quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
You say they shouldn't be exposed to marriage if that's my position. So then I guess in your point of view, prostitutes should be able to hawk their wares in the kids' park as well? After all, they are making a lifestyle choice, are they not?

quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12

I don't consider exhibitionism to be a de facto part of D/s, nor do I see it as having any automatic relationship with D/s. One can be D/s without being exhibitionist and be exhibitionist without being D/s. Exhibitionism has nothing to do with consent or submission and needs to be considered separately.

Ultimately, exhibitionism is the desire to force others to be confronted by your sexuality - it is by nature non-consensual. An exhibitionist would not get their kick by 'displaying' in a room full of people who couldn't care less - they *need* the shocked reaction and / or disapproval of those watching in order to get a thrill. This is much easier to achieve when those watching have not consented to witnessing the display and when the display is inappropriate to the time and place.

Exhibitionists will often downplay the non-consenting aspect of their kink as though the non-consenting third parties were irrelevant to their enjoyment. Yet they will admit that they simply don't get the same thrill being led around on their leash in a place where they are unlikely to be seen by such people. The exhibitionist is similar to the flasher in the dirty mac who exposes himself to unwilling people - they both want to shock and outrage and they need the non-consenting third party to do so. I personally consider it a kind of sexual harassment. When you're getting your sexual kicks out of people who don't want to be a part of your sex life, then it is at best a violation of non-consenting parties and, at worst, a kind of sex offence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BecomingV

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
You say they shouldn't be exposed to marriage if that's my position. So then I guess in your point of view, prostitutes should be able to hawk their wares in the kids' park as well? After all, they are making a lifestyle choice, are they not?

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/422/

LL, before you ever write again about prostitutes, please avow yourself of an education about what you are talking about! Jesus Christ! Prostitutes ARE kids.

The idiocy astounds!

And, did you notice how you did NOT address the point about exposing kids to marriage? I'm interested in that response. I had the same thought.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

Why should they not be exposed to marriage, which is a legally binding, committed relationship between two individuals? Notice I say individuals, not a man and a woman, because I support gay marriage, and have happily watched as the walls started to crumble and continue to crumble so that everyone can get married.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SeekingTrinity

All I want to say is that when someone gets a hard on for you, Gauge...they put John Holmes to shame with how freakin' ginormous that hard on is

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

They're not actually being involved in it though. It's not like anybody's being forced to take the leash or spank her ass. They're being forced to tolerate the existence of a lifestyle that's different from theirs. Further I think Gauge has brought up a good point, what standard does one use to justify forcing tolerance of trans and gay lifestyles on a non consenting public and then turn around and discriminate against me for wanting the exact same right.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

So because it's NYC there are automatically no small children about? Sorry folks, I still think it's wrong simply because there are kids all over the place. We lived there when my daughter was young and I wouldn't have wanted to explain this to her.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kaliko

When I wrote that, I was thinking of the flamboyantly gay example used earlier in the thread. Gay people don't have all the rights that others do, so there may be more reason to having a voice about the fact that they're gay - in my mind anyway . I was also thinking outside of kink. Drawing attention to yourself to further a cause is not quite the same thing as drawing attention because it gives your ego a boost.

ETA. I reread what you said. To clarify - I don't think it's necessary for the world to know that I like to be yanked around on a leash now and then because I'm not denied any basic rights because of it. So no, I don't believe everyone here fits into the downtrodden or discriminated against group.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gauge
Are our attitudes toward this sort of thing more of a cultural thing here in America because sex is vilified and often suppressed to the point of stupidity? Is this sort of thing handled differently in other countries, particularly Europe and the oft wacky UK?

I can only speak for the UK and France. In both these countries it very much depends where you are. In London and Paris its an every day occurrence to see the weird, the wild and the wonderful. In London I have seen a human pony and trap, a Goddess carried over London Bridge on a throne chair as well as a few people on collars and leashes. In Paris I have walked behind a very pregnant woman who's loose skirt was so short I could just see her bum cheeks. As the wind blew, the skirt kept blowing up and she clearly wasn't wearing knickers!. In both Paris and London we see some very provocatively dressed T-girls.

In both London and Paris, I wouldn't turn a blind eye on a woman dressed from head to toe in latex on a collar and leash, assuming she isn't showing any naughty bits. If I had young children with me and they questioned me about her/them, I would answer the same way I would if they asked me about the six foot man dressed from head to toe in ladies clothes, "Some people like to express themselves a certain way and that's fine, don't you think?"

Out in the sticks its different, though T-girls are still a common and mostly unnoticed minority.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

If you need to shock the natives so you can pretend you are "extreme" or more "serious" then you to gain some self confidence and maturity.

quote:

I want to expose my woman's cunt to a stranger, I do it to a guy in a bar, the chance of offending someone is near zero.

quote:

It like the teenage kids who walk REAL slow in a crosswalk, relishing the rare moment of power they are experiencing, its small and petty.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

Because I don't think it is something you should do around your kids to be quite frank. A child seeing a stranger do this will ask their parent/guardian. A child seeing their parent do this will ask their parent. Children need to be free to make their own decisions in life and this is the type of thing that may give them defined roles instead of being able to choose for themselves.

quote:


As for the appropriateness of the place....it depends on the place, as I've already mentioned. A grade school function? If you are there as a parent, you should look like a parent, not someone's pet. A church? I know you are an atheist, but if you attended a church for a wedding or whatever, you should have respect for the people who are congregants there. A courtroom? Well, if you are stupid enough to show up for court in latex and wearing a leash, go for it. The judge will handle that in due course, and you aren't likely to be happy about it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: IrishMist

~FR~

I have tattoos.
I have two slave bands, one around each arm. They start on the bicep and extend downward to my wrist.
I have a tattoo across my shoulders in the back which says, in very large black letters 'property of xxxxx xxxxx" the x's being my late husbands name.

I wore a collar for more than 20yrs. I wore this collar around my neck, 24/7.
Not a necklace that 99% of those here call a collar.
A real slaves collar. With a lock on it, and tag identifying my owner.

I also raised 4 children. Went to school with them, attended school functions, took them to church.

I never covered my tattoos or tried to hide my collar.
They are a part of me. A part that I was and am very proud of.

The school never batted an eye. The other parents never batted an eye. Those in church never said a word, or looked disgusted/shocked.

My kids grew up watching how their father and I interacted with each other. If they had questions, they asked and were told the blunt, honest truth. We did not believe in sugar coating or lying.
Did we run around the house naked? Of course not. But the tattoos, the piercings and the collar were all explained honestly.

My kids had no problems with it.
Their friends had no problems with it.
The parents of their friends had no problems with it.

So, if I see someone walking down the street on a leash and collar...I applaud the person for having the confidence to be themselves in a world that says hiding is better.

quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12

I don't consider exhibitionism to be a de facto part of D/s, nor do I see it as having any automatic relationship with D/s. One can be D/s without being exhibitionist and be exhibitionist without being D/s. Exhibitionism has nothing to do with consent or submission and needs to be considered separately.

Ultimately, exhibitionism is the desire to force others to be confronted by your sexuality - it is by nature non-consensual. An exhibitionist would not get their kick by 'displaying' in a room full of people who couldn't care less - they *need* the shocked reaction and / or disapproval of those watching in order to get a thrill. This is much easier to achieve when those watching have not consented to witnessing the display and when the display is inappropriate to the time and place.

Exhibitionists will often downplay the non-consenting aspect of their kink as though the non-consenting third parties were irrelevant to their enjoyment. Yet they will admit that they simply don't get the same thrill being led around on their leash in a place where they are unlikely to be seen by such people. The exhibitionist is similar to the flasher in the dirty mac who exposes himself to unwilling people - they both want to shock and outrage and they need the non-consenting third party to do so. I personally consider it a kind of sexual harassment. When you're getting your sexual kicks out of people who don't want to be a part of your sex life, then it is at best a violation of non-consenting parties and, at worst, a kind of sex offence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gauge


Setting definitely has a lot to do with it. School, Church, Court, all are established institutions and whether or not we agree with it or not, there are a few basic rules of decent conduct in order to enter one or all of those places. They are also, not fully public places, which is where I have confined my examples to. A transvestite can go to a school as a parent, yes? Can the transvestite attend a wedding? A court proceeding? My point being that the appropriateness of the setting changes for the transvestite and not for a kinky couple. There is no good reason for that. Make no mistake, I get your point, it is just food for thought.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
I've admitted it can be a slippery slope.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
The point I'm making is that BLATANT displays should be kept at home.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
Should the transgendered not take their children to the park? Of course they should. But they shouldn't be feeling up their partner while their there, and neither should the heterosexual couple.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
As Irishmist said, she was honest with her children, but they didn't blatantly display their roles in front of the kids (i.e. going around naked).

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
You say they shouldn't be exposed to marriage if that's my position. So then I guess in your point of view, prostitutes should be able to hawk their wares in the kids' park as well? After all, they are making a lifestyle choice, are they not?

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
I'm all for people having freedom, but there are some things that I think people should use a little discretion about the when and where.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
A perfectly "vanilla" example: One shouldn't be drinking alcohol openly in the kids' park either.

quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12

I don't consider exhibitionism to be a de facto part of D/s, nor do I see it as having any automatic relationship with D/s. One can be D/s without being exhibitionist and be exhibitionist without being D/s. Exhibitionism has nothing to do with consent or submission and needs to be considered separately.

Ultimately, exhibitionism is the desire to force others to be confronted by your sexuality - it is by nature non-consensual. An exhibitionist would not get their kick by 'displaying' in a room full of people who couldn't care less - they *need* the shocked reaction and / or disapproval of those watching in order to get a thrill. This is much easier to achieve when those watching have not consented to witnessing the display and when the display is inappropriate to the time and place.

Exhibitionists will often downplay the non-consenting aspect of their kink as though the non-consenting third parties were irrelevant to their enjoyment. Yet they will admit that they simply don't get the same thrill being led around on their leash in a place where they are unlikely to be seen by such people. The exhibitionist is similar to the flasher in the dirty mac who exposes himself to unwilling people - they both want to shock and outrage and they need the non-consenting third party to do so. I personally consider it a kind of sexual harassment. When you're getting your sexual kicks out of people who don't want to be a part of your sex life, then it is at best a violation of non-consenting parties and, at worst, a kind of sex offence.