This topic is now full - if you want to reply, please make a new post on the board itself.
This post is on the Pro-Mistresses etc web board.
| 5 May 11, 7:17 AM hollythedolly UK(NN), 2 yrs    |
Really or is that because you have educated them ? | |||||||
| 5 May 11, 7:32 AM hollythedolly UK(NN), 2 yrs |
Please do a survey because I'd love to meet these right minded vanilla's Why do you think the majority of people live in secret in a bdsm world it's because vanilla's are so open minded isn't it. The dungeons aren't getting raided by councils and pro domme's who have other jobs aren't being exposed in newspapers. You and lady anna are living in a dream world. I happen to have very open minded parents and was able to tell them not many people can sit down with their father and watch a bdsm show. But the emphasise back then was it was freaky sex. And if you are going to shorten my name at least do HTD I am less likely to hit the computer screen . | |||||||
| 5 May 11, 7:33 AM Badg1Vo UK(B), 6 yrs |
So, we can now add "It was a troll trap" to "I was just testing" as a further (poor) excuse for a rubbish E_M post. As for the fact that E_M has never had a lifestyler at a session : there is an alternative explanation. So, I don't believe it proves LAB's point (though LAB's point is still valid, none the less). Perhaps the lifestylers are more likely to have seen those E_M's posts that are dissociated from reality, or heard of them by reputation ..... A much more plausible reason why they would stay away, surely?. | |||||||
| 5 May 11, 7:46 AM wonderer UK, 5 yrs |
In an adult world, it's quite possible for someone to do the same or similar work on both a professional basis and free of charge without any conflict of interests. If someone is a professional counsellor one doesn't reject their words of comfort at a funeral, nor their friendship or support in other circumstances, nor would we object to them doing voluntary work in a hospital. We don't suspect that everything they do is "touting for business" or advertising. Similarly if someone has a job with computers but happens also to help the old fellow next door when he gets a computer virus, I see no necessary conflict of interest. I know someone who volunteers as a TA in a school and also does some part time paid work in the same role in the same school. I see no reason why PDs should be constantly suspected of mixed motives; possibly less in fact because most regard BDSM as an enjoyable lifestyle or leisure activity as well as work. Also, even if in some contexts some professionals did offer a free taster in the hope of future commercial business, consumers are increasingly accustomed to having an open relationship with people selling goods or services in his sort of way, and are quite capable of taking the free offer (e.g. software on a 3 month trial) and then saying no. I don't think this is how most lifestyle/pro Dommes operate, but even if some did, so long as they were open (displaying a green £), in an adult world we should be able to cope. "Wisdom begins in wonder” (Socrates) | |||||||
| 5 May 11, 7:50 AM lisal 9 yrs |
I thnk quite a bit of this depends on your own experiences Mine have been that vanillas (God I hate that word) are very open minded. Everyone who knows what I do is cool about it. They don't want to hear the gory deails but it doesn't send them running for the hills either In terms of secrecy most BDSMes I know don't tell not because they are scared of the reaction but because it's not something (especially if it is sexual) that they feel the need (or want) to discuss. Can't say I am over interested in my friends sex lives either Most strident anti BDSM stuff comes from a few sensation seeking newspapers/some narrow minded politicians and church leaders. I honestly believe most people don't give a stuff about what we do as long as it's not shoved in their faces. I do totallly get, though, that some folks worry about the effect on their jobs (especially in vulnerable areas of employment) Re LAB's comments about PD customers and lifestylers and IC. I can only go from my own experience again. Quite a few subs/PDs I know do go to clubs/munches. Quite a lot of clients are more than happy to limit their own activities to sessioning and do have a laugh at some of the antics on IC Edited 5 May 11, 8:19 AM by lisal | |||||||
| 5 May 11, 8:19 AM ThedaVamp UK, 6 yrs |
In answer to the OP's question - No. Next. Vote for the repeal of the Extreme Pornography Laws | |||||||
| 5 May 11, 9:25 AM Lady_Anna_Bradford UK(BD), 5 yrs   |
Yes, really. "If no sexual offence is being committed it seems very odd indeed that there should be an offence for having an image of something which was not an offence," Lord Wallace of Tankerness | |||||||
| 5 May 11, 9:45 AM Lady_Anna_Bradford UK(BD), 5 yrs |
The only people who are bothered about who does what are the newspapers and they only care because sex sells. People lose their jobs because the employers don't want their companies or businesses brought into disrepute by association **in the newspapers**. It's all about reputation which is considered less important than the sales figures by editors who have targets and journos who want their bylines. Journos who hound kinksters are not representative of the rest of the population (or other journos) most of which think it is all a hoot. When a dungeon is raided read the comments under the news article. How many are really shocked and horrified. One? Maybe two? The rest think it is funny and make favourable comments. Most people think BDSM is funny. People keep it a secret because they don't want to take the risk. They also keep it a secret because they don't think it's anyone else's business. Some people want it to be a secret because it's naughtier that way. 'Vanillas' aren't a different breed of people. I think it's stupid and ignorant to insist that they are.
"If no sexual offence is being committed it seems very odd indeed that there should be an offence for having an image of something which was not an offence," Lord Wallace of Tankerness | |||||||
| 5 May 11, 9:55 AM nastybstd UK(LU), 6 yrs |
"PDs don't need or rely on lifestylers. Our clients are not part of any scene. Most of them think 'the scene'/IC is a joke." They are not the only ones to think the "scene" is a joke! My personal circle of friends are outside of the "scene" and I can assure you this much. They are far more into the reality of bdsm than most here on IC. I would go as far as to say the real minority is in fact the "scene" itself. "So I'm afraid in vanilla circles pro domme's aren't viewed any different from prostitutes and I'm sure I'm not the only one who's had that discussion." Pretty much everyone I know in the vanilla world views a PD as a prostitute. Nothing wrong with that. I like hookers! OK I have not yet been "educated". But that wont change the facts. Sex workers for money are prostitutes. "I can just imagine all those subs stalking the streets, jumping unsuspecting women, tying a strap on to them, then raping the shit out of the poor woman's new found appendage. All the while screaming, 'Tell me what to do! Tell me I'm your dirty little fuckslut!'" That is such a funny image in my head. If Monty Python ever made porn!!! "What a load of crap. I know loads of non-kinky people and they can see the difference quite easily." Ref difference between prostitute and PD. Non Kinky people are never going to call you a hooker to your face. They are generally polite and the word itself is rarely mentioned in polite circles. Flushing out the trolls! I can see the cartoon legs running backwards trying to stop the inevitable crash with smoke bellowing from the soles of the shoes. LOL. Did I just call someone a hooker? Not me. I'm polite. If you dont have anything good or positive to say, dont say anything. | |||||||
| 5 May 11, 10:42 AM Lady_Anna_Bradford UK(BD), 5 yrs |
Are strippers prostitutes? Are erotic dancers prostitutes? Are phone sex operators prostitutes? Are burlesque performers prostitutes? Sex worker is a general term. Sometimes it refers to prostitutes but when you dig deeper into the term you realise that it is far more general than that.
"If no sexual offence is being committed it seems very odd indeed that there should be an offence for having an image of something which was not an offence," Lord Wallace of Tankerness |
