RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Alternative Lifestyles in the News



Message

FreeAgent -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 10:17:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:


Your rights begin where mine end. But, if I force you to see what you do not want to see, I'm infringing on your rights. It becomes in a sense, play without consent. The point of asking a neighbor's permission to live one's life is two fold. Since when does your neighbor have to live by your standards and be ok with seeing your kink?


Straw man argument.  No one is "forced" to see that which they deem unpleasant.  One always has the choice to look away.  

If you insist on looking my direction and getting offended by what you see, the infringement is by you against me, not the other way around.



You're right, not forced to see it but, as any human with natural instincts when I look up and unexpectedly see what I've not wanted to see...is that fair?



celticlord2112 -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 10:20:02 AM)

quote:

Is it ok to force play on those without consent?


Circular reasoning, as "force" presumes a lack of consent.

Moreover, since when is being in someone's field of vision "forcing" anything?



celticlord2112 -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 10:21:12 AM)

quote:

You're right, not forced to see it but, as any human with natural instincts when I look up and unexpectedly see what I've not wanted to see...is that fair?


Yes.



Mercnbeth -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 10:24:22 AM)

quote:

Is it ok to force play on those without consent?


There is nobody forcing you to view a person at the end of the leash as "play".

Should I judge an adult with a toddler on the end of a harness leash a pedophile because that's the dynamic my mind perceives when I apply the same visual to beth? We saw just that while strolling down the promenade in Redondo last weekend. Should we have alerted the police and/or call child welfare services?

Do a search on CM regarding the lactating fetish. Should public breast feeding be banned because a certain segment of the population views lactating in a sexual nature? While on the subject of exposed nipples; why is a lactating nipple exposed to feed a baby "right", while a dry nipple "wrong" subject to arrest? 

quote:

However, does it make it "right" to do them?
Yes - any 'evil' or 'perversion' perceived is in the eyes of the perceiver.
Turn the question around - does it make it "wrong" to do them?



brainiacsub -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 10:28:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreedyTop

behaviour? if all they were doing was dressing Gothy, and using a leash, what behaviour was it that justified discrimination?

The article gives no indication that they were being disruptive in any manner other than the way they were dressed (and yes, I consider the leash to be a fashion accessory).



Ugghhh...I am afraid to answer your question for fear of becoming a broken record. Please read my subsequent responses to CelticLord and then let me know if I have not sufficiently addressed your concerns.

But I will say that it was the act of being led by the leash that got them booted from the bus. If she had been wearing the leash dangling from her neck like a fashion accessory, I wonder if the bus driver would have reacted the same way.

I would also like to add that if you really feel this way, I think you must ask yourself if you are prepared to become an advocate for social change and work to educate the public as to the symbolism and significance of the collar and leash in the lifestyle. This act of dominance and submission will never be viewed by the public as anything more than diminishing human life to that of the likes of animals. What society would want that? This is a perfect example of why social norms exist to begin with. Changing them requires education and activism.



sirguym -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 10:28:50 AM)

I strongly disagree; may I make an anaology that may help explain why.

There is a substantial population in the UK of muslim people. Many of their women-folk wear the niquab; the veil that hides the face below the eyes; or the burqua, the all-enveloping garment with a gauze 'window'. I find both unsettling to see, particularly the burqua, and I consider the whole baggage of cultural assumptions and religious fundamentalism that often goes with it to be both dangerous and misogynist for all concerned.

But I accept that these women have the right to hold those views if they wish, however abhorrent I find those views; and to wear the garments that proclaim that they accept that set of cultural (for it is NOT a religious thing, there are many muslim women who don't wear them) views.

There are arguments against accepting the wearing of those garments in particular circumstances; eg it means CCTV systems can't identify muslim women thieves, terrorist men can more easily escape by pretending to be women; they prevent non-verbal communication, etc. These specific problems need to be addressed. But I cannot see a good reason for banning the wearing of the garments in public outright.

This young couple have adopted a lifestyle where the collar and lead are fundamental and essential to their lifestyle. It is a cultural statement; albeit a culture of only two people. But what is the minimum number? If there were only two muslims in the town I live in and one was a man who wanted his wife to wear the veil, and the other was his wife who wanted to do so, could I say that was not acceptable?

Can anyone say that their particular choices are less valid then that of veil-wearing muslim women? Less rational?

It seems to me to be far more logical, rational and acceptable!

Surely they have the right to live their life the way they want; unless said lifestyle actually threatens anybody else's health, wealth or whatever.

quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

You can live your life in private any way you want. Again, as I have said, that is a separate argument. There are many people on this thread answering that question more eloquently than I could. But for me personally, I side with those who are arguing that no one has the right to impose their lifestyle choices on another. Flaunting this behavior in public qualifies.



FreeAgent -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 10:30:01 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

Is it ok to force play on those without consent?


There is nobody forcing you to view a person at the end of the leash as "play".

Should I judge an adult with a toddler on the end of a harness leash a pedophile because that's the dynamic my mind perceives when I apply the same visual to beth? We saw just that while strolling down the promenade in Redondo last weekend. Should we have alerted the police and/or call child welfare services?

Do a search on CM regarding the lactating fetish. Should public breast feeding be banned because a certain segment of the population views lactating in a sexual nature? While on the subject of exposed nipples; why is a lactating nipple exposed to feed a baby "right", while a dry nipple "wrong" subject to arrest? 

quote:

However, does it make it "right" to do them?
Yes - any 'evil' or 'perversion' perceived is in the eyes of the perceiver.
Turn the question around - does it make it "wrong" to do them?


But, two adults, one on a leash and the other holding it, are not doing this for the welfare of a person that is mentally and physically incapable of caring for themselves.  As it would be with a parent and toddler.  These two people, these adults have entered into an agreement to play and have carried their play into public.  When I look up and inadvertantely see this, I'm being exposed to a D/s scene.  I can look away but, without warning I've already been exposed to it.

And yes, when I turn the question around, I do still believe it to be something that is wrong.



sambamanslilgirl -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 10:44:02 AM)

replying without having read any other replies to this thread

i wore my leather collar and leash on public transportation twice to 2 Goth shows i was covering during Halloween (there's a pic of me w/the mask on my profile). i mostly i kept the leash hidden while riding under my jacket until reaching the venues. i don't impose my way of dress nor the lifestyle on any of the passengers aboard the buses and trains - then again, that's just me.

i wouldn't call what the driver did was wrong ...but i wouldn't go far to say what he did qualifies as discrimination.  i have seen people get tossed of the bus for the way they're dressed to nonpayment of fares to selling bootleg DVDs plenty of times in Chicago. passengers can scream "that's discrimination" all they want but CTA has the final say.



celticlord2112 -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 10:49:29 AM)

quote:

These two people, these adults have entered into an agreement to play and have carried their play into public. When I look up and inadvertantely see this, I'm being exposed to a D/s scene. I can look away but, without warning I've already been exposed to it.


Why must this be a "scene"?  I consider a scene to be contrived behavior.  I do not see where the couple's behavior is necessarily "contrived", and the statements of the female suggest that this is merely how they go about their daily lives.

In fact, other than her statement that she lives as a "pet", there's scant information in the article to suggest they are even a D/s couple.

Finally--you see (briefly) something you don't like.  So what?  That happens to people every day.  Dislike and offense is not the same as harm.  You are not harmed by seeing a couple on a leash.

My advice? Get over it.



FreeAgent -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 11:05:30 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

Get over it.



Is making the decision to put on a collar and be lead around on a leash not contrived behavior?  It's a planned decision they've made in choosing to put these items on and wear them in public for others to see. 

And you're right, I see people vomit, boogers in noses all gross things I don't want to see BUT, all things that are inside the social norm.  Which is what this comes down to.  I am as kinky as the next person  but, I do still believe that those that do not share my kinks have the right to live their lives as they choose without me imposing my lifestyle on them.

And no worries, I'll get over it because I was never under it. lol  Merely expressing my point of view which happens to differ greatly from yours.  Maybe listen to your own advice, get over it.



brainiacsub -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 11:16:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sirguym

I strongly disagree; may I make an anaology that may help explain why.

There is a substantial population in the UK of muslim people. Many of their women-folk wear the niquab; the veil that hides the face below the eyes; or the burqua, the all-enveloping garment with a gauze 'window'. I find both unsettling to see, particularly the burqua, and I consider the whole baggage of cultural assumptions and religious fundamentalism that often goes with it to be both dangerous and misogynist for all concerned.

But I accept that these women have the right to hold those views if they wish, however abhorrent I find those views; and to wear the garments that proclaim that they accept that set of cultural (for it is NOT a religious thing, there are many muslim women who don't wear them) views.

I agree with you that form and mode of dress is cultural and should be tolerated - up to a point. Would it be acceptable for indigenous peoples of New Guinea to walk around the streets of London or New York wearing only a boar tooth necklace and a penis sheath? I think not. But, the niquab and burqua do not qualify. Again, I agree with you that it should be their right to wear it if they so choose, but the problem I have with this argument is that many of these women do not feel or understand that they have a choice. Therefore, for many of these women, their cultural dress is actually oppression thinly veiled (no pun intended) as cultural and/or religious expression. I support those who are educated and free enough to have a choice and wish to exercise it. I would be willing to bet that it is not the majority.

quote:

This young couple have adopted a lifestyle where the collar and lead are fundamental and essential to their lifestyle. It is a cultural statement; albeit a culture of only two people. But what is the minimum number? If there were only two muslims in the town I live in and one was a man who wanted his wife to wear the veil, and the other was his wife who wanted to do so, could I say that was not acceptable?[...snip...]

I believe I may have addressed this sentiment in my reply to GreedyTop. If I did not to your satisfaction, please let me know. I am all for education and activism to change social norms. I do not agree with 'imposing' our culture on others.




celticlord2112 -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 11:28:13 AM)

LOL

So many words just to ask if we may politely agree to disagree.....



Stephann -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 11:30:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeAgent

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stephann

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeAgent

I know I'm getting off topic but, in reply to celtic:

Your rights begin where mine end.  But, if I force you to see what you do not want to see, I'm infringing on your rights.  It becomes in a sense, play without consent.  The point of asking a neighbor's permission to live one's life is two fold.  Since when does your neighbor have to live by your standards and be ok with seeing your kink?


Erm, this might seem like I'm playing both sides of the fence; I'm not.

I have every right to act as I wish in public; in effect, 'forcing' you to see me kiss my girlfriend.  Your recourse is to look away.  I have the right to walk up to someone, and ask them the time, their full name, or if they like dancing in jello.  They, of course, have the right to refuse to answer, and walk away.  Being in public, means you expect to be exposed to things you have no real control over.  The only recourse, is to never be in public.

If I want to do kinky things that are legal under the letter of the law in my front yard, I have that right.  My neighbor has the right to not watch, or to build a fence if he wishes.

Stephan


 
And I can definitely see your point here.  However, in a situation i.e. a moving bus I don't have the ability to just walk away.  And you're right, if you wanted to do kinky things outside someone's house that were technically legal, you'd have that right.  However, does it make it "right" to do them?  Is it ok to force play on those without consent?


If it's legal in the street, it's legal on the bus.  You have the right to take the next stop, or the next bus.

Confusing 'is this right' with 'do I have the right' is the problem here.  The assumption that others will play nicely will usually be disappointing.

By your position, if I write "People who have abortions are going to hell" (something I don't believe, but it works as an example) and you've had an abortion, do you feel I've violated your rights?

BDSM activities, often, are self-expression and protected as free speech.  If I hold my slave on a leash, I am exercising self-expression.

The confusion, though, is that just because my speech is protected, that other people speaking against me shouldn't be protected (when it is, equally in fact.)  Thus, someone calling me a 'freak' for leading my girl on a leash is well within their rights.  There's no law against being prejudiced or a bigot; the law only says I cannot act on certain types of prejudice (racial, gender, ethnic, or religious) without risking civil or criminal suits.  Being gothic or gay doesn't fall under the letter of the law. 

Anyone is entitled to lead another person (consensually) on a leash.  Others are entitled to ridicule or even deny service to someone leading or being led on a leash.  And we're allowed to say how horrible everyone involved is.

Stephan



celticlord2112 -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 11:40:11 AM)

quote:

Thus, someone calling me a 'freak' for leading my girl on a leash is well within their rights.


True enough.  And if that was all the off-duty bus driver had done, there would be so much less to discuss.  It would still be bigoted and wrong, but it would also be down in the realm of the merely crass.



AquaticSub -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 11:44:25 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeAgent

You're right, not forced to see it but, as any human with natural instincts when I look up and unexpectedly see what I've not wanted to see...is that fair?


I have to see things I don't want to all the time, from those "Big Johnson" shirts to women popping their breasts out to breast feed. I wouldn't support them being called freaks and kicked off a bus either. I don't want to see women of my size trying to wear clothes three times too small and I don't want to see UMs dressed like 24 year old sluts. I think their mothers should be slapped around and called idiots.

I really don't see wearing a leash as being much different, especially considering my vanilla friends who do the exact same thing.



AquaticSub -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 11:49:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeAgent
When I look up and inadvertantely see this, I'm being exposed to a D/s scene.  I can look away but, without warning I've already been exposed to it.



I completely disagree.

By that logic my entire life is a scene just because I happened to be owned and the fact that I'm owned affects my decisions of what groceries to buy. I don't feel I've been exposed to foreplay when a vanilla couple shares a longer than usual kiss, they haven't seen me scene when they see me on a leash.

quote:


Is making the decision to put on a collar and be lead around on a leash not contrived behavior?  It's a planned decision they've made in choosing to put these items on and wear them in public for others to see. 


It's not a touch more contrived than the decision to curl your hair or wear a cross. It's something you do because you like the way it looks or it means something to you.



Stephann -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 11:51:15 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

Thus, someone calling me a 'freak' for leading my girl on a leash is well within their rights.


True enough.  And if that was all the off-duty bus driver had done, there would be so much less to discuss.  It would still be bigoted and wrong, but it would also be down in the realm of the merely crass.



The point I'm making, is that the driver is, in fact, bigoted, wrong, and crass.  What he did wasn't illegal as a representative of the city transportation board, but rather the act of a private citizen who was intolerant.  If I were his boss, I'd have fired him.

Yet, that driver is fully entitled to be bigoted and wrong.  Yet, if I go out with a slave on a leash, I'd be pretty foolish to think I won't or shouldn't experience a negative reaction from someone.  Honestly, it was my understanding that many goths tend to actively seek those kinds of situations with the intention of provoking a response.  Thus the couple in question also bear a measure of responsibility for their actions.

Stephan



domiguy -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 11:54:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

These two people, these adults have entered into an agreement to play and have carried their play into public. When I look up and inadvertantely see this, I'm being exposed to a D/s scene. I can look away but, without warning I've already been exposed to it.


Why must this be a "scene"?  I consider a scene to be contrived behavior.  I do not see where the couple's behavior is necessarily "contrived", and the statements of the female suggest that this is merely how they go about their daily lives.

In fact, other than her statement that she lives as a "pet", there's scant information in the article to suggest they are even a D/s couple.

Finally--you see (briefly) something you don't like.  So what?  That happens to people every day.  Dislike and offense is not the same as harm.  You are not harmed by seeing a couple on a leash.

My advice? Get over it.



My advice...Take your own advice. How do you know that this is how they live their lives behind closed doors? Trust me like many people who flock towards goth, they are in it totally for the "shock value." You are making tremendous assumptions. You are basing the story on the one sided account of some unemployed vampire who admitted to referring to someone as a "fascist pig." Everything else in the story is based upon his account of things....I personally have yet to find an honest vampire. Always trying to lure one out past their bedtime. Extremely dishonest folk.

Riding "public" transportation means that you must adhere to certain rules, unfortunately many of these rules fall under "common sense." While a woman will probably not be criticized for breast feeding an infant on a bus, I assure you she would be removed and probably arrested for breast feeding me. NO ONE IS HARMED FOR WATCHING ME TAKE IN SOME SERIOUS NOURISHMENT...You also can't beat the design of the container. So why should I be thrown off the bus? Why can't people excercise any form of common sense and control? Why can't you play loud music? Quietly and privately masturbate?

They sought to get attention and they got what they deserved....Fuck 'em.


When one argues with brainiac they argue with me. She is so polite. Such a nice subbie. She is incredibly well spoke and carries herself with a grace and demeanor that has never been seen before on the forums of CM. It was out of necessity that I created her. First, to show other subs that there is power in words and education and that one may still be viewed as submissive and yet possess the intelligence and self worth to speak their mind. Secondly, I enjoy receiving all the fucked up letters from these A-hole Doms expressing the various and vile ways that that I can serve and be penetrated. Lastly, it allows me to be a more appreciative man, to express things in the feminine, to cry at movies, smile warmly at children, complain when I'm not feeling so "fresh", without fear of retribution or ridicule....Braniac you complete me. I tend to engage in arguments by routinely referring to my opponent as either a cocksucker, motherfucker or cunt....Hence "the moderation." braniac has brought out a more tender side...A kinder, gentler domiguy. A moderationist, entrenched in Moderatism. We are forever in each others debt. As Pat Benatar so wisely proclaimed..."We Belong."



RCdc -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 11:59:30 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeAgent

And you're right, I see people vomit, boogers in noses all gross things I don't want to see BUT, all things that are inside the social norm.  Which is what this comes down to.  I am as kinky as the next person  but, I do still believe that those that do not share my kinks have the right to live their lives as they choose without me imposing my lifestyle on them.


And yet until something is seen regularly, it will never be inside the 'social norm'.
So which comes first.  Chicken or egg?
 
the.dark.



angelikaJ -> RE: Master and pet banned from the bus (1/24/2008 12:02:16 PM)

I have not read the entire thread so my apologies for the probability of repeating that which has already been said... .

What about heterosexual couples holding hands vs same sex couples doing the same thing.... .

On any given day I may see something that may offend me...a slogan on a t-shirt...someone might be reading a book that I disagree with... .

I have the right to disagree and the choice to not look.

How does how someone else choose to live their own life interfere with how I live mine...?

Is anyone being harmed ...if not, then frankly I don't think it is any of my business.

As for the argument that it is the equivalent of non-consensual play...I don't buy that....as long as no one is going around placing collars and leashes on the unwilling....

jenn



Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875