RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann)

RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (Full Version)

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

Message

dawntreader -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 8:51:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: missturbation In a nilla pub you wouldnt interrupt a couple arguing and tell them to take it elsewhere so why in a bdsm setting. Its still however you look at it none of your business. Here in the states, they would be asked to leave - it is NOT appropriate behavior here~

AquaticSub -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 8:51:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross Well I do agree that "My master wants it" isn't an excuse for inappropriate behavior- it's still inappropriate behavior no matter who orders it to be done. But there are certainly ways a person can be "non traditionally submissive" without causing any social friction or notice whatsoever. Ack, I worded that terribly! [:o] I very much agree what the "my master wants it" defense is no excuse for inappropiate behavior. But I don't really think that anyone should care if we are being playful with each other, and not being rude to others. However, what are we talking about? Are we talking about playful sassing (which I have heard discribed as such a terrible thing from others so I assumed that we were talking about "bratty" subs/slaves) or are we talking about making a scene in loud voices that bothers everybody? I would not cause a scene because Valyraen wanted it, but I will sass him and refuse an order for awhile because it amuses us both.

AquaticSub -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 8:54:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrDiscipline44 quote: ORIGINAL: missturbation I said I would talk to the master in question and see if HE found that he enjoyed it or not. My response to that would be 'is it any of your business'? Who are you to question others relationships when you dont know the dynamics? I personally think that is just rude. Is it any more or less rude then having me bare witness to their relationship dynamic in public? We also don't know what the protocols of the group are? Maybe it is within my right to question him/her while they're apart of this group. If you are at a group function then it isn't public. It's a place where a group met to enjoy each other's company. So yes, you agreed to witness their dynamic. Most couples I know aren't going to change their dynamic for the evening because you are going to be at a play party or munch.

missturbation -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 8:56:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrDiscipline44 quote: ORIGINAL: missturbation I said I would talk to the master in question and see if HE found that he enjoyed it or not. My response to that would be 'is it any of your business'? Who are you to question others relationships when you dont know the dynamics? I personally think that is just rude. Is it any more or less rude then having me bare witness to their relationship dynamic in public? We also don't know what the protocols of the group are? Maybe it is within my right to question him/her while they're apart of this group. You have other options than speaking to the dom. Walk away from the conflict and interact with others! Speak to whoever is hosting the party / gathering! It is not up to you to question the dynamics of someone elses relationship. It may not be anymore rude for you to speak to the dom but if a girl walks up to me in a pub and punches me does that mean i should copy that behaviour and hit her back or would it be better just to turn the other cheek and walk away from making myself no better than her.

LaTigresse -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 8:57:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong Thus comes the art of making your point without overtly calling a foul. When the behavior becomes obviously unbearable, I'd stand up, bid the gathering adieu and head for the door. I guarantee there will be much muttering and questioning of this type quick and sudden departure. Let them wonder and keep your mouth shut until the said master eventually asks you why you left. It's his 'job' to muzzle his bitch...not anyone else's. When they are no longer asked to attend functions as they were.. maybe the light will come on. This is also a very good way to handle things such as this. I have been known to leave gatherings without a single spoken word condeming another's behaviour yet to all but the uberdense it was quite obvious why. A single look or facial expression with a polite "excuse me" can convey everything.

MrDiscipline44 -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 9:00:40 AM)
And what if the group in question isn't a play-party or munch but a high protocol dinner? What if the group in general is high protocol? One can twist this any way they like because of how the OP was worded. My opinion is as I stated earlier. Don't like it or agree? I really don't care. But don't get you're knickers in a twist , love. Oh, and public, to me, is anything that is in the company of other people. If it is private then noone would be witnessing anything.

missturbation -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 9:03:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dawntreader quote: ORIGINAL: missturbation In a nilla pub you wouldnt interrupt a couple arguing and tell them to take it elsewhere so why in a bdsm setting. Its still however you look at it none of your business. Possibly here too but not by a customer by the landlord /landlady. Here in lies the difference between the host / hostess saying something and just an average joe customer / guest. Here in the states, they would be asked to leave - it is NOT appropriate behavior here~

AquaticSub -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 9:07:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrDiscipline44 And what if the group in question isn't a play-party or munch but a high protocol dinner? What if the group in general is high protocol? One can twist this any way they like because of how the OP was worded. My opinion is as I stated earlier. Don't like it or agree? I really don't care. But don't get you're knickers in a twist , love. Oh, and public, to me, is anything that is in the company of other people. If it is private then noone would be witnessing anything. At a high protocol dinner I would expect everyone to follow the protocol set down as best they could. However, it's still none of your business to check into those who don't unless you are hosting the event. Your defination of public and private being what they are you might give a thought to being more tolerant. If you attend group events you should expect people to be who they are - not what you want them to be. Which means either starting your own group with a bunch of people who do BDSM just like you, or realizing that your way isn't the only way. And, for the sake of being clear - what behaviors are you refering to? Simple sass or causing a scene?

dawntreader -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 9:08:58 AM)
It is a sticky situation regardless, i guess i have a difficult time understanding people who chose to act out in public or even a private gathering.

LaTigresse -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 9:11:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrDiscipline44 And what if the group in question isn't a play-party or munch but a high protocol dinner? What if the group in general is high protocol? One can twist this any way they like because of how the OP was worded. My opinion is as I stated earlier. Don't like it or agree? I really don't care. But don't get you're knickers in a twist , love. Oh, and public, to me, is anything that is in the company of other people. If it is private then noone would be witnessing anything. If it is YOUR high protocol dinner or the host/hostess have asked you to be their eyes/ears/act in their stead because they are busy then you have been given the authority. If it is YOUR place of business or you are an employee of said business, you have the authority. IF those things, or something similar, do not apply then you are just displaying your own bad manners and sticking your uberdom nose where it doesn't belong. Don't be shocked when you are on fewer and fewer guest lists.........

missturbation -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 9:14:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dawntreader It is a sticky situation regardless, i guess i have a difficult time understanding people who chose to act out in public or even a private gathering. I agree with you, it's not pleasant to witness. It shouldn't really happen but it does. On a further note in my line of work which is pub / bar / club management the quickest way to cause further trouble or get yourself a smack in the teeth is to put your two penneth into someone elses argument. Bring it to your host / landlords attention and let them deal with it. Involving yourself is not the cleverest way to go about it. If the host / landlord thinks it is acceptable behaviour and does nothing then you can choose to leave the gathering. Not a place you'd choose to be anyway.

MrDiscipline44 -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 9:15:04 AM)
Ah but it may well be within my right to check those that are out of line. For as you said yourself, everyone is expected to follow the protocol set down. If it was set down as protocol, then I'll check'm if they're out of line.

missturbation -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 9:17:22 AM)
Then dont be surprised when you catch yourself a smack in the teeth for putting your nose in where it doesnt belong. *Unless you are the host or have permission to act for the host.

MrDiscipline44 -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 9:21:39 AM)
It's interesting how people feel so threatened by a simple opinion expressed about a hypothetical situation.

LaTigresse -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 9:22:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrDiscipline44 Ah but it may well be within my right to check those that are out of line. For as you said yourself, everyone is expected to follow the protocol set down. If it was set down as protocol, then I'll check'm if they're out of line. My point is ........Your right determined by whom? I see someone driving recklessly thru morning traffic and almost cause an accident. That person is certainly breaking the law, I observe it and acknowledge that they are in the wrong. Is it my right to arrest them and cuff em?......and don't EVEN bring out some lame citizen's arrest bullshit cuz we all know how far that will go in a court of law. OR, your child is throwing a temper tantrum in the supermarket, screaming and yelling, making everyone around them uncomfortable. Your wife, the childs mother is standing there watching and doing nothing. Is it MY right to take the brat outside and adjust their attitude then talk to your wife about her parenting skills??? And if you answer no, then answer why. Bratty kid or bratty sub/slave. Either way the person responsible for their behaviour is not doing their job right? So that means anyone that thinks they are better/smarter/more uber dom/parent should be able to step in and take charge of the situation as they see fit??

LaTigresse -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 9:24:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrDiscipline44 It's interesting how people feel so threatened by a simple opinion expressed about a hypothetical situation. Threatened.......doubtful. Amused by an over inflated head........most definately.

missturbation -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 9:27:23 AM)
I don't feel threatened in any way. It's your inflexibility in your opinion to the point of not being able to see that in certain situations you may not be acting in the best way that infuriates me. It is not always your way or the highway that is right. What is acceptable to you may not be acceptable to others and in this case your behaviour would not be acceptable to me. However i can see that behaviour such as we are discussing would be out of order too. Its how you deal with it that is important and possibly creating a worse situation out of an already unpleasant one is just childish and typical cave man behaviour. There is such a thing as dealing with a situation tactfully to avoid possible confrontation and in my opinion and job i have always tried to use the avenues that lead to the least chance of further disruption and undesirable behaviour.

MrDiscipline44 -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 9:30:42 AM)
It's funny how you can't actually make a point without trying to attack the person your making the point to in some way. To me, that denotes that you're threatened by opinions expressed. Maybe we should have a look at that maturity thread again.

Stephann -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 9:31:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: missturbation In a nilla pub you wouldnt interrupt a couple arguing and tell them to take it elsewhere so why in a bdsm setting. Its still however you look at it none of your business. Yes, I have, would, and likely will again. I say this, with the caveat that I only do so when it has become clear to me that the situation is overtly disruptive, and has a high probability of becoming dangerous. Three weeks ago, I was walking to a bus stop. I saw a woman talking on her cell phone. A man approached her, apparently an acquaintence of her, and started yelling at her. She started yelling at him. I walked closer, ready to intervene. When I was ten feet away, he started punching her. I got between them, and it was obvious he was so drunk he couldn't see straight. It's a question of situation. If I'm not interacting with two people during an arguement, I don't involve myself unless I think they start airing their dirty laundry at a volume that prevents most others from enjoying their night out. We didn't consent to that; if they wanted their business private, they should have kept it private. Stephan

missturbation -> RE: Unwilling Witness (For Stephann) (3/27/2007 9:34:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stephann quote: ORIGINAL: missturbation In a nilla pub you wouldnt interrupt a couple arguing and tell them to take it elsewhere so why in a bdsm setting. Its still however you look at it none of your business. Yes, I have, would, and likely will again. I say this, with the caveat that I only do so when it has become clear to me that the situation is overtly disruptive, and has a high probability of becoming dangerous. Three weeks ago, I was walking to a bus stop. I saw a woman talking on her cell phone. A man approached her, apparently an acquaintence of her, and started yelling at her. She started yelling at him. I walked closer, ready to intervene. When I was ten feet away, he started punching her. I got between them, and it was obvious he was so drunk he couldn't see straight. It's a question of situation. If I'm not interacting with two people during an arguement, I don't involve myself unless I think they start airing their dirty laundry at a volume that prevents most others from enjoying their night out. We didn't consent to that; if they wanted their business private, they should have kept it private. Stephan Of course it is and there are exceptions to every rule but 16 years of dealing with situations like the op has mentioned makes you consider the best action to take to cause the least disturbance. Sometimes disturbance is unavoidable but stopping and thinking about the course of action we are about to take in all aspects of life isnt a bad thing.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875