idk if it’s because I’m autistically naive or if it’s because I’m old and words meant different things back in the day, but I was under the impression that the Q part covered everything that wasn’t vanilla cishet, and that’s why “Queer” was synonymous with “weird.”
so kink just seems like an inherent part of it to me, because I thought Pride was about being out and proud about being Different from the vanilla cishet mainstream
but also I’m just some rural yokel, what do I know
idk about this. Following this logic a cis het dude into feet or BDSM would be queer and I don’t think they should count bc they aren’t being discriminated against the way a LGBT person is. I do think there’s certain kinks/ways cis het people could be considered queer but I think this definition obscures why Pride exists to begin with.
I think part of queerness is not fitting in traditional gender and/or sexuality roles. Like is the libs of Tiktok lady coming after y’all just for existing?
I’m not hating on y’all and you’re definitely welcome at Pride imo but it feels weird to say everyone who has a kink is queer when kinks are so normalized that it would basically mean everyone is queer at that point. I also feel like that definition makes things weird for asexual people (who definitely are a part of the community bc they do face similar discrimination and marginalization.)
I think part of queerness is not fitting in traditional gender and/or sexuality roles. Like is the libs of Tiktok lady coming after y’all just for existing?
I agree that it’s weird to consider it a form of queerness, but I think the libs of TikTok lady would definitely go after a lot of people just for having kinks
She doesn’t though. People in the US openly talk about sex online a lot (even in front of children) but she only goes after queer people and allies saying queer people should be allowed to exist.
It was the + before the + iirc. It meant a lot of things, queer, genderqueer, questioning. It was meant as an umbrella term, then people added an umbrella on top of the umbrella.
I don’t want to get in the middle of this kink at pride discussion, much less define what queerness is, but I will just say that I am a very kinky cishet guy. I wouldn’t identify as queer just because I’m kinky/nonvanilla. That would seem deeply problematic to me if I did it because I don’t think my kinks queer my sexual orientation, in fact I kinda feel like my kinks in totality reinforce my cishetness. I can see how queerness and kink are mutually inclusive but I wouldn’t think that they are mutually exhaustive.
I don’t go to any of the kink-specific festivals or rallies though. I feel like they’re kinda cringe? Maybe it’s just me. I went to one once but got bored because it wasn’t kinky enough for me so I left and went to the library. I guess I expected a kinky orgy or something, I don’t know.
I think it’s more like, from the perspective of patriarchal normative society etc, kinks are seen as similarly deviant to queerness, not that they’re literally the same thing
idk if it’s because I’m autistically naive or if it’s because I’m old and words meant different things back in the day, but I was under the impression that the Q part covered everything that wasn’t vanilla cishet, and that’s why “Queer” was synonymous with “weird.”
so kink just seems like an inherent part of it to me, because I thought Pride was about being out and proud about being Different from the vanilla cishet mainstream
but also I’m just some rural yokel, what do I know
idk about this. Following this logic a cis het dude into feet or BDSM would be queer and I don’t think they should count bc they aren’t being discriminated against the way a LGBT person is. I do think there’s certain kinks/ways cis het people could be considered queer but I think this definition obscures why Pride exists to begin with.
I think part of queerness is not fitting in traditional gender and/or sexuality roles. Like is the libs of Tiktok lady coming after y’all just for existing?
I’m not hating on y’all and you’re definitely welcome at Pride imo but it feels weird to say everyone who has a kink is queer when kinks are so normalized that it would basically mean everyone is queer at that point. I also feel like that definition makes things weird for asexual people (who definitely are a part of the community bc they do face similar discrimination and marginalization.)
I agree that it’s weird to consider it a form of queerness, but I think the libs of TikTok lady would definitely go after a lot of people just for having kinks
She doesn’t though. People in the US openly talk about sex online a lot (even in front of children) but she only goes after queer people and allies saying queer people should be allowed to exist.
I’m a solid millennial and queer and kink are basically the same thing in all of my circles too so yeah basically this.
I think the queer is short for genderqueer rather than just generalised queer/weird.
It was the + before the + iirc. It meant a lot of things, queer, genderqueer, questioning. It was meant as an umbrella term, then people added an umbrella on top of the umbrella.
I don’t want to get in the middle of this kink at pride discussion, much less define what queerness is, but I will just say that I am a very kinky cishet guy. I wouldn’t identify as queer just because I’m kinky/nonvanilla. That would seem deeply problematic to me if I did it because I don’t think my kinks queer my sexual orientation, in fact I kinda feel like my kinks in totality reinforce my cishetness. I can see how queerness and kink are mutually inclusive but I wouldn’t think that they are mutually exhaustive.
I don’t go to any of the kink-specific festivals or rallies though. I feel like they’re kinda cringe? Maybe it’s just me. I went to one once but got bored because it wasn’t kinky enough for me so I left and went to the library. I guess I expected a kinky orgy or something, I don’t know.
I think it’s more like, from the perspective of patriarchal normative society etc, kinks are seen as similarly deviant to queerness, not that they’re literally the same thing
I agree with this but in a less literal way? Idk how to phrase it