Pup play fans dance for children at Pride

[OrchidInTheSun]

How charming!

twitter.com/pupchester/status/1142449770893586432?s=21

When asked if he thought this was suitable entertainment for children before Pride, PupChester said no (see screenshot)

So if Pride is a celebration of fetish, why are our police and town councils supporting it so broadly? Why are we closing streets to parade BDSM fans?

As a (lapsed) Catholic I reject all the abominable stuff the Church has presided over.

I also reject skeevish stuff which Pride presides over (not anything to do with LGBT people, who are fine and the day is for them - but boner dude in fetish wear playing with child... not fine).

But I don’t think anyone is looking at that pic and saying it’s a-ok (at least I hope not).

*Dude was sitting there with a raging boner while interacting with children.

Men were indulging their kink in a space designed to attract children, at a “child friendly” event.*

I agree with Pp above.
I mean ,come on,how are people justifying this ?

But I guess because there was a bad decision to have human pups at the children's tent, that must mean anyone who has ever adopted the role must be a paedopille. Good logic

Except nobody's even said that. Although unfortunately it seems there is a photograph of at least one man sexually aroused around the children... People are just saying keep your pup play sexual fetish away from children.

Ah apologies zebras So this comment - What drew you, as a pup play type, to Mumsnet I wonder. wasn't implying I am a paedo, purely for stating that I've participated in pup play

That's not implying that anyone who indulges in pup play is a paedo - that's a specific question to you. I was wondering why a person would join up to Mumsnet to talk about pup play and try to make out it's not a sex thing.

Aaaah so it wasn't implying everyone is a paedo, just me, that's perfectly reasonable then.

Assume you missed the post about how I am a regular poster but have NC. Or where I I acknowledged sexual fetishes AND non sexual fetishes exist. Or where I said repeatedly that I didn't think it was appropriate for the tent to be aimed at kids.

Why is it necessary to name change in order to discuss this?

Why are you arguing this here? This thread is about men displaying their sexual fetishes about Pride, in front of children, and clearly sexually aroused. Stop de-railing.

*at Pride

I can't believe people are trying to say its fine to expose children to kink because they don't know what it is. I have a 3yo that loves Paw Patrol- he'd have been dashing over to that tent before I could stop him.

I didn't think it was appropriate for the tent to be aimed at kids

Then you do understand how pedophiles could use this then and are just being akward?

Why is it necessary to name change in order to discuss this?
Because if I have been outed in other posts already, I would prefer not to have my family, friends, neighbours privy to what I do on my own time. I think it's fairly standard (and sensible) to NC.

Why are you arguing this here?
If I am called a paedo, I'm obviously going to comment back on that. Otherwise I'm talking about the exact same thing everyone else is, I just have a slightly different opinion on it, that's not the same as derailing.

Then you do understand how pedophiles could use this then and are just being akward?

I understand how paedophiles could use a great number of child friendly spaces to access children. I don't think that's what happened here. I haven't said I don't understand.

I don't think it should have been targeted at children, but I don't see the harm in the men being at pride dressed up in the first place and can understand why they where there.

QueenofAshes - get over yourself.

Stop me-railing this thread - it's not about you.

I don’t think Queen is defending the sketchy men with the kids, she did say the tent was wrong (and I sometimes NC too, since intern fiasco).

If it’s not connected to sexuality though (and in fact can be a non-sexual hobby?) I’m even more confused about it being in Pride.

Why not people marching with their stamp albums or knitting yarn? These are non-sexual hobbies, which I’m sure some LGBT partake in.

Oops x-post (I’m 10 posts behind as usual)

So to sum up:

" Oh I know full well what you are saying, I don't agree with what they were doing, I understand and feel it wasn't right to open this up to children.....but i just want to make the thread about me."

Stop me-railing this thread - it's not about you.
In that case please stop accusing me of disgusting things and asking questions about the specific parts of my post that relate to me.

I have said plenty of other things too, if pp don't want it de-railed, why not converse about those things instead

Oops-
the intern fiasco
LGBT people

People who take personal offence at safeguarding protocols should probably examine themselves and their own attitudes before telling other people off. Jus' sayin'.

Safeguarding loopholes around children are not ok. End of.

Apologia for safeguarding loopholes around children is not ok. End of.

Once again, for clarity: end fucking of.

" Oh I know full well what you are saying, I don't agree with what they were doing, I understand and feel it wasn't right to open this up to children.....but i just want to make the thread about me."

Ha - yes, I think that about sums it up!

2B sums it up nicely - if it’s not sexual then why is it even at pride?? If it is sexual then pride should not be encouraging kids to attend and they should be staying the hell away from any kids who do attend.

Elsewhere on Mumsnet today - the NSPCC are further capitulating to TRAs in order to keep their stall at Pride London.

NPSCC can currently be found self-flagellating in penance to Munroe Bergdorf - all for applying their own safeguarding measures.

These are serious concerns for the welfare of children.

I think the actual thing that makes "human pups" sinister at an event billed family friendly is the very fact that children are attracted to cute doggies.
I mean, a man in arse less leather chaps is clearly signifying a sexual message, but 4 year olds are unlikely to make a beeline for him.
It's almost as if furries and pups are intending their "play"( boak) to be appealing to children.

Or where I I acknowledged sexual fetishes AND non sexual fetishes exist. Or where I said repeatedly that I didn't think it was appropriate for the tent to be aimed at kids.

What is a non-sexual fetish? Fetish is defined as sexual gratification, isn't it?

This thread is a useful, if grim, demonstration of the determination to normalise adult sexuality around children.

Mermaids take puppies and sweets to pride, in order to attract children. And they have refused to attend if lesbians who define as same-sex attracted, also visibly attend.

So what started as a protest march, to support homosexual orientation, is now deeply and publicly homophonic, encourages the participation of children, goes out of its way to normalise adult fetishes in public, and are on record supporting a transactivist over their assertion that little kids should contact them privately online, with the apparent endorsement of the NSPCC.

It's fucking risible that people are getting offended when other people say paedophilia?