Informed Consent

News blog

YKIOK: Your Kink Is OK (22 Feb)
"No place in our society": Paul Goggins has died (8 Jan)
Protest against "Rape" Porn censorship law, London, 16 Dec '13 (21 Nov)
Submissive But Not Your Submissive (16 Sep)
More calls to criminalise possession of "rape" pornography (7 Jun)
more posts...

IC group on FetLife
- IC feed on FL
- UK events list

IC on Twitter

IC on Facebook

BDSM Rights
- Campaigns
- Organisations
- Other groups
- Documents

BDSM Flag
- Other symbols

Submissive But Not Your Submissive

About IC

© Informed Consent
1997-2014

Pictures on IC.

Posted by LittleMissLeather on Mon 4 Jan 2010 to the BDSM Activism web board

Sorry folks have been more than a little shocked at some pictures I have seen on here today with the present climate I am to be honest surprised they have been allowed. Do not get me wrong anyone that knows me well ,will know I need and love extreme but I feel any pictures of such activities should be kept private I feel that allowing pictures of extreme marking and blood play, which any John Doe can see on here will do us kinksters no good whatsoever.....ok rant over.

Subspace is my perfect vacation from busy mind...blessed be the Dominant who can stamp my ticket there......Elizabeth.

Reply by Miss_Despotic on Mon 4 Jan 2010

If they're legal and everyone in them has consented, what's the issue?

Reply by Thought_Policeman on Mon 4 Jan 2010

Miss_Despotic wrote:
If they're legal and everyone in them has consented, what's the issue?

The children! Damn you, why will you not think of them? :(

Reply by LittleMissLeather on Mon 4 Jan 2010

Miss_Despotic wrote:
If they're legal and everyone in them has consented, what's the issue?

Simply airing my opinion nothing more nothing less. Not questioning the legalities.

Subspace is my perfect vacation from busy mind...blessed be the Dominant who can stamp my ticket there......Elizabeth.

Reply by rodm99 on Mon 4 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
Miss_Despotic wrote:
If they're legal and everyone in them has consented, what's the issue?

Simply airing my opinion nothing more nothing less. Not questioning the legalities.

It might help if you spelled out clearly what your issues are? IC's guidelines are already considerably stricter than those on most modelling/photographic websites.

'Twosies beats onesies, but nothing beats three...'

Reply by CookieMonster on Mon 4 Jan 2010

Thought_Policeman wrote:
Miss_Despotic wrote:
If they're legal and everyone in them has consented, what's the issue?

The children! Damn you, why will you not think of them? :(

I dont get this cliche, seems a bit reckless. Care to enlighten me?

Veritatis simplex oratio est. Seneca, Roman Statesman Ca. 65 A.D. The language of truth is simple.

Reply by CookieMonster on Mon 4 Jan 2010

CookieMonster wrote:
Thought_Policeman wrote:
Miss_Despotic wrote:
If they're legal and everyone in them has consented, what's the issue?

The children! Damn you, why will you not think of them? :(

I dont get this cliche, seems a bit reckless. Care to enlighten me?

Ah found it. Used to critique emotional arguments and logical fallicies that envolve referencing children when irrelevant.

Fair enough up to a point, and that point is where children are involved which makes it look like supporting child abuse. Or like the OP, where the reference wasn't made and is just a negative projection and lack of thinking on your part.

An example of the former. http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/

"5. Kyle and Jackie O. Kyle Sandilands

Kyle Sandilands

The Kylie and Jackie O Show was suspended after airing a segment in which a 14-year-old girl was strapped to a lie detector and questioned by her mother, Sandilands and Jackie O about her past experiences with sex and drugs — A recipe for disaster with the child admitting she was raped at the age of 12. There was a national outcry and legitimate concerns about the treatment (or exploitation) of children for entertainment were raised. However, many of the attacks focused more on silencing Sandilands and campaigning to remove him from the airwaves."

Number 16 as well could be seen as indifference at least to child abuse.

I would suggest that on a BDSM website cliches that relate to children should be avoided especially when they have the potential to backfire spectacularly.

Veritatis simplex oratio est. Seneca, Roman Statesman Ca. 65 A.D. The language of truth is simple.

Reply by Beau_Tox on Mon 4 Jan 2010

I think it was just meant to be a Daily Mail-style outcry of shock at the horrors of seeing a bruised bottom.

I believe that's what's known as "making a funny".

I believe what you've done is what's called "failing to have s ense of humour and making passive aggressive emotionally overcharged rant".

* * *

.

"There is nothing more valuable than this day."

Reply by LittleMissLeather on Mon 4 Jan 2010

rodm99 wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Miss_Despotic wrote:
If they're legal and everyone in them has consented, what's the issue?

Simply airing my opinion nothing more nothing less. Not questioning the legalities.

It might help if you spelled out clearly what your issues are? IC's guidelines are already considerably stricter than those on most modelling/photographic websites.

I thought I did ? I will repeat. My issues are that some pics I saw on here recently inclding markings from play and blood in pictures will not do any of us as kiknksters any good as anyone can view them on the site and mis-interprate them. The more I read about laws etc the more I fear the whole scene being pushed back under-ground. Hence the above. But hey maybe I am just old and past it eh ? what do I know ?

Subspace is my perfect vacation from busy mind...blessed be the Dominant who can stamp my ticket there......Elizabeth.

Reply by hollythedolly on Mon 4 Jan 2010

Maybe these people are making a stand for what they believe in

Have you thought that people may look at some of your pictures and get offended.

I also think the use of children's cartoon characters can be distasteful if we are thinking of mere mortal's looking at this website but i would never censor people's pictures.

Reply by PrinceCaspian on Mon 4 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
the more I fear the whole scene being pushed back under-ground.

Isn't that what you are advocating in suggesting that people stop displaying legal photos of legal and consensual activities on an adults only website?

And last night, when my hands were choking you. Last night, when the room and your mood was dipping And last night, when the ropes were pulling you in…. You said, “Hey, how could you love me this way?”

Rilo Kiley

Reply by Degenerate on Mon 4 Jan 2010

People are trying to keep out images which actually are illegal but it's quite hard to tell what's illegal or not.

If random non BDSM people visit here and find the pictures unsavoury.. they only really have their own curiosity to blame - as you need to make some effort browsing photos to find much of really shocking nature. IC is clearly labelled and aimed at adults consensually viewing. It would be pretty strange to find a BDSM website without BDSM images on it..

Re what is allowed, this is the tamest site i am aware of partly because it is trying to keep within UK law, as it is UK based (I like that!)

The key as others have said is Informed Consent..I don't think we should have to scuttle under a rock because a few people are out to get us - then we're just repressing ourselves on their behalf.

De

Sign up to CAAN's statement www.caan.org.uk

Spanner Trust SM campaign - can you join in? http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/239250/0

Reply by Hypnotist on Mon 4 Jan 2010

I saw a picture on here the other day of a right ol' minger. I dunno, but I reckon she might have had a cock.

Proper put me off my cornflakes, it did.

Reply by rodm99 on Mon 4 Jan 2010

I'm still confused, and I wonder how familiar you are with the law in this area?

Since IC recruited its membership to help rate pictures I don't think I've seen anything on here that seems to come close to being illegal. And I simply don't accept that there's anything to be gained from our collectively engaging in prior restraint by choosing not to upload pictures in case Daily Mail readers don't like them.

I really don't think there's an issue here. Why should we, or anyone else, in any area of activity, choose to limit ourselves more tightly than the law requires?

slave_elizabeth wrote:
rodm99 wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Miss_Despotic wrote:
If they're legal and everyone in them has consented, what's the issue?

Simply airing my opinion nothing more nothing less. Not questioning the legalities.

It might help if you spelled out clearly what your issues are? IC's guidelines are already considerably stricter than those on most modelling/photographic websites.

I thought I did ? I will repeat. My issues are that some pics I saw on here recently inclding markings from play and blood in pictures will not do any of us as kiknksters any good as anyone can view them on the site and mis-interprate them. The more I read about laws etc the more I fear the whole scene being pushed back under-ground. Hence the above. But hey maybe I am just old and past it eh ? what do I know ?

'Twosies beats onesies, but nothing beats three...'

Reply by spankAlicious on Mon 4 Jan 2010

When it consensual or no risks to peoples health personally I believe its about opinions each to their own. There is nothing dangerous or illegal about it and nothing to say we don't like what we see. If it was me and I was shocked and worried I think my main concern would be maybe this is the wrong place to be looking for what I need. This is not an extreme site but there are plenty of places out there and again nothing wrong with them, I don't see any problems or factors of negativity not as much as seeing a woman having her nipples clamped to having her bottom cained. its all the same BDSM activity on a BDSM website.

I have pictures on face book that my friends and family think are risky and dislike, nothing bad about them just a little too much thigh or a flash of chest. I have pictures on here I would never in a million years share with them on there. This is a site of people in the BDSM community what's one persons extreme is another's usual. It's the same with googling a picture google the word Dick and what do You get???

When there is a time and I place I personally feel this is it, Its not face book and its not a social dating site it's a BDSM community with BDSM activates. The picture rules are strict and well monitored I myself believe its again another from of nanny state. My personal answer, If You don't like it don't look.

x X x

Life is for living why wait for the storm to ride out when you can learn to dance in the rain!!!

Reply by ClassAct2005 on Mon 4 Jan 2010

I wouldn't want censorship at all, not that I like looking at any extreme images. A few choice marks of a whip is sexy for me. Severe beating looks dreadful and I would always look away but not stop others displaying that, just as I cannot stand the penis pictures on alt but wouldn't stop someone using that image if he thinks it will get him anywhere.

This is a very important topic. When a minority gives in to a majority view and everyone becomes like clones that's a very sad day and very wrong. I want people to be free to and not just be free to do it too, to show images I don't like, even pictures of women over 13 stone and men with a beer gut!

Reply by rodm99 on Mon 4 Jan 2010

ClassAct2005 wrote:
I wouldn't want censorship at all, not that I like looking at any extreme images. A few choice marks of a whip is sexy for me. Severe beating looks dreadful and I would always look away but not stop others displaying that, just as I cannot stand the penis pictures on alt but wouldn't stop someone using that image if he thinks it will get him anywhere.

This is a very important topic. When a minority gives in to a majority view and everyone becomes like clones that's a very sad day and very wrong. I want people to be free to and not just be free to do it too, to show images I don't like, even pictures of women over 13 stone and men with a beer gut!

Can't argue with any of that. :)

'Twosies beats onesies, but nothing beats three...'

Reply by Beau_Tox on Mon 4 Jan 2010

Well, I'm kind of with the OP on some of this...

I don't know how seriously a pic of a spanked botty needs to be taken. And it's arguable what is a "transient and trifling injury" - some people come up a deep purple from a minor slap but it disappears within an hour. That's just skin colouration. Cannot display picture!

But some pictures do cause me issues. Me, I don't like the sight of blood. A little bit of potentially staged blood, like this seems to me to be ok:

But the a picture like this is certainly pushing it a bit:

Cannot display picture!

To each their own... I'm just saying I can see the point OP is making.

* * *

.

"There is nothing more valuable than this day."

Reply by Mimi_69 on Mon 4 Jan 2010

I will say i spent a couple of hours rating photos, gawd! how many dick, pussy, anal shots did i see?! fuckloads.

Maybe i'm nieve, but i have never seen a fisting shot. I worked in a porn shop for over a year, wow. i actually was shocked. Felt rather relived i still knew what disgust was!

bite me... please?

Reply by PrinceCaspian on Mon 4 Jan 2010

Professor_Tim wrote:
Well, I'm kind of with the OP on some of this...

I don't know how seriously a pic of a spanked botty needs to be taken. And it's arguable what is a "transient and trifling injury" - some people come up a deep purple from a minor slap but it disappears within an hour. That's just skin colouration. Cannot display picture!

But some pictures do cause me issues. Me, I don't like the sight of blood. A little bit of potentially staged blood, like this seems to me to be ok:

But the a picture like this is certainly pushing it a bit:

Cannot display picture!

To each their own... I'm just saying I can see the point OP is making.

There are plenty of things people take photos of on here I'd rather not see ;)

However I don't for a second think that means I should tell them not to put them up.

Contrastingly I think one of the photos you posted there is absolutely beautiful.

And last night, when my hands were choking you. Last night, when the room and your mood was dipping And last night, when the ropes were pulling you in…. You said, “Hey, how could you love me this way?”

Rilo Kiley

Reply by kweilo on Mon 4 Jan 2010

Professor_Tim wrote:
Well, I'm kind of with the OP on some of this...

I don't know how seriously a pic of a spanked botty needs to be taken. And it's arguable what is a "transient and trifling injury" - some people come up a deep purple from a minor slap but it disappears within an hour. That's just skin colouration. Cannot display picture!

But some pictures do cause me issues. Me, I don't like the sight of blood. A little bit of potentially staged blood, like this seems to me to be ok:

But the a picture like this is certainly pushing it a bit:

Cannot display picture!

To each their own... I'm just saying I can see the point OP is making.

Visit www.bme.com and you'll find plenty worse than that.

In comparison to BME, the pictures you'll find on here are tame.

Bit of a non-issue, IMHO.

Reply by switch_bitch on Mon 4 Jan 2010

ClassAct2005 wrote:
I wouldn't want censorship at all, not that I like looking at any extreme images. A few choice marks of a whip is sexy for me. Severe beating looks dreadful and I would always look away but not stop others displaying that, just as I cannot stand the penis pictures on alt but wouldn't stop someone using that image if he thinks it will get him anywhere.

This is a very important topic. When a minority gives in to a majority view and everyone becomes like clones that's a very sad day and very wrong. I want people to be free to and not just be free to do it too, to show images I don't like, even pictures of women over 13 stone and men with a beer gut!

Strange, i find you rather pathetic, and bit of a sad case, yet you still amuse me, obviously you are looking for some kind of backlash, and attention, with your little (or maybe that should be BIG,LARGE,FAT) digs at anyone who does not conform to your idea of perfection!!

Keep up the good work, i love a good giggle :-D

edited, as my nose was at the side on my smiley =-o can't have an imperfect smiley!

If you go through life with your head in the sand, all people will see, is an arse :-D ...........................................

It starts when you sink in his arms.....and ends with your arms in the sink!

Reply by Beau_Tox on Mon 4 Jan 2010

PrinceCaspian wrote:
Contrastingly I think one of the photos you posted there is absolutely beautiful.

I picked that one because it's likely to have the most polarised views. I doubt there's much middle ground on it.

As to whether pics like that will drive BDSM back underground is a different matter. I don't believe that is the case.

* * *

.

"There is nothing more valuable than this day."

Reply by hollythedolly on Mon 4 Jan 2010

PrinceCaspian wrote:
Professor_Tim wrote:
Well, I'm kind of with the OP on some of this...

I don't know how seriously a pic of a spanked botty needs to be taken. And it's arguable what is a "transient and trifling injury" - some people come up a deep purple from a minor slap but it disappears within an hour. That's just skin colouration. Cannot display picture!

But some pictures do cause me issues. Me, I don't like the sight of blood. A little bit of potentially staged blood, like this seems to me to be ok:

But the a picture like this is certainly pushing it a bit:

Cannot display picture!

To each their own... I'm just saying I can see the point OP is making.

There are plenty of things people take photos of on here I'd rather not see ;)

However I don't for a second think that means I should tell them not to put them up.

Contrastingly I think one of the photos you posted there is absolutely beautiful.

I think these pictures mean something to the people who posted them and good luck to them for expressing themselves in the way they have.

I am not keen on blood play, but i wouldn't expect those people to drool over the pictures that i like.

Reply by Jahc99 on Mon 4 Jan 2010

hollythedolly wrote:

I also think the use of children's cartoon characters can be distasteful if we are thinking of mere mortal's looking at this website but i would never censor people's pictures.

Clangers are cool tho!

Why poison your liver when I could eat it for you?

Reply by Numbers on Mon 4 Jan 2010

PrinceCaspian wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
the more I fear the whole scene being pushed back under-ground.

Isn't that what you are advocating in suggesting that people stop displaying legal photos of legal and consensual activities on an adults only website?

Really... Since the CIJA (2008) came in this site has been very careful to make sure nothing (potentially) illegal remains. While I understand what you mean I think you're being a little over-sensitive TBH. I can assure you that a significant proportion of ICers (probably the majority) have no intention of ever going 'back underground', whatever might happen...

Degenerate wrote:

If random non BDSM people visit here and find the pictures unsavoury.. they only really have their own curiosity to blame - as you need to make some effort browsing photos to find much of really shocking nature. IC is clearly labelled and aimed at adults consensually viewing. It would be pretty strange to find a BDSM website without BDSM images on it..

That would be pretty strange... The fact that you can view IC as a guest is the reason I don't have any needle, cutting or facial pictures here myself but I think they should be here, otherwise we might as well be on poxy facebook!

:-$

"Life at its best is a creative synthesis of opposites in fruitful harmony" - Martin Luther King, Jr.

Reply by Mimi_69 on Mon 4 Jan 2010

Jahc99 wrote:
hollythedolly wrote:

I also think the use of children's cartoon characters can be distasteful if we are thinking of mere mortal's looking at this website but i would never censor people's pictures.

Clangers are cool tho!

i agree :D

bite me... please?

Reply by electronic_doll on Mon 4 Jan 2010

rodm99 wrote:
My issues are that some pics I saw on here recently inclding markings from play and blood in pictures will not do any of us as kiknksters any good as anyone can view them on the site and mis-interprate them.

I don't think that censoring legal, IC approved images of the things we do (do you have a link to any you are especially concerned about, I'm not 100% clear on the sort of image you mean) will have a good effect on either the community or on those same casual viewers.

There is a chance that those viewers will see those pics and just click away. No harm done. They might look at the profiles of the people in the pics, realise that these are activities that are pleasurable and consensual and change their minds.

Then there's us to think about. After all, surely this is a safeish space for us to talk about and share our interests, the more closed we become, the more underground, the more scared about sharing what we do with others outside the community, so people never get an insight and we remain strange weirdos to be feared and mistrusted.

Alternatively, they might see them and get turned on and come and join us...

Our hopes and expectations

Reply by CherryPip on Mon 4 Jan 2010

PrinceCaspian wrote:
Professor_Tim wrote:
Well, I'm kind of with the OP on some of this...

I don't know how seriously a pic of a spanked botty needs to be taken. And it's arguable what is a "transient and trifling injury" - some people come up a deep purple from a minor slap but it disappears within an hour. That's just skin colouration. Cannot display picture!

But some pictures do cause me issues. Me, I don't like the sight of blood. A little bit of potentially staged blood, like this seems to me to be ok:

But the a picture like this is certainly pushing it a bit:

Cannot display picture!

To each their own... I'm just saying I can see the point OP is making.

There are plenty of things people take photos of on here I'd rather not see ;)

However I don't for a second think that means I should tell them not to put them up.

Contrastingly I think one of the photos you posted there is absolutely beautiful.

I agree with this :)

Reply by Masters_Delight on Mon 4 Jan 2010

The report button is there for a reason...

I'm so fucking fabulous, i piss glitter. :-D

Reply by Cake_x on Mon 4 Jan 2010

Personally the most offensive thing I find in this picture is my horrific choice of underwear!

I can, however, understand why blood play and images like this are not to everyones 'taste' and i think those people are just as entitled to express that as I am to enjoy it.

I think this photograph of my particular experience is fairly tame in comparison to some of the photographs on here.

:-)

Anyone for Cake? ;)

Reply by mini_velvet on Mon 4 Jan 2010

<faints>

Reply by PrinceCaspian on Mon 4 Jan 2010

athena25 wrote:
rodm99 wrote:
My issues are that some pics I saw on here recently inclding markings from play and blood in pictures will not do any of us as kiknksters any good as anyone can view them on the site and mis-interprate them.

I don't think that censoring legal, IC approved images of the things we do (do you have a link to any you are especially concerned about, I'm not 100% clear on the sort of image you mean) will have a good effect on either the community or on those same casual viewers.

There is a chance that those viewers will see those pics and just click away. No harm done. They might look at the profiles of the people in the pics, realise that these are activities that are pleasurable and consensual and change their minds.

Then there's us to think about. After all, surely this is a safeish space for us to talk about and share our interests, the more closed we become, the more underground, the more scared about sharing what we do with others outside the community, so people never get an insight and we remain strange weirdos to be feared and mistrusted.

Alternatively, they might see them and get turned on and come and join us...

I just want to point out that rod did not say that, it was in fact the op's opinion which he himself was questioning.

And last night, when my hands were choking you. Last night, when the room and your mood was dipping And last night, when the ropes were pulling you in…. You said, “Hey, how could you love me this way?”

Rilo Kiley

Reply by CookieMonster on Mon 4 Jan 2010

Not sure what the aup says of hand about blood letting, ive reported pictures I thought were illeagal, its up to YSF to have the final say.

Not into the pictures shown but dont have a problem with em, just wonder what the rules are here.

Veritatis simplex oratio est. Seneca, Roman Statesman Ca. 65 A.D. The language of truth is simple.

Reply by Mischievous_Imp on Mon 4 Jan 2010

Mimi_69 wrote:
Maybe i'm nieve, but i have never seen a fisting shot. I worked in a porn shop for over a year, wow. i actually was shocked. Felt rather relived i still knew what disgust was!

I watch fisting porn sometimes. In fact, today was one of those times. I don't find it disgusting at all :-p

Now blood play *shudder* - definitely not my thing, but I know that lots of people like it.

I think we should just stick to the rules on photos, and live and let live with the rest - we can't all like the same things.

Reply by LittleMissLeather on Mon 4 Jan 2010

Just read the replies cheers folks will be back after dinner with some responses.

Subspace is my perfect vacation from busy mind...blessed be the Dominant who can stamp my ticket there......Elizabeth.

Reply by rodm99 on Mon 4 Jan 2010

PrinceCaspian wrote:
athena25 wrote:
rodm99 wrote:
My issues are that some pics I saw on here recently inclding markings from play and blood in pictures will not do any of us as kiknksters any good as anyone can view them on the site and mis-interprate them.

I don't think that censoring legal, IC approved images of the things we do (do you have a link to any you are especially concerned about, I'm not 100% clear on the sort of image you mean) will have a good effect on either the community or on those same casual viewers.

There is a chance that those viewers will see those pics and just click away. No harm done. They might look at the profiles of the people in the pics, realise that these are activities that are pleasurable and consensual and change their minds.

Then there's us to think about. After all, surely this is a safeish space for us to talk about and share our interests, the more closed we become, the more underground, the more scared about sharing what we do with others outside the community, so people never get an insight and we remain strange weirdos to be feared and mistrusted.

Alternatively, they might see them and get turned on and come and join us...

I just want to point out that rod did not say that, it was in fact the op's opinion which he himself was questioning.

Many thanks, Prince Caspian, for pointing this out.

'Twosies beats onesies, but nothing beats three...'

Reply by frenchie on Mon 4 Jan 2010

kweilo wrote:
Professor_Tim wrote:
Well, I'm kind of with the OP on some of this...

I don't know how seriously a pic of a spanked botty needs to be taken. And it's arguable what is a "transient and trifling injury" - some people come up a deep purple from a minor slap but it disappears within an hour. That's just skin colouration. Cannot display picture!

But some pictures do cause me issues. Me, I don't like the sight of blood. A little bit of potentially staged blood, like this seems to me to be ok:

But the a picture like this is certainly pushing it a bit:

Cannot display picture!

To each their own... I'm just saying I can see the point OP is making.

Visit www.bme.com and you'll find plenty worse than that.

In comparison to BME, the pictures you'll find on here are tame.

Bit of a non-issue, IMHO.

Awww don't say that, it's all BME crew that worked on that pic, the scarification that is: me and Lukas Zpira and Samppa Von Cyborg, check it out on BME ;)

french_slave_the_Crucified is MmeDeSade

Reply by kweilo on Mon 4 Jan 2010

frenchie wrote:
Awww don't say that, it's all BME crew that worked on that pic, the scarification that is: me and Lukas Zpira and Samppa Von Cyborg, check it out on BME ;)

Sorry frenchie, to clarify, by 'worse' I'm not suggesting that I personally find anything wrong with it.

But a wee bit of scarification vs the 'splitting penis down the middle' stuff are certainly worlds apart in terms of graphic intensity!

Reply by frenchie on Mon 4 Jan 2010

kweilo wrote:
frenchie wrote:
Awww don't say that, it's all BME crew that worked on that pic, the scarification that is: me and Lukas Zpira and Samppa Von Cyborg, check it out on BME ;)

Sorry frenchie, to clarify, by 'worse' I'm not suggesting that I personally find anything wrong with it.

But a wee bit of scarification vs the 'splitting penis down the middle' stuff are certainly worlds apart in terms of graphic intensity!

Ah maybe you are confused with the scale, the scarification runs along my whole thigh. And in fact a penis split in two would not hurt all that much and also it is a progressive work, you'd do a few centimetres at a time, let heal for a few months and start again, as is also often done with tongue splitting unlike what the majority of people might think...extreme body modifications do take time in doing. Now to come back to the thread, I am sorry (not, obviously) if I have offended any of you guys out there who do have a wish to perv and be unconventional...but maybe I should raise at least one point: extreme body hacking is amusingly enough less feared than the little kinky stuff some of you, some of us, are up to behind closed doors (or not, for that matter)...I had laughed quite a bit when at the second Hades at Mass, quite a few years ago, the Psycho Cyborgs had performed in the front of a crowd of old school bdsmers who always think they play hard and some of them had fainted and many were crying "shock, horror, damnation!" but did not lift an eye brow when later a woman was fisting up to the shoulder almost and with two arms a guy who were being so appropriately fucked that his stomach was under mental pressure and he had to spit constantly to get through it (or have ot got through him rather)...I suppose what shocks some does not shock others and my picture if it is bloody only shocks you because of that very reason: you see blood, you are not supposed to see blood, blood should be inside the body...but here I shall come back to what kweilo says and agree: "a wee bit of scarification" is not going to make you go blind...hopefully;)

french_slave_the_Crucified is MmeDeSade

Reply by Romolalalalalalala on Mon 4 Jan 2010

I think the OP is a classic case of someone universalising their own 'icks'. If a picture is within the AUP, nobody has any right to argue that it shouldn't be here, no matter how icky they find it personally.

It's only a weblog :-)

Reply by kweilo on Mon 4 Jan 2010

frenchie wrote:

Ah maybe you are confused with the scale, the scarification runs along my whole thigh. And in fact a penis split in two would not hurt all that much and also it is a progressive work, you'd do a few centimetres at a time, let heal for a few months and start again, as is also often done with tongue splitting unlike what the majority of people might think...extreme body modifications do take time in doing. Now to come back to the thread, I am sorry (not, obviously) if I have offended any of you guys out there who do have a wish to perv and be unconventional...but maybe I should raise at least one point: extreme body hacking is amusingly enough less feared than the little kinky stuff some of you, some of us, are up to behind closed doors (or not, for that matter)...I had laughed quite a bit when at the second Hades at Mass, quite a few years ago, the Psycho Cyborgs had performed in the front of a crowd of old school bdsmers who always think they play hard and some of them had fainted and many were crying "shock, horror, damnation!" but did not lift an eye brow when later a woman was fisting up to the shoulder almost and with two arms a guy who were being so appropriately fucked that his stomach was under mental pressure and he had to spit constantly to get through it (or have ot got through him rather)...I suppose what shocks some does not shock others and my picture if it is bloody only shocks you because of that very reason: you see blood, you are not supposed to see blood, blood should be inside the body...but here I shall come back to what kweilo says and agree: "a wee bit of scarification" is not going to make you go blind...hopefully;)

Whilst I've got no particular hankering to keep my red stuff anywhere other than inside me (says he, who is covered in unintentional scars from tens of reasonably serious mountain bike crashes...!), the aesthetics of it (scarification, blood, etc) are genuinely interesting.

But the penis splitting just squicks me out fullstop. But it isn't offensive either way.

Regardless of which, if everyone is having fun, and it is SSC (and legal, etc), then pictures of it being here are just fine.

Reply by Degenerate on Mon 4 Jan 2010

I think Frenchie's photo is beautiful. And it is not illegal. There are other photos I find distasteful here.. and I think people have the right and should keep the right to post them. IC has bent over as far as it reasonably can in accomodating the law. Whats extreme or not (illegal or otherwise) is very much a matter of opinion.

Sign up to CAAN's statement www.caan.org.uk

Spanner Trust SM campaign - can you join in? http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/239250/0

Reply by frenchie on Mon 4 Jan 2010

Degenerate wrote:
I think Frenchie's photo is beautiful. And it is not illegal. There are other photos I find distasteful here.. and I think people have the right and should keep the right to post them. IC has bent over as far as it reasonably can in accomodating the law. Whats extreme or not (illegal or otherwise) is very much a matter of opinion.

:):):) Thank you!

french_slave_the_Crucified is MmeDeSade

Reply by CookieMonster on Mon 4 Jan 2010

Maybe theres a happy medium?

Pictures on public display and pictures that appear once youve logged in? This suggestion is mainly for spin and PR purposes as a way of neutralising any public offence arguement.

At the other exstreme would be the in your face approach, maybe admin would restrict front page pics to bod mods in this state of the world?

Not bothered myself but thought I would throw in the idea.:)

Veritatis simplex oratio est. Seneca, Roman Statesman Ca. 65 A.D. The language of truth is simple.

Reply by misfit on Mon 4 Jan 2010

ClassAct2005 wrote:
I wouldn't want censorship at all, not that I like looking at any extreme images. A few choice marks of a whip is sexy for me. Severe beating looks dreadful and I would always look away but not stop others displaying that, just as I cannot stand the penis pictures on alt but wouldn't stop someone using that image if he thinks it will get him anywhere.

This is a very important topic. When a minority gives in to a majority view and everyone becomes like clones that's a very sad day and very wrong. I want people to be free to and not just be free to do it too, to show images I don't like, even pictures of women over 13 stone and men with a beer gut!

Strangely enough I agree with your first paragraph but then normality resumes in paragraph two sadly.

M

Space travels in my blood. And there ain't nothing I can do about it.

I know I'm being used, that's okay cause I like the abuse.

I can resist everything except temptation.

It's always funny until someone gets hurt and then it's just hilarious.

Cake or Death?

She'll tie a noose with your heartstrings

Reply by Admin on Mon 4 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
Sorry folks have been more than a little shocked at some pictures I have seen on here today with the present climate I am to be honest surprised they have been allowed.

You've got a picture of a (very nice) tattoo of the word "slave" on your body. Some people would be offended by that and it would make them more anti-BDSM.

IC's "editorial" policy is to do our best to comply with the law (eg no "extreme pornography" according to the CJIA) and our contractual obligations (eg no genital nudity.)

Regards,

Admin

Remember: it's only a website :)

Reply by emark on Mon 4 Jan 2010

It's an argument that occasionally pops up - "You shouldn't write/show such-and-such because it will give 'us' a bad name".

But there's never any evidence that this would be the case - anyone who is offended at such images may just as well be offended by all manner of images and threads on this site, whether it's about bloodplay, or other things like hardcore sex or 24/7 D/S.

Professor_Tim wrote:
To each their own...
Exactly - so if we removed every image that at least one person didn't like, there wouldn't be any images left.

What is the OP suggesting - how would we decide which images shouldn't be allowed? Or is it a more general post of "be careful what you post"?

Sign the Consenting Adult Action Network's statement

Reply by Jahc99 on Mon 4 Jan 2010

CookieMonster wrote:
Maybe theres a happy medium?

Pictures on public display and pictures that appear once youve logged in? This suggestion is mainly for spin and PR purposes as a way of neutralising any public offence arguement.

At the other exstreme would be the in your face approach, maybe admin would restrict front page pics to bod mods in this state of the world?

Not bothered myself but thought I would throw in the idea.:)

Must admit, I have become increasingly uneasy with putting my kink pics on IC as it is so public, on twitter etc. And sure, that's an 'each too...' as well. But I have shifted almost all to another place where I can control who sees them. I don't think just logging in is enough of a filter, tho, since anyone can set up a profile.

I seem to recall the idea that you could set some pics to be visible to your network only has been floated before, but I would support that idea. But being a total net numpty I have no idea if that is do-able or no? Or how it would sit with the new ratings arrangement either.

Why poison your liver when I could eat it for you?

Reply by LittleMissLeather on Mon 4 Jan 2010

Admin wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Sorry folks have been more than a little shocked at some pictures I have seen on here today with the present climate I am to be honest surprised they have been allowed.

You've got a picture of a (very nice) tattoo of the word "slave" on your body. Some people would be offended by that and it would make them more anti-BDSM.

IC's "editorial" policy is to do our best to comply with the law (eg no "extreme pornography" according to the CJIA) and our contractual obligations (eg no genital nudity.)

Regards,

Admin

Hello Admin and point taken thank you, but unfortunately my point has been missed by many (not all) who have replied, I will try and get my concerns over for the last time.

As I have said already I am not worried about the pictures themselves but the possible ramifications of anyone chancing to see images which they might constru to be ilegal or offensive and the negative affect that could have on the portayal of the BDSM community.

Thank you for all your comments.

" I'm selfish,impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can't handle me at my worst, then you don't desreve me at my best." Marilyn Monroe.

Reply by rodm99 on Mon 4 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
Admin wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Sorry folks have been more than a little shocked at some pictures I have seen on here today with the present climate I am to be honest surprised they have been allowed.

You've got a picture of a (very nice) tattoo of the word "slave" on your body. Some people would be offended by that and it would make them more anti-BDSM.

IC's "editorial" policy is to do our best to comply with the law (eg no "extreme pornography" according to the CJIA) and our contractual obligations (eg no genital nudity.)

Regards,

Admin

Hello Admin and point taken thank you, but unfortunately my point has been missed by many (not all) who have replied, I will try and get my concerns over for the last time.

As I have said already I am not worried about the pictures themselves but the possible ramifications of anyone chancing to see images which they might constru to be ilegal or offensive and the negative affect that could have on the portayal of the BDSM community.

Thank you for all your comments.

Thank you for all your comments.

We could keep going round this, but I don't see the point. I'd say you've been given a very wide-ranging and compelling set of *reasons* why people disagree with you - 'reasons' meaning arguments, and discussions, not just the repetition of gut-feeling assertions.

'Twosies beats onesies, but nothing beats three...'

Reply by emark on Mon 4 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
Admin wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Sorry folks have been more than a little shocked at some pictures I have seen on here today with the present climate I am to be honest surprised they have been allowed.

You've got a picture of a (very nice) tattoo of the word "slave" on your body. Some people would be offended by that and it would make them more anti-BDSM.

IC's "editorial" policy is to do our best to comply with the law (eg no "extreme pornography" according to the CJIA) and our contractual obligations (eg no genital nudity.)

Regards,

Admin

Hello Admin and point taken thank you, but unfortunately my point has been missed by many (not all) who have replied, I will try and get my concerns over for the last time.

As I have said already I am not worried about the pictures themselves but the possible ramifications of anyone chancing to see images which they might constru to be ilegal or offensive and the negative affect that could have on the portayal of the BDSM community.

Thank you for all your comments.

Thank you for all your comments.

Shall we start with you? :) What should we do about the possibility of people being offended by your slave photo?

By including not just images that offend people, but also images that anyone might possibly be offended by, then that just makes the issue even broader, and if we applied it consistently, would mean that just about every image should be disallowed just in case someone finds it offensive.

I'm also unclear of your argument - is it that these pictures misrepresent what it is that people do here? Or that we should hide what it is that people do? I'm unclear on how seeing what we do would turn someone to being intolerant of BDSM, unless they already had a negative view on these acts.

My guess is that you don't want to be lumped in with those doing what you see as more extreme acts - the problem there is that there's many people who could apply that argument to you and I ("I'm just into spanking during sex, I don't want to be lumped with people who call themselves slaves...")

Sign the Consenting Adult Action Network's statement

Reply by boundtodesire on Mon 4 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
Pictures on IC.

Sorry folks have been more than a little shocked at some pictures I have seen on here today with the present climate I am to be honest surprised they have been allowed. Do not get me wrong anyone that knows me well ,will know I need and love extreme but I feel any pictures of such activities should be kept private I feel that allowing pictures of extreme marking and blood play, which any John Doe can see on here will do us kinksters no good whatsoever.....ok rant over.

I'm with you on this one Elizabeth. Words that spring to mind are Tact, Commonsense and Sanity. Good for you for speaking out. D

Reply by yoda_dog on Mon 4 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
Admin wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Sorry folks have been more than a little shocked at some pictures I have seen on here today with the present climate I am to be honest surprised they have been allowed.

You've got a picture of a (very nice) tattoo of the word "slave" on your body. Some people would be offended by that and it would make them more anti-BDSM.

IC's "editorial" policy is to do our best to comply with the law (eg no "extreme pornography" according to the CJIA) and our contractual obligations (eg no genital nudity.)

Regards,

Admin

Hello Admin and point taken thank you, but unfortunately my point has been missed by many (not all) who have replied, I will try and get my concerns over for the last time.

As I have said already I am not worried about the pictures themselves but the possible ramifications of anyone chancing to see images which they might constru to be ilegal or offensive and the negative affect that could have on the portayal of the BDSM community.

Thank you for all your comments.

Thank you for all your comments.

*playing devil's advocate*

Have you considered the negative connotations that could be construed from your own pictures? A woman not only submitting to a man, but becoming his slave and having her body permanently altered to that fact! Some people would find that offensive and illegal (slavery is illegal).

So, rather than saying the same things over and over, could you explain what ramifications you can perceive from the pictures that are on this site (compared to the rest of the internet) and how they will negatively effect the portrayal of the BDSM community.

"Bottom line: it's couples who are truly right for each other wade through the same crap as everybody else, but the big difference is they don't let it take them down. One of those two people will stand up and fight for that relationship every time."

Reply by frenchie on Tue 5 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
Admin wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Sorry folks have been more than a little shocked at some pictures I have seen on here today with the present climate I am to be honest surprised they have been allowed.

You've got a picture of a (very nice) tattoo of the word "slave" on your body. Some people would be offended by that and it would make them more anti-BDSM.

IC's "editorial" policy is to do our best to comply with the law (eg no "extreme pornography" according to the CJIA) and our contractual obligations (eg no genital nudity.)

Regards,

Admin

JUst to answer, the bdsm community needs not shocking pics to have a bad or idiotic reputation...you cannot be a pervert and want to be seen as a spotless angel :)

Hello Admin and point taken thank you, but unfortunately my point has been missed by many (not all) who have replied, I will try and get my concerns over for the last time.

As I have said already I am not worried about the pictures themselves but the possible ramifications of anyone chancing to see images which they might constru to be ilegal or offensive and the negative affect that could have on the portayal of the BDSM community.

Thank you for all your comments.

french_slave_the_Crucified is MmeDeSade

Reply by LittleMissLeather on Tue 5 Jan 2010

rodm99 wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Admin wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Sorry folks have been more than a little shocked at some pictures I have seen on here today with the present climate I am to be honest surprised they have been allowed.

You've got a picture of a (very nice) tattoo of the word "slave" on your body. Some people would be offended by that and it would make them more anti-BDSM.

IC's "editorial" policy is to do our best to comply with the law (eg no "extreme pornography" according to the CJIA) and our contractual obligations (eg no genital nudity.)

Regards,

Admin

Hello Admin and point taken thank you, but unfortunately my point has been missed by many (not all) who have replied, I will try and get my concerns over for the last time.

As I have said already I am not worried about the pictures themselves but the possible ramifications of anyone chancing to see images which they might constru to be ilegal or offensive and the negative affect that could have on the portayal of the BDSM community.

Thank you for all your comments.

Thank you for all your comments.

We could keep going round this, but I don't see the point. I'd say you've been given a very wide-ranging and compelling set of *reasons* why people disagree with you - 'reasons' meaning arguments, and discussions, not just the repetition of gut-feeling assertions.

For goodness sake ....for those who dont see my point forgive me I have obviously failed and thanks again to those who did.

" I'm selfish,impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can't handle me at my worst, then you don't desreve me at my best." Marilyn Monroe.

Reply by hollythedolly on Tue 5 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
rodm99 wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Admin wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Sorry folks have been more than a little shocked at some pictures I have seen on here today with the present climate I am to be honest surprised they have been allowed.

You've got a picture of a (very nice) tattoo of the word "slave" on your body. Some people would be offended by that and it would make them more anti-BDSM.

IC's "editorial" policy is to do our best to comply with the law (eg no "extreme pornography" according to the CJIA) and our contractual obligations (eg no genital nudity.)

Regards,

Admin

Hello Admin and point taken thank you, but unfortunately my point has been missed by many (not all) who have replied, I will try and get my concerns over for the last time.

As I have said already I am not worried about the pictures themselves but the possible ramifications of anyone chancing to see images which they might constru to be ilegal or offensive and the negative affect that could have on the portayal of the BDSM community.

Thank you for all your comments.

Thank you for all your comments.

We could keep going round this, but I don't see the point. I'd say you've been given a very wide-ranging and compelling set of *reasons* why people disagree with you - 'reasons' meaning arguments, and discussions, not just the repetition of gut-feeling assertions.

For goodness sake ....for those who dont see my point forgive me I have obviously failed and thanks again to those who did.

People see your point it's just none of us agree with you

Reply by LittleMissLeather on Tue 5 Jan 2010

yoda_dog wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Admin wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Sorry folks have been more than a little shocked at some pictures I have seen on here today with the present climate I am to be honest surprised they have been allowed.

You've got a picture of a (very nice) tattoo of the word "slave" on your body. Some people would be offended by that and it would make them more anti-BDSM.

IC's "editorial" policy is to do our best to comply with the law (eg no "extreme pornography" according to the CJIA) and our contractual obligations (eg no genital nudity.)

Regards,

Admin

Hello Admin and point taken thank you, but unfortunately my point has been missed by many (not all) who have replied, I will try and get my concerns over for the last time.

As I have said already I am not worried about the pictures themselves but the possible ramifications of anyone chancing to see images which they might constru to be ilegal or offensive and the negative affect that could have on the portayal of the BDSM community.

Thank you for all your comments.

Thank you for all your comments.

*playing devil's advocate*

Have you considered the negative connotations that could be construed from your own pictures? A woman not only submitting to a man, but becoming his slave and having her body permanently altered to that fact! Some people would find that offensive and illegal (slavery is illegal).

So, rather than saying the same things over and over, could you explain what ramifications you can perceive from the pictures that are on this site (compared to the rest of the internet) and how they will negatively effect the portrayal of the BDSM community.

I had all my tatts done because I wanted them not because a man asked me to. Ok now how can I put? this very simply ok imagine for example some one looking to cause trouble as in outing someone were to come on here looking for what they consider "evidence" and they see pitures of lots of blood ,needles and severe markings chances are there gonna use the pics against us all.

" I'm selfish,impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can't handle me at my worst, then you don't desreve me at my best." Marilyn Monroe.

Reply by LittleMissLeather on Tue 5 Jan 2010

boundtodesire wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Pictures on IC.

Sorry folks have been more than a little shocked at some pictures I have seen on here today with the present climate I am to be honest surprised they have been allowed. Do not get me wrong anyone that knows me well ,will know I need and love extreme but I feel any pictures of such activities should be kept private I feel that allowing pictures of extreme marking and blood play, which any John Doe can see on here will do us kinksters no good whatsoever.....ok rant over.

I'm with you on this one Elizabeth. Words that spring to mind are Tact, Commonsense and Sanity. Good for you for speaking out. D

Cheers.

" I'm selfish,impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can't handle me at my worst, then you don't desreve me at my best." Marilyn Monroe.

Reply by Lady_Anna_Bradford on Tue 5 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:

I had all my tatts done because I wanted them not because a man asked me to. Ok now how can I put? this very simply ok imagine for example some one looking to cause trouble as in outing someone were to come on here looking for what they consider "evidence" and they see pitures of lots of blood ,needles and severe markings chances are there gonna use the pics against us all.

So why have you posted a pic of your slave tattoo? Can't that be used agianst us all?

Slavery is illegal.

"If no sexual offence is being committed it seems very odd indeed that there should be an offence for having an image of something which was not an offence," Lord Wallace of Tankerness

http://www.clips4sale.com/studio/26308 http://ladyannadominatrix.c4slive.com/ http://www.professionaldomination.co.uk

Reply by Caracal on Tue 5 Jan 2010

Is this the sort of picture you mean?

It was taken during a meaningful situation, with someone I respect, an image of personal catharsis and is not in any way against the AUP. The marks lasted a short while and will probably only be revealed again when I get some sun on my back.

I am proud of this picture, it represents something very important to me and if I want to post it, why shouldn't I be able to put up this image of total trust within a bdsm context? Cannot display picture!

eta, I have a scar on my hand, left behind from my storm-terrified cat that will last longer than these cuts....

What is a Caracal?

The nice lady with the whip.

Reply by emark on Tue 5 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
I had all my tatts done because I wanted them not because a man asked me to.
And a random person out to cause trouble would consider this? I imagine the same is true of the pictures you criticise, anyway.
Ok now how can I put? this very simply ok imagine for example some one looking to cause trouble as in outing someone were to come on here looking for what they consider "evidence" and they see pitures of lots of blood ,needles and severe markings chances are there gonna use the pics against us all.
...not to mention the pics of women who are branded with the word "slave".

Sign the Consenting Adult Action Network's statement

Reply by frenchie on Tue 5 Jan 2010

Professor_Tim wrote:
Well, I'm kind of with the OP on some of this...

I don't know how seriously a pic of a spanked botty needs to be taken. And it's arguable what is a "transient and trifling injury" - some people come up a deep purple from a minor slap but it disappears within an hour. That's just skin colouration. Cannot display picture!

But some pictures do cause me issues. Me, I don't like the sight of blood. A little bit of potentially staged blood, like this seems to me to be ok:

But the a picture like this is certainly pushing it a bit:

Cannot display picture!

To each their own... I'm just saying I can see the point OP is making.

Oh yeah, by the way, just one thing I was about to forget...my profile is not an ad, it means it's not popping every five minutes to beg for attention so nobody, fondamentaly is confronted to it too often...so do not feel forced to perve at it and you professor...next time you feel the need to illustrate an argument with somebody else's image, be courteous and polite enough to ask them first if they want their image used for the said argument..I know my profile is public but excuse me for hoping that we avoid name and shame on ukbdsm, dear me, am I naive :)

french_slave_the_Crucified is MmeDeSade

Reply by LittleMissLeather on Tue 5 Jan 2010

Lady_Anna_Bradford wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:

I had all my tatts done because I wanted them not because a man asked me to. Ok now how can I put? this very simply ok imagine for example some one looking to cause trouble as in outing someone were to come on here looking for what they consider "evidence" and they see pitures of lots of blood ,needles and severe markings chances are there gonna use the pics against us all.

So why have you posted a pic of your slave tattoo? Can't that be used agianst us all?

Slavery is illegal.

I agree it could be used against us but as all we IC ers know the term " slave " does not mean that I am a slave in the original meaning of the word and sorry but its still only a tattoo not blood or severe markings.

Anyone that knows me will vouch that i am not squeamish or judgemental by any means but my OP is still valid in my opinion.

Nitey nite all.

PS forgive the spelling mistake earlier ... Pictures*

" I'm selfish,impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can't handle me at my worst, then you don't desreve me at my best." Marilyn Monroe.

Reply by Caracal on Tue 5 Jan 2010

And tattoos don't result in blood being drawn?

Mine did!

What is a Caracal?

The nice lady with the whip.

Reply by emark on Tue 5 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
I agree it could be used against us but as all we IC ers know the term " slave " does not mean that I am a slave in the original meaning of the word and sorry but its still only a tattoo not blood or severe markings.
I thought your argument wasn't about what we thought, but about what other people not into BDSM might think?

And if you agree that your photo could be used against us, are you going to take it down - if you expect others to do the same with theirs?

Sign the Consenting Adult Action Network's statement

Reply by Lady_Anna_Bradford on Tue 5 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
Lady_Anna_Bradford wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:

I had all my tatts done because I wanted them not because a man asked me to. Ok now how can I put? this very simply ok imagine for example some one looking to cause trouble as in outing someone were to come on here looking for what they consider "evidence" and they see pitures of lots of blood ,needles and severe markings chances are there gonna use the pics against us all.

So why have you posted a pic of your slave tattoo? Can't that be used agianst us all?

Slavery is illegal.

I agree it could be used against us but as all we IC ers know the term " slave " does not mean that I am a slave in the original meaning of the word and sorry but its still only a tattoo not blood or severe markings.

Anyone that knows me will vouch that i am not squeamish or judgemental by any means but my OP is still valid in my opinion.

Nitey nite all.

PS forgive the spelling mistake earlier ... Pictures*

But other people who aren't into BDSM don't know what we mean by the word slave do they?

*Only* a tattoo? Isn't a tattoo more permanent than most cutting?

So your method os self-expression is perfectly acceptable but others who have different methods and cause as much, if not less, damage to their body isn't? A bit hypocritical don't you think?

Before we have another 'Oooooooo why can't the 'nillas just accept what we do?' thread I think some of us need to sort our own houses out.

"If no sexual offence is being committed it seems very odd indeed that there should be an offence for having an image of something which was not an offence," Lord Wallace of Tankerness

http://www.clips4sale.com/studio/26308 http://ladyannadominatrix.c4slive.com/ http://www.professionaldomination.co.uk

Reply by Lady_Anna_Bradford on Tue 5 Jan 2010

frenchie wrote:
Professor_Tim wrote:
Well, I'm kind of with the OP on some of this...

I don't know how seriously a pic of a spanked botty needs to be taken. And it's arguable what is a "transient and trifling injury" - some people come up a deep purple from a minor slap but it disappears within an hour. That's just skin colouration. Cannot display picture!

But some pictures do cause me issues. Me, I don't like the sight of blood. A little bit of potentially staged blood, like this seems to me to be ok:

But the a picture like this is certainly pushing it a bit:

Cannot display picture!

To each their own... I'm just saying I can see the point OP is making.

Oh yeah, by the way, just one thing I was about to forget...my profile is not an ad, it means it's not popping every five minutes to beg for attention so nobody, fondamentaly is confronted to it too often...so do not feel forced to perve at it and you professor...next time you feel the need to illustrate an argument with somebody else's image, be courteous and polite enough to ask them first if they want their image used for the said argument..I know my profile is public but excuse me for hoping that we avoid name and shame on ukbdsm, dear me, am I naive :)

It's a beautiful pic frenchie, and I for one am glad it was posted on this thread tonight :) I wouldn't have seen it to admire it otherwise.

"If no sexual offence is being committed it seems very odd indeed that there should be an offence for having an image of something which was not an offence," Lord Wallace of Tankerness

http://www.clips4sale.com/studio/26308 http://ladyannadominatrix.c4slive.com/ http://www.professionaldomination.co.uk

Reply by yoda_dog on Tue 5 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
yoda_dog wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Admin wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Sorry folks have been more than a little shocked at some pictures I have seen on here today with the present climate I am to be honest surprised they have been allowed.

You've got a picture of a (very nice) tattoo of the word "slave" on your body. Some people would be offended by that and it would make them more anti-BDSM.

IC's "editorial" policy is to do our best to comply with the law (eg no "extreme pornography" according to the CJIA) and our contractual obligations (eg no genital nudity.)

Regards,

Admin

Hello Admin and point taken thank you, but unfortunately my point has been missed by many (not all) who have replied, I will try and get my concerns over for the last time.

As I have said already I am not worried about the pictures themselves but the possible ramifications of anyone chancing to see images which they might constru to be ilegal or offensive and the negative affect that could have on the portayal of the BDSM community.

Thank you for all your comments.

Thank you for all your comments.

*playing devil's advocate*

Have you considered the negative connotations that could be construed from your own pictures? A woman not only submitting to a man, but becoming his slave and having her body permanently altered to that fact! Some people would find that offensive and illegal (slavery is illegal).

So, rather than saying the same things over and over, could you explain what ramifications you can perceive from the pictures that are on this site (compared to the rest of the internet) and how they will negatively effect the portrayal of the BDSM community.

I had all my tatts done because I wanted them not because a man asked me to. Ok now how can I put? this very simply ok imagine for example some one looking to cause trouble as in outing someone were to come on here looking for what they consider "evidence" and they see pitures of lots of blood ,needles and severe markings chances are there gonna use the pics against us all.

How is a tattoo not a severe marking? It's there for life, how severe do you want?

If you'd had a picture of your tattoos being done, would that be wrong, blood and all?

How about if you are a member of a site that allows full genital photos, would you be tarred with the same brush? Even if you didn't have any such pictures up?

"Bottom line: it's couples who are truly right for each other wade through the same crap as everybody else, but the big difference is they don't let it take them down. One of those two people will stand up and fight for that relationship every time."

Reply by frenchie on Tue 5 Jan 2010

Lady_Anna_Bradford wrote:
frenchie wrote:
Professor_Tim wrote:
Well, I'm kind of with the OP on some of this...

I don't know how seriously a pic of a spanked botty needs to be taken. And it's arguable what is a "transient and trifling injury" - some people come up a deep purple from a minor slap but it disappears within an hour. That's just skin colouration. Cannot display picture!

But some pictures do cause me issues. Me, I don't like the sight of blood. A little bit of potentially staged blood, like this seems to me to be ok:

But the a picture like this is certainly pushing it a bit:

Cannot display picture!

To each their own... I'm just saying I can see the point OP is making.

Oh yeah, by the way, just one thing I was about to forget...my profile is not an ad, it means it's not popping every five minutes to beg for attention so nobody, fondamentaly is confronted to it too often...so do not feel forced to perve at it and you professor...next time you feel the need to illustrate an argument with somebody else's image, be courteous and polite enough to ask them first if they want their image used for the said argument..I know my profile is public but excuse me for hoping that we avoid name and shame on ukbdsm, dear me, am I naive :)

It's a beautiful pic frenchie, and I for one am glad it was posted on this thread tonight :) I wouldn't have seen it to admire it otherwise.

aww thanks a lot!

french_slave_the_Crucified is MmeDeSade

Reply by LittleMissLeather on Tue 5 Jan 2010

emark wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
I had all my tatts done because I wanted them not because a man asked me to.
And a random person out to cause trouble would consider this? I imagine the same is true of the pictures you criticise, anyway.
Ok now how can I put? this very simply ok imagine for example some one looking to cause trouble as in outing someone were to come on here looking for what they consider "evidence" and they see pitures of lots of blood ,needles and severe markings chances are there gonna use the pics against us all.
...not to mention the pics of women who are branded with the word "slave".

Its a tatt not a branding, there is a difference. A random person seeing extreme pics is not a worry but someone looking for such is.

" I'm selfish,impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can't handle me at my worst, then you don't desreve me at my best." Marilyn Monroe.

Reply by LittleMissLeather on Tue 5 Jan 2010

yoda_dog wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
yoda_dog wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Admin wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Sorry folks have been more than a little shocked at some pictures I have seen on here today with the present climate I am to be honest surprised they have been allowed.

You've got a picture of a (very nice) tattoo of the word "slave" on your body. Some people would be offended by that and it would make them more anti-BDSM.

IC's "editorial" policy is to do our best to comply with the law (eg no "extreme pornography" according to the CJIA) and our contractual obligations (eg no genital nudity.)

Regards,

Admin

Hello Admin and point taken thank you, but unfortunately my point has been missed by many (not all) who have replied, I will try and get my concerns over for the last time.

As I have said already I am not worried about the pictures themselves but the possible ramifications of anyone chancing to see images which they might constru to be ilegal or offensive and the negative affect that could have on the portayal of the BDSM community.

Thank you for all your comments.

Thank you for all your comments.

*playing devil's advocate*

Have you considered the negative connotations that could be construed from your own pictures? A woman not only submitting to a man, but becoming his slave and having her body permanently altered to that fact! Some people would find that offensive and illegal (slavery is illegal).

So, rather than saying the same things over and over, could you explain what ramifications you can perceive from the pictures that are on this site (compared to the rest of the internet) and how they will negatively effect the portrayal of the BDSM community.

I had all my tatts done because I wanted them not because a man asked me to. Ok now how can I put? this very simply ok imagine for example some one looking to cause trouble as in outing someone were to come on here looking for what they consider "evidence" and they see pitures of lots of blood ,needles and severe markings chances are there gonna use the pics against us all.

How is a tattoo not a severe marking? It's there for life, how severe do you want?

If you'd had a picture of your tattoos being done, would that be wrong, blood and all?

How about if you are a member of a site that allows full genital photos, would you be tarred with the same brush? Even if you didn't have any such pictures up?

With the present climate I would not have pics of blood on my profile no matter what.

" I'm selfish,impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can't handle me at my worst, then you don't desreve me at my best." Marilyn Monroe.

Reply by LittleMissLeather on Tue 5 Jan 2010

epona74 wrote:
I've been following this one with interest, and rather a lot of sadness.

Sadness, because it smells to me of a slightly hidden "your kink is not okay" sort of smell.

Oh, you phrase it as though you're concerned about what others who aren't into bdsm might think, but then dismiss how they might take your own, far more permanent marking, which has connotations that others would not understand too. Quite frankly, you can't have it both ways. We either post NO pictures that might possibly be taken the wrong way by anyone, or we stay within the law and post what we enjoy. Your tattoo means something special to you, and someone's cutting means something special to someone else.

Why not simply accept that some people do things that you wouldn't, and you do things that others wouldn't? I don't actually particularly enjoy pictures of cuttings myself, but I'll defend peoples' rights to post them! And I'd never have a slave number tattooed on me, but have no criticism for you doing so. We're limited enough by the new laws in what we are and are not allowed to show, and IC does a really good job in following those laws. We shouldn't have to be criticised 'in house' as well.

I can and do accept most pics that I see on here but surely the phrase " less is more " might be a way of getting my point over.

I myself have pics similar with blood and needles and markings but I wont post them because of the present climate and I dont mean the beautiful snow ! Where is the need to ? as for my tatts sure they are very personal but I have not read anything saying they have shocked anyone.

Once again thanks for ALL comments folks.

" I'm selfish,impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can't handle me at my worst, then you don't desreve me at my best." Marilyn Monroe.

Reply by Degenerate on Tue 5 Jan 2010

CookieMonster wrote:
Maybe theres a happy medium?

Pictures on public display and pictures that appear once youve logged in? This suggestion is mainly for spin and PR purposes as a way of neutralising any public offence arguement.

At the other exstreme would be the in your face approach, maybe admin would restrict front page pics to bod mods in this state of the world?

Not bothered myself but thought I would throw in the idea.:)

But where to draw the line eh? Whose opinion of what's 'too much' and 'not too much'? Our existence is too much for some. Others don't care.

What non BDSM people (or non members) think of a BDSM website is pretty irrelevant isn't it? Like - I dunno - I'm not much interested in stamp collecting, so I doubt the photos on a hobbyists site would please me either. So I don't go.. and I certainly don't expect them to pick images based on my preferences.

Adults are able to self censor. I think it's important that the site is public because no doubt there are people who would access information about being risk aware who don't join.

De

Sign up to CAAN's statement www.caan.org.uk

Spanner Trust SM campaign - can you join in? http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/239250/0

Reply by Mistress_Dragonfly on Tue 5 Jan 2010

Totally agree with you on this site. I guess if you don't like, move on.

To the OP....if you think those are bad, check website mentioned here. You may think after that IC pictures are tame!!

kweilo wrote:
Professor_Tim wrote:
Well, I'm kind of with the OP on some of this...

I don't know how seriously a pic of a spanked botty needs to be taken. And it's arguable what is a "transient and trifling injury" - some people come up a deep purple from a minor slap but it disappears within an hour. That's just skin colouration. Cannot display picture!

But some pictures do cause me issues. Me, I don't like the sight of blood. A little bit of potentially staged blood, like this seems to me to be ok:

But the a picture like this is certainly pushing it a bit:

Cannot display picture!

To each their own... I'm just saying I can see the point OP is making.

Visit www.bme.com and you'll find plenty worse than that.

In comparison to BME, the pictures you'll find on here are tame.

Bit of a non-issue, IMHO.

Reply by Mistress_Dragonfly on Tue 5 Jan 2010

Totally agree with you on this site. I guess if you don't like, move on.

To the OP....if you think those are bad, check website mentioned here. You may think after that IC pictures are tame!!

kweilo wrote:
Professor_Tim wrote:
Well, I'm kind of with the OP on some of this...

I don't know how seriously a pic of a spanked botty needs to be taken. And it's arguable what is a "transient and trifling injury" - some people come up a deep purple from a minor slap but it disappears within an hour. That's just skin colouration. Cannot display picture!

But some pictures do cause me issues. Me, I don't like the sight of blood. A little bit of potentially staged blood, like this seems to me to be ok:

But the a picture like this is certainly pushing it a bit:

Cannot display picture!

To each their own... I'm just saying I can see the point OP is making.

Visit www.bme.com and you'll find plenty worse than that.

In comparison to BME, the pictures you'll find on here are tame.

Bit of a non-issue, IMHO.

Reply by Degenerate on Tue 5 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
yoda_dog wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Admin wrote:
slave_elizabeth wrote:
Sorry folks have been more than a little shocked at some pictures I have seen on here today with the present climate I am to be honest surprised they have been allowed.

You've got a picture of a (very nice) tattoo of the word "slave" on your body. Some people would be offended by that and it would make them more anti-BDSM.

IC's "editorial" policy is to do our best to comply with the law (eg no "extreme pornography" according to the CJIA) and our contractual obligations (eg no genital nudity.)

Regards,

Admin

Hello Admin and point taken thank you, but unfortunately my point has been missed by many (not all) who have replied, I will try and get my concerns over for the last time.

As I have said already I am not worried about the pictures themselves but the possible ramifications of anyone chancing to see images which they might constru to be ilegal or offensive and the negative affect that could have on the portayal of the BDSM community.

Thank you for all your comments.

Thank you for all your comments.

*playing devil's advocate*

Have you considered the negative connotations that could be construed from your own pictures? A woman not only submitting to a man, but becoming his slave and having her body permanently altered to that fact! Some people would find that offensive and illegal (slavery is illegal).

So, rather than saying the same things over and over, could you explain what ramifications you can perceive from the pictures that are on this site (compared to the rest of the internet) and how they will negatively effect the portrayal of the BDSM community.

I had all my tatts done because I wanted them not because a man asked me to. Ok now how can I put? this very simply ok imagine for example some one looking to cause trouble as in outing someone were to come on here looking for what they consider "evidence" and they see pitures of lots of blood ,needles and severe markings chances are there gonna use the pics against us all.

There's reasons why they don't. One of them is that it's hard/impossible in many cases to prove which images here are real and faked (from a whether a crime was committed during the act point of view - any harm more than transient and trifling is likely illegal to do). And also the incentive to arrest consenting adults for what they do together is pretty low.

The illegal images: IC is doing all it reasonably can about that.

Most people in danger from outings don't have identifiable photos.

As everyone keeps saying potentially any photo here may offend a random non member, so it's impossible to draw a line based on the tastes of non members.

It sounds like what's really going on here is that you don't want to be associated with some of the practices of some of the members. It doesn't take much to let anyone know who has seen you here that BDSM is an world of a thousand possibilities and nobody does all of them.

De

Sign up to CAAN's statement www.caan.org.uk

Spanner Trust SM campaign - can you join in? http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/239250/0

Reply by katie_may on Tue 5 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:

I myself have pics similar with blood and needles and markings but I wont post them because of the present climate

the present climate won't change if everyone hides

everyone who puts a photo on here has a personal calculated risk

the website has a collective calculated risk

any photo that gets past those two points deserves to be there, regardless of my opinion or anyone elses

this is an adult website containing adult material and is clearly marked that way

folk are fed up of being dictated to, by law, by society, by individuals, all they are doing in reality is pushing boundries, boundries that sore need some pushing

personally i pushed some boundries myself 30 years ago, i had a TATTOO done, OMG it was unheard of, just 30 years ago a tattoo on a woman was cause for ridicule, aggression and ostracism... now a lot of women sport them, no one even looks at mine anymore, in fact it's become a bit of a kind of female tribal trait in the family, but what right did society have to tell me i can't do with my body as i wished? what right did they have to treat me that way?

30 years hence, if folk keep going, these pictures won't offend anyone, they won't even look at them with an opinion anymore, but we will have the right to use what pictures we please without society or law condemning for the content

start hiding them now and you might as well all go hide under a rock and never come out

never was one for hiding, too proud for that

and as for giving bdsm a bad name... hhhmmm i would seriously analyse that properly

edited because my spelling is pants! always has been pants and probably always will be pants

show me something different xkx

Reply by fluffy_welsh_angel on Tue 5 Jan 2010

Can I say I am offended by the amount of animals killed for the leather in the OPs pics??? We can all take offence at different things. :-D

Mew

Reply by yoda_dog on Tue 5 Jan 2010

fluffy_welsh_angel wrote:
Can I say I am offended by the amount of animals killed for the leather in the OPs pics??? We can all take offence at different things. :-D

Won't somebody think of the cows!!!! >:o

"Bottom line: it's couples who are truly right for each other wade through the same crap as everybody else, but the big difference is they don't let it take them down. One of those two people will stand up and fight for that relationship every time."

Reply by Nurse_Ratched on Tue 5 Jan 2010

yoda_dog wrote:
fluffy_welsh_angel wrote:
Can I say I am offended by the amount of animals killed for the leather in the OPs pics??? We can all take offence at different things. :-D

Won't somebody think of the cows!!!! >:o

where's a Hindu domme when you need one ?

Reply by emark on Tue 5 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
Its a tatt not a branding, there is a difference. A random person seeing extreme pics is not a worry but someone looking for such is.
I mean "branding" in the sense of "marked". And yes, let's consider the case of someone who sees your pics, and decides to use them against "us" (or whatever it is you are claiming that someone might do). You already said "I agree it could be used against us", so are you going to take the picture down, or is it one rule for you and another for everyone else?

Blood might have more of an "ick" factor for many, but there are many ways that people can and do criticise BDSM. As people have pointed out, the "extreme" pics are no worse than those on body modification sites. But instead a criticism that people may make of BDSM is that it's abuse of women, about women submitting to men, and condoning slavery. No one here actually has a problem with your pic - but if we were concerned about pictures giving a bad name, then people might just as well criticise yours.

I'm still curious how someone could use these pictures against us - how would this happen? I mean, given that there *are* people here who are into body modification and blood play, why is it misleading to have such images on a BDSM website?

Sign the Consenting Adult Action Network's statement

Reply by LittleMissLeather on Tue 5 Jan 2010

fluffy_welsh_angel wrote:
Can I say I am offended by the amount of animals killed for the leather in the OPs pics??? We can all take offence at different things. :-D

Sure you can its a free country, but again my point has been missed never mind. Going out to take pictures of the lovely snow, Laters.

" I'm selfish,impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can't handle me at my worst, then you don't desreve me at my best." Marilyn Monroe.

Reply by fluffy_welsh_angel on Tue 5 Jan 2010

slave_elizabeth wrote:
fluffy_welsh_angel wrote:
Can I say I am offended by the amount of animals killed for the leather in the OPs pics??? We can all take offence at different things. :-D

Sure you can its a free country, but again my point has been missed never mind.

It's not been missed, I'm just pointing out that everyone will be offended by something, if we stopped doing everything for fear of offence we would all be sat in with our mugs of organic tea doing sad all.

Mew

Reply by frenchie on Tue 5 Jan 2010

Mistress_Dragonfly wrote:
Totally agree with you on this site. I guess if you don't like, move on.

To the OP....if you think those are bad, check website mentioned here. You may think after that IC pictures are tame!!

kweilo wrote:
Professor_Tim wrote:
Well, I'm kind of with the OP on some of this...

I don't know how seriously a pic of a spanked botty needs to be taken. And it's arguable what is a "transient and trifling injury" - some people come up a deep purple from a minor slap but it disappears within an hour. That's just skin colouration. Cannot display picture!

But some pictures do cause me issues. Me, I don't like the sight of blood. A little bit of potentially staged blood, like this seems to me to be ok:

But the a picture like this is certainly pushing it a bit:

Cannot display picture!

To each their own... I'm just saying I can see the point OP is making.

Visit www.bme.com and you'll find plenty worse than that.

In comparison to BME, the pictures you'll find on here are tame.

Bit of a non-issue, IMHO.

I am getting upset over this now, also not for the reasons one might think lol My pictures are BME proof, I am a BME member, and no you don't find "much worse on BME than that", you will only find more close ups or more flow of blood but it is important for me to step in at this point and say that whatever or almost you find on BME (and anyway you cannot access the website fully if you don't pay or are not a full member oh and, you cannot become a member easilly since you need to submit pics of your own bodmods and have them considered as such by BME crew...) People too often confuse the sight of blood with something serious, a dangerous trauma, an unbearable thing to do and have done to one... I have to say, the kinky things I have done that have not drawn blood have often been far more dangerous and less controled than my work with my BME friends who are all professional people who do very much know how to proceed safely, hygienically blah blah blah...a bruise can be far more traumatic than a cut, a rope suspension far more damaging than one with hooks (and here I do know what I am talking about!) Now, to at least give one thing to the OP whom I find desperatly irritating, since we are allowed to express our opinion:) here is to you: we, in body art have been experiencing issues of a legal nature for a few years, these are around laws about torture and mutilation and consent, some of the things we do are indeed on the verge of what is legaly bearable, we do have a hard time now finding venues for shows...however, the law with us is FAR more flex than it is with perverts obviously and we are far less often bothered by the authorities than kinksters, what we do is far more accepted and even sometimes recognised as a form of art and if not recognised as an interesting ability to handle pain (it is so easy to fool people the second you draw blood ppl think it hurts...) and to end and be stupid since you are not all that clever: my scarifications, my tattoos etc never cost me weird looks or questions or concerns from doctors when I need consultation, in fact they are curious, interested and often, weirdly enough, do like it...on the other hand I would be very very very scared to go to the doc, undress and have them see me scarred with ink engraving in me the word slave and the word sub (what a paradoxe by the way...) but now that's me being to the level of your post and I could have stopped myself but oh well I am on my period so a little bitchiness won't hurt :):)

french_slave_the_Crucified is MmeDeSade

Reply by fluffy_welsh_angel on Tue 5 Jan 2010

RoyalLeathering wrote:
Comparing it to "wearing leather" or "having slave tattooed" is pretty weak. When there's a lot of blood involved, the worry is "how do we know for sure that blood was spilled with consent"? Surely you can imagine the uproar if a picture was uploaded that included blood spatterings from an unwilling party.

Rubbish! No one would even think of doing that!

Mew

Reply by mini_velvet on Tue 5 Jan 2010

RoyalLeathering wrote:
Comparing it to "wearing leather" or "having slave tattooed" is pretty weak. When there's a lot of blood involved, the worry is "how do we know for sure that blood was spilled with consent"? Surely you can imagine the uproar if a picture was uploaded that included blood spatterings from an unwilling party.

did the cow consent to being made into chaps?

Reply by Alley_Cat on Tue 5 Jan 2010

RoyalLeathering wrote:
Comparing it to "wearing leather" or "having slave tattooed" is pretty weak. When there's a lot of blood involved, the worry is "how do we know for sure that blood was spilled with consent"? Surely you can imagine the uproar if a picture was uploaded that included blood spatterings from an unwilling party.

Did anyone obtain consent from the cows for people wearing leather?

Im sure theres alot of unhappy cows out there :-(

Oh come on now, why on Earth would there be pictures up here of 'blood splatterings' from an unwilling party?

I can think of more people who have an issue with those wearing leather (many animal rights people and vegans) than I can of those who would truly believe that pictures of body modification on a BDSM website came from an unwilling party.

People really need a get a grip on reality.

I can't believe I've no control

It's all deranged - Bowie

"Computer games don't affect kids. I mean if Pacman affected our generation, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music."

Reply by RoyalLeathering on Tue 5 Jan 2010

Of course they wouldn't think of doing that. But only in the pink and fluffy world you live in.

I'm talking about the real world.

Reply by fluffy_welsh_angel on Tue 5 Jan 2010

RoyalLeathering wrote:
Of course they wouldn't think of doing that. But only in the pink and fluffy world you live in.

I'm talking about the real world.

FFS man! Are you mad, they may do it, but not post them on here!

Mew

Reply by RoyalLeathering on Tue 5 Jan 2010

ok well firstly, I wasn't even typing to you. Secondly, if a deranged idiot rapes a woman tonight and cuts her, then posts his work on the Internet you can reply by saying "cows have rights too, she was wearing leather". I'll leave you to your pink fluffiness.

Reply by Alley_Cat on Tue 5 Jan 2010

RoyalLeathering wrote:
ok well firstly, I wasn't even typing to you. Secondly, if a deranged idiot rapes a woman tonight and cuts her, then posts his work on the Internet you can reply by saying "cows have rights too, she was wearing leather". I'll leave you to your pink fluffiness.

PMSL!!

Ok, fine you werent typing to me, then how about you learn how the quote box works, then there wouldn't be any confusion would there?

You did post after my reply, so of course I am going to think it was to me.

Learn how to use the internet, might help your case.

Secondly, what does BDSM and a derange idiot, who rapes a woman have in common?

Fuck all.

Jeez, you sound like one of the obsessive americans who believe Marilyn Manson is down to school shootings.

I can't believe I've no control

It's all deranged - Bowie

"Computer games don't affect kids. I mean if Pacman affected our generation, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music."