As even the most saccharine queer representation comes under attack, and porn bans proliferate across the U.S., some queer people have rightfully sanitized their presence online and IRL; but others—sex party promoters, kink community leaders and educators alike—have refused to shy away from the more explicit aspects of the queer experience.
Despite what pearl-clutching critics of play parties, bathhouses and other sex-inclusive spaces would have you believe, the bacchanalian festivities actually serve important cultural and historical purposes for queer people, dating back more than a century. More complex than simply a space for people to have sex, bathhouses, play parties and sex clubs are places where queer culture is born, connections are made and community is found.
And though the advent of hookup apps have made these physical spaces less necessary, per se, spaces where people can meet in public for sex, or meet to suss out a potential hookup, still serve a necessary purpose.
It is talking about the kink community as though it’s equivalent to or entirely contained within the queer community. Plenty of kinky people don’t identify as queer. The “kink community needs safe, sex positive, queer inclusive spaces” is not as flashy as a title. The lgbt community is regularly lambasted by the idea they are all consumed by kink/their sexuality is predatory and forced upon the public, so the framing of the title seems to lean into that claiming that spaces for “public sex” are needed, where most people in society wouldn’t think of sex in a sex club or bathhouse when they hear “public sex.” These are private clubs where people generally have to actively consent to this and know what to expect. It’d be like saying “the queer community needs space to have sex with people that aren’t their partners” and then the article is about how dating apps should let queer people also list that they are poly, not about how the queer community needs to accept cheating. I think these spaces are great and add to the queer experience and community as a whole, but are not necessary for a portion of the queer community, while also being necessary for a portion of the non-queer community. The framing is sensationalist in my opinion and in a way that can easily be taken out of context to reinforce negative stereotypes. I’m not playing into respectability politics, I’m just saying there are more accurate titles for the article that don’t bring up imagery of sex in the middle of a park to the average American, but those titles don’t garner as much engagement, so the editor/publisher chose one more capable of inciting hate than the one that’s more accurate/informative.
While I agree, I do think they’re trying to make a point about a need for a community that is currently under attack. The kink community isn’t under attack in quite the same way, and having a space to release tensions and deal with trauma is rather important, especially when you’re in the process of experiencing new trauma.