idk about this. Following this logic a cis het dude into feet or BDSM would be queer and I don't think they should count bc they aren't being discriminated against the way a LGBT person is. I do think there's certain kinks/ways cis het people could be considered queer but I think this definition obscures why Pride exists to begin with.

I think part of queerness is not fitting in traditional gender and/or sexuality roles. Like is the libs of Tiktok lady coming after y'all just for existing?

I'm not hating on y'all and you're definitely welcome at Pride imo but it feels weird to say everyone who has a kink is queer when kinks are so normalized that it would basically mean everyone is queer at that point. I also feel like that definition makes things weird for asexual people (who definitely are a part of the community bc they do face similar discrimination and marginalization.)

I'm a solid millennial and queer and kink are basically the same thing in all of my circles too so yeah basically this.

I think the queer is short for genderqueer rather than just generalised queer/weird.

I don't want to get in the middle of this kink at pride discussion, much less define what queerness is, but I will just say that I am a very kinky cishet guy. I wouldn't identify as queer just because I'm kinky/nonvanilla. That would seem deeply problematic to me if I did it because I don't think my kinks queer my sexual orientation, in fact I kinda feel like my kinks in totality reinforce my cishetness. I can see how queerness and kink are mutually inclusive but I wouldn't think that they are mutually exhaustive.

I don't go to any of the kink-specific festivals or rallies though. I feel like they're kinda cringe? Maybe it's just me. I went to one once but got bored because it wasn't kinky enough for me so I left and went to the library. I guess I expected a kinky orgy or something, I don't know.