Live data from Hacker News

A History of Leather at Pride: 1965-1995

aphyr.com

31–33 of 33 posts

Re: A History of Leather at Pride: 1965-1995

#31
post #14

For cishet folks on HN: this writing isn't about or for you. I've seen a lot of this community's homophobia, misogyny, transphobia, and generally reactionary political drift over the last 12 years--including replies to my technical writing. I know exactly how this conversation is going to go if it happens here. I'm asking y'all not to have it. I'm returning a 403 on HN referrals to aphyr.com as a mild discouragement.…

[deleted]

Re: A History of Leather at Pride: 1965-1995

#32
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally find that the most uncivilized people always come dressed in suit and tie.

Like any other thing, it depends on why someone wears it. A trans man wearing a traditional man's cut to celebrate getting top surgery at pride is probably not what you had in mind though.

Hm, I'd personally go with a bow tie.

Nothing wrong with those.

Re: A History of Leather at Pride: 1965-1995

#33

> Consent is key to healthy BDSM practice, but the public did not consent to seeing these sexual displays (...). By wearing leather harnesses and chaining each other up in broad daylight, kinksters have unethically involved non-consenting bystanders in a BDSM scene for their own (likely sexual) gratification. Do young people have such a warped view of consent now that wearing a leather harness in public is considered…

"wearing leather harnesses and chaining each other up" is a bit different than just wearing a leather harness in public. But also how hard is it to just be civilized when you're in public? I don't need you to wear a suit and tie, but at least have some decency.

Who defines "civilized" and why does that seem to particularly exclude specific categories of people?
Post reply on HN