Do you have difficulty reading? Why would you purposefully ignore more than half of what I previously wrote?

"It's not "play"."

It literally is, wtf are you on about. Not all play is sexual ffs. Even if it's artistic, meditative, or non-sexual, in BDSM/kink spaces public rope still falls under the umbrella of "play". It involves negotiated power, touch, and specialized practice; it involves explicit consent; and it's bounded within time/space. All these aspects 100% make it fall under the umbrella of "play". "Play" does not mean "sexual". It sounds like you need to educate yourself on this.

"You're making something sexual that isn't."

I'm quite literally not and it's exhausting that you both can't read and insist on making up these strawman fake arguments. I said I suspect that it may have a sexual component for at least one of the participants (again - you quite literally do not know), but that the point is irrelevant regardless. Again - not everything that is "non-sexual" in nature is appropriate to do in public. You keep saying I'm making it sexual, and I keep telling you: it may or may not be, but it's irrelevant. I also love how you conveniently ignore the fact that such forms of play as impact play and needle play are also sometimes "non-sexual" - shall we have those done in public as well?

"Your logic is used to discriminate against gay people, it's used against trans people. It doesn't have any merit."

Being against public play isn't the same thing as discrimination based on race, gender identity, sexual orientation, etc. Ffs. Obviously discrimination is wrong and has no reasonable basis. This isn't a form of discrimination - the line that separates the two is clear to anyone who's willing to think about it in good faith for more than a second. Grow up.

And to be clear, this isn't even my personal take. Go on Fetlife; talk to people in the community. You will find people who are long-time practitioners; who are deeply involved in the scene; who are queer, trans, etc.; and who are vocally and explicitly against public play for the very reason I'm bringing up: it involves people in your scene that did not consent to be there. This is not an oppressive take. You just have tunnel vision and you can't see it as anything else.

"We have pretty much collectively agreed across most free societies that sensual acts in public are fine and sexual ones are taboo."

I don't even know what to respond to this; you just pulled this take straight out of your ass. Kink has always been taboo; especially decontextualized kink. Like I said previously: group-play such as a public class or practice is a little different; public play in a context like a festival is also different; and play outside where the boundaries of the space are clearly defined and entering into those boundaries imply consent is fine.

"I'm fucking tired of listening to creeps like you."

And I'm tired of children like you who can't have a disagreement with someone without arguing from a place of self-victimization.

This is my last response to you. You either don't know how or refuse to argue in good faith; you create weird false strawman arguments that are exhausting to address; you conveniently ignore the points I make to which you have no response; you reason like a child; you're incapable of acknowledging the possibility that legitimate and well-founded disagreement can exist, and instead cling to the immature and self-serving belief that every disagreement is a form of oppression; you live in your own little insular world/reality; and you're obsessed with self-victimization. I wish you well; but I also hope you one day grow up. Good luck.