Overt Displays of BDSM.

[violetyoshi]

I personally don't care. I often wear a spiked collar; and yes, I've worn a dog collar before. However, anyone trying to attach a lead to it would end up with injury; mine is more of an "attack dog" statement.

I wore a dog collar in high school, a real one. You see the ones made for humans, chafe the neck, so instead of whatever I got from army surplus I think. I got one from the pet store. Yeah, it was weird, but who doesn't do weird crap as a teen.

So anyways, I was going to say I think I wore the collar as a bit of an attack dog statement too, although I thought it was Goth at the time.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

It's already been stated, and I heartily agree that while it may be sexual it isn't necessarily sexual. Furthermore I don't see significant enough difference between collar with lead and spiked collar to treat one differently than the other. It's clothing, of sorts one way or the other and unless it's overtly sexual (like, I dunno, a hood or codpiece) it's just weird clothing, something we all have a right to wear if we choose.

I get enough funny looks wearing a hoody where I live, I can't imagine how these (super jumpy) people would react if I did anything approaching a collar, but even if I did that isn't my problem.

We need to draw a line between banning overtly sexual acts in public and banning things which are, if not inherently, comparatively innocent and far from galvanizing all things considered.

I'd really rather move forward with the best intentions of free speech (which I don't have to tell anyone extends beyond spoken words to include writing, images, actions, clothing, etc. yet here I am ) regardless of my own feelings.

I don't WANT to see people 'all goth-i-fied' or really anyone flouncing about in skin-tight spandex, it is rude and to an extent it does offend me. But what would offend me more is the thought that anyone has the right or even the expectation not to be offended at any time, in any place.

End of Song.

[Greenday]

Furthermore I don't see significant enough difference between collar with lead and spiked collar to treat one differently than the other. It's clothing, of sorts one way or the other and unless it's overtly sexual (like, I dunno, a hood or codpiece) it's just weird clothing, something we all have a right to wear if we choose.

A collar for being walked is not an article of clothing. That's like saying my dog's collar is clothing, which it is not. I see a huge difference between a goth's spiked collar and a submissive's collar for being walked with a leash.

[BroomJockey]

We need to draw a line between banning overtly sexual acts in public and banning things which are, if not inherently, comparatively innocent and far from galvanizing all things considered.

Err, after reading this, I feel the need to make absolutely clear that I wasn't advocating banning it, or making it illegal or anything. It's just fucking rude on their part. Overtly or not, if the slave is getting off on people seeing him or her being lead around, the pair is making me part of their sex life without my consent. It's nothing like rape (since my phrasing opens up that parallel), but frankly, if I'm part of someone's sex life, I wanna be getting something out of it too.

[anriana]

something we all have a right to wear if we choose.

We need to draw a line between banning overtly sexual acts in public and banning things which are, if not inherently, comparatively innocent and far from galvanizing all things considered.

People seem to think they have the right not to see anything they don't like anymore, and the 'forcing' of one's sexuality on the public is something stated by anti-gay rights types as a horrible intrusion.

I'd really rather move forward with the best intentions of free speech (which I don't have to tell anyone extends beyond spoken words to include writing, images, actions, clothing, etc. yet here I am ) regardless of my own feelings.

I don't WANT to see people 'all goth-i-fied' or really anyone flouncing about in skin-tight spandex, it is rude and to an extent it does offend me. But what would offend me more is the thought that anyone has the right or even the expectation not to be offended at any time, in any place.

nothing less than a constitutionally protected right

A right that deserves the utmost respect because people's rights are more important than anyone's opinions.

So you have to acknowledge that those people are into that, tough. That's the way the world is. I have the right to express anything and everything including sexual preference of any kind as long as I don't physically endanger anyone.

Since you have brought this up 8 times:

No one other than you is talking about banning this. No one thinks this should be made illegal. No one is talking about censoring free speech or ignoring the Constitution or any of those things you are so irrelevantly concerned with. Not one single person on this thread has said that leading someone on a leash should be illegal. Why are you continually bringing up arguments that no one is making?


And unless you are a member of the BDSM community and just haven't bothered adding that point, I promise you that I am more concerned with the legality of kink than you are. Your insinuations about those who oppose this shows an ignorance of the actual BDSM community. As was mentioned in my original post and elsewhere on the first page, public acts of BDSM are considered inappropriate by the BDSMers at large. Is the entire community therefore comparable to anti-gay crusaders? Do we want to ban ourselves?

[Wingates_Hellsing]

@ Greenday: Any item worn by someone for practical or decorative purposes is an article of clothing in my book. Both make a statement about the person wearing it.

@ BroomJockey: I wasn't saying that you were, but I always have seen the advocacy of any action to prevent something as a potential start towards more serious infringements. Same reason why I'm against any new gun restrictions, or businesses refusing service for non-lawful reasons, that sort of thing. Not that you advocated those sorts of thing either, but I am (quite stupidly seeing as I have no qualifications or much tenure in life) the kind of person who likes to look at the next step past what is being talked about and potentially warning against that step, sometimes for the sake of making my point.

I apologize if I implied that you said anything you didn't (ie put words in your mouth).

[Slytovhand]

I think wearing such garb in public should be banned and made illegal. *



Ok, so what, really, is the relevantly significant difference between wearing that attire and in that situation, and say... a prostitute walking the streets? Or porn mags on offer in newsagents? Or a lot of billboards around these days? Or commercials that use sex to sell??? FMB's? etc etc etc... all 'sexual' of a type...



*nah... just kidding

[Dreamstalker]

I wore a dog collar in high school, a real one.

I did too (it has my grandfather's first dog's registration tag on it--dog's name was Bonzo and mom thought that appropriate for me).

Later for a particularly odd LARP session, my merry group of nuts pooled our money and got a "real" leather collar custom-made. The owner of the collar changed over the course of the game, but everyone understood it was not to be worn in public (out on the street). Eventually when we disbanded I wound up with it...it's a really nice piece of hardware, but I don't think I'd wear it except on Halloween.

[Depot Denizen]

Dreamstalker, that reminds me of my LARP days. I actually won a leather mantle in an auction during a winter event. It's not a collar, but it looks pretty kickass. Heh, I can't find a good picture of a mantle, I'll have to find one sometime. I used to wear my LARP gear frequently, we'd go into McDonalds in garb. It was fun. Now I just wear it on Halloween, but it looks badass.

[BroomJockey]

a prostitute walking the streets? Or porn mags on offer in newsagents? Or a lot of billboards around these days? Or commercials that use sex to sell???

Prostitutes are in it for the sex, but they still take it to a different area before starting anything.

You don't start fiddling in your pocket before you get home with the porn mag.

Billboards aren't dependant on other people around to achieve their effects. Neither are commercials.

Are you sure you even know the stance of the other side? I don't think anyone has actually SAID "Make it illegal," and by joking about it as you did, you're simply using appeal to ridicule. Change what we say slightly, then say "isn't that just ridiculous? They wanna BAN sexual behaviour!"

The only one of your examples that comes close to being equivalent is the porn mag example, and I'm fairly certain that while not illegal, most people would consider it rude to take out one of those on the bus-ride home, so they'd be all ready to go when they stepped in the door. In this case, the porn mag is like the leash. A tool for the people involved to prepare for sex. (And before Flyn says anything, I mean for the couples who DO use it that way.)

[Depot Denizen]

Question is, how to you tell the difference between the two? I'm not sure if you'd be able to tell by visual cues alone. Well, maybe some of you could. I'm not against public displays of affection, but my girlfriend gets irritated when she sees people playing tonsil tennis in public.

My personal opinion is that if someone feels uncomfortable about a situation, they have the ability to ask the offending couple to take it elsewhere. Likewise, that couple can ignore the person, or tell them go take a hike, or agree and go off somewhere in private. No matter what you do, there will be someone who is offended by it.

On a side note, I am usually very modest when it comes to my own appearance in public. The most outrageous thing I do is have my head shaved smooth, I like how it feels and so does the girlfriend. I'm considering a tattoo in a strategic location, but aside from that I'm very modest.

[Slytovhand]

Are you sure you even know the stance of the other side?

Depends on which 'side' I'm apparently on as to who 'the other side' is... If you're referring to the BDSM side - they consider it rude to engage in any activity that belongs to their scene that is done outside their scene... as it is a form of sex-play... well - some do... obviously, the 2 from the linked thread disagree. So too do others... is there any reason why a pride rally (which often has BDSM members) walking around with similar garb, any different -and thus, any less rude?

Strangely enough, their 'side' is in league with the sexually conservatives, who think that such things are icky, and shouldn't be anywhere at all... public or otherwise...

Then... there's the 'freedom' crowd... while it harms none, do what thou wilt. That's where I am - and others on this thread.

Billboards aren't dependant on other people around to achieve their effects. Neither are commercials.

I'm sorry, you're really going to have to redo that statement, it's just done my head in.... commercials and billboards don't need people to view them to achieve their effects??? Coulda fooled me!

Prostitutes... I interpret that you don't think their walking around in next to nothing, 'soliciting', and actually wearing clothes designed to, not merely 'entice', but to arouse, is not in any way sexual???? No, sorry, don't buy it at all.

Maybe I'm just weird (well, yes, Ok, I am weird)... but I don't see walking around with a collar and sitting at someone's feet as equating to having sex in public, or helping someone masturbate in public (or yourself, for that matter). It's not even close to tonsil hockey...

I will go back to my post on different cultures... you don't see holding hands in public as an issue.. it's not a 'sexual act'.... Japanese, Indians and Chinese do.... who's right?


[quote} I don't think anyone has actually SAID "Make it illegal," and by joking about it as you did, you're simply using appeal to ridicule. Change what [/quote]

No, they haven't... in fact, Anriana made a complete post about it.. so, I thought I'd give her something to fire at

I don't need to appeal to ridicule, and I certianly don't need to change the argument to make my 'side' more attractive.... but I can use humour when some things get a bit serious.

[Greenday]

Maybe I'm just weird (well, yes, Ok, I am weird)... but I don't see walking around with a collar and sitting at someone's feet as equating to having sex in public, or helping someone masturbate in public (or yourself, for that matter). It's not even close to tonsil hockey...

It's pretty much foreplay. Making out isn't as bad to do in public as foreplay in my opinion.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

If making out is foreplay, what's the difference?

Furthermore, I'm going to go ahead and re-state that it isn't necessarily foreplay.

[Greenday]

Neither is making out.