We all know by  now that there is no expectation of privacy in public spaces and that includes the streets.  This is settled law, no argument.

Unless you are in San Francisco and organizing the Folsom Street Fair.

Now, Folsom Street Fair is not your average Market’s farmer with clowns making animal balloons for the kids and the smell of hot corndogs in the air.  There is rubber…and leather and it smells but more horndog than corndog.  Folsom Street Fair is a no-holds-barred Sexual Fetish extravaganza in which anything goes, except photography in public places.  

(Warning: The links will take you to articles with photos you may not want to see. You have been warned)

Organizers of the Folsom Street Fair, San Francisco’s famed fetish festival, took new measures this year to educate attendees — especially sightseers and gawkers — on the subject of consent.
“Gear doesn’t mean consent. What you’re wearing doesn’t mean consent. An enthusiastic ‘yes’ means consent,” said Edwin Morales, president of the Folsom Street Events board.
The message was distilled into a social media campaign and onto signage around Sunday’s 13-block fair, which featured bondage exhibits, people pulling their collared partners on leashes, and lots of bodies clad in leather — or nothing at all.

Folsom Street Fair stresses consent amid leather and BDSM

I predict that they will use this as to portray photography as the new rape. A rape that does not requite physical contact. I do love how their little minds twist themselves to make censorship sound polite:

Finger says that when it comes to the photography, the flier is an effort to establish best practices and be respectful. “It doesn’t say you can’t photograph people, it just says ask first,” says Finger of the fliers. In 2016, Folsom began a campaign to request that fairgoers “ask first” before photographing people. “We’re not telling someone not to do something.”

Folsom Street Fair emphasizes consent in advance of 2018 event

Yes, that is exactly what you are saying.

Finger says that showing an attendee out of the fair for repeatedly taking photos without a person’s consent would be a “last resort.”

“Tovarish, you have violated the illegal photography consent rule in a public are and you must be removed by Eric and Patty and their collection of whips.”  That is censorship, you effing moron.

Then again, if somebody were to take a picture of a White Woman flogging a Black Man, I’d be worry somebody  may take it the wrong way and feel insulted.

Or violence against women? If Liberals are shitting bricks about accusations without corroboration 36 years after the accuser say it happened but do not remember well about the event, shouldn’t photographic evidence be definite even if it is staged? Somebody may get confused and think they can tie a woman up just because they like it or just condemn the whole fair because its depiction against women, gays and People of Color..

Yeah, I know. Those rules do not apply to them.