RE: SOVEREIGN ESTATE MISTRESS SANDRA

RE: SOVEREIGN ESTATE MISTRESS SANDRA (Full Version)

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

Message

LaTigresse -> RE: SOVEREIGN ESTATE MISTRESS SANDRA (3/19/2007 12:24:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kc692 That is such an awesome saying LaTigresse, may I borrow it for my irc tag line? Of course, I just made it up......

BeachMystress -> Photos of BDSM taken inside of Disney World!! (3/19/2007 12:52:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BostonGuy 3. She did not identify herself as a prodomme in her profile here. My response: ----------------- From the discussion, she did have a profile in which she was very clearly a prodomme. Do note that prodommes may also have the same kinds of hopes, wishes, and desires for relationships that other people have. I have certainly seen profiles of other prodommes here in which they were not seeking clients. In fact, some were seeking long-term relationships. Prodommes are human and have human emotions. Perhaps the profile here was not intended to attract clients. As I said in a prior post .. (No, I do not buy that she is on this site looking for personal/non pro-client subs. Someone with a struggling business does not give away product for free!) I am not willing to buy that she was looking for a relationship. In my experience, when you are starting a business and/or struggling, you do not have time to waste on new interpersonal relationships. Diverting your energy from your business is a good way to fail. Plus, the pro I've seen advertising for personal relationships mention being a pro in their profile and that they are seeking a nonpro partner. quote: ORIGINAL: Celeste43 That's the law she broke. She rented a house from a private school, on the same grounds as the private school and ran an illegal adult business there. Now if she was arrogant enough in New York State to do so, knowing how strict the state is on sexual offenders, especially in relation to children, she does deserve appropriate punishment. It was ON THE GROUNDS of the school? If that is true, this woman is going to have a very rough time at trial. That even makes me pause for a second, and I believe in people's right to practice Pro Domination. Could someone post a current link to the news coverage of this case? Oh, and I did actually visit the site seeking money.. and am somewhat taken aback by the link "make money for MISTRESS" and the photos of the woman's trip to Fl and Disney. Not only is such a trip expensive and the money could have been used for her defense, but one of the photos shows her in Dominatrix get up, inside of Disney, http://newyorkdominatrix.com/whatsnew/febweek4diary.html with a man in a head/leg lock, with a man kissing her ass, with a man on hands and knees leashed and with a guy tied up while her foot is on his crotch. Such behaviour shows a true lack of understanding of what is socially acceptable! This woman exposed people, including children, to BDSM sexuality without their consent. What do we call it when people force sex upon each other in our society? Rape. I feel involving vanillas in our lifestyle without their concent is a mild form of rape! Whatever her crime or lack of crime was in New York, I am appalled by her behaviour on her trip to Disney!

LaTigresse -> RE: SOVEREIGN ESTATE MISTRESS SANDRA (3/19/2007 12:54:51 PM)
To answer your questions. Considering my personal contacts within the community I live in and how I chose to live my life I am very certain I have no reason to be concerned. Sexual orientation, lesbian, no concerns at all. Also, I am far from being a pro-anything, let alone a dominatrix. In addition, considering the type of women I tend to get involved with, they usually have more to lose than I do as far as public attention. I am no fool. I do not bring fools into my life. You see the difference between a professional and a lifestyle BDSM, Ms, Ds, participant is that the professional NEEDS others to survive, others that actually pay the rent. Higher volume and less screening makes for higher risk. Whereas a lifestyle participant is searching for a partner, usually longterm relationship stuff. For this we care about more than the size of the wallet. Things like.......is this person trustworthy enough to bring into my life? Does this person have a history of problems that might cause ME problems. Granted nothing is guaranteed. There is no reason to think anyone is exempt from risk. However, I seriously doubt that there is a much higher risk of accusations and charges in a serious longterm BDSM relationship gone wrong than many vanilla relationships gone bad. (he threatened me, he beat the kids, she gets drunk/does drugs.......etc etc etc) My point is this.........all of life is a risk, we have to calculate to what extent we are all willing to take risks. If someone is going to make a living with the knowledge they will be at greater risk, that is their problem. They should have known. And yes, I have discussed BDSM stuff with several attorneys and law enforcement officials as well as a judge or two, they are friends of mine. We discuss alot of things, most are alot more interesting subjects that what any of us enjoy behind closed doors. Things like, gardening, our dogs, trips we have taken/want to take, the weather....etc. You know, boring real life stuff. Not wether or not the anal sex, lawyer A had with his partner, the gallery owner, while he was tied down, was legal or not.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Photos of BDSM taken inside of Disney World!! (3/19/2007 1:11:34 PM)
quote: Such behavior shows a true lack of understanding of what is socially acceptable! This woman exposed people, including children, to BDSM sexuality without their consent. What do we call it when people force sex upon each other in our society? Rape. I feel involving vanillas in our lifestyle without their consent is a mild form of rape! Whatever her crime or lack of crime was in New York, I am appalled by her behavior on her trip to Disney! Beach, Granted that the activity pictured appears to go over the line. But accept a challenge. How do you feel about Disney welcoming and encouraging a "gay day" at their park? I'm not sure that it is a sanctioned Disney day any longer but I remember a bunch of folks from NYC going down there annually to attend. I thought they also did it at the Anaheim park. I thought it was a great idea to put a positive image out in public. I'm sure many gay people attending go as couples and bring their "replicants". I'm sure that there are some gratuitous public displays of affection. I don't believe the park is closed to everyone else. Do they deserve more consideration than us? Why should our public persona be limited to Jerry Springer? If they had "BDSM Lifestyle Day" at Disney wouldn't it be great? Maybe the evolution of "gay day" was that a couple or a group of couples started going on one particular day and next thing you know - Disney realized they could make money from soliciting a large group of individuals who wouldn't normally go to Disney. It's all about the $$$ after all. Take a slow weekday and announce it to a special interest and next thing you know the day is sold out. Corporate "political correctness" is defined as making more money from a group than you lose from the people alienated and threatened by the group. That speaks to me, because short of being taken at gunpoint - I have no desire to set foot into a Disney park. But I'd be there if given the chance to share a day with a group of like minded folk. Maybe call it "Folsom-Lite"?

BeachMystress -> RE: Photos of BDSM taken inside of Disney World!! (3/19/2007 1:27:36 PM)
I'm all in favor of gay day or BDSM day or purple giraffe day. And when they have those days, the group being catered to can set the standards of behaviour. I will admit, while I am totally comfortable watching men kiss each other, I don't want to see them involved in more sexuality than that. It is a question of public displays of affection. Degree matters. As does discretion. Kissing is pretty much accepted everywhere, however I will note that when we ate in an Amish restaurant on my last visit to Ohio, I denied my husband not only kissing, but hand holding. It would have been distasteful to the local populace. When someone comes into my environment they live by my rules but when I go out in public I am considerate of those who are less.. open, than I am. This has nothing to do with BDSM, but with how I was raised. BTW, the dominatrix in questions blog says they were kicked out of Disney because her behaviour was so "over the top."

Vendaval -> RE: Photos of BDSM taken inside of Disney World!! (3/19/2007 4:25:51 PM)
If you guys can get the Disney execs to agree, go for it! Just be prepared for certain attractions being a bit more popular than others, most likely Pirates and the Haunted House. [:D]

kc692 -> RE: SOVEREIGN ESTATE MISTRESS SANDRA (3/19/2007 4:52:32 PM)
Yay, thank you!!!!!

BostonGuy -> RE: Photos of BDSM taken inside of Disney World!! (3/19/2007 5:02:27 PM)
In reply to BeachMistress: 1. The house she rented was owned by the religious group but was NOT "on the grounds" of the group or its school. It was on a private lot and the religious group has a compound. 2. The photos of Disney are NOT of Sandra, who has dark hair. They are of the ProDomme who started this thread. 3. Some people do, in fact, seek romance when they are not financially in great shape. I cannot speak for Sandra as to the reason for her posting of this profile.

Wildnfreehrt2004 -> RE: SOVEREIGN ESTATE MISTRESS SANDRA (3/19/2007 5:11:03 PM)
Maybe you missed Steak and BJ Day? (yearly on Mar 14, one month after Valentines) :)

PAULG1BD -> RE: Photos of BDSM taken inside of Disney World!! (3/19/2007 5:23:30 PM)
In reply to Boston Guy, you are absolutely correct in all three of your statements. Trust me, Sandra didn't go to Disney, and enjoy herself, and the legal defense fund was never set up to, nor will it ever be used for anything even remotely considered pleasure or fun. It was set up by friends of hers only to help her deal with the costs of a good defense and help her survive through this situation. It will never come close to covering the legal costs anyway, but the intent was that it might help defray them somewhat. Paul G

bschwimmer -> RE: Photos of BDSM taken inside of Disney World!! (3/20/2007 4:52:11 PM)
has any one spoken to her?

PAULG1BD -> RE: Photos of BDSM taken inside of Disney World!! (3/21/2007 6:48:25 AM)
I speak to her at least every day, why, what's up? Paul

CandleInTheWind -> RE: SOVEREIGN ESTATE MISTRESS SANDRA (3/21/2007 2:01:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PAULG1BD It wasn't a client, it was another person in the profession that sent the police the unsigned letter I think. But I can't say that for sure, just an educated guess. I doubt we'll ever know 100% who sent it. Funny thiing Paul....I have a slew of gentlemen friends wearing blue and not one of them would make an arrest based on an unsigned letter...something about evidence...the police are funny about getting sued for false arrest they really are and they HATE to say they made a mistake! but again that is just this little one's research i shall journey out and ask for more information on arrest warrants. red

CandleInTheWind -> RE: SOVEREIGN ESTATE MISTRESS SANDRA (3/21/2007 2:24:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PAULG1BD First, I think your idea about a general defense fund for the entire lifestyle, that could be donated to, and then have the fund used people in the lifestyle, to defend them in cases such as this and others, is a really great idea. I don't see it ever working due to the amount of effort it would need to get it started, and growing, and I tend to think it would end up getting donations and being used by professionals in the lifestyle, only because it's hard to see a non professional lifestyler having the same type of legal situation since money isn't talked about or exchanged between non pros, right? Paul G How many of us do you think have been through heavy duty custody battles with former spouses due to our interests....???? In MY case I had a $10,000 personal attourney bill and a court appointed "law guardian" attourney bill for over $5,000 anyone wish to contribute to that one?? Those of us who do it for free do NOT earn the money to put in a just in case fund!!! I know of a few "Professionals" in the area do i hold anything against them? NOPE it is there comfort level that they have to live with...I do know of at least one that is capable of maintaining her home, utilities, car with vanity plates, and what not without any outside job that any of us in the area is aware of...of course she may very well be an old money person, but knowing her I do not see that as being a likely thing...but again it isnt mine to worry about.....what IS mine to worry about is the idea that in time medical care will be needed and after so many years of not being a TAX PAYING PERSON she will be a burden on those of us that did indeed work and pay taxes and have to share the shrinking social security fund with! AND so PAUL I beg you please do not mix personal BDSM and Professional BDSM....they are 2 entirely different things....I know I have my limits in all things and you are who you are based upon where your line is drawn. again just the humble opinion of this little one. red

PAULG1BD -> RE: SOVEREIGN ESTATE MISTRESS SANDRA (3/21/2007 6:05:42 PM)
Red, I don't know why people here seem to think I'm trying to force people to agree with my feelings, or donate to a fund set up to help with the cost of defending the rights of a pro dom/domme to work in that profession in a state where it's legal. If you don't agree with my view, fine, if you don't feel it's right to donate to this fund, fine. Everyone is entitled to feel and act as they wish. My comment about a world wide fund to defend against this type of thing only said that I thought it would be a good idea, but that it would probably be something that would concern pro dom/dommes, since I couldn't see a non pro having issues such as this issue since money isn't exchanged in personal BDSM relationships. I'm not comparing either, nor am I saying one is better, or one is worse. I'm not sure why this seemed to get you upset, but I guess it did. As far as the post you wrote just before, saying that you personally know many "boys in blue" and that they don't serve arrest warrants without evidence, since they are worried about false arrest law suits, or looking bad, I'll say this. In general, I think most cops are fair, honest, and basically truthful, but they don't issue arrest warrants, they serve them. If every arrest was based on having evidence and proof of a crime having been commited, there wouldn't be a need for having a trial. The person arrested would always be guilty, lock them up, throw away the key, get rid of lawyers since they wouldn't be needed anymore. If one is arrested, they were arrested because there was evidence that proved they were guilty. That's not how the system works, thank god, it is how it worked in Germany in the 1930's & 40's, but not in America. Arrest warrants are issued for many different reasons, and actually, there never was an arrest warrant issued, a search warrant was issued which needs very little information to be issued. What haappened when the search was done can't be detailed here, but I have no doubt that things will work out as they should when this situation gets finished. I don't think I or anyone else suggested the police acted improperly, they did what they were told to, to get the results they wanted to get. Paul

PAULG1BD -> RE: SOVEREIGN ESTATE MISTRESS SANDRA (3/21/2007 6:07:29 PM)
Red, Why do you think she was a non tax paying person? You're totally incorrect to say that, and I have no idea why you would think that. Paul

CandleInTheWind -> RE: SOVEREIGN ESTATE MISTRESS SANDRA (3/21/2007 8:07:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PAULG1BD Red, Why do you think she was a non tax paying person? You're totally incorrect to say that, and I have no idea why you would think that. Paul i was mearly stating that the vast majority of Pros that I know are indeed not claiming the extra funds to uncle sam that is all.... you dont make me angered or irate or anything else...I just ahppen to only cme on line periodically and i read the message baoards then and send my opinions and pearls of wisdom then...so i wish your lady friend well but i was just putting in my 10 cents worth...again I didnt start the fire Im just not putting it out.. In regard to your statement about search warrants not needing proof ...again you are simplifying the issue some type of smoke to a fire...so to speak.. but again i wish your lady friend well and well the truth will eventually come out. I have early been stating the definitions of things i have never once said that this particular individual did x y or z i just gave my impression of the legal definition of things I have never said that she did or offered any of these types of services... and so forgive me for givign the public at large the insight i have. have a nice day red

PAULG1BD -> RE: SOVEREIGN ESTATE MISTRESS SANDRA (3/21/2007 8:40:39 PM)
Red, No problem, I understand everyone is entitled to have and present the thoughts they have. Unfortunitly, many people totally believe what they see or red in the media, and many times, as is the case here, it's only one side of the story, and because of legal concerns, the detailed version from the other side can't be explained on this type of forum. But as you and I both said, hopefully in the end, things will turn out properly. Have a good one. Paul G

domiguy -> RE: SOVEREIGN ESTATE MISTRESS SANDRA (3/21/2007 10:10:48 PM)
I believe ...it seems like she exhibited poor choice in her business locale....And it seems like she wasn't nearly picky enought in choosing her clientele...but then again the one with the money controls the relationship....She was just chasing dollars...Quite a dominant characteristic...Since she is such a powerful Domme couldn't she just order him to go away?....lol.

ModeratorEleven -> RE: SOVEREIGN ESTATE MISTRESS SANDRA (3/21/2007 10:18:00 PM)
This has gone on far longer than it should have. XI

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875