quote:


So......... anyone else have some interesting humiliation ideas they want to share?

quote:

some subs/slaves may enjoy having such displays of humiliation.

quote:

"To learn the art of submission a slave must first give up the desires that drew him to submission in the first place." Mistress Jasmyn Jan 2005.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsSonnetMarwood

quote:


So......... anyone else have some interesting humiliation ideas they want to share?

"Good ideas" are relative.

I actually find that public humiliation that involves an audience of non-consenting vanillas (and who probably aren't even all adults) to be completely out of line, and part of what gives this lifestyle a bad name and perpetuates the idea that we are "freaks".

I'll agree with you- it's humiliation at a whole new level - and not a good one. Perhaps the difference is that with "clients" rather than a sub one is in a personal relationship with, being considerate of others is less of an issue than getting one's fee. That line is going to spark a lot of controversy but it needs to be said. It's a shame because in general, I resepct prodommes.

quote:

some subs/slaves may enjoy having such displays of humiliation.

Right. But what about the vanilla non-consenting audience?

quote:

Remember, the pro domme doing that lives in New York City where some of her techniques will not have the same public shock value it would if performed in rural America.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Boondoggle
That said, I still think there are still times when legal, kinky, public activities are inapropriate. A human pony parade at 3pm next to an elementry school as kids are released from school, for (a rather extreme) example, is inapropriate. Nothing I've seen posted in this thread, however, approaches that.

quote:

"To learn the art of submission a slave must first give up the desires that drew him to submission in the first place." Mistress Jasmyn Jan 2005.

quote:

"To learn the art of submission a slave must first give up the desires that drew him to submission in the first place." Mistress Jasmyn Jan 2005.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jasmyn

Amen to that...

I fear soon the kink scene will be telling me I can't wear high heels and pvc in public for fear people will recognise it as the trappings of a fem dom and by viewing said attire will be non-consensually involved in my kink... if my partner wears a pink floral shirt accompanying myself on a date, is that public humiliation or his personal clothing choice? Is it anyone's business but ours?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Boondoggle

To me, refraining from a legal activity in a legal place because you just might offend someone is foolish. Sure, someone might be made uncomfortable when they weren't expecting it. Frankly, too bad, that's life. I get upset and uncomfortable every time I hear that bafoon holding the office of the preseidency talk; I'm not comfortable driving in rush hour traffic; I absolutely hate when cars seem to blatantly ignore me as I bike to work. These aren't anyone elses problems but mine.

To continue with the shoe store example, if a child sees a woman trampling a man in the store, they are seeing just that, nothing more. Seeing this action isn't going to scar them. Most likely, they will just curiously ask their parent what those people are doing. While the parent may very well know that there is something underlying the strange display, it is because he has had some exposure to that dynamic before and, hopefully, has the maturity to tell his child they are just playing a game or something. Had the child seen two rabbits f*cking in the park outside, she would probably ask her daddy a similar question, and, again, he will hopefully have the maturity to respond appropriately for a young child.

No one can hope to always protect themselves and their kids from uncomfortable or unplesant events. Life is always going to challenge peoples preconcieved notions and expectations whether we (as perverts) 'play' in public or not. I think this is a very good thing. I think everyone needs to be challeneged more, especially socially.

That said, I still think there are still times when legal, kinky, public activities are inapropriate. A human pony parade at 3pm next to an elementry school as kids are released from school, for (a rather extreme) example, is inapropriate. Nothing I've seen posted in this thread, however, approaches that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Boondoggle

I think our difference in opinion lies in the fact that you consider the motivation behind the act relevent, whereas I don't. I don't think of this kind of humiliation play as rude or selfish because I don't view it in the context of a sexual relationship, rather, I take the action simply at face value and compare it to accepted societal standards. Whether anyone is getting their rocks off or not is a moot point, IMO.

Going back to the trampling example, a woman walking on a man in a shoe store is weird, very weird, even, but when simply taken at face value and not trying to imply or extrapolate some sort of relationship, a woman walking on a man isn't rude or selfish, just unusual.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Boondoggle

I think our difference in opinion lies in the fact that you consider the motivation behind the act relevent, whereas I don't. I don't think of this kind of humiliation play as rude or selfish because I don't view it in the context of a sexual relationship, rather, I take the action simply at face value and compare it to accepted societal standards. Whether anyone is getting their rocks off or not is a moot point, IMO.

Going back to the trampling example, a woman walking on a man in a shoe store is weird, very weird, even, but when simply taken at face value and not trying to imply or extrapolate some sort of relationship, a woman walking on a man isn't rude or selfish, just unusual.

quote:

ORIGINAL: perverseangelic

To me, that's different than walking on someone in a shoe store. ~shrug~ Maybe it's a fine line, but for me, dressing as one chooses within the decency laws doesn't really bother me, but engaging in -overtly- sexual or "scene related" behavior does.

For example, I have no problem with people in clothing or adorment or makeup that isn't stereotypically associated with their gender. Nor with casual displays of affection between partners of any gender and number. (Well, to be more correct, I am an active advocate of all sexual orientations and configurations getting the same priviledges heterosexual couples have.) I -do- have a problem with someone urinating in their pants in public (intentionally) or, hell, giving one's partner a blowjob on a public bus. Kink or no kink I prefer overt sexual acts stay in venues that are more appropriate. (Including clubs and screenings of the ROcky Horror Picture Show)

I dont' know that I could codify it into a set of rules that work for me, but there's a difference, for me, between those sets of behaviors.

quote:

"To learn the art of submission a slave must first give up the desires that drew him to submission in the first place." Mistress Jasmyn Jan 2005.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jasmyn

quote:

ORIGINAL: Boondoggle

I think our difference in opinion lies in the fact that you consider the motivation behind the act relevent, whereas I don't. I don't think of this kind of humiliation play as rude or selfish because I don't view it in the context of a sexual relationship, rather, I take the action simply at face value and compare it to accepted societal standards. Whether anyone is getting their rocks off or not is a moot point, IMO.

Going back to the trampling example, a woman walking on a man in a shoe store is weird, very weird, even, but when simply taken at face value and not trying to imply or extrapolate some sort of relationship, a woman walking on a man isn't rude or selfish, just unusual.

Well said Boondoggle.

In the scenario I gave of my partner wearing a pink shirt. Now that could simply be his own fashion sense...or it could be because I insisted he wear it because I know he considers himself a masculine man and wouldn't dare wear pink of his own accord....hence it's humiliating for him. We go out in public, him in pink, wahlah 'public humiliation'...to anyone else...it's a man wearing pink.

quote:

ORIGINAL: perverseangelic

To me, that's different than walking on someone in a shoe store. ~shrug~ Maybe it's a fine line, but for me, dressing as one chooses within the decency laws doesn't really bother me, but engaging in -overtly- sexual or "scene related" behavior does.

For example, I have no problem with people in clothing or adorment or makeup that isn't stereotypically associated with their gender. Nor with casual displays of affection between partners of any gender and number. (Well, to be more correct, I am an active advocate of all sexual orientations and configurations getting the same priviledges heterosexual couples have.) I -do- have a problem with someone urinating in their pants in public (intentionally) or, hell, giving one's partner a blowjob on a public bus. Kink or no kink I prefer overt sexual acts stay in venues that are more appropriate. (Including clubs and screenings of the ROcky Horror Picture Show)

I dont' know that I could codify it into a set of rules that work for me, but there's a difference, for me, between those sets of behaviors.

And above I posted that for public humiliation I draw the line at sex, nudism/exhibitionism, and masturbation. Everything listed in my ideas for public humiliation can be done, and have been done under my guidance, and not caused offence.

A sub, a sissy, wishing to whisk me away for a night was given three lists of items he needed to get. He had instructions to go to three different supermarkets and for at least one item on each list he had to ask for help to find them. Your usual array of feminine products, condoms, phallic vegetables and lube included. As far as anyone knew he was a man in a supermarket...not much of a rarity these days...buying feminine hygenie products...even less of a rarity these days. The fact he was wearing diapers underneath his jeans...interesting... but not anything that couldn't be explained away as 'inconteninence' or 'recovering from surgery' if anyone was to ask.

Also, in everyone's haste to disparage an accomplished professional's techniques...let's not forget we weren't there in the shoe store with her...we don't know that she didn't ascertain the environment before embarking on a mini-shoe scene in a shoe store...we don't know if she had the store owner's full permission to do so.

I've often taken guys lingerie shopping...a quick discussion with the manager or owner if this guy could try on some outfits seems to suffice. I remember one day, out of 12 shops we went to only one said no they wouldn't feel comfortable if he did so....the rest seemed to fall over themselves in their haste to be of assistance.

Boondoggle is right, looking at the motivation behind the act from your own personal experiences is in part the problem. Scene related or not, is only a person's interpretation of what they themselves are seeing that causes them offense.

quote:

Going back to the trampling example, a woman walking on a man in a shoe store is weird, very weird, even, but when simply taken at face value and not trying to imply or extrapolate some sort of relationship, a woman walking on a man isn't rude or selfish, just unusual.