You are viewing IC as Guest    
Why not the site? It's free!
   
If you're already a member, it's better if you

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

I see IC is in the papers today (97)

This topic is now full - if you want to reply, please make a new post on the board itself.

This post is on the BDSM Activism web board.

12 May 11, 2:48 PM
Dr_Deviant
UK(YO), 2 yrs

My support and sympathies to the Domme in question. XXX

Does this mean me and my sub are going to have to go into danger mode to vet the predictable avalache of NEW profiles from people,press etc joining to look for for neighbours,freinds or a cheap story. I for one will be extra carful about anyone who has joined recently and taking down some our pics.

Sorry to anyone who is new and genuine BTW just the way it is.

12 May 11, 2:49 PM
Beau_Tox
UK(CB), 7 yrs


SirDreadly wrote:
I've edited my post, as requested politely, and otherwise, in memo's.

Perhaps you'd best remove the link(s) to the article in the paper too then...

Regards, Maz.

Hopefully, the Daily Constitutional will drop it from their web presence in a while.

.
Let's all beat up on someone, because they represent something that we don't like. Fuck yeah, beat on them!

12 May 11, 2:57 PM
Gentledom14
UK(CA), 6 yrs


Dr_Deviant wrote:
My support and sympathies to the Domme in question. XXX

Does this mean me and my sub are going to have to go into danger mode to vet the predictable avalache of NEW profiles from people,press etc joining to look for for neighbours,freinds or a cheap story. I for one will be extra carful about anyone who has joined recently and taking down some our pics.

Sorry to anyone who is new and genuine BTW just the way it is.

As much as this is devastating for the Domme involved, i dont think its a big enough story for the press to get on the BDSM search like they sometimes do, well no more than normal.

“Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up.”

Edited 12 May 11, 2:58 PM by Gentledom14

12 May 11, 3:00 PM
The_Moog
UK(OL), 6 yrs

Let us not forget this is the paper that came out in full support of Oswell Mosley and his black shirts. So it would appear the Daily Mail beleives geneside is fine but having a private life outside of your work is not.

Forgot to add this Link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eBT6OSr1TI

Never fails to chear me up.

Edited 12 May 11, 3:28 PM by The_Moog

12 May 11, 3:06 PM
Monkey_Wench
UK(B), 20 mths

I have used that InformedConsent website for years, and a lot of the people who advertise ther services on it work in positions of trust with vulnerable people, in poaitions such as teachers, nurses, care workers, child minders. There are even a couple of county councillors. Mistress Saffron is correct in that the services provided *may not* be sexual to the dominatrix. It is mostly about power, not sex. The scenarios & roleplays are mostly where the dominatrix shows a display of power & humiliation (often learned in their day job) over the paying client, which the client enjoys as a sexual outlet.

The above is a quote from a comment on the piece.

May I suggest that IC will now be more of a target for the tabloids while people make comments like this.

12 May 11, 3:44 PM
magpieuk
UK(LA), 5 yrs


Whilst the lass in question has my heartfelt sympathy I'm going to be slightly controversial.

I think working as a pro-sub at the same time as being a primary school teacher kind of shows a wee bit of gap in judgement.

Don't get me wrong people should be able to have a private life that is private no matter what their job, and that even people who work in the public eye or work with children & vulnerable people have that right - completely agree.

It's just that whilst yes they should have that right in today's society as this case has shown you don't actually get it. People are prejudice, she made the choice to advertise her services as a pro-sub knowing that should that side of her life be made public it would impact on her substansive employment.

I sincerely hope she's okay and things work out for her.

Come to the darkside - we have cookies...

12 May 11, 3:51 PM
DancesWithPussycats
UK(TW), 7 yrs

The Lady in question has all my best wishes, its crap that what she does in her private life should be held against her. They admit she is no threat to the children she teaches, so how is there any public interest in her being outed and harried like this, let alone her professional life threatened.

International man of mystery
Men are from Mars, women are from Hell

Edited 12 May 11, 4:11 PM by DancesWithPussycats

12 May 11, 4:09 PM
gerald2468
UK(DE), 15 mths
I am somewhat sorprised by the sympathy evoked regarding this woman. I agree that ones private sex life should be exactly that, private. However when you advertise as a proffesional dominatrix you have removed the privacy bit. For a start in the eyes of the law you have become a prostitute because the legal definition of a prostitute is a person who receives money for a sexual service. If she had wanted to persue her sexual prediliction, for what is after all a fairly harmless deviation from the norm (whatever the norm is) then this would not have occured. The fact she did it proffesionaly makes a huge difference and I am surprised that many on here don't seem to grasp that fact.
12 May 11, 4:14 PM
go4it
UK, 8 yrs
freddiein40s wrote:
I seriously do believe this lady has been grassed up by someone in this scene.

Sadly, you are probably right. Not for the first time, Woman E rears her ugly presence.

Read Heresy Corner http://bit.ly/kz6Jzp

Trust Jane Fae will find an outlet as well.

Hopefully she has/will find employment she enjoys again. Not being struck off is a good start, and congratulations to CAAN on being there to help.

(Later this thread was continued here)

Edited 12 May 11, 6:44 PM by go4it

12 May 11, 4:19 PM
Jahc99
UK, 5 yrs
Shame on you. What a despicable, low thing to say. Quite apart from the fact it's total bullshit.

My symapthies go to the Lady in question.

gerald2468 wrote:
I am somewhat sorprised by the sympathy evoked regarding this woman. I agree that ones private sex life should be exactly that, private. However when you advertise as a proffesional dominatrix you have removed the privacy bit. For a start in the eyes of the law you have become a prostitute because the legal definition of a prostitute is a person who receives money for a sexual service. If she had wanted to persue her sexual prediliction, for what is after all a fairly harmless deviation from the norm (whatever the norm is) then this would not have occured. The fact she did it proffesionaly makes a huge difference and I am surprised that many on here don't seem to grasp that fact.

Next page

This is the standard version
©1997-2012 Informed Consent
UK map

UK Map

UK listings
Clubs
Munches
Groups
Dungeon Hire
Services
Kink-friendly
Shops
Other countries
Dictionary
BDSM
Fetish
Top
Bottom
Bondage
Dominant
Submissive
RACK vs SSC
Top Pictures
Rate the pictures

Top BDSM Books
The Story of O
Showing you the Ropes
Female Domination
The Ethical Slut
The Human Pony

More sites
IC's advertisers
BDSM Rights
Kink.com
Kink Podcasts
The Slave Register
Ownership & Possession

Help & About IC