Talk:Coming Out

From BDSM Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Re: Discussion of Jack McGeorge

The article currently makes the claim that the Jack McGeorge case shows that BDSM is a threat to one's job. Actually, the facts show the opposite. Please see the linked article. I added citation needed tags because the article cites a lot of statistics out of thin air, which actually seem dubious. That, together with the error about Jack McGeorge, shows a very clear bias in the writing. I recommend removing this reference and trying to rewrite with a more NPOV (eliminate bias). 21:44, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Good points that need to be addressed, that edit was from someone else, I'll look into some research on it. --Admin (talk) 07:27, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
After researching I have to disagree, the linked article shows that Jack McGeorge was publicly scrutinized and forced to step down. Loss of job status was a clear and present danger shown thanks to him being involved in BDSM. --Admin (talk) 13:38, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Erasure of queer/homosexual perspective

This is an entire entry about coming out that doesn't even mention queerness/homosexuality. It is appropriative to the point of erasure. Revisionist history for het BDSMers.

The goal of this wiki is not to bias for any specific gender, status, or orientation, but to discuss BDSM. If you would like to add history about coming out in there and the gay movement you are welcome to reference and write it for perspective, but it isn't essential to explain the key concept of it's potential hazards because those apply regardless if someone is gay, straight or otherwise, so no, it's not revisionism, it's content appropriate as the writing isn't to be skewed in any one direction unless that is specifically implied to relate the function of an article, which in this case it isn't. If you don't like it, fix it, that is the policy, not complaining, please see the wiki help page if you are confused. --Admin (talk) 07:28, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Maybe I can elaborate on what I think the poster above might be getting at.
You have to be aware that there are many different ways someone can find themselves in an oppressed class. Although no one wants to compare "my oppression versus yours", it's important not to fall into the other trap of believing they are all equal. For instance: if someone has dark skin in the U.S., they are not white-passing, and they will have a more difficult life because of it. Whether it's being pulled over by a cop, going shopping in a Walmart, or the way their cashier treats them in the checkout line -- everywhere they go, their skin is visible, and people treat them differently and worse because of it.
Now take sexual orientation. If someone is gay, maybe a cop or a cashier won't know. But it still has a major affect on their life. They may, for instance, want to find a life partner. They may want to have children, and a family. They will face opposition and discrimination from their parents, from teachers at parent-teacher conferences, etc. etc. If they run for political office, people will know, because their partner will be up there with them at the podium. You get it? Sexual orientation is "visible" in that sense. It is not the same kind of oppression as racism. But it's still something that will have a significant effect on your public life. And so "coming out" is a pretty big deal, because it's the decision to accept that judgment from society, or from parents, or anyone else.
Now take BDSM. No one has to know about BDSM outside your bedroom. And if you go to a private party, dungeon, whatever. It is not like skin color. It is not like sexual orientation or gender, both of which are visible to family, work, children, etc.. It is not something one ever needs to come out about, in any similar sense or scale. That, to me, is why this article is a problem. By writing it purely about BDSM and forgetting anything else, you lose a sense of scale of what "coming out" is about. You never need to come out about your kinks to your parents or your children, or your children's teachers. You never need to have people drive past you on the street and throw a bottle at your head because you are holding hands with your partner. So? Here's what you wrote:
"but it isn't essential to explain the key concept of it's potential hazards because those apply regardless if someone is gay, straight or otherwise," -- this is privilege denial. Because you don't understand that, no, the potential hazards are NOT the same regardless. Coming out about being gay is a big deal. Coming out about being into kink is not.
A note has been added about the term being coined in regards to the gay rights movement, but this is the BDSM wiki. Gay rights is worth a mention as it is very much intertwined, but gay rights is not exclusively BDSM, nor is BDSM exclusively gay rights. And I strongly disagree with the statement of oppression about BDSM as someone who lives a life entirely in a 24/7 dynamic. BDSM is not just in the bedroom, it is my way of life and my orientation, and coming out about it has had a drastic impact on my life as well as many others. Assuming it does not simply means you aren't educated on the repercussions. Criminal status, loss of job status, loss of friendships and family, all the pitfalls of being gay are there plus you get to go to jail for it. That is oppression my friend. --Admin (talk) 13:34, 25 March 2014 (UTC)