Folsom Street Fair Folly
What Possessed These Parents to Expose Their Kids to This?
I remember when Hugh Grant appeared on "The Tonight Show with Jay Leno" shortly after his arrest while with a street-walking sex worker in L.A. Right off the bat, Jay leaned over and said, "Hugh, I gotta ask...What were you thinkin'?"
That's what I would like to ask fathers Gary Beuschel and John Kruse when they decided to take their two-year old daughters to the San Francisco Folsom Street Fair (FSF) decked out in lace shirts and studded black leather dog collars. This event is a long-running annual event at which the BDSM world displays its wares - people, props, and all. While all sexual orientations participate in the display areas, it's heavy on male/male power exchange demonstrations.
When questioned, these two fathers said that they wanted their daughters to be exposed to the diverse community of San Francisco. I'm all for diversity and letting children have healthy opportunities to eventually develop a pleasurable sexuality - but how taking two toddlers to this event contributes to that completely escapes me.
Let children be children. Offer them a steady and gentle dialogue with their parents about sexual matters. A buffet of paraphilias really doesn't contribute - and may just cause nightmares.
I don't have an argument with the people who wanted to participate in this event. There were entrances with FSF staff informing people when they entered that this was not for the faint of heart. One does not accidentally wander into this mecca of extreme sexual intensity.
According to all reports, nothing happened to these two little girls. The fathers kept a watchful eye on them as they wandered in the midst of some partially clad and some completely nude people. I suppose that two young children could also play on a freeway and come away unharmed. But why even take such a chance?
The FSF offers displays of spanking, whipping, extreme bondage, piercings, and highly unusual role playing. Don't get me wrong - the people are having a good time, a really good time. More power to them - or, uh, from them. There's just no reason why a child should have the opportunity to take this all in.
Many adults would have a hard time stomaching the graphic nature of what causes pleasure to some of humankind. Why should a child have to unravel a reenactment of a quasi-Nazi commandant with a few extremely bound captives. And what about that guy with the fish hooks in his back? "Daddy, doesn't that hurt?"
A few weeks ago, I complained here that I didn't want to have to explain to my sons that some people choose public restrooms for sexual contacts and what the sounds coming from the next stall were about. I certainly have no desire to explain how some people develop a type of intensity about their sexuality that speeds on by that of most other people.
I remember when Janet Jackson had her "wardrobe malfunction." My son happened to see the performance of a song during that same Super Bowl halftime that had some unmistakable BDSM visual content. A breast, that was relatively easy to explain. That some people feel very, very good in the midst of this type of power dynamic - how does one explain that to a four-year old? We'll get to that in our ongoing sex ed dialogue, but in due time - in due time.
Much has been written about how this sets gay rights back a few centuries much to the Far Right's glee. (Yeah, this newsworthy decision by these fathers couldn't have helped.) Others have chimed in about the importance of accepting human nudity. (How about a nudist camp or beach for that?) But where the real pay dirt is for me on this one concerns the kids.
Dressing kids up in fetish wear makes about as much sense as putting a Halloween costume on your cat. No, it makes far less sense. I actually don't really care that much about the anthropomorphizing of a cat, but I really can't think of any good reason to prompt even a pseudo-sexual image that involves two-year old girls. (This goes for child beauty pageants too.) Perhaps these men thought that they were just getting into the spirit of the fair. Perhaps they wanted others to know that they had their daughters there on purpose, not by accident. Perhaps they wanted us to know that extremely poor parental judgment does not discriminate based on sexual orientation.
We can speculate all we want about the underlying psychological reasons they made this choice: they see their children as fashion accessories; they want to inspire envy in other gay fathers; they're working out their own exposure to confronting images and what it did to them - and so on. But, it doesn't feel like speculation at all when I picture child protective services paying them a visit.
Related Topics: Technorati Tags: child development, sexualize children, sex education, Folsom Street Fair, BDSM
I remember when Hugh Grant appeared on "The Tonight Show with Jay Leno" shortly after his arrest while with a street-walking sex worker in L.A. Right off the bat, Jay leaned over and said, "Hugh, I gotta ask...What were you thinkin'?"
That's what I would like to ask fathers Gary Beuschel and John Kruse when they decided to take their two-year old daughters to the San Francisco Folsom Street Fair (FSF) decked out in lace shirts and studded black leather dog collars. This event is a long-running annual event at which the BDSM world displays its wares - people, props, and all. While all sexual orientations participate in the display areas, it's heavy on male/male power exchange demonstrations.
When questioned, these two fathers said that they wanted their daughters to be exposed to the diverse community of San Francisco. I'm all for diversity and letting children have healthy opportunities to eventually develop a pleasurable sexuality - but how taking two toddlers to this event contributes to that completely escapes me.
Let children be children. Offer them a steady and gentle dialogue with their parents about sexual matters. A buffet of paraphilias really doesn't contribute - and may just cause nightmares.
I don't have an argument with the people who wanted to participate in this event. There were entrances with FSF staff informing people when they entered that this was not for the faint of heart. One does not accidentally wander into this mecca of extreme sexual intensity.
According to all reports, nothing happened to these two little girls. The fathers kept a watchful eye on them as they wandered in the midst of some partially clad and some completely nude people. I suppose that two young children could also play on a freeway and come away unharmed. But why even take such a chance?
The FSF offers displays of spanking, whipping, extreme bondage, piercings, and highly unusual role playing. Don't get me wrong - the people are having a good time, a really good time. More power to them - or, uh, from them. There's just no reason why a child should have the opportunity to take this all in.
Many adults would have a hard time stomaching the graphic nature of what causes pleasure to some of humankind. Why should a child have to unravel a reenactment of a quasi-Nazi commandant with a few extremely bound captives. And what about that guy with the fish hooks in his back? "Daddy, doesn't that hurt?"
A few weeks ago, I complained here that I didn't want to have to explain to my sons that some people choose public restrooms for sexual contacts and what the sounds coming from the next stall were about. I certainly have no desire to explain how some people develop a type of intensity about their sexuality that speeds on by that of most other people.
I remember when Janet Jackson had her "wardrobe malfunction." My son happened to see the performance of a song during that same Super Bowl halftime that had some unmistakable BDSM visual content. A breast, that was relatively easy to explain. That some people feel very, very good in the midst of this type of power dynamic - how does one explain that to a four-year old? We'll get to that in our ongoing sex ed dialogue, but in due time - in due time.
Much has been written about how this sets gay rights back a few centuries much to the Far Right's glee. (Yeah, this newsworthy decision by these fathers couldn't have helped.) Others have chimed in about the importance of accepting human nudity. (How about a nudist camp or beach for that?) But where the real pay dirt is for me on this one concerns the kids.
Dressing kids up in fetish wear makes about as much sense as putting a Halloween costume on your cat. No, it makes far less sense. I actually don't really care that much about the anthropomorphizing of a cat, but I really can't think of any good reason to prompt even a pseudo-sexual image that involves two-year old girls. (This goes for child beauty pageants too.) Perhaps these men thought that they were just getting into the spirit of the fair. Perhaps they wanted others to know that they had their daughters there on purpose, not by accident. Perhaps they wanted us to know that extremely poor parental judgment does not discriminate based on sexual orientation.
We can speculate all we want about the underlying psychological reasons they made this choice: they see their children as fashion accessories; they want to inspire envy in other gay fathers; they're working out their own exposure to confronting images and what it did to them - and so on. But, it doesn't feel like speculation at all when I picture child protective services paying them a visit.
Related Topics: Technorati Tags: child development, sexualize children, sex education, Folsom Street Fair, BDSM
4 Comments:
Were they thinking at all?? Is the father of those girls capable of examining the effects of his decisions on the lives of his children? Or is he so caught up in some bizarre version of sexual liberation, that his fatherhood takes a back seat to his ego.
Speaking of bizarre. If you swat your screaming child on the butt in the supermarket, you can end up in jail pretty easily; but you can do something like this, have your girls show up in the newspaper, and people just shake their heads or ignore you altogether. I think that is sort of strange.
I have never done this before but I wanted to know if it is right for me to be without sex at the age 55 due my husbands ED & diabetes?? It's been a long time since I've enjoyed sex with him and really miss it. I'm not sure if asking him to have surgery is the thing to do--what do you think??
It was more than just nudity, leather and chains at that Folsom Street Fair. I stumbled on an on line portfolio of pictures that showed gay men proudly walking around with erections and performing sex acts (mostly fellatio) on each other...all in public view. Sorry but this is not a place for ANY minor child...period!
Anybody that has ever looked at my blog knows that I'm far from being a prude but this is even more than I (at age 67!) would be willing to witness in public. I guess the gay patronizing political climate in San Francisco prohibits the police from cracking down on this kind of gay public sex as they undoubtedly would do with straight couples showing such affection in public.
You certainly do have to wonder about these fathers (or any parents) taking their young children to such events. Personally I have nothing but contempt for both of these bozos and hope they lose custody of their kids...and soon! Just my ancient and humble opinion as usual!
I've been to the Folsom Street Fair many times. Never have I seen any children. It is for consenting adults. In reality, most who are into the lifestyle..(which by the way borders on 80% of the country..has tried it) Most protect their kids better than the typical parents.
Because two guys went to the fair with their children makes them gay? Get real people. Come out of the ice ages.
I am not condoning the fact they brought them to the fair. It was a mistake, but I'm quite sure they did everything they could to protect them at the same time.
Post a Comment