Annoying the world, one offense at a time.
So I think we’ve all read this by now “Pet” girl kicked off bus for wearing leash. I’m seeing it linked just about everywhere.
It was an amusing little story, and my sympathies initially went with the couple in question. Certainly they weren’t breaking any laws or doing anything that called for that sort of reaction from the bus driver.
I think the driver had a big ol’ bowl of bitchflakes for breakfast that morning.
The girl, the pet of the couple, is quoted in the story as saying “”I am a pet [...] It might seem strange but it makes us both happy. It’s my culture and my choice. It isn’t hurting anyone.”
So it’s not hurting anyone. And it is their choice. I would be completely outraged had someone walked into their home and said the things that the bus driver said. But, they brought it public. They took it outside their home. Do the same rules of tolerance apply?
I’m strongly opposed to PDK’s (public displays of kink). I think kink belongs in your home, not in Wal-mart or the Chinese buffet line. When I go out in public, I expect a modicum of appropriate behavior, from myself and everyone else.
I don’t necessarily think that this couple stepped over that line, at least not in any blatantly disrespectful way. Especially in this day and age where “goth wear” typically includes spiked collars and chains dangling from various places. I’m so accustomed to seeing goth styles that I don’t even suspect a person is into kink if I see a collar or a leash. I actually tend to look for more subtle clues these days. That flaunting style, in my opinion, rules out a serious interest in kink. (which is my opinion only. I think people who flaunt are making up for some other insecurity perhaps. But thats another entry.)
That’s why there are events and get-togethers, you know? There are appropriate places to let it all hang out and show off your interest in bdsm.
This couple wants to play Owner and pet. That’s wonderful. Who doesn’t? Yet, they clearly suspend the “play” when they have to. The “pet” was walking on two feet, wearing clothes, and was quoted with an articulate response in the newspaper. She wasn’t listed as saying “Arf! Arf!” (or whatever animal she’s playing) so why can’t they also suspend the roleplaying and leave the leash off when they get on the bus? People do outrageous things precisely to get that sort of shocked reaction and then whine when they get it.
But culture and choice is her defense. Fine. There are cultures where nudity is the choice but they wouldn’t be allowed on the bus either. What if the next person chooses to wear his adult Huggies, his baby bonnet, and suck on his “mommy’s” breast?
Where do you draw the line for public exposure? When did the public consent to being pulled into *your* kink?
Like
Uncategorized | kaya | 
Friday January 25th, 2008 9:48am
Honestly, I think they could find a less visible way to show the ownership, like the rest of us do.
But then again. If the gays hadn’t gone out there, being gay wouldn’t be accepted (all though I think the pride parade has turned from “We’re proud to be gay!” to “We’re sthpahrklin’!”).
Uh. Sparkle refrence can be understood after watching this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epsx2dlQQ6k
One has to wonder, if the parade was less “sthpahrklin’” (snicker), would they have gained respect sooner?
Well, dressing in drag in public isn’t the norm, but it happens and people usually just get a giggle out of it. In my opinion, a leash would get the same response. And i think you’re comparing apples and oranges when you’re saying…
There are cultures where nudity is the choice but they wouldn’t be allowed on the bus either. What if the next person chooses to wear his adult Huggies, his baby bonnet, and suck on his “mommy’s” breast?
Because public nudity (in most places) is against the law as are public sex acts (on a bus at least). And “baby” or not sucking on a breast (as an adult) is a sexual type act as far as the law books are concerned. If she really had half a brain (or wasn’t desiring the attention), she would have not said she lived as a pet. i see all kinds of strange things and just assume people are strange, but then again, i’m open minded and not a (apparently) narrow-minded bus driver. i get annoyed when i see teen-age girls showing off their goodies in public by way of low cut and midriff shirts and skirts that are so short i can see what color panties they’re wearing, but with me it’s more of a “your parents let you out of the house looking like that?” than it’s offense. i guess those things are on the same lines of wanting attention.
Sexual kink needs to be left at home (or at an event) but accessory kink (did i just invent a new fashion sense? lol) is an expression of individuality.
Now i have to go back and read this to see if i made sense because i started rambling lol
~His bits
It was precisely when she said that she lived as a pet that it ceased being a fashion statement and became another matter altogether. Had she not said that, this story never would have made the news. Ever. What is newsworthy about this is the kink. And kink doesn’t belong on the bus. IMO.
I’d feel the same about those low-cut tops. If it’s just a girl “expressing” herself? Then, you know, whatever… but if she makes a point to say something like “my Dom makes me dress like a slut” or something like that, it all changes.
Public nudity, public sex, it all kind of falls under the umbrella of public decency. And that’s really what I’m saying. Those this couple wasn’t necessarily pushing the boundaries of public decency, but it’s a slippery slope to get there. Where is the line? WHAT is the line? So, maybe sucking “mommy’s” tit is over the line, but is wearing a diaper? It’s not nudity, it’s not a sex act. But I’d be highly offended to see it on my way to the market.
i don’t think i’d be offended, moreso squicked out *giggles* but only cuz it’s not my thing *snicker* (no offense to the “babies” out there).
~His bits
Well, I strongly believe in being polite, socially. If my Master felt like taking me out on a leash, he could where we live, because it’s San Francisco, and anything goes in this city. You have to be pretty creative to even begin to shock people!
But if we visit say, his dad’s place, which is in a pretty rural area of England, well, we wouldn’t put on a leash to go down t’ pub! It’s just not appropriate (even though the Brits are, as a whole, an extremely kinky group of human beings. They just don’t generally air their latex laundry in public.)
Even people like trannies can “dress it down” for day-to-day life. When my Master and I went to get the diamond in my engagement ring appraised (it was handed down to me by my grandma) we got to the office, and the nice lady in the very proffesional jacket and skirt and heels, her hair nicely done up, just happened to have an adam’s apple. But she wouldn’t have stood out, walking through the financial district, or going shopping, or what-have-you. You can have your kinks, your distinctiveness, and still make it work without offending the average person’s sensibilites. (There are, of course, those who walk around looking to be offended, and there’s not much you can do about them.)
That’s true. Some people find offense in everything and anything.
I used this couple only because they were in the news. I personally don’t see that they did anything “wrong”, at least not in their style of dress. However, once they voiced their intent with that leash, it ceased being an expression of style and became something else entirely (I think anyway).
“You can have your kinks, your distinctiveness, and still make it work without offending the average person’s sensibilites”
I agree completely.
I think the reason for this story is far less risque.
The bus driver refused them entry to the bus (after calling them “freaks” and so on (if you believe their story) because of “passenger safety”.
The bus company position was that were the young lady attached to a leash in the hand of another there could be a safety risk should there be a sudden breaking incident or some such.
The gentleman in whose care the leash usually resided stated categorically that upon getting on a bus he always handed the leash to his pet in case there was a such a sharp breaking incident. He was very aware of safety – hers in particular.
Their issue with the bus company is that the bus driver didn’t like their goth attire and discriminated against them – only on grounds of safety when questioned *after* the complaint was made.
This story only made the headlines after the complaint was made and the “kinky” nature of their relationship was uncovered.
I think had they been common-or-garden goths the discrimination would have been the same ..
Agreed. I only used them as an example because it was a current news story that most people had read. I agree that had they not stated the “pet” lifestyle, this never would have made the news.
Personally, I don’t agree that their “PDK” is pushing their kink on others. I mean, it’s just a collar and leash. I could understand if, say, he was carrying a crop around and whipping her every time she messed up or just because he felt like it. I could understand if he had her walking around naked. I could understand if he was bending her over and spanking her or fucking her. But it’s just a collar and leash. I see that more as a fashion statement than PDK.
Their lifestyle, in my opinion, should have never come up. It really doesn’t matter why she wears the collar and leash. The fact remains that she wears it and they were banned from the bus simply because she wears it. It really had nothing to do with their lifestyle. I mean, who’s to say, without already knowing the back story, that she wasn’t wearing it because she lost a bet? And how come it’s okay to wear a collar and/or leash out because you’re goth or you took a dare or lost a bet, but suddenly it becomes taboo because you’re kinky?
And to be perfectly honest, I’m sick of hiding. Aren’t you? That’s not to say I think we all should be fucking on the side of the road or that we should be tying each other up in the village square. But I want to be able to be true to who I am when I’m in public, not have to pretend I do whatever I want whether Master likes it or not so people don’t classify Him as abusive.
When He asks me a yes or no question in the store, I want to be able to say “Yes, Master.” and not have to worry about whether or not the woman in the next aisle will have a whole herd of heifers and call the cops or the manager will ask us to leave. I want to be able to wear short sleeve shirts when I have rope burn and bruises on my wrists in the summer without worrying about whether or not He’s going to get arrested if some cop happens to see it. I already wear His collar in public, and if wants to take me for “walkies” with the leash dangling from His wrist, I don’t want to have to worry about what someone’s going to do or say in protest. And the way I see it, that’s not pushing my kink on someone else, that’s being myself. And if someone who just happens to be where I am doesn’t like it, that’s really their problem. They’re more than welcome to avert their eyes and/or ears. I have the right to be myself… even if society doesn’t like who me is.
Anyway… just my opinion.
I could understand if he had her walking around naked. I could understand if he was bending her over and spanking her or fucking her. But it’s just a collar and leash. I see that more as a fashion statement than PDK.
That’s my point though. So the collar and leash is fashion, which I totally agree with! Had they not mentioned the whole ‘living as a pet’ thing, this story never would made the news. Now that the correlation has been made though, between the collar and leash and their kink, what I’m saying is, where does one draw the line on what’s acceptable? If you are saying that walking your pet down the sidewalk *should* be accepted, then why NOT spanking her with a crop as she went? If thats your kink and thats how you express it, who’s to say that you can’t do it! It’s just such a slippery slope to having zero amounts of respect for decency.
I mean this couple was nothing, a collar and leash, big whoop-de-do. I only used the story because it’s so recent and so widely read on the blogs I read. But what’s next?
People should get to choose what they want to be exposed to. Like watching TV. If you don’t like it, change the channel. Dont like the blog you are reading? Click the X. Don’t like that magazine article? Close it. But you can’t not go outside and you can’t not ride the bus and you can’t not be exposed to the public. Therefore the public should conduct themselves with some basic amounts of decency.
Fashion is not kink. Fashion is fashion. Kink is kink. “Fet wear” belongs at a fetish event. It becomes taboo when it ceases being a goth expression and becomes, instead, an expression of your lifestyle that *should* be kept in the privacy of your home.
You know, I don’t feel like I’m hiding. I am perfectly content with how we stay true to ourselves, as well as being respectable to the rest of society. It shouldn’t go too far either way, don’t you think? I am still submissive to him when we’re out in public. Nothing changes, except that things become a little more subtle than at home. But, maybe that’s easier for us because we’re used to toning it down even at home. We have kids.. so maybe that makes it something less constricting that what you experience. I don’t know.
An Exit to Eden Island would be wonderful. But it’s a pipe dream. It’s never going to happen. You want to have the right to be yourself and express yourself (and you do, in your own home. you have that right), but so does the old man next door who wants a pig farm made out of girls in his front yard. So do the pony girls and the adult babies and the nudists. They all want that too. BUT, so does everyone else who *doesn’t* want to see it. They should have to get on the bus wearing blinders? That’s insane. You aren’t being asked to not be true to yourself, you’re being asked to respect another person’s boundaries of public decency. I just don’t see why that’s an imposition.
I’m glad you shared your opinion. It makes me examine mine a little closer. That’s always a good thing. Thank you. :-)
An Exit to Eden Island would be wonderful. But it’s a pipe dream. It’s never going to happen.
That’s a little bit of an exaggerated step from what I’m saying.
I just disagree that all parts of kink become public taboo the second we classify them as part of our own personal kink. One of Master’s kinks is skirts. So I should never wear a skirt in public because it’s His kink? Another of His kinks is belled anklets. No one else knows the significance of a belled anklet to us (except, perhaps, another BDSMer), but I should leave it at home when we go in public because it’s sexual to us? The extremes go both ways.
Personally, I think nudists should be able to walk around naked if they want. The human body isn’t vulgar or taboo. It’s just nature. And if an adult baby wants to walk around in a diaper carrying their bottle and teddy bear, let them. Neither are overtly sexual and if they are, so what? It’s no different than the chick walking down the street with “Juicy” on the ass of her daisy dukes and her ass cheeks hanging out while the twins are peeking from her shirt cut so low only the nipples are covered.
I guess I just don’t see BDSM and its various facets as “taboo” and I think the rest of the world needs to grow up a little. “Fetish wear” is just clothing and sex is just sex and I think it’s stupid that we can talk about “normal” sex and have “normal” public displays of affection but bring kink into the mix and that makes it bad.
Getting into the “invading a person’s rights” discussion always spirals out of control. I feel a person has a right to live how they want, both public and private, and no other person has a right to encroach on that. But at the same time I understand that it’s virtually impossible to enforce that because John Doe over here wants a pig farm made of naked women in his front yard and his next door neighbor Jenny Dean wants a perfect world all pink frills and lace so her daughters are never exposed to a shred of darkness. It is a slippery slope. Whose rights do you trample and whose do you protect?
But I can agree to disagree :)
Of course Exit to Eden Islands exist. They are called swinger’s resorts. You might want to get out more often.
We were talking about a more socially accepted standard of normal (an Exit to Eden Island mentality) rather than a specific island or place for hedonistic practices.
You might want to pay better attention.
It all comes down to consent and respect for others. Which should be the first and foremost rules of kink.
Let’s use this little example:
I’m into bondage and role playing such as the pet play. I am NOT inso severe body scarification/bloodplay, SCAT, breathing restrictions etc.. I have nothing against other people doing it…but I don’t enjoy watching it or being exposed to it for my own personal reasons. It’s pretty traumatic for me…not because I am not open minded hell I’ve already made it clear I’m into kink, but for other reasons. If I wasn’t open minded I wouldn’t be ok with other people doing it.
That being said, as much as I would love to be allowed to walk my pet on a leash in public I can’t live a double standard and be a hypocrite. Someone else might find me walking my pet just as traumatic and unnaceptable publicly as I am with people mutilating their bodies for everyone else to see. They may not be opposed to it…but they may not want to see it either because it’s not their cup of tea.
If you allow one kink in public…you have to pretty much allow all kinks in public. And that’s when you start imposing things on people.
I don’t consider it repression in any way. I am still open minded enough of a person to accept that other people are into SCAT and bloodplay, that some will restrain other people’s breathing to the point of near damage. It’s their choices…I respect that, but I want no part in it and I don’t want to witness it. They are still allowed to do these things in the sanctuary of their own homes, parties etc. And by doing so, I don’t have to worry about taking the bus and possibly have an anxiety attack for a public display of kink bringing back a lot of nasty issues and memories with me.
We have to consider there’s certain things in life we just can’t have. The pedophile might have the same mentality as well and feel the same type of entitlement “it’s my personnal preferences, it’s my kink therefore people should be ok with it. If they’re allowed their kinks why can’t I?” But Pedophilia is obviously NOT ok! To someone else kink might feel just as perverse as pedophilia for them. Irrational yes…but it’s reality. Someone might get just as offended for seeing me walk another person as a pet. Maybe they were tied to a radiator and beaten and treated as a dog as a child…you never know. It’s not always the case of people not being open and accepting enough and you can’t always tell. You have to respect that.
So the safe alternative for all of this is to keep your kink at home out of respect for others that are not into it for whatever reason, EDUCATE others so they understand why you’re into it and maybe in the long run people will be able to see past their own preferences and stigmas and to be accepting of it but NEVER impose your preferences or anything on others.
Yes we have a right to our own preferences but so does someone else. And when those preferences conflict you can’t force another’s point of view to justify it. You just have to accept the differences and come to a compromise or mutual agreement. Allright you want to sit on cactus…Allright I don’t want to see it. Ok then you sit on your cactus at home…you still get to do it…I don’t get to see it….everyone’s happy.
And that’s where my point of view sits.
The End! :p
Well written. Very well written.
I went over and read the article as i had not seen it yet. Much like you initially i felt badly for the couple. We whom explore our kink are not harming anyone and like she stated it is our own choice. No one is putting a gun to our heads to live this way.
However – I also agree with you that when i step out of the door it mostly stays there – in the house. My prized marks stay below clothing where no one will confuse them for abusive tell tales. (for which they most certainly are NOT! I like them!)
Sure i will still call him “Daddy” when we are about and the children are not around. It is simply what I call him. Something he expects when the times allow.
I can say with near certainty that he would agree with me (and you) that some aspects of our lifestyle belongs in our home – period.
*nods nods nods*
First of all, I think the couple in question are just the most adorable little goth kids ever. I adore the pair of them and want to take them home and keep them.
That said, you know, I think the whole episode is more a case of teenagers wanting to scream ‘look at me’ than anything else. I think they need the freedom to do it. Teenagers don’t always quite know what they’re saying with statements like this, but you know, they need to say it, even if they cringe later when confronted with the photos.
And, you know, they’re just damned cute.
Oh I agree. I only used them because they were so fresh in the news. They just gave me something to build on. What they did wasn’t bad at all.. but others do!
I agree with everything rayne said. Can’t think of anything to add, she summed it all up pretty good.
Then I’ll refer you to my response to her. ;-)
PDK — gross. We’ve talked about that before. These kids? I don’t know. I don’t have the whole back story, but I agree with you that people love to illicit shock & then act all offended when they get it. It’s a pet peeve.
I have this discussion with Am on occasion. She likes to be different, but doesn’t think there should be any reaction to that. You can’t buck society and not be called on it. Isn’t that the point of bucking society?
I feel that PDK’s are bringing people into our scene in one way or another. And a lot of those people aren’t interested. Indeed, a lot of those people may be tolerant of alternative lifestyles, but they don’t want to have their noses rubbed in it.
Master and I keep our kink to ourselves or at appropriate venues. We just look for more venues!
While the bus driver had no business throwing those kids off the bus, the kids probably should have kept their visible kink items off. They were looking for a confrontation. But then, that’s what kids tend to do, isn’t it?
a lot of those people may be tolerant of alternative lifestyles, but they don’t want to have their noses rubbed in it.
I completely agree.
In my view, this is a particular variety of BDSM play that I consider to fall into the category of “vanilla violation.” Simply, it is when BDSM folks go out into the vanilla world with the intent to put non-consenting vanillas in the position of participating in THEIR kink. I’ve listened to a wide variety of people maintain that WE ought to be able to be who we are without apology, and that the sooner we get fully out in the world, the sooner we’ll achieve some modicum of equality. And I’ve heard the argument that since “they” mistreat and discriminate against us, it is only turnabout that we put it in their faces now and then. I just don’t buy it. BDSM is just fine when everyone who is into it is into it and has chosen the game and is fully capable of having given that consent. However, when I take my stuff out into the casual, unsuspecting, public environment and act out in ways that are calculated to shock and outrage those who cannot reasonably consent to that interaction that is outside the boundaries of what I consider to be ethical BDSM practice. The fact that I would like to see my lifestyle treated more equitably; the fact that I believe that I am mistreated and discriminated against by mainstream society; the fact that being out and educating where we can is likely to move that agenda forward — none of that justifies “vanilla violation.”
swan
I couldn’t agree more. I like that term too; vanilla violation.
Vanilla violation! I love that!
Why in the world should anyone have to explain to their children the reasons for the leash? In my mind it brings images of having to explain oral sex (because hey…maybe that guy over in the taco bell booth feels like demanding his slave to give him a blowjob)to my children. Where’s the line drawn?
exactly.
In a world where many of us who do “what it is that we do” choose to protect and shield our OWN children from all the details, why shouldn’t those who do not participate in OUR kink have the same choice?
swan
I walked into a Best Buy with my friend Abby on a leash for shits and giggles once when we were in high school. She had cat ears on too. Since it was the week before Halloween, no one batted an eye and the clerk even apoligized for not having candy. But that was really before I realized my interest in D/s and S&M.
Now that I consider myself submissive, I think there are much subtler ways to show your submission that people won’t see as weird or unnatural.
Be as kinky as you want at home though :0)
See? Halloween is an appropriate time to take your “kink-wear” out in the public. Even though that’s not what you were doing, it is a time when people expect it.
well I see it like this… If the busdriver hadn’t discriminated in the first place, her statement wouldn’t even be in question to upset you. Because she felt discriminated against, she felt the need to explain. Had that NOT happened, no explanation on her part would have been needed. Just like you, Kaya, going to the doctors and having to explain carvings on your breasts. When you are ASKED, you feel required to give an explanation. So, lay blame where due. The idiot busdriver.
Had they not taken their kink out of the privacy of their own home, there would have been no discrimination and nothing to explain.
It’s hardly the bus driver’s fault that they dressed inappropriately, is it?
I already said the bus driver was acting like a bitch. I merely used this story as an illustrating point to make my post. I’m not “upset”. I just make posts about things I think about.
I don’t see how they dressed “inappropriately” and neither did you, in your first post. It was her admitting that she was his “pet” that supposedly threw you over the edge. Make up your mind.
You know what? We don’t agree and that’s fine. We don’t have to. If you want to argue, take it to your own blog. I’ve given you a place to say that you don’t agree with my opinion, which is far more than I am obligated to do. I’m not going to argue with you because.. remember? Arguing over the internet…
And for that matter, what makes you surmise that there is any “kink” involved? A “pet” per se does not predetermine a sexual fetish.
“Kink” is not limited to sexual fetishes either. Being a pet is a kink, sexual or non-sexual.
I agree with you, but where is the “sin” if it isn’t sexual? I see alot weirder stuff than that on a daily basis, and the bottom line is, had the busdriver not acted in the manner that he/she had, this would’t even be being discussed. And I am failing to see where any “argument” is. I just stated my opinion, as did you. Do you always get so upset when someone doesn’t jump on the Tess bandwagon? Geez, you brought it up. Next time post a disclaimer saying “if you don’t agree with me, go to your own blog”
I actually did post that exact disclaimer, several weeks ago. If you don’t like what I have to say and don’t agree with it, bitch about it on your own site. This is my place to say what I want. You want that right? Pay for it. I do.
I do not always get upset when people disagree with me. Several of the commenters here didn’t agree with me. But I get upset when people think they can come here and be a bitch while they disagree. There is way to disagree politely.
The psychological aspect of it will unnerve people just as much as the sexual part of it.
It may not have been sexual in this content…but it was definitely psychological and people that don’t understand it will have issues with it. I think that’s what happened in this case.
And if you could read correctly, you would see that it WAS done politely, in my first response. YOU chose to create an argument where one didn’t exist. I stand by my conviction, that had the busdriver not been a moron, we wouldn’t be discussing this now. You can read into that whatever you choose to. Apparently, that is EXACTLY what you are doing. Your choice. Not everyone agrees with you. Sorry about that.
Don’t you have anything better to do than argue repeatedly and rudely with kaya on her own blog?
Here in America the standard is supposed to be that I am free to do what ever I want so long as I don’t hurt anyone or get in the way of someone else’s freedom. To the extent that my freedom and someone else’s collides there needs to be a compromise.
In the case of public kink at some point it collides with other peoples need to believe of what they believe in order to maintain their identity, it also gets in the way of their freedom to raise their kids shielding them from realities that they don’t think their kids should be aware of.
The majority indicates where this line is by how the laws are written and how the police go about their job. I figure that I am free to publicly display kink up to the point that I will get in trouble if caught. My wife and I enjoy public kink, and we take it as close to the line as we dare. Out of self interest we go to great lengths to avoid being around kids, because the standards for the allowed show of kink are much lower with kids witnessing it. Kink in walmart or on a public bus is stupidity in action. Also, Kink that is “in your face” is stupid because people are much less willing to tolerate that than they are something that they were obviously not intended to see (for instance by chance coming up upon us when I have her naked or partly so and playing with her as apposed to me opening her up in front of somebody)
as for a leash, that is a pretty direct challenge to people’s need to believe that individuals need to be/are/should be free and also be self acting individuals. A person freely and willingly surrendering this freedom to another does not compute, and visualizing this with a leash is shoving peoples faces in something that they don’t want to deal with. Public leashing outside of maybe the hallway at the hotel in Vegas or at night out and about new Orleans is dumb.
If you are taking the steps necessary to ensure that those who might witness your public kink are adults, and somewhere where “shocking” behaviors wouldn’t be out of place (for instance, a dark corner of a bar as opposed to a secluded corner of the park. A bar should be guaranteed adults only but a park holds the possibility of kids wondering around), then I can take a more lenient stance about it. Responsibility goes a long way, you know?
To the extent that my freedom and someone else’s collides there needs to be a compromise.
I agree completely. But it seems to me that it’s leaning more and more away from public decency. Not just in fetish wear, but just standards of dress and behavior period.
I have a comment and a funny story:
Comment – she did say she was a pet, all be it a human pet … and the bus company does have a no pets rule ;-)
Funny Story – A lady dom I know from TES (in NY) told me about this cute guy she saw in the mall wearing a collar. She went up to him and asked: “Are you a slave or just a slave to fashion?” He was the later, unfortunately for her.
- Don
Ah! Good point!! I would have liked to see the reaction to the bus driver using that as the reason..lol. I bet she’d have dropped the pet charade right quick!
Slave to fashion. I’m going to remember that one. ;)
“Comment – she did say she was a pet, all be it a human pet … and the bus company does have a no pets rule”
This was my exact first reaction too!! ;-)
Everything seems to be a discrimination case now a days. And I mean, yes the bus driver was very rude. However, if she had simply taken the leash off… (Oh no! Not the leash for a moment!) .. and placed it safely away, and then was still refused access to the bus.. I could see the problem. But no. That didn’t happen. I would have still complained to the bus company, but I wouldn’t have made the scene and news these people did. Seriously, why is this making headline news? Aren’t there other things we can be focusing on, or is this a slow news time? After all, I see it as no different then if I were to go to an airport.. and go through airport security, and they asked me to remove my collar (which is an Eternity collar) I would comply. That wouldn’t be discrimination. That would be standard procedure.
In fact, when I went on a plane about 3 years ago, I had on a subtle leather collar with a single o-ring in the middle, connecting the two pieces of leather. They asked me to take it off before I stepped through the metal detector. Master was standing behind me, watching me leave… I complied and thanked them when I got to the other side and put my collar back on. Was that discrimination? No.
When I first read this I thought that the bus driver was extremely rude and deserved a complaint to his higher ups… but a news story? No. And I thought that the couple were morons for not simply stating that they would remove the leash and put it away for the duration of the bus ride. What is so hard about that? I would have been pissed off, yes.. but I would have done it.
Exactly. The bus driver was a bitch, no question there. But removing the leash would have been pretty freaking simple.
Kaya,
Another great post. I actually dealt with this issue in one of my stories. I’ve done a fair amount of research into BDSM for my writing (and enjoyment), though probably a lot less than I should, and I’ve noticed one thing. There may be lots of disagreeement on things like SSC, safewords, submissive vs slave, and the like; but there is one constant in every part of the scene, and that is CONSENT. Nothing happens to anyone in the lifestyle without consent. Some, such as yourself, may see consent as a one time deal while others (the safe word using people) see consent as an ongoing thing. But everyone sees it as rape, or worse, is their is no consent.
Why does anyone think that vanillas are any less entitled to that respect for their consent as those in the lifestyle. Keep in mind that viewing kink activities is a form of participation (I am really talking myself out of my vanilla status now). When participation is forced, that is just plain wrong. To take an example someone used earlier, gays achieved greater acceptence, in part, by making themslelves known to the public with rallies and marches. However, I am covinced that such acceptence would have come even sooner if those same functions had not flaunted their extreme activities. Floats with people blatantly simulating sex acts, let alone sex acts that many find disgusting, is not the way to make friends and influence people.
In the same way, if the fetish community wants greater acceptence, yes, it will have to make itslef known, but to throw behaviors into the faces of people who are sure to be disgusted with them is not the way to do it. I don’t know what the perfect solution is, if there is such a thing, but the fetish community will not gain respect by intentionally tripping people’s perv alarms.
As for the incident in the news, I haven’t read any articles about it, but regardless of whether the driver mentioned it up front or not, things like leashes, baby strollers and bikes are hazards that it is reasonable to insist be made safe on a bus. If they didn’t and someone got hurt, then there would be an even greater outcry and lawsuit. I’ll quit now and return you to your regularly scheduled blog. :)
Dave
viewing kink activities is a form of participation (I am really talking myself out of my vanilla status now). When participation is forced, that is just plain wrong.
That is precisely what I think too. The public should not be a forced participant. I dont think that people (some people) consider viewing, or sitting next to them on the bus, is forced participation though.
However, coming from a (corrupted) vanilla such as yourself, if YOU say that watching it feels like participating, how can anyone argue with that? They’d be telling you that you don’t feel what you feel. That’s preposterous.
Excellent post with many well stated points! It’s funny I first read the leash article the other day on digg and I really wanted to comment on our blog about it but I started having so many mixed feelings regarding the situation I was having a hard time getting my thoughts to flow. As far as this particular situation I think you gave much validity in the end of your post stating how if she is not barking like a dog or on all fours then what is the big deal about removing the leash in public?
I respect everyone’s opinions and their individual kinks and fantasies. We all have them and only a handful of us have the courage to act upon them in order to come to terms with what we truly want. As far as public display of kinks- my motto is basically that I could not do anything in public that I would not want my children to see from someone else if they were out in public. What me and Master Homis do stays in our playroom (basement), bedroom, and is shared at our discretion on our website. We would never flaunt our lifestyle publicly.
Another point I think of is that we have recent read up on some interesting viewpoints in regards to our lifestyle and remaining a bit inconspicuous in public while still applying “rules” for the lifestyle on Leather and Roses . For example Master holding out his hand for me in public if I am going to far away from him. This would be seen as a simple sign of affection but I know what it stands for beyond that. Surely, there are similar means for other lifestyles to continue to work on their choice ways in public without being offensive or blatant.
I really enjoy your site- it is one of my favorites; particularly for the fact that you have varied but still applicable content… :)
~Viemoira
We have some of the same gestures and looks that work well for us in public. Things that no one would think twice about if they saw it. The meaning of these actions is known only to us. What we don’t need is for anyone else to know because we don’t need that outside validation.
I have to wonder if those of us with children are the ones who are more conservative with our styles. It’s just a thought, but maybe those who don’t have kids and who are more accustomed to being fully open with things at home have a harder time reigning it in when out in public. They may see public decency as an imposition, where for people with kids, it’s the norm for us at home and out in public. I know that we have the same gestures and secret looks in the living room over the kids’ heads as we do in Wal-mart.
*shrug* Just a thought.
Interesting post Kaya.
I agree with you though. PDK is a fine line. I am all for people being open minded and believing in whatever they may. But just as I wouldn’t want a Burquha imposed on me…I wouldn’t want that imposed on me either.
I’m an advocate of do what you want with yourself, to yourself and to “CONSENTING OTHERS” but don’t have any consequences of that spill or be imposed onto any other persons life that may not want any part of it. I think it’s called respect for others choices, preferences and boundaries/limits.
If someone wants to sit naked on a cactus for the hell of it…fine by me, but don’t force me to watch. I don’t find pleasure in that.
I do believe that things like that should be left for the home, fetish parties, dungeons and photoshoots. Not in public! There’s more sublte ways to play kink in public without offending the general public.
I honestly think these kids were going for the shock value. Tshey wanted to make a statement and they obviously did. But there’s a line between asserting your opinions/preferences, voicing your concerns and trying to open people’s mind and feeling entitled to impose such opinions/preferences on others…I find that bloody disrespectful and it will not help open anyone’s minds to anything. If anything…it will re-inforce the stereotype and negative notion that we’re ingrate degenerates with no respect for human beings.
Yes it’s sad that we live in a narrow minded world that can’t be accepting of those things. But it’s reality and we cannot force the change. As much as I can’t be forced into wearing a Burquha, I cannot force others to be ok with me being treated as a dog in public.