Wikipedia cites Victoria, Australia’s legal definition of “sex on premises venue” to mean “any venue where a person is required to pay an admission fee or charge to enter the venue for the purpose of engaging in sexual activities with another person who has also entered the venue on the same terms and who did not receive any form of payment or reward, whether directly or indirectly, for engaging in sexual activities”.
That would include “gay bath house”, “gay sauna” or whatever euphemism for a homosexual sex on premises venue. That would include “on-premise” swinger clubs. That would exclude “off-premise” swinger clubs (which do not allow sexual activity on-site and look more like bars or nightclubs). That would also exclude most of the other [[:Category:For adults only]] suspects like the amenity:brothel, amenity:love_hotel, amenity:stripclub and shop:erotic tags…
As I raised this question in What tags and keys apply to a sex-on-premises venue (SOPV)? - OSM Help and got no response at all, I’m tempted to propose as a tag:
Tag:amenity-sex_on_premise_venue
with complementary keys:
- Key:gay=welcome/yes
- Key:lgbtq=*
- Key:fetish)=*
to mirror the keys currently used on tag:amenity=swingerclub.
See Sex on premises venue - Wikipedia for an overview of the terminology. The rationale for referring to these as SPoV instead of swingerclub is that the term “swinger” has been appropriated and co-opted by one specific subgroup; opposite-sex couples looking to swap partners. That means that other groups, such as gey men, gay women or single prople, really don’t identify with the “swinger” label, even if they are sexually active.
The end result I’ve been seeing on OpenStreetMap typically looks like this: There are two Toronto businesses about a block apart; one (Oasis Aqualounge) panders to opposite-sex lifestyle couples and is correctly tagged as “amenity=swingerclub”. On the next block, the other (Spa Excess) caters exclusively to gay males. Both are sex-on-premise venues, but Spa Excess gets tagged as “amenity=swimming_pool, amenity1=sauna” or something similar.
Effectively, if the gay SPoV is on Open Street Map at all, it’s being tagged with what are basically euphemisms which aren’t very helpful to the voyager. Tag:amenity=public_bath (with Key:bath_type=) or Tag:leisure=sauna (with Key:sauna=") should be being used in their normal, vanilla definitions so that the reader doesn’t get directed to a sex-on-premise venue if they’re just looking to take a bath. Yes, one of these establishments might have a swimming pool, but that’s no reason to remove it from its primary categorisation and plop it into amenity=swimming_pool with all of the city-operated fitness venues.
9 posts - 4 participants
Ce sujet de discussion accompagne la publication sur https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/there-needs-to-be-a-better-tag-than-amenity-swingerclub-for-sex-on-premise-venue/8333