Freedom of speech or offensive?

[Bete Noire]

Originally Posted by LiUsAiDh

With the grieving man scenario, surely neither is 'wrong' per se if he gets upset. Just in his state of upset, he can't blame the dressed up person.

Actually I agree with this. In all honesty I'm surprised I could type straight last night. I was very much on the wrong side of sobriety.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by Bete Noire

Actually I agree with this. In all honesty I'm surprised I could type straight last night. I was very much on the wrong side of sobriety.

If the grieving man tries to deny a person a public service because he doesn't like his clothes, he is definitely in the wrong. Fuck catering for him because he's lost someone or is mentally fragile, he's being a massive floppy cock.

[Apathy's_Child]

Originally Posted by WizardElement5

Is it offensive?

Some people may well be offended because they misinterpret the couples sexually dominant/submissive roles as a more general view about the status of women in society. Of course most people are not familiar with SM realationships as SMers are both a minority sexuality and a sexuality that is still widely discriminated against in most societies. That someone can be sexually submissive whilst maintaining equal status with their partner and in so doing, continue to enjoy their full human rights, is beyond the comprehension of many people. However, that is indeed the position of consenual SM relationships.

While there are those who will be offended because of their lack of understanding at what they see, there will be others, namely SMers themselves, who may well be uplifted by the expression of their own truth within a society that very largely frowns upon and discriminates against their freedom of expression.

It is only by more people being open and out about their sexuality and brave enough to be themselves in a society that is mostly hostile towards them, that the level of understanding and tolerance can be increased to a point that minorities no longer feel threatened and repressed within their own society. For those who wish for a more liberal and friendlier world to live in, such expressions of truth can only be a good thing.

YES! Thank you. My gf and I aren't 24/7, but she has friends who make her feel like a traitor to feminism just because she's submissive in bed. (And she totally breaks my balls out of bed, so it's doubly nonsensical.)

[Tam Li Hua]

In regards to the OP, I don't find it all that shocking. I think folks over-react to such things, and need to realize that not everyone is into exactly the same things.

Geez, it's not like he's whipping her in public or something. :P

[Tam Li Hua]

Sir_Vex: Are you equally offended by women going around in little more than bras and panties in public during the summer? Are you offended by bikinis? What about magazines like Cosmo that freely advertise, on the front pages where kids can see, how a woman can 'please' her man?

This isn't them having D/s sex in public; this is simply an expression of their relationship. :/ I don't see this as any worse than wearing a wedding ring, or a couple...even a same-sex couple....holding hands, or any other outward expression of faithfulness.

As for the bus driver, I think some folks here need to go back and read the news story. The couple was taking the leed off before getting on the bus. Not only that, but isn't the Goth lifestyle all about dressing how you want, and who gives a flying rat's ass about what the Mundanes think?

Seriously, this is completely ridiculous. >_< Of all the things to be offended about, this should be somewhere down at the bottom, right next to Victoria's Secret stores and late-night ads for penis enlargement pills. -_-;;;;

[Sir_Vex]

Originally Posted by WizardElement5

Is it offensive?

Some people may well be offended because they misinterpret the couples sexually dominant/submissive roles as a more general view about the status of women in society. Of course most people are not familiar with SM realationships as SMers are both a minority sexuality and a sexuality that is still widely discriminated against in most societies. That someone can be sexually submissive whilst maintaining equal status with their partner and in so doing, continue to enjoy their full human rights, is beyond the comprehension of many people. However, that is indeed the position of consenual SM relationships.

While there are those who will be offended because of their lack of understanding at what they see, there will be others, namely SMers themselves, who may well be uplifted by the expression of their own truth within a society that very largely frowns upon and discriminates against their freedom of expression.

It is only by more people being open and out about their sexuality and brave enough to be themselves in a society that is mostly hostile towards them, that the level of understanding and tolerance can be increased to a point that minorities no longer feel threatened and repressed within their own society. For those who wish for a more liberal and friendlier world to live in, such expressions of truth can only be a good thing.

This isn't "discrimination" or "misunderstanding." This is, "sexual acts should remain behind closed doors." Like I've been saying, if a couple wants to engage in this behavior, there is nothing wrong with that, as long as it's in an appropriate place. A bus is not one of these places.

I'm certainly open to the idea of a more liberal and friendly world, but one where acts such as this remain where they belong.

Originally Posted by Tam Li Hua

Sir_Vex: Are you equally offended by women going around in little more than bras and panties in public during the summer? Are you offended by bikinis? What about magazines like Cosmo that freely advertise, on the front pages where kids can see, how a woman can 'please' her man?

I am not offended by nudity, I feel that nudity is a natural state that should be embraced. If men can remove their shirts, so should women, and in time I hope that we have a much more open mind to the human body and find it beautiful rather than something that should be hidden and sexual every time it's shown.

I don't think that Cosmo should be posting that on the front of their magazines. It is understood at this point what type of article that Cosmo publishes.

[WizardElement5]

Originally Posted by Sir_Vex

This isn't "discrimination" or "misunderstanding." This is, "sexual acts should remain behind closed doors." Like I've been saying, if a couple wants to engage in this behavior, there is nothing wrong with that, as long as it's in an appropriate place. A bus is not one of these places.

I'm certainly open to the idea of a more liberal and friendly world, but one where acts such as this remain where they belong.



I am not offended by nudity, I feel that nudity is a natural state that should be embraced. If men can remove their shirts, so should women, and in time I hope that we have a much more open mind to the human body and find it beautiful rather than something that should be hidden and sexual every time it's shown.

I don't think that Cosmo should be posting that on the front of their magazines. It is understood at this point what type of article that Cosmo publishes.

Hi Sir Vex, it’s good to hear that you are “open to the idea of a more liberal and friendly world.” Perhaps now is the time to go beyond the idea and embrace the reality. It is simply no good to claim support for liberality, whilst supporting actions that directly oppose it.

You wish to embrace nudity, well that’s fine, as nudity and semi-nudity, (eg, a low cut, revealing top), are certainly expressions of a very many people’s sexuality and is a healthy and natural state for them to be in. But there are those who share the society in which you live who have different sexualities and different truths. For a certain woman, the wearing of a collar and lead is no more, nor no less an expression of her sexual self, than the wearing of a low cut top is for another. For that woman, the wearing of a collar and lead is her “natural and healthy state” to be in. To prevent her from wearing them is as cruel and unjust as it would be to prevent the other from wearing a low cut top. It certainly would be “discrimination.” It is not possible to divorce people from their sexual selves and it is being extremely brutal to try to do so.

Being “open to a more liberal and friendly world” means giving support to those whose truth is different from your own – dealing equally with both the collar and lead and the low cut top. To support and promote only that expression which mirrors your own desires and tastes, because they somehow represent “beauty and the natural way” whilst other truths are something unworthy that must be hidden away, is an easy refuge for the sexual majority, but a kind of totalitarianism that results in a very great deal of suffering for minorities within our society and in the end, to its eventual breakdown.

Only you can decide what sort of person you wish to be, but all those who fear and suffer repression must hope that your claim for “a more liberal and friendly world” does not ring hollow.

[Bete Noire]

Originally Posted by Sir_Vex

I'm certainly open to the idea of a more liberal and friendly world, but one where acts such as this remain where they belong.

Jeez they're hardly fucking in public. If she's submissive to her partner it doesn't matter if they show it. To be honest the idea of being offended by a chain round someones neck is seeming increasingly stupid. And it wasn't looking so clever to begin with.

[HumanePain]

Middle class morality. Hmph.

[Sir_Vex]

Originally Posted by WizardElement5

You wish to embrace nudity, well that’s fine, as nudity and semi-nudity, (eg, a low cut, revealing top), are certainly expressions of a very many people’s sexuality and is a healthy and natural state for them to be in.

You missed the point where I said that I'd like to see the human body as seen in a way that is not sexual?

Truthfully, I don't believe that they should have been kicked off the bus. I don't think that it's a deal worth making this big. I was convinced at nearly the beginning of this thread that they should have been allowed on, I just wanted to see what some people's reaction would be if I were to fight for them to have not been allowed on the bus or in public like that.

If they had been wearing a full latex body suit and had a ball gag, then I'd be staunchly opposed. For what they were doing though I think it's perfectly acceptable, however, it's a fashion statement that I personally find distasteful. Something akin to a personal "white after labor day," except it's not OK any time of the year.

I also rethought my Cosmo comment, and that was a completely stupid answer to a legitimate question. Cosmo has the same rights as any other magazine to display on their covers what they'd like. While I personally think it's a bit stupid, (couples should just be open with one another) they have the same rights as anyone else, and I support that.