It's important that "For All" includes people under 18 years old

[maymay]

There's been an interesting discussion started in another thread about
"Informational Questions" (but that thread[0] was originally the
thread about KFADC, so I'm starting a new thread so the topics don't
get mixed up). I'm replying mostly to Chris's questions here; others
have replied already in that other thread[0].

First, though, I'll address the second question about nudity.

On May 27, 2009, at 12:30 AM, Chris ! wrote:
> 2) The wiki states that people should dress in casual clothes and
> that KFA is not a play event. How does this apply to
> presentations? For example, could someone demonstrate fisting? Or,
> is the requirements of the event that all participants be "street
> legal" at all times?

Just as I'd like never to draw a line between participants/volunteers/
unorganizers/attendees, so too do I wish to avoid drawing a line
between presentations and other activities that go on at KinkForAll
like, say, conversations or eating muffins. In other words, this
applies to presentations in exactly the same way it applies to
anything else: people should come dressed in whatever they want to,
and should expect a casual, non-play environment when they arrive. If
your "casual" clothes means you wear 5 inch stilleto pumps, then
great, come wearing those.

More directly, *could* someone demonstrate fisting? Sure, as long as
the legalities of the venue contract allows that. *Would* someone
demonstrate fisting? In 20 minutes? I sure hope not, but I would decry
any move that a KinkForAll "unorganizer" made to *ban* a fisting
demonstration on the grounds that it was not appropriate for
KinkForAll. I think it's as perfectly appropriate as any other demo
is, which is to say not very appropriate at all, but certainly not
banned.

On May 27, 2009, at 12:50 AM, Emily Rutherford wrote:
> 2. No nudity, no sexual activity. I'm not sure what the absolute
> definition of "street legal" is, but I think it would be appropriate
> to demonstrate, say, rope bondage (or piercing--there was a piercing
> demo at KFANYC), but not fisting.

To be precise, the "no nudity, no sexual activity" rules of KFANYC
were not KinkForAll-inspired, they were venue-dictated. I *personally*
believe that nudity and sexual activity such as a fisting
demonstrations are 100% contradictory to the environment KinkForAll
aspires to create: informational, comfortable, fast-paced but low-
pressure.

On May 27, 2009, at 12:30 AM, Chris ! wrote:
> 1) KFA is billed as a public event. Does this mean that children
> and teenagers can attend, or is there an age cutoff? If people
> under 18 can attend, could the event have any legal issues as a
> result?

There is no age cut off.

On May 27, 2009, at 12:50 AM, Emily Rutherford wrote:
> 1. The cutoff is 18, for obvious reasons, so there shouldn't be any
> legal issues.

Let me repeat this: there is no age cut off.

is there an age cut off for walking on the side walk? No. There's no
minimum age anyone should be cutting off allowable entrance to this
sort of event. Moreover, how in the hell are you going to enforce
this? Just like the lack of enforcement of banning cameras, this is a
YAGNI situation for unorganizers as far as I'm concerned, and it's a
principle issue for minors. When I was 10 years old I was clicking "I
Am 18 Years Or Older" on all the porn web sites I was visiting.
Children should not be banned from EDUCATIONAL events like KinkForAll,
which is why the no-play (not no-nudity, but the no-PLAY) rule is
something I'm so adamant about.

Sara expressed this extremely well:

On May 27, 2009, at 1:59 AM, Sara Eileen wrote:

> As KFA is a "street legal" event with no play, I chose to treat it
> as an educational event dealing with sexuality. The reality is that
> sex education begins much earlier than 18 years of age, and that I
> think it is personally important to provide said education in an
> informed manner.

However, I take issue with the notion that "an age cutoff is an easy
way to avoid this issue," as Sara wrote here:

> However, the reality also is that there are legal entanglements
> involved in this particular discussion, and they are possibly not
> ones that KFA can deal with adequately. As presentation topics are
> not restricted to the educational, I would be very concerned about
> potential issues with pornographic content. An age cutoff is an easy
> way to avoid this issue.

I disagree. An age cutoff is not an easy way to avoid the issue at
all, it's just one way you can sweep the issue under the rug and
*pretend* it doesn't exist. In fact the issue does still exist, since
there's no reliable way you can really stop minors from participating
in a public space should they choose to do so. I know as a teenager, I
would have absolutely loved to attend KFANYC.

I think ultimately that's the point: if you are doing something at
KinkForAll you would be uncomfortable doing in front of children,
maybe you are sexualizing it too much. This is a judgement call, and
people will likely disagree with others judgement calls, but that is a
good thing and a place for starting discussion. Above all else,
unorganizers should be trying to create a situation where
serendipitious events can occur, and you will absolutely fail in doing
so if you create an arbitrary age cutoff.

I say again: can children go to street fairs? Can children watch the
gay pride parade? Then why should they not be permitted at KinkForAll?

If you are fearing legal concerns, I think Bostonpup's advice is great:

On May 27, 2009, at 12:10 PM, bostonpup wrote:

> In terms of other content, I would be very surprised if any parent
> (or minor) would have legal recourse against KFA if they or their
> child attends and is offended. In most (but not all) jurisdictions
> there is nothing illegal about teaching minors about sex if they
> show up voluntarily to your sexual education event.

So, consider your geographical jurisdiction, consider your own
presentation topic, and consider the kind of space you're trying to
make: educational, informational, and explicitly NOT play-oriented nor
sexualized. Then I'd ask you to again ask yourself why you're worried
about having minors attending.

Bostonpup's email ended with:

On May 27, 2009, at 12:10 PM, bostonpup wrote:

> I believe we ought to keep minors out to protect ourselves, not the
> minors

If you're trying to protect yourself by keeping a local KinkForAll
event 18+, I'm not going to say I don't understand your motivations
for doing that, although I will feel sorely disappointed in that
course of action. If you've taken the steps to be out at KinkForAll
but choose to restrict the possibility for others to do the same,
especially some of the most disenfranchised groups of people on the
planet, i.e., people the law doesn't consider adults, then I see that
as an immense hypocrisy and one I'd fight against as strongly and
loudly as I can.

Cheers,
-maymay
Blog: http://maybemaimed.com
Community: http://KinkForAll.org
Volunteering: http://ConversioVirium.org/author/maymay

EXTERNAL REFERENCES:

[0] http://groups.google.com/group/kinkforall/browse_thread/thread/6b5154c9fe7cbbff

[Emily Rutherford]

Those are good points all, maymay, and I do apologize for asserting in error that KFA is or should be 18+. I think I may have been dimly recollecting some discussion of the issue that occurred on this list before KFANYC without remembering its conclusion.

I still feel a sort of knee-jerk discomfort with the idea of juveniles attending a KinkForAll, but maybe that's just something I need to get over (and as a 19-year-old, it's certainly a *very* privileged thing for me to say). Now that I think about it, looking back on KFANYC, I think all the presentations I saw would have been under-18-appropriate--but my answer would definitely change at a venue where nudity was permitted, or if the presentations were any more sexualized than the ones I saw.

So I think you alluded to an important issue when you said that "if you are doing something at KinkForAll you would be uncomfortable doing in front of children, maybe you are sexualizing it too much." Maybe the onus is on us to provide an *educational* environment, one that reaches out to people who aren't already in a scene or a community or an umbrella acronym (LGBT, BDSM). I'm glad you raised that, because I think it's something I'd like to keep in mind when I plan my presentation for KFADC and for subsequent KinkForAlls.

-Emily

[Trish Kitten]

Hi Maymay, in general I agree with you --- I very much want people of
any age to be allowed in and feel welcome --- but there's one point of
inconsistency that makes me nervous:

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 5:11 PM, maymay <bitethea...@gmail.com> wrote:
> More directly, *could* someone demonstrate fisting? Sure, as long as
> the legalities of the venue contract allows that. *Would* someone
> demonstrate fisting? In 20 minutes? I sure hope not, but I would decry
> any move that a KinkForAll "unorganizer" made to *ban* a fisting
> demonstration on the grounds that it was not appropriate for
> KinkForAll. I think it's as perfectly appropriate as any other demo
> is, which is to say not very appropriate at all, but certainly not
> banned.

> There is no age cut off.

These things combined make me nervous. I don't think we should
explicitly ban either one in marketing material, and I'd rather pull
someone aside and say "I'm sorry, you can't demonstrate fisting here"
than "I'm sorry, you have to leave while those people demonstrate
fisting," but I would feel obligated to do one or the other if someone
under 18 was in the room and someone else was going to demonstrate
fisting (and my name was on the form as an event sponsor). I do think
that we can encourage an environment where these things won't be a
problem, and I'm sure you can respond to this with YAGNI or some other
acronym, but if we're going to talk about what's appropriate and who's
allowed, I think there's a real concern here.

I do agree with this:

> I think ultimately that's the point: if you are doing something at
> KinkForAll you would be uncomfortable doing in front of children,
> maybe you are sexualizing it too much. This is a judgement call, and
> people will likely disagree with others judgement calls, but that is a
> good thing and a place for starting discussion. Above all else,
> unorganizers should be trying to create a situation where
> serendipitious events can occur, and you will absolutely fail in doing
> so if you create an arbitrary age cutoff.
>
> I say again: can children go to street fairs? Can children watch the
> gay pride parade? Then why should they not be permitted at KinkForAll?

With one caveat: You can't give a fisting demo at a pride parade. (Sadly.) :)

I have more good news about Boston --- I need to run right now but
will write a full message about it later tonight.

Thanks,

Trish

[bostonpup]

There is no age cut off.

On May 27, 2009, at 12:50 AM, Emily Rutherford wrote:
> 1. The cutoff is 18, for obvious reasons, so there shouldn't be any
> legal issues.

Let me repeat this: there is no age cut off.

 

If there's no age cut off, there's no age cut off, no need for further discussion.  I'm puzzled as to how anything (at all) is ever comprehensively decided in the KinkForAll community, however.  This isn't a bad thing.  But if age cut off or lack thereof is an exception, are there others we should be aware of?  I think we should all strive to avoid absolutes or be upfront about them at the start.

 

As I've mentioned, my own opinion that as a matter of prudence, KFA-[insert city here] shouldn't allow minors to attend unless the matter has been discussed with the venue and the venue has no objection.  My concern is that is that we risk not being welcomed back into a space.  Of course, if spaces are so abundant that this isn't a problem, then it's not a problem, and for many cities this could be the case!

 

I also noted that from a legal perspective, it would be extremely prudent to prohibit any kind of nude imagery used in a presentation unless minors are prohibited from entering the room during such presentation.  You may otherwise end up violating laws. It's a little amusing imagining an assistant DA trying to figure out who exactly to prosecute for such a thing given the decentralized structure.  If it actually happened, it probably wouldn't be very funny.

 

Broader point: I think KinkForAll has a fascinating and entirely admirable inner struggle between a desire to be "un"organized and essentially benignly-anarchic, and the need to create uniform organizational systems.  Take for example the existence of "rules" altogether; there are not often rules in genuine public places.  We don't restrict people to 20 minutes per park bench.  We don't turn people away from the sidewalks if the the sidewalks are too crowded and the newcomers didn't register to attend the sidewalks in advance.  If someone wants to stand up on a soap box and talk about their toe nail collection, no one minds that they are off topic.  Kink For All is a better space, however, because we do things differently than the side walk and the park.  Some rules are necessary for the event, not only to function but to be successful in achieving its goals, and so we have them. 

 

Reluctantly but deliberately, let me bring up another point, as another illustration of the tension KFA has internally.  Should KFA have a rule that participants not take pictures of other participants without permission?  This is permitted on a sidewalk.  Many people would permit it at KFA.  I believe KFA should have, as a rule of participation, that participants (being all attendees) respect each other, including respecting each other's privacy.  How KFA would enforce this (or an age cutoff) is not as important as what we as a community decide the standards for behavior are, and I have trouble seeing a philosophical difference between a "20 minute per presentation" rule and a "respect your fellow participants" rule.  Neither one of these rules exists in public spaces, as anyone who has been on a NYC sidewalk during rush hour can attest to.  Both of them are good for the conference.  Each KFA as a community needs to decide this rule and every other rule, there is no "right" answer except what the members decide.

 

Returning to the minors point, I think what is obvious about this as well as all other "rules" is that they are not decided by who is the strongest or loudest but what each individual KFA decides collectively to do, and that will depend on what each individual KFA's circumstances are.  Is your venue informed of what you are going to be doing and OK with minors attending?  If your venue faced outcry over minors attending, would they still welcome you back for another event, and if not, do you have alternate locations?  Do the laws of your local jurisdiction permit minors to attend your event, and if you are not sure, is the risk acceptable?  (The answer here can be "yes"-civil disobedience is real!)  Will you have a rule about "pornographic" imagery being displayed or handed out? 

 

I would love to have people under 18 attend KFA just as I would love to have Afghani women, "low caste" Indian sex workers, and transsexuals from strictly conservative Latin American countries-- there are unfortunately plenty of disenfranchised people in the world and these people are probably NOT going to be able to attend a KFA this year.  If we can create a space for minors that is also safe for everyone else, it's a victory.  Aiming for an ideal world doesn't require being blind to the real world, however.  I simply urge everyone to be careful and deliberate before risking the safety of all participants and the resources that KFA's community has gathered.

 

-bp

[maymay]

Bostonpup,

In general I agree with you 100%. Especially this, which I feel was
very well-stated and completely expresses how I see "this KinkForAll
thing" working well:

> Returning to the minors point, I think what is obvious about this as
> well as all other "rules" is that they are not decided by who is the
> strongest or loudest but what each individual KFA decides
> collectively to do, and that will depend on what each individual
> KFA's circumstances are. Is your venue informed of what you are
> going to be doing and OK with minors attending? If your venue faced
> outcry over minors attending, would they still welcome you back for
> another event, and if not, do you have alternate locations? Do the
> laws of your local jurisdiction permit minors to attend your event,
> and if you are not sure, is the risk acceptable? (The answer here
> can be "yes"-civil disobedience is real!) Will you have a rule
> about "pornographic" imagery being displayed or handed out?

Specifically on the minors front, when I say "there is no age cut off"
what I mean is that "Sara and I specifically decided to punt the issue
on a global level because we recognize the sensitivity of the
legalities and not only see a requirement that individual KFA events
figure out what is appropriate for themselves but also that
differences are necessary due to said geographic
jurisdictions." (Sara, correct me if I'm wrong on that; that was my
intent anyway.)

Note the specific phrasing on TheRulesOfKinkForAll:

> These guidelines are designed to inspire a creative, interactive and
> open environment where everyone can feel comfortable, and gains
> valuable insight. Specific KinkForAll events may choose to extend
> this list with rules that are specific to their local event.

To emphasize: Specific KinkForAll events may choose to extend this
list with rules that are specific to their local event.

*Extending* that list of guidelines with one's own list for a local
event makes perfect sense to me. *I* would do my damnedest to find a
way to engage minors in participating because I think it's downright
vital that they do, but hey, one step at a time in some places is all
that can be done.

In case it isn't obvious yet: nobody is forced to listen to me. I'm
just one voice among many others with my own hopefully very clear
agendas—one of which is to involve minors in sex education—that I try
to make very obvious in a loud, perhaps combative way (I *am* aware of
that and it's still not going to change)—but I'm just one in this
crowd. I'll try to keep making this point if it'll help discussions
from stalling.

Cheers,
-maymay
Blog: http://maybemaimed.com
Community: http://KinkForAll.org
Volunteering: http://ConversioVirium.org/author/maymay

[Sara Eileen]

Bostonpup, I could not more strongly agree with you. Thank you for saying this so well.

Allow me to add to this, speaking from my experience as a previous unorganizer and also from my hopes that KFA will continue to move forward strongly and with impetus.

On May 28, 2009, at 7:20 PM, bostonpup wrote:

There is no age cut off.

On May 27, 2009, at 12:50 AM, Emily Rutherford wrote:
> 1. The cutoff is 18, for obvious reasons, so there shouldn't be any
> legal issues.

Let me repeat this: there is no age cut off.

 

If there's no age cut off, there's no age cut off, no need for further discussion.  I'm puzzled as to how anything (at all) is ever comprehensively decided in the KinkForAll community, however.  This isn't a bad thing.  But if age cut off or lack thereof is an exception, are there others we should be aware of?  I think we should all strive to avoid absolutes or be upfront about them at the start.

 

As I've mentioned, my own opinion that as a matter of prudence, KFA-[insert city here] shouldn't allow minors to attend unless the matter has been discussed with the venue and the venue has no objection.  My concern is that is that we risk not being welcomed back into a space.  Of course, if spaces are so abundant that this isn't a problem, then it's not a problem, and for many cities this could be the case!

 

I also noted that from a legal perspective, it would be extremely prudent to prohibit any kind of nude imagery used in a presentation unless minors are prohibited from entering the room during such presentation.  You may otherwise end up violating laws. It's a little amusing imagining an assistant DA trying to figure out who exactly to prosecute for such a thing given the decentralized structure.  If it actually happened, it probably wouldn't be very funny.

I continue to believe this is an exceptionally complicated issue. I sincerely and deeply admire the passion and values of people who wish to make strike the age limit across the board. In a perfect world, this could be the case. But I also sincerely believe that creating a rule of this sort will throw up more impediments than Kink For All can currently accommodate. I would therefore suggest that having no age limit should be a strongly followed *goal,* but not a rule.

I want to see Kink For All thrive, and I recognize that to establish itself and gain momentum, it needs to be allowed to move forward, gain momentum, and adapt to individual communities. I would rather see events off the ground that follow the spirit of the Kink For All rules in a genuine way, rather than stall by adhering to the letter of the law.

Please note that on the KFA "rules" page has the following note: "Specific KinkForAll events may choose to extend this list with rules that are specific to their local event." This is not a coverall; unorganizers should still pursue strict and lofty goals. But also, do what you need to do to make this work.

So I think it is accurate to say that Kink For All does NOT have an age limit. However, individual events will make the choices they need to make.

 

Broader point: I think KinkForAll has a fascinating and entirely admirable inner struggle between a desire to be "un"organized and essentially benignly-anarchic, and the need to create uniform organizational systems.  Take for example the existence of "rules" altogether; there are not often rules in genuine public places... Some rules are necessary for the event, not only to function but to be successful in achieving its goals, and so we have them. 

Mike, this is very true. As I said in my first emails to the group, Kink For All is organized chaos. The rules are a framework designed to be extremely strict, so that they can support a maximum amount of chaos. And as we saw at the first event, it *works.* 

Some rules, like the age limit, might need to change to get the event off the ground. 

Others, like the 20 minute turn-around, are essential to the model and type of event we're trying to run. Unorganizing is powerful. So forgive me for being a complete and utter geek, but you knew it was coming. With great power, comes great responsibility.

As May has just said, please remember that although he and I do have experience with unorganizing, and have developed this model, we are not the definitive word on how to work the logistics of individual events. I think it's safe to say that May is a *terrific* resource for prospective unorganizers. I am doing my best as well. 

We will continue to speak up. I hope to be able to do that more often in the future. Please let us know how we can best help make more events real.

Sara Eileen

[David Phillips]

I've been quiet, but the dominant question in this thread got me
going. KFA seems aimed at building community among members of
communities of sexual interest and enriching participants
psychologically, intellectually, and erotically. It is not
International Mr. Leather weekend or some other "sex on a stick" event
intended as a carnal escape. No bare asses in the lobby, no sex in
vendor market. Under these circumstances, allowing like-minded minors
to partake of the verbal masturbation which abounds seems sensible for
many reasons.

I started exploring WIITWD at age 8 with a chronological,
power-balanced peer not long after we discovered homosex. At 15 I
became a fisting top, and at 16 started doing commercial sex work. At
13 or 14 it would have been invaluable to listen to like-minded
elders, much less engage them in discussion. The [insert role
here]-in-a-box mentality which the Internet brings to teens and adults
exploring sexuality makes the need for welcoming circles for all ages
even greater.

Namaste,
David