RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message


longwayhome -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 8:57:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets


quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome
the existence of any boundary lines and the house rules are all besides the point.


I'm not going to disagree with all of your other points, and, I'm not going to disagree with this point that I quoted above, except to reiterate that a SERIES of FAILURES occurred BEFORE it ever got to LP's need for action.

That series of failures should NOT be overlooked, even as you commend LP for her quick and decisive actions.


I know what you are saying but it's a bit sad when we need a whole serious of measures to stop people from groping others uninvited.




crumpets -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 9:08:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome
I know what you are saying but it's a bit sad when we need a whole serious of measures to stop people from groping others uninvited.


Fair enough.
You seem reasonably (as opposed to the "chop off his fingers" crowd).

If the moron from NY would have his way, the offender would be hauled into court for a sentence of chopped fingers, however, the guy would almost certainly get off the hook when the perp's defense attorney would certainly bring up any known or perceived flaws in the "system" that could have, or should have, prevented the offense from occurring.

That's my main point, which is that the system failed, such that LP was forced into quick corrective action, which is a role she shouldn't have had to perform.

Having said that the "system" is often to blame, I have never said that the guy himself wasn't to blame (as for all I know, he's the type to enter even if there was a "keep out" sign.

It's why we have increasingly severe penalties for repeat offenses such as common trespassing, for example.
And, it's why another 100 gun-control laws isn't gonna stop the next mass murderer either.

A. There is a system in place, but it only works on the reasonable or knowledgeable people.
B. For the unreasonable or unknowledgeable people, we have a system of steadily escalating penalties.

In this case, it seemed that only the first step in "B" needed to be exercised, the discussion mainly centering around whether the "penalty" of a strict admonishment being apropos, or not.

NOTE: Some (decidedly unreasonable) people seem to have ignored the "steadily escalating penalties" part, jumping to the likes of Fundamentalist Islamic Law as the first step, which I, personally consider deplorable.




PonyGroom -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 9:24:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mistian

Was there ever a point where diplomacy would have worked? I get the impression that the guy was determined to touch and you did the minimum necessary to make him back off. That's fair. Someone like that probably would have ignored more polite phrasing.

Honestly, even knowing that a stranger had been close enough that he could have touched me during a scene if the Top hadn't intervened would bother me a bit when I thought about it later and was deciding whether to do another public scene. It would be reassuring to me to know that you made him back off as fast as possible and didn't play around being nice to him.


Diplomacy, in this model of how this all works socially, happens during the initial tour of the dungeon, or when they sign the paperwork, or when they have a conversation about the rules with staff.

If it makes sense that war happens when diplomacy fails, violent speech is an escalation of diplomacy in the direction of war.

Yelling usually startles people and startled people stop doing whatever they were doing.

Yelling sometimes angers the person you yelled at so things might escalate.

The top in a scene does well when they protect the bottom. Protecting the tender feels of a rule violator is quite secondary and optional. If you manage to protect your bottom AND prevent a disruption by using words alone? Good on you.




LadyPact -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 9:25:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome
I'm with this all the way.

LadyPact's response was in no way excessive.

The setting, the existence of any boundary lines and the house rules are all besides the point. This is a simple matter of respect, consent and trust. Touching someone who hasn't consented because they are in a submissive role in public is unacceptable and potential an assault. A strong response to any potential interference from a third party is entirely appropriate and frankly should be expected.

The fact that there are men and women who think that they have a right to treat subs/bottoms in a high-handed manner, including touching them or getting involved in play without consent, is exactly the kind of thing that can make being submissive in public unpleasant. Rather than being concerned about the effect on the man who wanted to touch the bottom, the concern should entirely be for the bottom who has the right not to be molested. Protecting someone in a potentially vulnerable position is more than a virtue, it is a responsibility.

I am only submissive to those I consent to be submissive with. That can be more than one person but it doesn't extend to just anyone who calls themselves a Dom/me. Equally I will be respectful to everyone but wont bow and scrape (or offer my body) to someone just because of a label they give themselves.

I wanted to take just a moment to say that I found this to be a wonderful contribution to this thread. (Not just because you are agreeing with me, either. [;)] ) I very much enjoy well thought out, articulate comments, so I wanted to thank you for your time.





OsideGirl -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 9:36:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets



POTENTIAL WRONG 1. The orientation either didn't exist, or sucked at explaining boundaries ...



Here's the thing - there are always people that think the boundaries don't apply to them, regardless of how well they're explained.

You say that you've created many test profiles and I'm sure those profiles had boundaries stated - age - relationship status - orientation - etc. How many people ignored those boundaries and emailed that profile anyway?




MisterP61 -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 9:53:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets

quote:

ORIGINAL: MisterP61
From one NYer to another, how about you stop the bullshit.

As a New Yorker, then, you won't mind me telling you that you're full of shit.
While your "words" may make sense to you, calling an attempted touch a 'rape' is completely ignorant of you to say, think, or even imply.

Oh please do show me exactly where in my statement I called the attempted touch a rape? You are the prime example of someone who reads into statements what they want so that their point can be proven. Wrong.
quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets

Like you would expect. I'm being clear here. You are full of shit. It's not rape.
It's a lot of other things, but it's not rape, you idiot.

Again. Show me the proof I called this a rape. ( I want to point out that I haven't thrown one insult your way, nor will I, but please feel free to keep throwing them my way. Your opinion of me matters very little).
quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets

quote:

ORIGINAL: MisterP61
First off kink has not one fucking thing to do with this. Zero. Zip. Nada.

Now you're doubly an idiot, if you won't mind me saying so, like a New Yorker would.
Tell it to a jury of your peers.
"They" get to decide the law, and, they "do" take into account circumstantial evidence.
Sometimes they are told to explicitly follow the precise wording of the law; and sometimes they actually follow it.
Sometimes they don't.

A lot of the law has to do with how a "normal" person would behave (as defined elsewhere, since we're talking kink here, whether your feeble brain can recognize that or not).

Anyway, you're so full of shit that I realize the text I'm wasting to try to knock a modicum of sense into your puny brain is being wasted, as we speak.

Again you like adding shit to make your point. Again you are wrong. Kink has nothing to do with how laws are written. How you inferred that I was saying it wouldn't have had anything to do with how it is used in a trial is pretty amazing.
quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets

quote:

ORIGINAL: MisterP61
It is illegal to touch any person in a sexual way without consent.

You're jumping way ahead of your own capabilities.

I don't think Lady Pact or the DM or the owner or any of the customers even thought ONCE during that engagement, to call the police.

However, I'll let LadyPact and the owner engage on that:
@LP: Did you feel that calling the police was warranted in that (rather common) situation?
@OWNER: Did you call the police? (Do you even have the equivalent of a "security force"? (Volunteer DMs don't count for that question.)

I really hope you aren't hurting yourself with all this jumping to conclusion shit you are doing. It sure as hell is amusing me though. Didn't say cops should have been called... nope not once did I say it. An attempt to violate is different than actually violating. Doesn't change the fact that the actual statement is true. It is illegal to touch a person in a sexual way without their consent... kinky or not.
quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets

quote:

ORIGINAL: MisterP61
The fact that he still has ten fingers is a testament to the restraint She showed.

That statement shows you're an idiot.

Again with the insults. I do love how you present your arguments.
quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets

There were MANY failures BEFORE the guy got to the point he got to.
And, there were MANY ways to handle the situation.

Spot on. No disagreement with any of this statement

quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets

For a guy who postulates that the offender should likely have been charged with a crime to then intimate just as vehemently that his fingers should also have been chopped off simply tells all of us how stupid your thinking processes are, however logical they "appear" to you (in the fucked-up world in your mind).

I, for one, won't even TRY to understand your fucked-up logic.
(Am I New Yorker enough for you yet, you creep?)

Again with the jumping, are you legs tired yet? No where did I say he should have been arrested or had his fingers cut off. My previous statement about him being lucky, however poorly worded I will admit, was metaphorically speaking so I can see why you thought I was saying it should have actually happened.
quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets

quote:

ORIGINAL: MisterP61
If I was with Her there, I would not have been part of the scene with Her bottom, but I am pretty sure I would have been part of the "scene" of ensuring the Richard Cranium's activity was very well known to the clubs proprietors.


Ask the proprietor what he actually did, and we'll see what a reasonable person actually does when they're running a business that happens to include naked people and paying customers and fetish activities all wrapped up in one.

CAVEAT TO NON-New-Yorkers: Just as LP could have been, I certainly could have been more diplomatic to this self-avowed "fellow New Yorker" just now; however, I chose to match his tone, and demeanor, however humorous and disgusting his ideas turned out to be (he understands, and, if he really is a New Yorker, he can take it as well as he can dish it out - so don't feel too sorry for the moron).

You have a very long way to go to match my demeanor. You use insults I do not. We can disagree (it is why we have these forums, so that others views can be heard (got it, technically it is seen), but to be disagreeable and resort to the name calling is pretty low. I got news for you though, I will stand with you in the fact you have your right to your opinion as I have my right to mine. I don't have to agree with yours and you don't have to agree with mine. All good in the grand scheme of things.




PonyGroom -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 9:53:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

Could you have been more diplomatic? Sure.

But that's the wrong question. The right one is should you have been, and the answer to that is 'hell no'.


Completely with you there. IMO when his hand advanced, diplomacy has already failed. Applying verbal force is appropriate. Trying to negotiate with the rules violator is a bad idea. Some tops in similar situations say "Step Back" and that starts an unwanted conversation.

quote:


The Man would have been a lot more vulgar about it. If he hadn't of immediately decked him.


Does this actually happen at dungeons and BDSM events? I don't mean swing clubs.

I've never seen it happen at a dungeon or play party or BDSM / Leather event.

quote:


And I'm left wondering if he would have tried this with a male top. Or if he assumed that since you're female, you would not have been direct since girls are taught not to 'make nice'. That he considered you a girl, and not a grown adult because in his mind only men qualify as that.


Men have "tried this" with me. Nobody drew back a bloody stump. There have been some hurt feels. I've hit people with floggers in the backswing.

My profile avatar is of my pony Lyndsey and I at Fetishcon. We are in the Vendor room. Hundreds of people are in the room and the adjacent halls. Many men attend this event just to watch. They are not industry. We call them tourists. They are allowed to have cameras. These men are everywhere and yet, there are hardly any "unwanted touching" incidents. Almost all of them understand "look but don't touch".

The rules of pony play are different. You may touch my pony WHEN, and IF, I give you permission. The courteous and curious get handed brushes and get to use them on her. She doesn't know it's happening - she is in her headspace. Being brushed pushes her farther into her headspace. I never leave her side.

So let's say LPs scene was instead mine, and this was pony time. The approaching guy would get my raised hand (Stop) and if he kept coming, a single word "Stop". Then we have a conversation about the rules, my rules, which are an exception to the event rules. Some of those men get hurt feelings and walk away. Some of those men pet the pony and smile. Bonus if she whinnies for them, in pleasure.

The entitled are always unhappy they were told NO or inhibited in any way. Fortunately they have always been a minority.




mistian -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 10:01:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PonyGroom


quote:

ORIGINAL: mistian

Was there ever a point where diplomacy would have worked? I get the impression that the guy was determined to touch and you did the minimum necessary to make him back off. That's fair. Someone like that probably would have ignored more polite phrasing.

Honestly, even knowing that a stranger had been close enough that he could have touched me during a scene if the Top hadn't intervened would bother me a bit when I thought about it later and was deciding whether to do another public scene. It would be reassuring to me to know that you made him back off as fast as possible and didn't play around being nice to him.


Diplomacy, in this model of how this all works socially, happens during the initial tour of the dungeon, or when they sign the paperwork, or when they have a conversation about the rules with staff.

If it makes sense that war happens when diplomacy fails, violent speech is an escalation of diplomacy in the direction of war.

Yelling usually startles people and startled people stop doing whatever they were doing.

Yelling sometimes angers the person you yelled at so things might escalate.

The top in a scene does well when they protect the bottom. Protecting the tender feels of a rule violator is quite secondary and optional. If you manage to protect your bottom AND prevent a disruption by using words alone? Good on you.


I get that the diplomacy starts when the person does the orientation or reads the rules and signs. I've never been to anywhere that had an orientation and I often wonder how many people actually read the rules. I also wonder how many people remember from visit to visit what the rules are, especially if they don't go to a place often but are not required to have a newbie tour every visit. In this case, maybe lurker guy forgot and there weren't DMs around to remind him politely. Or maybe he figured he didn't have to follow the rules because he didn't see DMs around to enforce them. Either way, he was an idiot and the Top was forced to deal with him.

I totally think a sharp verbal correction once someone gets that close is fair and probably the minimum necessary to stop the action in progress. She didn't set him on fire or do anything physically violent. I hope he felt embarrassed enough about it that there won't be a repeat.




OsideGirl -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 10:03:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PonyGroom

I've hit people with floggers in the backswing.


I've hit people with a flogger on the forward swing.




PonyGroom -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 10:17:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets


quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets
a SERIES of FAILURES occurred BEFORE it ever got to LP's need for action.


I should correct that to "a SERIES of FAILURES [may have] occurred BEFORE it ever got to LP's need for corrective action".

To better determine whether a series of failures DID in fact occur, was the reason for my set of related questions.


You didn't get it at 18, and you don't get it now.

It's simple. Do not touch someone without their explicit permission. Silence is not consent. Lying on a table is not consent. Being in a dungeon is not consent. Being at a swing club is not consent.

You are not entitled to touch someone without their consent. Ever.

Everything else is weasel words, fancy footwork, responsibility shifting, and of course, more crudely, bullshit.

There is no force large enough to stop you from feeling as you do and taking the chance of being thrown out of the club or told off by the top.

Good clubs need guys like you posting "They tossed me out of the club, all I did was touch a woman's ass while hot wax was being poured on her."

Bottoms look at that and say "YES! a club that cares about my welfare and doesn't entertain bullshit excuses!" and they go.

How do I know that? Several bottoms have told me so.

Your many words make it seem you are trying to reason your way around something you cannot feel. Maybe nobody ever told you this, but you cause harm. Your attitude and philosophy causes harm. It's nobodies job to educate you about this but you can have a conversation about wherein you are going to be told you are wrong, several kinds of wrong, and you aren't going to like it.

You don't have to have the feels for that bottom, to understand the harm.

Yo DO have to "get it" - the simple rule - do not touch someone without their consent. Ever.




tj444 -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 10:55:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

A little background info...

Before I know it, this guy (who I had never seen before) takes about three steps forward toward the table, with his hand outstretched, and his fingertips just inches away from her ass. Diplomacy flew out the window.

"Don't you dare f^cking touch that girl."

I must have had the look on me that, if he advanced further, he'd draw back a bloody stump. I didn't yell, but he knew I meant it. He turned on his heel and left. It's my understanding that he was out the door like a shot. He may not ever come back. He may come back after he learns scene etiquette.

Could I have been more diplomatic? Yes. Then again, I got the result necessary.

Please feel free to take this experience and have a discussion. Bottoms, how would you have liked your top to handle the scenario? Tops, what would you have done?


Sounds like you did the exact right thing.. I am sure the girl appreciated him not getting his grubby fingers on her alluring behind.. [:)]




LadyPact -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 11:06:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets
Gotta agree with you on that!

Oh, absolutely.

quote:

I assume the myriad and sundry lurkers pay the bills, so my assertion to follow depends on that as an assumption (owners of clubs can certainly tell me otherwise as I take correction well).

Now, I won't bullsh^t you. I don't take direction well. LOL.

quote:

That makes the "regulars" the "talent". The regulars, who tend to have play partners and prepared scenes, are the "show". Otherwise, it's just a room full of people, which, I guess, is fine and dandy, but, they make bars for that purpose of meet and greet.

There are some people here that I definitely consider the "talent". One is a rope guy that is just amazing. Most people don't impress me but this guy does because his rope is his art. He can do some pretty amazing things.

quote:

And then ... there are times that I don't!
:)

Yeah, well, I wasn't entirely sure how this thread was going to go over, either. I could have been seen as the outright asshole. [8D]

quote:

I liked the older place where they had that back elevated area, with the same Saint Andrew's Cross mounted just as it was in the new Edges, so, as a carryover, that was nice (in addition to the other equipment).

There's been at least three moves in the last five years or so, right? It's been a while for me.

quote:

Alex and Allie were wonderful, and Alex always gave me good advice, especially as I had asked about the rules if the police show up - and he patiently explained that, in California, it's a crime, basically, to spank someone (and leave any kind of marks), so, we were to dress immediately and leave if the alarm sounded, for example.

I did not have the opportunity to meet Alex. I spoke at length with Allie electronically and she was working the desk the time that I went. I liked her. She had the right balance of welcoming, while keeping the business side clear. Something staff has to have.

quote:

I remember Alex let me rent his play space for cheap. Something like $60 an hour, which, if you think about it, is a fantastic deal (I was doing a photo op at the time, with a friend).

This particular club mentioned in the OP does that, too. They have a great rate if somebody wants to just come and do pictures. Doing an actual private play party is a little more but I'd be willing to pay it *if* there were a special occasion. In my opinion, they really don't ask for much.

quote:

Thinking harder about it, I think I had spoken too soon.
Clearly the local dungeons have mandatory orientations which cover such stuff.
But, as I think back, only the Power Exchange and the swingers clubs had "CLEARLY" delineated spaces. Most of the swinger's clubs were in residences, so doors were the delineation, while the ropes with the clip were downstairs in the Power Exchange. The power exchange also had prison cells, and little rooms all over the place, further delineating things.

I think some of it depends if the club is what is known as "sex positive". (Meaning public clubs, not private house parties.) As you know, this is a fine line to walk and organizers/clubs/hosts have to be very careful that a door fee isn't interpreted as paying for sex upon entry. BDSM clubs that double as swinger events have special concerns in this area.

quote:

So, I do agree, now that I think more deeply about it. I don't remember Edges having a painted line or anything like that. Citadel is kind'a far for me, but when I was there, it seemed more like a multi-bar dance club than anything else. Same with the bar that is Bondage-a-GoGo on Wednesdays, as I recall.

I haven't been to the Citadel. I've seen a lot of discussions that are pro and against the space. Not the space, itself, but there has been a lot of talk about who they will allow entry. I can't support that.

quote:

So, that makes it doubly hard for you, the a priori scene maker, to communicate/convey/enforce boundary conditions (which you shouldn't have to do as that is mostly the House's responsibility).

I don't know if that's entirely possible. No top can convey boundaries to onlookers that walk up mid-scene.

quote:

I don't mind paying them either, as the bills gotta get paid - except that, for a single male, any payment is generally a waste of money and time and effort most of the time, so, unless I'm with a date (in which case, they're generally fun for her as she is usually a newbie), I don't bother anymore.

As a female top, I'm not going to disagree with you on this. I have a pretty good success rate when it comes to pick up play. I'm a chick who can crack a whip, so automatically, I have certain advantages.

quote:

It's the young wolves who lavishly spend their money endlessly seeking out the sheep, as I once was.

These days, I think it's spread out over age groups. There's a great TNG presence here but they aren't alone. This is probably one of the best mix areas that I've ever seen.

quote:

Agreed. I think "regulars" who give "good show" should also be exempt, but I leave all that to the owners to decide. I think the South Bay Spot allows working volunteers in free, right?

When I'm not presenting and am just coming to play like everybody else, I expect to pay like everybody else. It's not the same as being responsible for an organized class. If I choose to teach during regular play time, I can say yes, no, or I'm busy.

Many places allow volunteers to enter for free. Most are good people and do a good job. I was reading an article yesterday about results of a survey about how leaders, presenters, and volunteers have such a higher rate of engaging in consent violations. In my opinion, we have to work on that.

quote:

Bear in mind at most swingers clubs, and, I think, at the Power Exchange too, females (or those dressed as females) get in free, as, I think, do couples get a reduced rate. They only rape the single males, of which there are many.

I'm not sure how to address this. At swinger events, there is often a different price structure, which some could say is discriminatory to single males. At the same time, if your swingers event is a sausage fest, you're not going to get the women to go. How do we balance this so that everyone is treated well financially as well as socially? It's certainly interesting to think about.

quote:

Can't disagree.
Players are what gives the club it's rep, while the various and sundry lurkers give 'em their cash.
Both are required for a successful business (even if they, technically, are 'clubs').

In my opinion, rep is now more important than ever. "Bad things happen there" will kill a business. When's the last time you continued to eat at a restaurant that was reported to have roaches?

quote:

Yup. I think the lurkers rotate more so than become regulars, but, you'd know better than I since I only sporadically lurked myself, except for a while at the latest Edges (just when the City of San Jose was coming down hard on Alex for trumped-up "zoning violations", which eventually, I guess, closed him down.

We live in the post 'internet explosion' and the '50 Shades' revolution. We have more clubs, munches, cons, and groups than we ever have before.

And some of this is good. But, it's coming with a price.

We're not doing so hot in the territory of consent violations. Heck, I'd challenge darn near anybody to read Fet for a month to see what's happening in our communities. These issues must be addressed.

quote:

The DM is a volunteer, and the DM is busy, and they can't be everywhere, as you noted.
So, while it "is" first the responsibility of the house (during orientation) to set boundaries, and then second the responsibility of the DM to enforce boundaries, it was left thirdly to you, as the concentee, to set the boundaries (and fifth, to the common sense of the lurkee).

The DM class that I started doing about five years ago runs about four hours long. One of the people who helped me write it is in your neck of the woods. He's an awesome educator and wonderful DM. You probably know him.

quote:

Makes sense. I was just bringing up the responsibilities point, and the fact that there are ways to chastise a customer such that he never returns, or, such that he returns a better behaved person, and which anyone uses depends on what they want as an outcome for the house (which, let's never forget, is a business, even if it's legally structured as a club).

The lesson could go either way, couldn't it? The person might never come back. The possibility also exists that, if he comes back, he knows what will happen if he tries to grab somebody's ass. [;)]




crumpets -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 12:00:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PonyGroom
If it makes sense that war happens when diplomacy fails

While it has been said that war is merely yet another form of diplomacy, your point is valid that war is the predictable result of diplomacy gone wrong.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PonyGroom
violent speech is an escalation of diplomacy in the direction of war.

This is extremely true.
It has been said (which is to say I read it somewhere) that the escalation to fuck words is a way that humans "communicate" a dire escalation, which is "almost" to the point of physical violence. What I recall of what I had read is that we invented swear words to allow the other part to UNDERSTAND that we were at the point of violence, in order to allow the offending party to back down, just in time, as it were.

Such is your point, I believe.
Is that not on the right track?

quote:

ORIGINAL: PonyGroom
The top in a scene does well when they protect the bottom. Protecting the tender feels of a rule violator is quite secondary and optional. If you manage to protect your bottom AND prevent a disruption by using words alone? Good on you.


Except that it should never have gotten to that point, sadly to say.




crumpets -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 12:05:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl
there are always people that think the boundaries don't apply to them, regardless of how well they're explained.

Yes. I tried to make the motorcycle speeding one of the examples of that, and, the "keep out" signs as another.

We do not know (and perhaps never will know) whether the interloper would have broken the boundaries, no matter what they were.
quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl
How many people ignored those boundaries and emailed that profile anyway?


Men ignore the boundaries daily. It's like they're not there.
I have female profiles saying "do not contact me. I'm here only for the forums" or something to that effect, and, what do men do (in droves) anyway?

I have had so many cock shots shoved in my female profile's face, I should make a mosaic of them in the shape of a big stupid penis, and post that, as my profile picture!

(jk ... I would never actually do that. I just delete them, on sight, as would you.)




crumpets -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 12:07:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PonyGroom
The approaching guy would get my raised hand (Stop) and if he kept coming, a single word "Stop".

You sound like you have it all under control.
Of course, control takes experience.




crumpets -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 12:10:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PonyGroom
You didn't get it at 18, and you don't get it now.

Except I spared you the many times where it worked out just fine to be a bit bold and/or brash.

Reminds me of the advice the proprietor gave me at one of my first swing club events, I think it was in Austin Texas, but I don't recall... when I oh so innocently asked what I should do (as folks here know I am wont to do), and his one-sentence advice was a cause-and-effect sentence to the effect of "Don't be shy; it's a swing club, for heaven's sake!".




DocStrange -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 1:39:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: PonyGroom

I've hit people with floggers in the backswing.


I've hit people with a flogger on the forward swing.

I have been hit with a flogger on the side swing




OsideGirl -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 1:48:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DocStrange


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: PonyGroom

I've hit people with floggers in the backswing.


I've hit people with a flogger on the forward swing.

I have been hit with a flogger on the side swing

I cracked a guy right in the side of the head...because he was that close to the shoulder of the bottom I was playing with.




LadyPact -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 1:50:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DocStrange
quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: PonyGroom

I've hit people with floggers in the backswing.


I've hit people with a flogger on the forward swing.

I have been hit with a flogger on the side swing

Yep. I tend to think of this as not even scene space etiquette. More like pool hall etiquette. If you can't figure out that whatever toy I'm swinging goes both ways, that's probably your own fault. You wouldn't b^tch if you were in a pool hall, walked directly behind someone taking a shot, and you got hit with the pool cue. Don't do it when I'm swinging a whip, either.





ilovestarbucks -> RE: So, maybe I could have been more diplomatic (1/15/2016 3:16:43 PM)

@LadyPact

I think it all depends if the man was submissive or dominant.
As a Dominant, we tend to be aggressive, it's in our nature.
If he was Dominant, I think the more appropriate response would have been something like this,

"Excuse me Sir, but please do not touch the property. Please respect the boundaries."


Well, that's my 2 cents worth.




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625