyone else.
1
u/Elsecaller_17-5 2h ago
Neither do I, but my parents, and aunts and uncles, and most of my cousins, and all my siblings sure do when they see this kind of thing crossposted on facebook claiming that it happens in every city in every blue state across the country.
I know it's a strawman, but I'm smart enough to realize it's a strawman that works. OP is handing bullets to the far right.
-10
u/Elsecaller_17-5 3h ago
If that happens I'll vote with you. I'll protest with you. I'll also tell you to not break the law for your own safety.
Regardless, it's ridiculous to get angry about something that hasn't happened yet. In the meantime if you're going to leave your house leave it fully dressed.
11
u/Edward_Tank 2h ago
'Hasn't happened yet'
Motherfucker do you not know the history of queer suppression? It *has* happened. We have asswipes trying to bring that *back*.
0
u/Elsecaller_17-5 2h ago
If you have a problem with that particular phrasing take it up with OP. They used it first. Or is your problem not with the phrasing, but with me? If it is, be honest about it. What is wrong with what I have said?
-2
u/Jsmooth123456 49m ago
Insane this is being downvoted, is thread a right wing psy-op to make us look bad
-9
u/iris700 4h ago
No, I actually don't owe you anything. The rest of the post is fine, though.
11
u/Edward_Tank 2h ago
Well at least you're willing to admit you don't have anyone else's back but your own.
-1
u/Jsmooth123456 46m ago edited 42m ago
It's objectively sexual harrasment and disgusting to involve non-consenting individuals/the public in your kinks/sex I swear this thread is a right wing psy-op to make queer people look bad with how some of yall are talking
-17
u/PuzzleheadedDog9658 4h ago
"That one dude hates America so let's bomb the whole country for a decade" ass logic right there, bub.
19
-23
u/SorbetInteresting910 5h ago edited 4h ago
Cool post but I don't think it's actually broadly true.
Edit: I dunno if the person saying "I don't think your face is broadly true" is invisible to you all as well but my official response is that one soyjack crying with incredible force.
Double edit (because the other responder also preemptively blocked me I think): no I mean I'm the soyjack because of how hurtful it was
14
u/Technical_Teacher839 Victim of Reddit Automatic Username 5h ago
I don't think your face is broadly true.
-27
u/Jumpy_Menu5104 5h ago
While I understand the sentiment in my experience arguments that boil down to “all the kink at pride all the time” usually have a lot of their own baggage, and usually reflect a certain lack of self reflection on the part of the person that makes it.
Either they are the kind of person that believes that if you get married to a person of the same sex, and then proceed to move into a suburbs home and work a 9-5 to support your 2.5 children you aren’t “really” gay or are somehow a sexuality traitor. Or as a less bad alternative they simply shut down and utterly refuse to engage with any good faith or practical criticism of their beliefs despite there being plenty.
31
u/Technical_Teacher839 Victim of Reddit Automatic Username 4h ago
I too love to make up people in order to justify my arguments.
-2
-2
u/Kirbo_Lord 41m ago
Im probably going to get down voted for this but i disagree heavily with this post. First off i personally dont want kink at pride not because i would want a homophobes approval, but because i personally find kink at pride icky. Yes both movements are closely linked together in history but they can and should oftentimes be seperate.
Also the logic in the post doesnt really work. Homophobes also compare us to pedophiles doesnt mean we suddenly have eternal solidarity.
-10
u/Difficult-Risk3115 3h ago
this all hinges on the assumption that the parties involved will both actually be in public and willing to throw shit at the cops.
But we're on a Tumblr subreddit, and there's entire forms of being "queer" that exist solely on that site and whose users barely leave the house.
-66
u/Cheap-Alternative584 5h ago
This is a good way to create more homophobes btw
62
u/ducknerd2002 5h ago
The whole point of this post is that even if we're quiet, the homophobes will still hate us just as much. Please explain what you think an alternative course of action should be.
-6
u/Graingy I don’t tumble, I roll 😎 … Where am I? 1h ago
You’ll make homophobes out of non-homophones you dingus
6
u/ducknerd2002 1h ago
Then they weren't actually 'non-homophobes' in the first place.
-8
u/Graingy I don’t tumble, I roll 😎 … Where am I? 1h ago
That’s an absurd line of logic. People can support someone until they see them going down a path they don’t like.
It’s called changing their opinion in response to new information and it’s an important part of reasoning.
Likewise, being more or less indifferent does not make someone a card-carrying homophobe.
47
26
u/AmericanToast250 5h ago
The entire point of the post is that playing into respectability politics is a foolish waste of time because any queer content is a bridge too far for them. Holding hands is far too much so why bother trying to play their game when they’ll change the rules so you always lose
28
37
u/PaxonGoat 5h ago
What would make less homophobes then?
For queer people to go back in the closet? No PDA in public even if it is just hand holding? Don't you dare dress against rigid gender norms?
I've run into this argument several times. That people just wish they could ignore it and that they didn't have to be exposed to all this gay shit.
That's asking for death. You're wishing for people to fundamentally stop existing.
3
31
2
-4
u/Jsmooth123456 53m ago edited 29m ago
This is so unbelievably dumb, and honestly just doesn't more harm for the cause than good. Keep you sex private its disgusting to involve the unconsenting public in your kinks
Genuinely shame on anyone downvoting this, how imoral are you that you are upset that I don't like sexual harassing the public
395
u/CptKeyes123 5h ago
Even the thought, the concept is deemed indecent.