RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective

RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress

Message

BonesFromAsh -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 1:26:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TonyB79 What you girls are describing is more akin to walking into a male brothel, approaching the nearest stud and saying, "Oh my god PLEASE rape me!" then slapping him across the face and saying "How DARE you!!!" when he says, "Yeah, okay." Interesting viewpoint. So, you're equating dominant women with whores? Bless you. I would ask that you view my profile, and then tell me why...given what I have written and the photos I have posted, I just received an email from a male telling me he wants to be spanked and how badly he wants me to spank him. My use of the cliche "she was asking for it" simply plays into your cliche excuse of " provocative pics"and "profiles specifically tailored to advertise your sexual proclivities".

LaTigresse -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 1:30:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TonyB79 Very clever insults, ladies. What was I thinking? OF COURSE a bunch of cultured women like yourselves should be able to come on a fetish-themed site, post provocative pics, and create profiles specifically tailored to advertise your sexual proclivities, and not expect to be contacted by men who are interested in - GASP! - sex. I hasten to add... I'm not saying these guys' behavior is appropriate or excusable. I just wonder what kind of attention you were honestly expecting to attract... Very probably something more positive, cultured and classy than the type of attention you are expecting. Apparently you are into humiliation.

LadyConstanze -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 1:32:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Epytropos quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze Well, since you aren't convinced that being offended is not a real emotion we're all not entitled to our feelings? You're entitled to your feelings, I'm just not convinced that they actually exist as they are described. I've never met anyone who claimed to be offended by things that wasn't trying to gain control over a related situation - the anti-porn people, the anti-gay people, the anti-violent film/tv/game/etc people, they all have one thing in common, and that is that they are trying to make some power play in society. If that estimation is incorrect, feel free to be as offended as you like. You know I am so not offended by porn or gays, if somebody wants porn, they should be able to get it, do I want to have to watch porn? That's the difference, and getting emails that sometimes seriously make me want to throw up, that is a bit offensive. Some of the things are very explicit, let's just say scat fantasies... I don't mind anybody indulging in FT with a partner, it's just I don't need somebody sending me pics of a guy eating feces, sorry, there goes my lunch... And yes, that is something I do find offensive, if people do it together and are happy, fine, but no, I do not need to see it... Sensitive tummy and all that. quote: ORIGINAL: Epytropos quote: some of us just might not like to be assaulted with the sexual fantasies of strangers, so your solution is to put the profile into hiding and not get any mails instead of having the reasonable expectation that people treat you like a human being and not some piece of meat that is there to fulfill their fantasies? Great solution.... Isn't that like telling a woman if you don't want to have your butt pinched in public transportation, you better not leave the house or make sure you only take a car? One would think that it is a reasonable expectation to be treated with some basic respect, but again, that's just me... Fair point - I just don't see the emails that get quoted here as being anything close to as bad as all that. I see one of these threads every few weeks at a minimum, and many are rife with quotes of these 'terrible' emails, and they're hardly the worst thing I've read. I just have real trouble with the idea that they have any real affect on people who read them by choice. Being molested on a train is no closer to having an email sent to you asking if you like "loser pig boys" than it is to hearing the word 'cunt' in casual conversation, which incidentally is another one of those things people are always 'offended' enough by that others are expected to acquiesce to their 'needs' Some of the emails women get here, you have to see to believe them, it's not "do you like loser pig boys" it's a lot worse and the only thing you can do is to delete and block, because if you try to tell them politely that it's out of order or that you really weren't interested in their glowing descriptions of how they would "serve" you and that it is not a good way to approach any woman, you're getting the most vile replies, then you block, and then they come back with a bunch of other names. I just think that online the same basic manners as offline should be expected, and if somebody uses 'cunt' a lot in casual conversation, I draw my own conclusions about their education level, their intelligence and the way they view women... Should they use it in a restaurant, I would have no problem asking for the manager and complaining about it, because I don't think that spending quite a bit on nice food includes having to listen to a bunch of yobs using derogatory terms for women or women's vaginas, I would do the same if it was a group of females who'd be talking about "dicks" - and if there would be younger people around, I'd absolutely would make a stink. The kids will pick up those words by themselves, no doubt about it, but they shouldn't get the impression that it's remotely acceptable to use them, unless of course their sole aspiration is living in council housing. I find cunt very offensive and being called one, let's say the last time it happened the guy did regret it.

PeonForHer -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 1:43:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze and it's not a catsuit Isn't it? I always thought it was.

Epytropos -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 1:44:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze I just think that online the same basic manners as offline should be expected, and if somebody uses 'cunt' a lot in casual conversation, I draw my own conclusions about their education level, their intelligence and the way they view women... Should they use it in a restaurant, I would have no problem asking for the manager and complaining about it, because I don't think that spending quite a bit on nice food includes having to listen to a bunch of yobs using derogatory terms for women or women's vaginas, I would do the same if it was a group of females who'd be talking about "dicks" - and if there would be younger people around, I'd absolutely would make a stink. The kids will pick up those words by themselves, no doubt about it, but they shouldn't get the impression that it's remotely acceptable to use them, unless of course their sole aspiration is living in council housing. I find cunt very offensive and being called one, let's say the last time it happened the guy did regret it. Ok but see that's exactly what I mean. It's never "I'm offended." It's always "I'm offended so you need to behave according to the following proscriptions." I would never behave as you described it in a restaurant, but neither would I feel the need to involve myself in the affairs of others if they did, or even care for that matter. What in God's name makes one person's idea of 'proper' language inherently superior to another?

LadyConstanze -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 1:59:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Epytropos quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze I just think that online the same basic manners as offline should be expected, and if somebody uses 'cunt' a lot in casual conversation, I draw my own conclusions about their education level, their intelligence and the way they view women... Should they use it in a restaurant, I would have no problem asking for the manager and complaining about it, because I don't think that spending quite a bit on nice food includes having to listen to a bunch of yobs using derogatory terms for women or women's vaginas, I would do the same if it was a group of females who'd be talking about "dicks" - and if there would be younger people around, I'd absolutely would make a stink. The kids will pick up those words by themselves, no doubt about it, but they shouldn't get the impression that it's remotely acceptable to use them, unless of course their sole aspiration is living in council housing. I find cunt very offensive and being called one, let's say the last time it happened the guy did regret it. Ok but see that's exactly what I mean. It's never "I'm offended." It's always "I'm offended so you need to behave according to the following proscriptions." I would never behave as you described it in a restaurant, but neither would I feel the need to involve myself in the affairs of others if they did, or even care for that matter. What in God's name makes one person's idea of 'proper' language inherently superior to another? Living in a society? I simply think if I am spending money in a nice restaurant, I am spending a bit to enjoy the food and the ambiente, so it's simply not too much to ask that I don't have to hear language that doesn't belong there, I'm not going to be offended by the occasional effing and blinding slipping out, but somebody cussing loudly, really don't need to waste £100 or more for a meal that is made unenjoyable by behaviour that is simply unacceptable in public. Would you put up with somebody talking loudly in a cinema? You'd ask them to shut up or complain, because you spent money on watching the movie, if I spend quite a bit for a meal that I intend to enjoy with somebody, then it's not unreasonable that I'm not disturbed by excessive gutter language. Now of course if the owner of the restaurant is fine with some people peppering their language with "cunt", not a problem, just cancel my order and I take my business somewhere else.

LadyConstanze -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 2:01:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze and it's not a catsuit Isn't it? I always thought it was. It's a leather dress with a corset, I thought that was obvious?

LadyConstanze -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 2:04:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TonyB79 Wow, you disagree with my opinions so it's on to fat jokes now? You're right, you're WAY classier than I am. I salute you, madam. tips hat You saw fit to comment on my outfit and looks, and declare it's inviting sexual advances of any kind, but I am not allowed to comment on the profile picture that you put up there yourself? Btw I don't think obesity is a joke, it's a serious health risk, but in your case I'm not too bothered about the risks to your heart, diabetes and all the rest - you picked your profile picture yourself. Interesting that you're allowed to comment on my looks but I'm not allowed to comment on all your chins...

Epytropos -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 2:27:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze quote: ORIGINAL: Epytropos quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze I just think that online the same basic manners as offline should be expected, and if somebody uses 'cunt' a lot in casual conversation, I draw my own conclusions about their education level, their intelligence and the way they view women... Should they use it in a restaurant, I would have no problem asking for the manager and complaining about it, because I don't think that spending quite a bit on nice food includes having to listen to a bunch of yobs using derogatory terms for women or women's vaginas, I would do the same if it was a group of females who'd be talking about "dicks" - and if there would be younger people around, I'd absolutely would make a stink. The kids will pick up those words by themselves, no doubt about it, but they shouldn't get the impression that it's remotely acceptable to use them, unless of course their sole aspiration is living in council housing. I find cunt very offensive and being called one, let's say the last time it happened the guy did regret it. Ok but see that's exactly what I mean. It's never "I'm offended." It's always "I'm offended so you need to behave according to the following proscriptions." I would never behave as you described it in a restaurant, but neither would I feel the need to involve myself in the affairs of others if they did, or even care for that matter. What in God's name makes one person's idea of 'proper' language inherently superior to another? Living in a society? I simply think if I am spending money in a nice restaurant, I am spending a bit to enjoy the food and the ambiente, so it's simply not too much to ask that I don't have to hear language that doesn't belong there, I'm not going to be offended by the occasional effing and blinding slipping out, but somebody cussing loudly, really don't need to waste £100 or more for a meal that is made unenjoyable by behaviour that is simply unacceptable in public. Would you put up with somebody talking loudly in a cinema? You'd ask them to shut up or complain, because you spent money on watching the movie, if I spend quite a bit for a meal that I intend to enjoy with somebody, then it's not unreasonable that I'm not disturbed by excessive gutter language. Now of course if the owner of the restaurant is fine with some people peppering their language with "cunt", not a problem, just cancel my order and I take my business somewhere else. What makes 'cunt' inherently worse than any other word? There is no objective standard for it. You talk about how it ruins your dinner and is therefore bad. What about someone who finds the display of cleavage 'offensive?' Is a woman in a cocktail dress supposed to cover up in fancy restaurants because they might be offended? How about those who are offended by the showing of hair? Should we go over to the niqab? I know (or more accurately knew) people who were 'offended' by mention of cancer, finding it 'morbid' or having it remind them of lost loved ones. Should we stop people from discussing that in restaurants? People at neighboring tables might hear, after all, and be 'offended.' I can declare that I find anything offensive and by your logic everyone should stop doing it because it is impinging on my enjoyment of life. The only way yours is distinct from my examples is that you have a larger number of people on your side, though I daresay not the majority.

PeonForHer -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 2:35:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze It's a leather dress with a corset, I thought that was obvious? Nope, not to me. Whatever: it does the job. :-)

LadyConstanze -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 2:40:08 PM)
There are certain rules in society about what is acceptable, a bikini in a restaurant is not, using vulgar language is not - if I am spending money in a restaurant, I expect to enjoy it, if somebody violates what is generally accepted as good manners there is a reason to complain, simple as that. I don't have to accept listening to offensive language, should somebody find a display of cleavage unacceptable, they aren't forced to look - though most restaurants have dress codes - but it would be a bit much to have to wear earplugs because you don't want to hear vulgar language in a restaurant. We went out to dinner the other week and a couple of people were behaving in a way that was not acceptable, swearing loudly, we didn't have to say anything, a waiter asked them to tone it down or please leave, since they didn't tone it down, the manager came and asked them to leave. In case I'd go to a country where they have a certain dress code, I will adapt to it, it's their turf and I have the choice of not going, in most countries yelling cunt loudly is about as unacceptable as yelling Fuck, Shit, Bugger, Asshole, etc., now if somebody does that in their own home and in private, not a problem, once they force it on others, it does become a problem. Now if I go to a restaurant, I behave like it is expected and dress like it is expected, it's simple respect to others, if I come to your house I will not violate your rules, in case I don't like it, I can leave. It's called manners.

Epytropos -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 2:56:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze There are certain rules in society about what is acceptable, a bikini in a restaurant is not, using vulgar language is not - if I am spending money in a restaurant, I expect to enjoy it, if somebody violates what is generally accepted as good manners there is a reason to complain, simple as that. I don't have to accept listening to offensive language, should somebody find a display of cleavage unacceptable, they aren't forced to look - though most restaurants have dress codes - but it would be a bit much to have to wear earplugs because you don't want to hear vulgar language in a restaurant. We went out to dinner the other week and a couple of people were behaving in a way that was not acceptable, swearing loudly, we didn't have to say anything, a waiter asked them to tone it down or please leave, since they didn't tone it down, the manager came and asked them to leave. In case I'd go to a country where they have a certain dress code, I will adapt to it, it's their turf and I have the choice of not going, in most countries yelling cunt loudly is about as unacceptable as yelling Fuck, Shit, Bugger, Asshole, etc., now if somebody does that in their own home and in private, not a problem, once they force it on others, it does become a problem. Now if I go to a restaurant, I behave like it is expected and dress like it is expected, it's simple respect to others, if I come to your house I will not violate your rules, in case I don't like it, I can leave. It's called manners. Manners being here defined as "the propensity to cater to the presumed opinion of an unpolled majority." You make repeated recourse to the "rules" of "society." Who writes these rules, and why was I never consulted? As to not having to look at certain people, the only way you could know to ignore the sight of something is by looking and seeing what it is. Hence, anyone who has sufficient information to do so has already been 'offended' by the sight of it, probably for at least the same period of time as it took you to hear a given curse word. Incidentally, this same argument could be used for the pictures and text cmailed to you - you could simply not look at them. Except you would have no way to tell what should and shouldn't be looked at until the 'damage' is done, and are hence here expressing distaste for the practice.

LadyConstanze -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 3:13:38 PM)
I'm terribly sorry that you were never consulted on generally acceptable manners. If you find that so offensive may I suggest a lonely island where you don't have to bother with it? Usually it is what your parents and school teach you, I assume you are familiar with both concepts? I also assume you have a job and you follow basic manners there? Were you consulted if it is convenient to you? I'm not offended by nudity, should that mean because it doesn't offend me I should expect everybody else to not be offended and happily do my shopping in the buff or show up in the board room starkers? And if I get arrested possibly complain loudly how others are too sensitive because I wasn't consulted... Somebody might not find it offensive to be fondled by strangers, so should we all assume that the "unpolled majority" can be fondled at will? Of course you are free to poll people before you use swearing in a public place, most people simply don't want to offend others and to be honest, I prefer the company of somebody who's aware of basic manners and conduct. Why do you think most restaurants have a dress code and will ask people to leave if they behave in a way that might offend others? As I said, if a restaurant wants to have sweary people in there, not a problem, I take my business somewhere else. Oddly enough most restaurants seem to prefer people who don't swear, dress in a certain manner, behave in a certain manner... Yup, they are catering to the presumed opinion of the unpolled majority and they don't consult you - isn't life tough? You can always test out how valid it is by applying for a job and not catering to manners "the presumed opinion of the unpolled majority" and see how far that gets you, I mean it's your right to chew gum and to use cunt, why should people be offended? So why not do it in a job interview or while at work? After all you were not consulted...

VaguelyCurious -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 3:27:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TonyB79 OF COURSE a bunch of cultured women like yourselves should be able to come on a fetish-themed site, post provocative pics, and create profiles specifically tailored to advertise your sexual proclivities, and not expect to be contacted by men who are interested in - GASP! - sex. Hello, Tony. Take a look at my profile. Tell me, if you would, what the fuck is sexually provocative about it, and I will remove the offending material at once. Then we will see if that cuts down the sexually aggressive spam in my inbox at all. I can tell you already that it won't. I'm not walking into a brothel and yelling 'rape me'. I'm just sitting there, trying very hard not to make eye contact with anyone or look too closely at the questionable stains on the carpet. And I get as much nasty spam as everyone else, believe me. Which means you're talking crap.

LadyConstanze -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 3:46:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VaguelyCurious quote: ORIGINAL: TonyB79 OF COURSE a bunch of cultured women like yourselves should be able to come on a fetish-themed site, post provocative pics, and create profiles specifically tailored to advertise your sexual proclivities, and not expect to be contacted by men who are interested in - GASP! - sex. Hello, Tony. Take a look at my profile. Tell me, if you would, what the fuck is sexually provocative about it, and I will remove the offending material at once. Then we will see if that cuts down the sexually aggressive spam in my inbox at all. I can tell you already that it won't. I'm not walking into a brothel and yelling 'rape me'. I'm just sitting there, trying very hard not to make eye contact with anyone or look too closely at the questionable stains on the carpet. And I get as much nasty spam as everyone else, believe me. Which means you're talking crap. LOL, you know apparently my picture is sexually provocative and invites strangers to spam me with their masturbation fantasies - now I would have thought all the naughty bits are well covered, my profile says "looking for friends only", I'm not flashing much flesh, though I do think I am flashing an impressive bullwhip - apparently that one escaped him, he was possibly too concentrated to unimagine the leather from neck to toe (maybe showing a few inches of bare arms are considered super provocative now - I am sure they would be in a Muslim country). I think we can sum it up, that if it is a fetish themed website it's carte blanche for desperate males to deem any picture sexually provocative and tailored to ensnare them to share their favorite masturbation fantasy. Oddly enough the same guys would possibly soil their pants before they'd walk up to any of us at a munch or a fetish party and do the same thing, but online they're so freaking courageous and we should be thankful for their attentions and not look at their pics, because of course it's fair and just if they rate us, but if we deem them unattractive or repulsive, we're shallow...

Epytropos -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 4:39:42 PM)
Wait, wait. Are you actually trying to imply that I'm the one trying to impose my views on the world and that I should abscond from society if I don't like it because I'm saying that people should be allowed to do things I myself have unequivocally stated I don't do without you forcing your view of propriety on them? I mean, really? Especially after your original argument was that people shouldn't have to leave society in order to not be harassed?

TonyB79 -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 4:51:47 PM)
I commented on your outfit, not your general physical appearance. It continually amazes me how hostile and prone to personal attacks the people on this message board are... I've truly never seen anything like it. You wear a catwoman outfit and crawl toward the camera with a come hither look in your eyes, and yet men are psychos because they dare to find it sexually provocative? Absurd. It's a sex site, ladies. PERIOD. The site is built around enabling people to showcase their sexual proclivities. That's the commonality that's brought us all together. We're all perverts. If that offends you (pictures you all dropping your teaspoons full of grey poupon as your frilly napkins flutter to the table and your mouths form shocked little o's of distaste), go elsewhere. You get what you pay for. (Or don't, as the case may be). And yes, I'm gonna go ahead and stick to my guns, and say that replying to my arguments (which you don't happen to agree with) by getting angry and saying "Yeah... well... you're FAT!" is about as low-class as it gets. I've had a lot of contentious discussions on a lot of message boards in my day, and never once have I had someone resort to insulting my weight in order to win an argument. Even Tea Partiers and Glenn Beck types don't stoop that low. Congrats!

LadyConstanze -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 4:54:17 PM)
What do you actually want? You were the one who proclaimed that people should be allowed to use the word cunt and if somebody is offended it is their fault and you complained that you weren't polled when it came to manners "the presumed opinion of the unpolled majority" So do make up your mind, if YOU think it is OK that they swear and use cunt because you say so and everybody who disagrees is wrong, who is trying to enforce the view on the majority? As I said, you can poll if it makes you feel better, what I am saying is that every society has generally accepted norms and it's expected to behave according to those norms, you are the one who thinks that's completely unreasonable to expect people to behave in a manner that is generally accepted - by "the presumed opinion of the unpolled majority"... Come on, remember, I am the horrible person who feels offended by some stranger sending her explicit pictures of scat, some guy using the word cunt, fuck and shit loudly in a fancy restaurant (one I pay quite a bit of money to go to, so oh so very unreasonable to expect to not hear swearing), you are the one who finds the whole concept of manners ridiculous because you weren't polled on them... What's it going to be?

Epytropos -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 5:16:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze What do you actually want? You were the one who proclaimed that people should be allowed to use the word cunt and if somebody is offended it is their fault and you complained that you weren't polled when it came to manners "the presumed opinion of the unpolled majority" So do make up your mind, if YOU think it is OK that they swear and use cunt because you say so and everybody who disagrees is wrong, who is trying to enforce the view on the majority? As I said, you can poll if it makes you feel better, what I am saying is that every society has generally accepted norms and it's expected to behave according to those norms, you are the one who thinks that's completely unreasonable to expect people to behave in a manner that is generally accepted - by "the presumed opinion of the unpolled majority"... Come on, remember, I am the horrible person who feels offended by some stranger sending her explicit pictures of scat, some guy using the word cunt, fuck and shit loudly in a fancy restaurant (one I pay quite a bit of money to go to, so oh so very unreasonable to expect to not hear swearing), you are the one who finds the whole concept of manners ridiculous because you weren't polled on them... What's it going to be? My argument is in favor of inaction, which is the default position of all things in a pseudo-deterministic system such as ours. Yours is in favor of actively telling the manager so that they can actively intervene in the activities of others. I am not saying people shouldn't observe manners if they wish to, I'm saying they shouldn't interfere with others if they don't. An argument of non-interference is reactive - that is to say, it only needs to be made in response to an argument of interference. Since I'm not saying that people should swear, only that they shouldn't be censored, the burden is on you to prove why we should censor them. On a more specific level, your argument that the common norms are inherently good because they are the common norms is est ergo debeat - It is, therefore it should be. This is fallacious. There is no reason it should be true. You are saying that we should act to restrict others from behaving in a way which violates the norm because it is the norm. Yet you have no way of proving what the norm is and isn't, nor any way of demonstrating that the norm is superior to the other options. You are telling me that the norm is thus and such, and yet ignoring the fact that many disagree, and then telling me that the world would be better if the norm was followed precisely, and yet ignoring the fact that many disagree with this as well. It all presumes facts not in evidence. On the issue of the freedom of a business to dictate activity within it's walls, you're absolutely correct. A business should be allowed to conduct affairs within its establishments to its liking. However, you are not arguing that we shouldn't interfere with what a business wants to do, you're arguing that you should go and use the 'offensive'ness of the other people's cursing to get the manager to take actions which they may or may not take otherwise, which is not allowing the management to do as they see fit, but instead acting to influence their behavior. EDIT: To answer your first question, I actually want people to quit trying to tell others how to talk, dress, and generally conduct themselves based on the false standard of 'offensiveness.'

LadyConstanze -> RE: What dominant women endure online - a halfway clueless male's perspective (8/6/2011 5:32:23 PM)
Actually no, my idea is in favour of only going to restaurants where people behave, because the staff will make sure of it, in case they don't, I will ask the manager to please solve the problem - he can decide if he'd like to give us another table, away from the problem or tell me there is no problem, in that case I will just cancel my order, it's their turf, if I don't like it I can leave. So you are claiming many disagree with the norm, where are your numbers? What I have is generally accepted behaviour in the work place and in public, behaviour that won't get you fired or asked to leave - I think we can agree that this can be defined as the norm. Now if the management doesn't notice a problem, as a client I can bring it to their notice. Just like I can politely point out that there is no soap in the restrooms, they are free to do then what they please and I am then free to decide if I want to spend money there or not. And I am not telling anybody how to dress or talk, in general what they do doesn't interest me, unless they do it in a way that I can't avoid it, as I said, what they do in their own homes is none of my business, if they force others to witness their behaviour, things change. Hey, I live in the middle of town, I have 2 large dogs, the dogs are quiet and placid because I am not living in on an island, now if they'd go mental all the time and bark loudly when somebody walks past the house or I walk them, I would be disturbing others - like people disturb others by swearing. Simple respect! Same thing with sexuality, people can do whatever they want as long as it's consensual and they aren't dragging people into it who didn't consent to it. While I might not be offended by my neighbours getting it on on their front lawn, I wouldn't want my niece or nephew to see it, to be honest, I don't particularly care to see it but I would possibly just laugh. You might rant and rave about how useless social norms and acceptable behaviour is, I disagree. It makes it easier for people to live together in cities or towns, it's simply trying not to offend others. If some people see that as an infringement of their liberties, well then they have to find a society who finds that kind of behaviour acceptable - not sure if the zoo has places open...

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.21875