Protect us from extrems of the BDSM world. [Archive]

BerkshireGent

05-09-2005, 21:26

It seems to me that without regulation the extremists of the BDSM world will tar the whole community as misogynist paedophiles. Whilst I am sure most of us see spanking as a fun part of a one to one relationship many do not. I would suggest that most people interested in the subject are going to be put off by the images portrayed on this and many other sites of bleeding bottoms and simulations of punished schoolgirls. And I accept that there are probably as many sites catering for those who prefer the male bum.

What we need is context in which spanking is shown to be something enjoyed by partners as part of their life style. What we see is endless promotions of ever more sadistic imagery along with self justifications under the guise of human rights and freedom of choice.

The proposed bill talks of violence with a sexual connection, it’s hard to see how a naked individual dominated and beaten till he or she is bruised or cut will not fall into that category.

Perhaps this site should take the lead and set an example by excluding all material that promotes anything other than love, harmony and respect within a BDSM relationship. In short get the moderators to remove images that are violent or degrading along with the many adverts for the same. We can then come here to share a common interest without fear of an early morning wake up call from inspector something from the yard taking our computers away for analysis.

tommytucker

05-09-2005, 21:47

Durcet

05-09-2005, 21:47

And when they came for me there was no one left to protest.

GorBlimey

05-09-2005, 21:48

Well said, old boy!

GB :wink

oyk4some

05-09-2005, 21:51

I have been a member of this site from almost the start and have never seen any pictures such as u have described..........

I would suggest that most people interested in the subject are going to be put off by the images portrayed on this and many other sites of bleeding bottoms and simulations of punished schoolgirls. And I accept that there are probably as many sites catering for those who prefer the male bum.

What we see is endless promotions of ever more sadistic imagery along with self justifications under the guise of human rights and freedom of choice.

Yes there have been pics of adults in school uniform, some models and some memebrs of this site, it is something a lot of members enjoy.

In fact since the gallery closed a year or so back there haven't been that many pics posted and all those that have been have been in good taste, redend, some with cane welts, but nothing that can be classed as too extreem.

little mischievous one

05-09-2005, 21:58

Im not quite sure how to vote on this BG. The problem is who decides what is degrading or violent or too severe.

On a personal level I dont like to see much more than a rather red and possibly lightly striped bottom.

Id certainly hate to see anything that depicted spanking in a sexual or non sexual context that even suggested non consent and to be fair i dont think Ive ever seen that here, and that generally it hasnt been seen as appropriate for this site.

lol Im so soft core I dont even like to see things that include the words "sluts" or "bitches" in their banners.

There is then also the question of the portrayal of the more disciplinary spanking which may not look "loving ", "caring " and harmony premoting but may well be have been experienced as such by the administrator and recipent, and when told the context may be understood as such by people who see it here.

All that said there are people here who do like the more severe stuff and as long as we can be assured the people partaking in the making of the image were consenting then though Id avoid looking at it given the choice do I have the right to deprive others of seeing it?

The prob is if I had to judge the removal id possibly remove a lot that others found perfectly acceptable, if someone into themost severe end was judging they may well leave pics that many found distressing.

I suspect that if the mods had to do more image censoring and approving than they already do there would be constant bickering with not even a real possibility of what the general membership thought was acceptable. Yet again theyd be damned if they did and damned if they didnt.

I know that there have been images posted that have been removed on suspicion that people in them were either unwilling participants or poss underage. I suspect many may have been removed with only a few views.

On balance at the moment i feel that over all a reasonable standard is reached on the images that are left. No like you I dont like them all. There are some id rather id been warned were severe so I hadnt looked.. but im only one person here and i realise possibly not representative of the majority.

peewee

05-09-2005, 22:01

I think you'll find just about any spanking image will offend somebody. For example spanking in a convent setting might upset religious people, a model in a spanking shot might resemble a family member.

Don't think you'll find any of the stuff the Government are talking about banning will appear on this site, nor do I like the stuff myself. I find the principle of censorship appalling, jail sentences for looking at pictures even more so.

If we give in too easily, the government will lower the barriers until one day spanking pictures will be banned.

Seems simple to me, if you don't like an image - hit the back button.

sunnygirl

05-09-2005, 22:06

Berkshire Gent - i have to agree with oykie. In all my time as a member of this site, i have not seen any images matching the description that you give:
images portrayed on this.............of bleeding bottoms and simulations of punished schoolgirls

Do you have any specific images from this site in mind, and if you do, can you post links to them so that we can judge for ourselves?

In my experience, this site is very different to other sites in what it offers, and i cannot see why you have lumped it in with other sites.

In the absence of any reference to any specific image on this site, or the names of the other sites with which you wish to group this one, i can see little or no necessity for your demands - since this site is, and has for as long as i have been a member, already meeting your criteria.

sunnygirl.

HenryIX

05-09-2005, 22:36

BerkshireGent, please look long and hard at my title, and see whether you may inadvertently have committed the error that it encapsulates.It seems to me that without regulation the extremists of the BDSM world will tar the whole community as misogynist paedophiles.Can you give an objective definition of extremists?Whilst I am sure most of us see spanking as a fun part of a one to one relationship many do not.How sure are you of that? How do you define most? 51%? 67%? 99%? There are two very large groups who do not fall into your alleged majority.

First, there are those for whom BDSM is not just fun but a way of life, an integral part of one's sexuality, no more to be denied or trifled with than (say) sexual preference or religious or political conviction.

Second, there are those for whom BDSM is by no means always part of a one to one relationship. In this group, there is more than one kind of person. For example, some simply reject monogamy (or at least any social compulsion to be monogamous) on principle. Others reserve their monogamy for "the transfer of bodily fluids"; they will happily spank--or be spanked by--many partners, but will each remain copulatively faithful to The One. Yet others find their choices restricted by marriage to vanilla partners: what they are allowed do outside the marriage differs widely (but not so widely, perhaps, as what they do in fact get up to).

(For the record, I belong to both major groups described in those two paragraphs.)

I strongly suspect that if we could add up all those people, they'd come to more than half of the membership. Certainly that's how it has looked on a couple of brief visits to the Chat Room to count heads. I propose a poll to find out more. I shall post one in a day or so, unless someone else does so first. In fact, BerkshireGent, if you'd like to PM me, we might agree on the wording and post it as a joint effort?

You can't expect us to take your poll seriously. It comes laughably close to "Have you stopped beating your wife?"I would suggest that most people interested in the subject are going to be put off by the images portrayed on this and many other sites of bleeding bottoms and simulations of punished schoolgirls.Yes. Some of them turn me right off. Perhaps everyone can say that: but would you not expect to find that we would each have a different list? To put it another way, if we each posted our Top Ten photos, and asked for comments, would you not expect that at least one of yours would utterly squick somebody? Who is to be the arbiter?And I accept that there are probably as many sites catering for those who prefer the male bum.Not to mention the many happy thrashers who never met a posterior they didn't like, whatever its sex. ( I envy them their wider range of opportunities).

By the way, had you not noticed that the male bum was quite well represented here?What we need is context in which spanking is shown to be something enjoyed by partners as part of their life style.That is exactly what we get here, along with a certain leavening of Burns-in-human-guise, consensual giraffe orgies, etc.What we see is endless promotions of ever more sadistic imagery ... Can you substantiate that? All I can offer is my own subjective impression, namely that the depictions on this site have become noticeably less extreme in the last while. I assume, however, that since you opened the bowling, you have some quantified research results to offer?... along with self justifications under the guise of human rights and freedom of choice.I really am not at all sure what those words might mean. I understand each individual word, of course, but not this arrangement of them.The proposed bill talks of violence with a sexual connection, it’s hard to see how a naked individual dominated and beaten till he or she is bruised or cut will not fall into that category.The way you put it, the same goes for a brisk hand-smacking accompanied by a little intimate groping. Let's hope that the lawmakers are more articulate. And what is inherently wrong with a few bruises, or even a lot? I am sure you have known subs who would bruise if hit at all hard with an ostrich-feather; but it rarely stops them coming back for more.Perhaps this site should take the lead and set an example by excluding all material that promotes anything other than love, harmony and respect within a BDSM relationship.I agree, provided you don't want the compulsory one-to-oneness included in the criteria?

But I draw your attention to the fact that almost all of the BDSM images on this site do in fact promote the ideal that you advocate. They may not all conform with your personal standards, or indeed with mine: but who are we to dictate what others should find accepptable?In short get the moderators to remove images that are violent or degrading, along with the many adverts for the same. Will you just pause for a moment and enjoy recalling your own favourite real-life BDSM memory. Now, how hard would it be to come up with any number of people who would find that very episode violent or degrading or both?We can then come here to share a common interest without fear of an early morning wake up call from inspector something from the yard taking our computers away for analysis.Dream on, my friend. There is no objective standard that could make us safe. The only answer is to stop the whole damned business--and at the next election, to vote for a Tory, a Socialist or a Liberal, running as such, and not for a wet Tory with a Labour Party card.

Harrumph.

Romola

05-09-2005, 23:20

And when they came for me there was no one left to protest.
Well said, Durcet.

Mister Marc

05-09-2005, 23:27

Eye of the beholder..... Nuff said.

MM

DrMax

05-09-2005, 23:27

Since in some people's view any form of physical punishment, no matter how light, is violent and degrading, this seems like a damn silly poll for a spanking site.

BerkshireGent

05-09-2005, 23:34

Is this a serious contribution or righteous indignation?

I give up.

Chopper81

06-09-2005, 01:42

Is this a serious contribution or righteous indignation?

I give up.

No it is a valid comment, maybe you could read and digest what he said.

As for giving up, well that's one nil to the politicians then. Didn't take long for them to win did it?

Remember Dunkirk and then the D Day Landings, June 6th 1944? Bloody good job we didn't give up then, we would all be speaking German now.

Chopper.

Handy

06-09-2005, 07:55

I would have thought this site was extremely well controlled as it is and I don't recall seeing any of the types of pictures that you mention. There are very few pictures posted here, we no longer have a gallery...........what is it here that needs censoring?

There is a picture of Burns here somewhere and that's quite frightening but apart from that I think your concerns are really unfounded.

To be honest, a lot of people would find the whole idea of spanking women mysogynist and degrading so perhaps we should all pack up and get back to our bible studies.

Handy

06-09-2005, 07:58

No offence intended to anyone who is into bible studies, I was just trying to make the point that this is a consensual spanking site which explicitly forbids references to children. I think we're a pretty responsible bunch.

cheeky

06-09-2005, 08:40

I was watching TV yesterday, a story of a woman whose daughter was strangled by some psycopath. Apparantly he had been accessing web sites of a violent nature showing images of women being strangled/ beaten etc.

Of course the usual claim is that without such images he probably wouldn't have been compelled to strangle his girlfriend, his victim.That these web images somehow encouraged his activity and strengthened his need to actually commit the crime.

I don't for one minute believe the intenet creates psycopaths or encourages perverts to carry out crimes in real life. Those types of people exist with or without the internet, but there are always going to be people who DO believe this to be the case.

My question is how on earth will a ' non-kinky' person be able to distinguish between a site which advocates the beating of someone else's behind to the point of marking it, and one which for example depicts rape or other violent activities?

I appreciate all of us here don't consider spanking/ caning etc. to be extreme or kinky and certainly not in the same league as rape/ other 'violent' acts ......but you ask the average vanilla what they think and I guarantee they will have a much different opinion. I somehow doubt they will see much of a difference between all of it. What we do is violence, whether we like to think of it like that or not.

Clearly sites involving anything to do with children are a totally different ball game......but I am referring to adult sites.

Ritchie

06-09-2005, 08:59

Re. Handy's post :

From what little I remember of the Bible, it's not short of scenes of violence and degradation itself.

But the man in the blue shirt makes a good point - the whole range of interests encountered on this site must appear very dubious to the outside world. Women dressing up as schoolgirls for punishment and sex, people seeking mental control over their partners, men beating women with straps and canes for sexual gratification ... it doesn't make very good reading, does it ?

If we're going to limit ourselves to talking about things which wouldn't shock the nice couple next door, then would the last person to leave please turn out the light. There's nothing wrong with "love, harmony and respect within a BDSM relationship" but I joined this site in order to chat to like-minded folk about all sorts of other spanking and corporal punishment too.

-R

Machoman

06-09-2005, 09:00

Adele Haze

06-09-2005, 09:45

Protect us from extrems of the BDSM world.

1. There is no "us". Please speak for yourself, and ask questions that relate to individuals rather than groups.

2. You are an adult. You are responsible for what you view. If you come across an image online that upsets you, the responsible course of action is to look away, and not put yourself in the way of images like that in the future.

Handy

06-09-2005, 09:50

Machoman you don't say at what age you had this revelation and I should think that would be quite important. If you were 8 it is quite a lot different to if you were 20.

cheeky

06-09-2005, 10:17

Machoman

I wasnt referring to spanking in isolation if you read what I put.

I appreciate there may be some who link their interest in spanking to a childhood memory etc etc. That isnt, however, the case for everyone.

My point was that the average joe bloggs on the street probably wouldnt distinguish between our site and those which WE would consider much more extreme.....

Whats to stop a man seeing this site and then turning into a violent man who beats up women in dark alleyways?

A load of crap in my opinion....but I do wonder whether the powers that be will view it that way....

Machoman

06-09-2005, 10:22

Machoman you don't say at what age you had this revelation and I should think that would be quite important. If you were 8 it is quite a lot different to if you were 20.
I was 8 , I am interested to know what the difference is.

Handy

06-09-2005, 11:53

Simply that in childhood you probably are more impressionable. I would be very surprised if a 20 year suddenly discovered a desire for spanking after seeing it happen. Of course I could be totally wrong.

Niki Flynn

06-09-2005, 12:38

peewee

06-09-2005, 16:21

I was watching TV yesterday, a story of a woman whose daughter was strangled by some psycopath. Apparantly he had been accessing web sites of a violent nature showing images of women being strangled/ beaten etc.

Of course the usual claim is that without such images he probably wouldn't have been compelled to strangle his girlfriend, his victim.That these web images somehow encouraged his activity and strengthened his need to actually commit the crime.

I don't for one minute believe the intenet creates psycopaths or encourages perverts to carry out crimes in real life. Those types of people exist with or without the internet, but there are always going to be people who DO believe this to be the case.

Many psychologists believe that when potential rapists etc view imagery they seek, it reduces their intention to go ahead with the real act - a safety valve in effect. Of course a rape or murder not taking place will not be on the news.

In effect the Governments censorship plans could actually increase the very thing they claim they're trying to reduce.

GorBlimey

06-09-2005, 16:57

Surely, the least we can do to wayward members who are guilty of posting pictures of bottoms that have been spanked with anything more than a feather is to send them to Coventry and perhaps ostracise them, too!

GB ;)

BerkshireGent

06-09-2005, 17:19

Berkshire Gent, please read the well-read and well-informed posts on the other threads already relating to this topic. No offense, but it's not a black and white "us or them" issue. And Henry's ironic definition of pervert is right on.

Love,
Niki

Niki

I agree that it’s not black and white, things rarely are. It is a question of degree. We tolerate boxing and marshal arts which are certainly violent but we do have rules set the intended level of harm. I say intended because sometimes people do die. You are a professional actress who makes moves that I would describe as sever but I am sure you have your limits.

I am interested to know what you think your audience is enjoying in your movies. I wonderer if you feel you portraying consensual erotica, or role playing in a film depicting violence towards women for the sexual gratification of the onlooker.

It seems to me that as a part of the BDSM community we should self regulate and define what we believe are acceptable limits and develop our own code of conduct before it is imposed. Imposed it will certainly be so perhaps our lobby will go someway to defining the limit of the law.

sunnygirl

06-09-2005, 18:16

But what you seem to have failed to understand, BerkshireGent, is that this site already DOES self regulate - and very effectively, in my opinion.

As I have already said, i am unaware of any images of the severity that you are describing on THIS site (although i am well aware that they will exist on other sites). If you have seen images like that on this site, then i wish you would tell us where they are, because i have seen nothing like that in over 2 years!!

Frankly, if you cannot produce evidence that this site is NOT self regulating adequately, then i think that you should admit that this thread is something of an overreaction!!

sunnygirl.

Handy

06-09-2005, 19:09

In my first response I asked why you were asking this of this site which does not carry the images you keep referring to.

It like the Women's Institute saying they really must not indulge in cocaine!

Brigella

06-09-2005, 19:29

I feel it a valid question to ask.
How many of you actually take out membership for a paysite?
As it's only images that would be affected by the proposed ban.

Regards
Briggy

sunnygirl

06-09-2005, 21:09

I feel it a valid question to ask.
How many of you actually take out membership for a paysite?
As it's only images that would be affected by the proposed ban.
Personally, briggy, i would not pay to join a paysite. To be honest, i don't really find the images do that much for me - i find words much more exciting - stories and r/l accounts etc. However, i know that there are a lot of people who really enjoy the spanking pics that are out there, and there are a lot of good people taking these pics and posing for them, and i neither wish to denigrate the value of what they do, nor do i wish to see them persecuted for it.

Anyhow, the biggest reason that i come to this site is the friendship and support that i have found here, both as i have found myself within the spanking world, and in my wider, everyday life.

sunnygirl.

RubberDali

07-09-2005, 09:57

HenryIX

07-09-2005, 10:08

Is this a serious contribution or righteous indignation?

I give up.Is this a serious contribution or righteous indignation?
I give up.I do apologise, my dear boy. I'm afraid I made some assumptions:
If this chap is a member here, he must be an adult;
so he can probably do such things as read, write, spell and think, all at an adult level;
and so perhaps he can and will engage in a serious discussion of what he obviously recognises as a serious topic.
I now see that if I had read the original post more closely, I might have avoided those mistakes.

This time, let me see if I can dumb it down a bit.

You clearly realise that kinkiness varies from one person to the next. There is a wide spectrum, all the way from plain vanilla to the blackest depravity. Shall we picture the entire population arranged in that sequence, vanilla to the left, perves to the right?

Now let’s imagine that we pick someone at random and ask him or her to mark the point in the line where normality ends and perversion starts. I suggest that (s)he will very probably pick the point where (s)he stands, or somewhere very close to it. Most people tend to see themselves as normal, of course; but at the outer, kinkier end of normal, maybe because that makes them feel special. Yes, of course that is stupid, but it’s very common.

That is what led some anonymous genius to the ironic definition (thanks, Niki Flynn) which I quote: A pervert is anyone kinkier than I am. And I suggested that you were displaying exactly that kind of illogic. Is that clear now?

And can we now get on to some serious debate, discussion, argument, whatever? I should explain how that works:
One person makes one or more statements and/or asks one or more questions. (You did that in your original post).
Someone else replies, paying attention to what was actually said, and responding to it with care and respect. (I did that, and so did several other people.)
The original person responds in the same manner. (You have yet to do that. Would you like to do it now?)

sunnygirl

07-09-2005, 10:12

RubberDali

07-09-2005, 10:28

thanks to SunnyGirl and HenryIX

well put again...

"Celebrate Perversity!"

HenryIX

07-09-2005, 10:30

Can i add a rider to that third point, please HenryIX??

Whilst responding with care and respect, the original poster should answer the questions and points put by the subsequent posters.

Sadly I feel that this point needs to be made clearer to the OP.

sunnygirl.Thank you, sunnygirl. Not so much a reminder as a clarification of my culpably obscure post. Is this better?
One person makes one or more statements and/or asks one or more questions. (You did that in your original post).
Other people reply, paying attention to what was actually said, and responding to it with care and respect. (I did that, and so did several other people.)
The original person responds in the same manner to all of those people. (You have yet to do that. Would you like to do it now?)
Steps 2 & 3 are repeated as often as necessary.

sunnygirl

07-09-2005, 10:39

That is fine, Henry - but please rest assured that i meant no criticism of your post.

sunnygirl.

HenryIX

07-09-2005, 10:56

That is fine, Henry - but please rest assured that i meant no criticism of your post.

sunnygirl.I understood that, sunnygirl. [Bows.] You write more clearly than I do. An uncomfortable admission, since writing is my main livelihood. :rolleyes:

Magnum

07-09-2005, 11:41

I understood that, sunnygirl. [Bows.] You write more clearly than I do. An uncomfortable admission, since writing is my main livelihood. :rolleyes:
Uncomfortable maybe Henry, but dignified.
_

Orson

07-09-2005, 17:19

as others have said here- I agree that whatever happens between 2 or more CONSENTING adults is no one else's business

Im afraid it is other peoples business Dali. There was the case in Germany a while ago where one person consented to be killed by another. If I remember right he was convicted of murder. Even under the "safety umbrella" of consent there are grey areas that are difficult to couch in law.

sunnygirl

07-09-2005, 19:32

Originally posted by HenryIX
I understood that, sunnygirl. [Bows.] You write more clearly than I do. An uncomfortable admission, since writing is my main livelihood.
Originally posted by Magnum
Uncomfortable maybe Henry, but dignified.
.....and an accolade that i do not feel that i deserve, but that made me blush anyhow.

Thankyou
sunnygirl

BerkshireGent

07-09-2005, 20:07

BerkshireGent- do you bottom- have you ever?

as a male bottom (only occasional top) the best spanking's for me have been the ones you seem to be describing... if you simply 'rosy' my cheeks- you are just getting started...

as others have said here- I agree that whatever happens between 2 or more CONSENTING adults is no one else's business

I personally like it top and bottom. However my personal view, that I think is reasonable, is that there should be no harm physically or mentally from BDSM play. So pink bottoms are up, bruises and blood down.

Whilst the consenting adult argument is often used it is not in itself valid. One might consent to something for fear of another. Take for example the victim of domestic violence who is afraid to leave house, children maybe to escape the actions of their partner…. It does happen! And then we go to the extreme where a couple of German nutcases agreed a death pact after consuming the latter deceased person’s genitals.

BerkshireGent

07-09-2005, 20:16

I do apologise, my dear boy. I'm afraid I made some assumptions:
If this chap is a member here, he must be an adult;
so he can probably do such things as read, write, spell and think, all at an adult level;
and so perhaps he can and will engage in a serious discussion of what he obviously recognises as a serious topic.
I now see that if I had read the original post more closely, I might have avoided those mistakes.

This time, let me see if I can dumb it down a bit.

You clearly realise that kinkiness varies from one person to the next. There is a wide spectrum, all the way from plain vanilla to the blackest depravity. Shall we picture the entire population arranged in that sequence, vanilla to the left, perves to the right?

Now let’s imagine that we pick someone at random and ask him or her to mark the point in the line where normality ends and perversion starts. I suggest that (s)he will very probably pick the point where (s)he stands, or somewhere very close to it. Most people tend to see themselves as normal, of course; but at the outer, kinkier end of normal, maybe because that makes them feel special. Yes, of course that is stupid, but it’s very common.

That is what led some anonymous genius to the ironic definition (thanks, Niki Flynn) which I quote: A pervert is anyone kinkier than I am. And I suggested that you were displaying exactly that kind of illogic. Is that clear now?

And can we now get on to some serious debate, discussion, argument, whatever? I should explain how that works:
One person makes one or more statements and/or asks one or more questions. (You did that in your original post).
Someone else replies, paying attention to what was actually said, and responding to it with care and respect. (I did that, and so did several other people.)
The original person responds in the same manner. (You have yet to do that. Would you like to do it now?)

Sorry but your argument to me seems to be one of a man who enjoys giving hard punishments and is seeking desperatly to justify himself. I expect a lot would agree with your position. I don’t. Judging by the poll I would seem to have more support for my position.

Anya

07-09-2005, 20:31

All that said there are people here who do like the more severe stuff and as long as we can be assured the people partaking in the making of the image were consenting then though Id avoid looking at it given the choice do I have the right to deprive others of seeing it?

The prob is if I had to judge the removal id possibly remove a lot that others found perfectly acceptable, if someone into the most severe end was judging they may well leave pics that many found distressing.

My feelings precisely LMO!

I recognise that I definitely come from the 'wimp' end of the spectrum when it comes to personal limits - but like you, provided the images portray consensual activities between consenting adults I hope I wouldn't judge the 'tastes' of others too harshly.

There's always a dichotomy for me between 'censorship' and 'protecting the vulnerable' and getting the balance between the two 'right' is nigh on impossible when legislation is often - by its very nature - a black and white affair! I guess in the face of real exploitation of the vulnerable, I would conclude that driving some of us to find a more private way of enjoying our 'kink' would be a small price to pay. But at the same time, I know there are people on this site with much more knowledge about how real a danger this exploitation is and how far legislation would serve to eradicate it! And certainly some of the self-righteous posturing by some people on this matter leaves me wondering why, if they find us all so perverse and the material so offensive do they keep dropping by?

I am quite heartened by the Scottish Executive/Home Office email which seems to suggest that they are at least trying to take the views of people involved in 'the scene'. I hope they will listen to the responses from the legitimate, professional & responsible voices that I have heard raised on BSC and use their views to balance the views of those whose public protestations often hide much murkier waters!

Anya

roddy9uk

07-09-2005, 20:37

I agree with Anya and LMO here. While I personally like the wimpish end of the "action" I see no reason to ban other's tastes and certainly NO need to be "protected" from them. I can choose to look at what i want.

I don't in any case look at dvd's or pics (or at least extremely rarely) preferring the real world to such things but that is simply my taste. I wouldn't take it on myself to judge what others should see.

roddy

Anya

07-09-2005, 20:50

Sorry but your argument to me seems to be one of a man who enjoys giving hard punishments and is seeking desperatly to justify himself. I expect a lot would agree with your position. I don’t. Judging by the poll I would seem to have more support for my position.

Did you pause to consider for one moment that your poll represents only two views so extreme that it might be difficult for anyone to vote "No"???

Presumably you think a "No" vote means
"Yay! Bring on the violent and degrading images!" when it could mean "I'm an adult who can decide for myself what constitutes 'violent and degrading'."

I, for one, didn't vote because neither option expressed my standpoint.

Anya

BerkshireGent

07-09-2005, 21:31

Did you pause to consider for one moment that your poll represents only two views so extreme that it might be difficult for anyone to vote "No"???

Presumably you think a "No" vote means
"Yay! Bring on the violent and degrading images!" when it could mean "I'm an adult who can decide for myself what constitutes 'violent and degrading'."

I, for one, didn't vote because neither option expressed my standpoint.

Anya

Sorry but I thought it was extreme verses moderation!

I am sure you can decide for yourself what is and is not acceptable. I have to wonder what you do when you do find somthing unacceptable. Cross the street perhaps?

Anya

07-09-2005, 21:52

I have to wonder what you do when you do find somthing unacceptable. Cross the street perhaps?

I'm afraid you would have to be more specific before I can answer your question!

If you are asking what I do about stills or moving images which might offend me then yes, I do "cross the street" metaphorically speaking. I don't seek them out. I avoid them on the internet. I delete any Email that looks potentially offensive to my sensibilities and I occasionally even avail myself of the TV remote.

If, however, you mean to imply that I would close my eyes to violence, abuse, injustice or exploitation if faced with it in reality, then I think most people who know me would affirm that I would do everything within my limited power to oppose it.

sunnygirl

07-09-2005, 21:56

And we still do not have an answer to the question about the whereabouts of the images from this site that BerkshireGent finds so disturbing and upsetting - and that the poor chap needs protecting from!!

So - once again, BG - can you tell us if you have found such images on this site, and if so, where??

I suspect that the reason that this question is being ignored by the Gent is that, as i said in my first post, this site does regulate itself pretty well, and there are no violent and degrading images - or if there are, they have been so well hidden that i have not seen them in over two years of membership.

You asked what happens when we find something unacceptable. We an intelligent membership that is perfectly willing to report any problems (such as images that they find offensive, or references to children), and we have moderators who take swift and decisive action when it is needed. What more do you want?

If you don't like the images that you see on this site, don't look at them. Come to the site for whatever it is that you do like about it, but ignore the spanking pics.

sunnygirl.

DrMax

07-09-2005, 22:06

I haven't voted because the terms violent and degrading in relation to spanking/BDSM are so subjective that the poll is meaningless

Anya

07-09-2005, 22:16

I haven't voted because the terms violent and degrading in relation to spanking/BDSM are so subjective that the poll is meaningless

My point, precisely, Dr Max - though more succinctly and less emotively expressed, I admit! :)

FraDiabolo

07-09-2005, 22:38

So - once again, BG - can you tell us if you have found such images on this site, and if so, where??
No. Of course he cannot...

CateStoker

07-09-2005, 22:38

Sorry but your argument to me seems to be one of a man who enjoys giving hard punishments and is seeking desperatly to justify himself. I expect a lot would agree with your position. I don’t. Judging by the poll I would seem to have more support for my position.
Can you not see that this could be from the way you phrased the question? " Lets keep this site free of violent and degrading images"... who is likely to answer no to that? Most of us who do like to see images of hard punishments do not see them as violent or degrading....so would still vote YES on your poll!

It would perhaps be fairer to ask "Would you prefer to keep this site free from pictures of bruised bottoms?"

Even the title of your thread is biased towards the position that you are seeking. Perhaps those that disagree didn't even bother to enter the thread.

Henry is spot on, IMO.

katie

HenryIX

07-09-2005, 23:31

Sorry but your argument to me seems to be one of a man who enjoys giving hard punishments and is seeking desperately to justify himself. I expect a lot would agree with your position. I don’t. Judging by the poll I would seem to have more support for my position.Rubbish, on several counts.

There is absolutely nothing in my argument which makes any reference at all to the severity involved in what I like to do. I simply did not address that issue. I have now reread what I wrote. Quite clearly, it could well have been signed by someone who neither gives nor receives hard punishments, nor wants to.

A fortiori, there is not a single syllable there that can possibly be taken as an attempt at justifying my disciplinary tastes, whatever those may be.

In fact, such content would have been irrelevant to your chosen topic. I was responding to your post, which is ostensibly not about what people should do but about what we should be allowed to see.

The same goes for your poll. It asks nothing about preferred activities. It addresses only censorship. Even on that issue, it is a supremely useless exercise. You obviously know nothing at all about questionnaire design. The problem is obvious, not only to anyone who has been professionally or academically involved in that activity (as I have, to a limited extent) but to anyone who has even focused a little thought on such matters (do you do thought?).

Let me explain. In polling, amongst other rules:
You must not ask about a preference in terms which themselves imply preference. Avoid value-laden words, in other words.
You must not combine two items that can be separated.
You must not assume anything.

Here is a simple case. You can't ask:
What should we do with unwelcome immigrants and refugees?
Instead, you need four questions:
Which refugees are welcome, and which (if any) are not?
Now we have that settled, what shall we do with the unwelcome ones?
Which immigrants are welcome, and which (if any) are not?
Now we have that settled, what shall we do with the unwelcome ones?
Do you see why that is so? Suppose you ask the single question, and I answer Send them home. You still don't know which ones I would send home. All of them, or only convicted felons with syphilis and crippling debts? And would they be refugees, or immigrants, or both?

Now let's look at your question. Well, it isn't a question, it's an exhortation, but it has a ? at the end, so let's pretend. (Oh, that reminds me, I have put in the missing apostrophe.)
Let's keep this site free of violent and degrading images?First, you need to separate that into two "questions":
Let's keep this site free of violent images?
Let's keep this site free of degrading images?
That's obvious enough, I think. You want everyone to vote on each issue. You can't assume that every individual would answer both in the same way.

Next, both violent and degrading are value-laden terms. You can't usefully just ask what I want to do about degrading images: you need to know which images I see that way; and the same for violent ones. So you need four questions:
What do you class as violent images?
Should we keep this site free of those?
What do you class as degrading images?
Should we keep this site free of those?
Of course, questions 2 & 4 would have to be complex to produce useful answers. One popular way to do it is by displaying a large number of images and asking respondents to classify them as violent or not, and as degrading or not. That might allow you to combine those two questions.

Finally, please look at my rule 3 above, and then look again at these unanswerable remarks from the admirable sunnygirl: And we still do not have an answer to the question about the whereabouts of the images from this site that BerkshireGent finds so disturbing and upsetting - and that the poor chap needs protecting from!!

So - once again, BG - can you tell us if you have found such images on this site, and if so, where??

I suspect that the reason that this question is being ignored by the Gent is that, as i said in my first post, this site does regulate itself pretty well, and there are no violent and degrading images - or if there are, they have been so well hidden that i have not seen them in over two years of membership. ...In other words: your "poll" assumes that the site contains these images that you so strongly deplore, but that is a lie. If it were not, then surely you would by now have responded to repeated invitations to give specific examples.

To sum up. Your original post was a muddle-headed, mean-minded, disingenuous response to your own mistaken perceptions. Several members have offered intelligent, insightful, intellectually honest and heroically courteous replies. All of those qualities have been conspicuously absent from your own subsequent posts, as indeed they were from the original post.

Here is a personal note. A guiding principle of my life, whether at work or elsewhere, has been this: I don't mind dealing with obtuseness; I don't mind dealing with ill-faith; but a combination of the two is dangerous. Your conduct on this thread is dangerous.

BerkshireGent

07-09-2005, 23:34

Rubbish, on several counts.

There is absolutely nothing in my argument which makes any reference at all to the severity involved in what I like to do. I simply did not address that issue. I have now reread what I wrote. Quite clearly, it could well have been signed by someone who neither gives nor receives hard punishments, nor wants to.
............................................binati on of the two is dangerous. Your conduct on this thread is dangerous.

I think he doth protest to much.

HenryIX

07-09-2005, 23:38

I think he doth protest to much.I think he knows when he is beaten (humanely, of course, without violence or degradation.) The time-stanps show that he cannot possibly have read my long post before responding. This bears out the apparently general belief that he doesn't take opposition seriously.

I also think he has no idea what was meant by the line that he has misquoted.

HenryIX

07-09-2005, 23:47

Sorry but I thought it was extreme verses moderation!Would those be anything like Satanic Verses?

Chopper81

07-09-2005, 23:49

I think he doth protest to much.

Well you are as entitled to your opinion just the same as everybody else. However, Henry does make some very valid and relevant points. Also poses some very pertinent questions. Not to mention some rather useful tips on how to construct a useful poll. (Thanks Henry).

I am still waiting to hear where these "Violent and Degrading" images are hidden on BS. Despite posting numerous pictures on the forums, I don't recall ever posting one that was either violent or degrading to anyone. Maybe I am just not looking in the right places. Be a pal and let me in on the secret.

You could also explain explain in simple terms for us thick bomb damaged ex soldiers, what you define as "Violent" and "Degrading". By doing so you might help clear the waters so to speak.

Chopper.

BerkshireGent

07-09-2005, 23:56

And we still do not have an answer to the question about the whereabouts of the images from this site that BerkshireGent finds so disturbing and upsetting - and that the poor chap needs protecting from!!

So - once again, BG - can you tell us if you have .................. Come to the site for whatever it is that you do like about it, but ignore the spanking pics.

sunnygirl.

Try a Google search of this site and you will see there are over 2000 images, then if you want to narrow it down add perhaps 'rge' and see how what you come up with. Or you could just clic on one of the promoted links at the top of the page for simulated scenes of kids being beaten against there wishes 'the schoolgirl'. The headmaster yeilding the cane etc.... If you were old enough to have been caned at school you might understand real pain and humiliation. But of course the kids have been naughty so they must be punished, so thats ok isent it.......

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&as_qdr=all&q=.jpg+site%3Abritishspanking.com+&btnG=Search&meta=

HenryIX

08-09-2005, 05:18

Uncomfortable maybe Henry, but dignified.
... and an accolade that i do not feel that i deserve, but that made me blush anyhow.

Thankyou
sunnygirlBows deeply to both. Enough said.

sunnygirl

08-09-2005, 11:57

BerkshireGent - once again you have failed to provide any examples of violent and degrading images FROM THIS SITE - and since you clearly feel that they exist here, it is up to you, not me, to prove this contention, without which, your poll is baseless and a total waste of our time.

You refer to following the links from the banners at the top of the pages of this site, and finding images that you object to there. Ohhh dear - have you not realised that these are links to OTHER sites, and these images are not actually on our site at all? The banners are there because the income from them allows this site to continue running and offering a service which is free.

Finally, i did take the time to read HenryIX's post, and found it most cogent and clear - however, it is equally clear that you have not read it, or if you did, you did not understand it at all!

So - let us keep it simple for you.

Please answer the two following questions:

Which specific images ON THIS SITE are you classifying as violent and degrading?

And

What do you consider makes a photograph violent and degrading (please be detailed and specific)?

Finally, i have to say that i find your statement:
Or you could just clic on one of the promoted links at the top of the page for simulated scenes of kids being beaten against there wishes 'the schoolgirl'. The headmaster yeilding the cane etc.... If you were old enough to have been caned at school you might understand real pain and humiliation. But of course the kids have been naughty so they must be punished, so thats ok isent it.......
to be an absolute insult. If you knew me, you would know that i am vociferous in my objections to any references to underage spankings - even fictional - on this site. What exists on other sites, of which i am not a member, is entirely outside my sphere of influence, save that i 'vote with my wallet' by not paying the membership such sites require.

Frankly, it shows the weakness of your case, that you see the need to descend to such unpleasant and personal insults, and i hope that the moderators will see this and take action.

sunnygirl.

Mogul

08-09-2005, 12:26

What worries me is that, at the time of this posting, nine people do not want the site kept free from violent and degrading images :(

HenryIX

08-09-2005, 12:42

What worries me is that, at the time of this posting, nine people do not want the site kept free from violent and degrading images :(Mogul, my friend, I thought I had dealt with that point in my screed about how not to word a poll. You are joking, I hope?

little mischievous one

08-09-2005, 13:09

Okay..... there have been images on here that I PERSONALLY have found too strong and somewhat designed to appear humiliating.. a couple i think were posted by Frants, sorry ive had a quick skim and couldnt locate them, they were too graphic for ME.

(As someone really only into spanking and not much into other BDSM practices, I tend to favour the red bum types and certainly not pics of hog tieing etc )

They did however depict adults.. and i presume were consensual as i believe they were part of the well known Lupus groups publication..

They did show excessive bruising and damage IMO. They did include a degree of restraint and exposure of genitals i didnt like...

Thats a matter of MY personal taste.. While id have appreciated a warning that these images were severe,( so i didnt open them), as they were consensual and featured adults I couldnt really expect that they were removed just cos I didnt like them.

To imply tho that these, or pictures which show the popular school girl genre, (again not my thing really), are in anyway approaching in depravity levels, actual pictures of actual under 18s being subjected to CP is simply silly.

There is a world of difference, and Moderators here do remove, and most members here do report pics and images they believe MAY show under 18s in cp scenarios.

The prob on this site, for me then remains who decides: ( with ref to viewing, possession and display of images ),

what is permissible to show ?
what isnt ?

What constitutes hurt?
what constitutes harm?
At what level does depiction of this in consensually made images become unacceptable?

What constitutes degradation/ humiliation?
Where do the levels shown become excessive to the extent they should not be displayed?

I think it would probably be well nigh impossible to write a remit for this on which all would agree.( or even one where a sufficient majority could be reached to do so). To be prescriptive enough to work it would have to consider so many factors it would become cumbersome and unweildy .

Where one man/womans "reasonable " level is anothers mild, or anothers severe someone will always loose something.

Im not of the school of thought that looking at an image will lead neccessarily to anything bad except in cases where there is a predisposition. ( and in this case almost anything could tip someone over the edge).

Most people have a limit over which disgust and horror overtakes the pleasure factor and even the facination factor.

I choose not to open many pics here that I suspect, ( from experience of other posts by certain members), will cause me to feel revolted.

Unless however they show things which are clear atrocities such as rape, bestiality necrophillia, torture, or other things unrelated to the spanking scene, (again where spanking depiction begins and ends begins and ends is a mute point ), I dont really feel I can demmand their removal.

Handy

08-09-2005, 13:26

I'm sorry but if you want to start a general debate about pictures on spanking sites that's fine, but you cannot debate it about this site because we do not have a gallery and relatively few pictures of any kind are posted here.

I personally think this thread is a waste of time from beginning to end and this will be my last contribution to it.

PS Berkshire It's an idiot's argument to come up with that old cliche, 'He protesteth too much.' People protest because they disagree with what you say.

mikesmad

08-09-2005, 13:39

I think I agree with my learned friend, Handy...........

......ye cannae get mair violent an degrading as was oan the news when Ah wis trying tae eat ma mince an tatties.......

..........boadies floatin awe oor the screen curtisy o' the Beeb!

BerkshireGent

08-09-2005, 18:14

BerkshireGent - once again you have failed to provide any examples of violent and degrading i......................you knew me, you would know that i am vociferous in my objections to any references to underage spankings - even fictional - on this site. What exists on other sites, of which i am not a member, is entirely outside my sphere of influence, save that i 'vote with my wallet' by not paying the membership such sites require.

Frankly, it shows the weakness of your case, that you see the need to descend to such unpleasant and personal insults, and i hope that the moderators will see this and take action.

sunnygirl.

Silly girl.

Don’t you realise that it is irrelevant where an image is hosted, its about where you access it from and this site is full of links to instant fulfilment.

And if you are so vociferace in references to underage spanking why are you not able to see the banners on the front page of this site that lead to the 'fictional' sites you deplore.

sunnygirl

08-09-2005, 18:30

Oh dear Berkshire - i obviously should have expressed myself a little more simply for you.

When i say that i object vociferously to fictional underage spanking, i mean stories about the spanking of children, and references to actual underage spankings.

However much you might dislike the 'fictional' sites that you are referring to, the fact remains that the women who appear in these images ARE over the age of consent.

To address your point about the banners - they are not an area of the site that the membership has any control over, as advertising is in the control of HeadMaster, the site owner. If you have a problem with this, then a poll is not the correct way to go about it, instead you should contact HeadMaster directly.

And finally, i (and others who have posted on this thread) would still like to have some definitive answer from you about what you consider to be a violent and degrading image, and whether you have found any such images on this site. It is a reasonable question, and i fail to see why you are so unwilling to address it, that you would rather stoop to unpleasant and very ungentlemanly abuse in order to avoid answering it!

sunnygirl.

roddy9uk

08-09-2005, 18:43

Berkshire Gent

You cannot click on a banner "by accident" unless you are very careless. If you do not like the idea of what is being advertised..simple..do not click on it..

If such banners were on, say, a DisneyWorld website then you MIGHT have a point..but they aren't (as far as I know, I never go to such sites).

This is a site for adults who what they like/dislike. No-one makes us come here and we simply do not need protection from what we do not have to look at. An image is an image, just that, and by itself can do no harm. Did the success of the Lord of the Rings lead to a sudden rash of cavalry charges across the western world? If it did I must have missed them. Did "Kill Bill" lead to heaps of severed limbs in the streets of our towns?

When I see (rarely) pictures of apparently severely caned bottoms my first thought is "I wonder who the make-up artist was?" Even if I decide that the marks are real and not made up it doesn't persuade me to go and try and replicate them.

You commented earlier to the effect that if someone had actually undergone such a caning they would know how painful and humiliating it was. Well, I HAVE undergone such a caning and yes it was painful but not particularly humiliating. The models in the videos and pictures are not forced to take part. You seem to miss a crucial point in all adult CP activities in that willing submission to the caning/strapping/whatever is essential to it. Because of that willing submission it cannot be "humiliating".

No-one here needs "protection" from any image posted HERE as no-one posts any pic that does not conform to the "safe sane and consensual" rules we all abide by. If they DID then the moderators would remove them.

Your poll as has been pointed out is badly constructed. The only way anyone can see the results of it is to vote..but there is no option for "neither of the above" and therefore the results lose any validity they might have had.

roddy

HenryIX

08-09-2005, 18:50

... vociferous in my objections to any references to underage spankings ....... if you are so vociferace in references to underage spanking ...Ya know, sunnygirl, we just might be wasting our time. Even a cantankerous old pedant can understand when a linguistically challenged person makes errors of grammar and spelling. However, when this nincompoop tries to copy a few words from your post, he introduces a spelling error into a word that you got right, and then misses out the next four. Where do you think he was when the brains were handed out?

Brigella

08-09-2005, 20:06

roddy9uk

08-09-2005, 20:13

Did anybody see the news tonight, about a mother seeking websites to be controlled?

Her 15yr old daughter commited suicide after looking and participated on suicide web sites.
Not related to spanking, but it does blow the theory that websites don't encourage behaviour out of the water.

Regards
Brigella

Sorry Brigella but if the girl was suicidal (for whatever reason) maybe thats WHY she logged onto such sites. I can't imagine why anyone other than a suicidal person (or an advisor like a Samaritan) would WANT to log on to such a site.

Do we log on to spanking sites and then get the urge to spank or be spanked? Or because we HAVE that urge already we then log on...

roddy

Brigella

08-09-2005, 21:13

That's right roddy, but perhaps some with a fantasy of spanking only act upon it once viewing websites?
It is those that worry me, because if they stumble upon a severe spanking site, it sets their precedent.

love
Briggy

Magnum

08-09-2005, 21:55

I think roddy is right. People are mistaking an effect as the cause. If somebody has a predisposition to do anything at all, it could result in their doing it in real life AND looking it up on the internet. But without the predisposition, neither would happen.

There are two areas for investigating the effect of websites. The first is where stumbling upon a website could awaken a latent predisposition. The second is where accessing websites enhances or exacerbates a predisposition. But it cannot be that accessing websites would create a desire that was not already present in the individual, if only seminally.
_

BerkshireGent

08-09-2005, 22:10

BerkshireGent

08-09-2005, 22:14

Ya know, sunnygirl, we just might be wasting our time. Even a cantankerous old pedant can understand when a linguistically challenged person makes errors of grammar and spelling. However, when this nincompoop tries to copy a few words from your post, he introduces a spelling error into a word that you got right, and then misses out the next four. Where do you think he was when the brains were handed out?

Oh dear. Unable to debate the propersition you are reduced to insults. Seem like a stereo typical 'I must control everything about what you' dom. I am happy to accept my lituarrreeee limitations but not your proppperzzzzisions.

sunnygirl

08-09-2005, 22:35

Originally posted by Berkshire Gent
er! Its not ok to write about spanking children but videos are ok. Which sunny planet are you from?
Please tell me where i said that videos of spanking children are ok!

I cannot control what advertising HeadMaster chooses to accept, nor can i affect the content of the myriad of other sites that exist on the internet. All i can do - and do - is to reject the opportunity to follow the links from this site, and reject the goods that are on sale from these sites.

I have to say that your insinuations about me could not be further from the truth, and they show more about the unpleasantness with which you think it is acceptable to meet reasoned debate than about my character.

Do you feel that by attacking me personally you are bolstering your case as the Guardian of all that is moral and good on this site? Do you think that people are going to respect you for it? I hate to tell you, but by descending to such depths, you damage your case, and demonstrate your utter lack of any real evidence of what you seek to condemn on this site, as well as your inability to enter politely into a reasoned debate.

sunnygirl.

HenryIX

08-09-2005, 23:39

er! Its not ok to write about spanking children but videos are ok. Which sunny planet are you from?She didn't say that, fool.

Romola

08-09-2005, 23:45

I'm sure that everyone will have been impressed by Berkshire Gent's carefully thought-out analysis of the issues in this thread and his diligent exegesis of the opposing position. I, for one, hope that all proponents of the possession law have similar rhetorical and analytical skills and a comparable standard of literacy.

HenryIX

08-09-2005, 23:49

Oh dear. Unable to debate the propersition you are reduced to insults. Seem like a stereo typical 'I must control everything about what you' dom. I am happy to accept my lituarrreeee limitations but not your proppperzzzzisions.Oh, silly child, please note the following:
I have been debating the so-called proposition all along.
It is you that have failed to do so, as several people have pointed out.
I am not a particularly controlling Dom.
I shan't try to explain that issue to someone who is clearly not equipped to understand D&S in any way.
If you think I'd be even faintly interested in controlling you, you flatter yourself.
I can't see how you reach such a conclusion--unless perhaps you have some dim feeling of being bullied by a superior intelligence.
That must be a familiar feeling for you: everyone else who has contributed to this thread has displayed an IQ one digit longer than yours.
I have not offered you any insult which you have not richly earned.

HenryIX

08-09-2005, 23:52

BerkshireGent

09-09-2005, 00:05

Originally posted by Berkshire Gent

Do you feel that by attacking me personally you are bolstering your case as the Guardian of all that is moral and good on this site? Do you think that people are going to respect you for it? I hate to tell you, but by descending to such depths, you damage your case, and demonstrate your utter lack of any real evidence of what you seek to condemn on this site, as well as your inability to enter politely into a reasoned debate.

sunnygirl.

Sunny

I am not attacking you personally. I have no idea who you are. What I am doing is pointing out the flaws I see in your argument much the same as you are doing with me.

In the fifties it was quite acceptable to refer to black people as ‘niggers’, gay men were put in prison and we hung people. Corporal punishment in schools was the norm, paedophilia was frowned and people didn’t mention the word cancer. Attitudes change.

Most of the men that I have met on the scene (I am in my sixties) have find that their interest is routed in school and home CP incidents at the time of puberty. Maybe they were loners or different but they found that they associated sexual drive with dominant or submissive scenarios.

Whilst the spanking school girl scenario is now treated as a bit ‘nudge nudge wink wink’ I think in time we will see it as unacceptable as drink driving. I don’t think we would want much to do with films about sexual activity with children even if it were simulated with adults. (But I bet there is a market out there).

Personally I would like to subscribe to a site that discussed the issues but was heavily moderated. The subscription to provide the funding, the moderation to make me feel comfortable that I could enter a site without the fear of an early morning visit from the boys in blue.

sunnygirl

09-09-2005, 07:11

Originally posted by Berkshire Gent
Personally I would like to subscribe to a site that discussed the issues but was heavily moderated. The subscription to provide the funding, the moderation to make me feel comfortable that I could enter a site without the fear of an early morning visit from the boys in blue.
Then maybe you should set up your own site, pay for the bandwidth yourself, and decide who, and what, you want on your site.

The fact remains that, amongst the panoply of fetish and spanking sites available, this site is extremely tame, due in large part to the vigilance of its members and the dedication of its moderators.

To be honest, if you object to the sorts of thing found on this site, then i suspect you will not be happy with any real spanking site.

For the record, i do consider your tone and the things that you have said about me in your recent posts to be an attack on me, and a particularly nasty one at that. Rest assured though, i am not holding my breath for an apology, as i doubt you have any intention of doing the right thing.

However, what disgusts me the most is the fact that you clearly have no intention of answering what i consider to be the basic questions that have been raised about your own beliefs.

So - in the vain hope that repetition will finally achieve a result:

Can you tell us if you have found any images that you consider violent and degrading ON THIS SITE (not in any sites reached by links from this site), and if so, where are they??

Secondly, what do YOU consider constitutes a violent and degrading image.

And finally, please point out where, in any of my writings on this site, i have stated that i consider spanking videos involving children to be acceptable.

sunnygirl.

roddy9uk

09-09-2005, 07:49

Sunny

Most of the men that I have met on the scene (I am in my sixties) have find that their interest is routed in school and home CP incidents at the time of puberty. Maybe they were loners or different but they found that they associated sexual drive with dominant or submissive scenarios.

............................................

Personally I would like to subscribe to a site that discussed the issues but was heavily moderated. The subscription to provide the funding, the moderation to make me feel comfortable that I could enter a site without the fear of an early morning visit from the boys in blue.

Berkshire Gent,

I have no way of knowing exactly whom you have met in the scene or how many or under what circumstances. But like tends to attract like and let me take a leap in the dark and posit that you have a deep-seated guilt-complex about your "interest". Maybe your first realisations DID come at puberty as you suggest but this is by no means true for all.

People on this site know me as a real person, not just as an internet "nick" and they know that I DO go out and about quite widely and talk, face to face, to many people. It is MY experience that the majority of men I have met first realised that they had an "interest" a long time before puberty. Whether the interest is in topping or bottoming it seems to surface at around the age of 7 (which is sometimes called the age of reason..the age when a child starts to positively think and consider rather than just react to circumstances). I say this not just from meeting one or two from this country but from meeting many from around the world.

Such discussion as you seem to want does exist but it exists more in real-life meetings of munches and parties where people know who they are talking to. It does not exist on the net for the very good reason that it is impossible to separate fantasy from real-life, lie from truth, when the "correspondent" is an unknown who exists purely as a nick in a chat-room. Groups like BS which are heavily leavened with those who meet real-life are better than some of the sites where no-one meets at all.

I, like many many others, did not find my interest through the net. I already had it and knew that there were real-life avenues to explore it. I simply use the net as a short-cut to getting there. You simply cannot stumble across sites like these by pure accident. Search engines are not like the pages of a book that can be idly flicked through. You HAVE to enter the key words and that means the key words must already mean something to you.

roddy

BerkshireGent

09-09-2005, 08:25

Berkshire Gent,

.................................. Maybe your first realisations DID come at puberty as you suggest but this is by no means true for all.

....................Whether the interest is in topping or bottoming it seems to surface at around the age of 7 (which is sometimes called the age of reason..the age when a child starts to positively think and consider rather than just react to circumstances).
roddy

Roddy

I think you are right. I have become more upset in recent years over my sexual orientation with regard to what I now see as antisocial. It has affected the way I have treated woman in my twenties and thirties. I think it has been a unhelpful burden that has got in the way. For many years I used the dom role as a way of life but I now see it as a defence to justify my position.

With regard to the age of socialisation I was taught that this started earlier in life at the point a child could start to converse. I have no doubt that the pattern is laid down at an early age but I think the sexual link takes place during puberty when your newfound sexuality merges with your other conceptions of the world.

Chopper81

09-09-2005, 08:28

Originally posted by Berkshire Gent

Quote:
Personally I would like to subscribe to a site that discussed the issues but was heavily moderated. The subscription to provide the funding, the moderation to make me feel comfortable that I could enter a site without the fear of an early morning visit from the boys in blue.

I have been reading this thread and trying to figure out what BG is trying to achieve, if anything.

I did not reply to your poll because I find the questions are far to simple but cover a huge range of possibilities. They also take no account of any persons ideas of what is degrading or violent.

I am of the school of thought that a smack in the mouth followed by a headbutt is just an extension of diplomacy by other means. sunny on the other hand is someone that prefers to be vocally diplomatic, courteous and well reasoned. Roddy, Briggella, Henry and Romola also favour a rational, intelligent debate. However, our means of debating an issue do not alter the fact that any one of us would without question, reject any image or written material that depicts any sexual or cp scene involving a child or an unwilling adult on this site.

Members of BS are a community and IMO we have a high standard of moral values. Those values are clearly demonstrated when anyone decides to cross the line, so to speak.

The style of BG's posts is IMO one of a person that has come up with a poorly thought out course of action and will not listen to what others have to say about his comments. BG has invited comment by posting his poll. Several intelligent people have pointed out the error in his train of thought in a polite and courteous manner, but he will still not accept that he is wrong on several counts.

You have also made another mistake BG, a big one. To even think that sunnygirl would condone the posting of written material or images of children in spanking or sexual scenarios is highly offensive to me and any other right thinking member of BS. sunny and her family have been guests in my home, I have enjoyed her company many times. You would struggle to find a more pleasant lady, BUT!!!! Go near one of her children, or even suggest that something unpleasant should befall them and I guarantee you would never know a minutes peace from her wrath. I have known briggy ever since I joined this site and I have worked with her several times. Lovely lady and another devoted mother. I could mention several other ladies that are members and are mothers, no need to. They would all defend to the death thier children. They would all also do something very quickly about any post or image that involved children.

You owe the ladies of this site a big apology, in particular sunnygirl. Are you man enough to admit you goofed big style BG? Or are you so arrogant that you cannot see what others are saying without resorting to very unpleasant insults?

Chopper.
Trying VERY hard to be calm and rational.

BerkshireGent

09-09-2005, 08:52

Originally posted by Berkshire Gent

.....................So - in the vain hope that repetition will finally achieve a result:

Can you tell us if you have found any images that you consider violent and degrading ON THIS SITE (not in any sites reached by links from this site), and if so, where are they??

Secondly, what do YOU consider constitutes a violent and degrading image.

And finally, please point out where, in any of my writings on this site, i have stated that i consider spanking videos involving children to be acceptable.

sunnygirl.

In your post you said 'Oh dear Berkshire - i obviously should have expressed myself a little more simply for you.

When i say that i object vociferously to fictional underage spanking, i mean stories about the spanking of children, and references to actual underage spankings.

However much you might dislike the 'fictional' sites that you are referring to, the fact remains that the women who appear in these images ARE over the age of consent.'

This seemed to me to be saying that because the videos feature actors over the age of consent they are ok.

I have already stated that my limit is pink bottoms not blood or brusing. Anything more than this is, I think, unacceptable.

If you had followed the search of the site through google you will have turned up many images many of which emanate from Rigid East / Lupus who seem to cater for the extremists I deplore. I am not prepared to download these images and repost them here.

sunnygirl

09-09-2005, 09:28

Well, BG, i am not sure where you will find the spanking site that is mild enough for your tastes - and i will repeat my assertion that this IS definitely one of the milder spanking/fetish sites. If the site was as heavily moderated as you want it to be, i think that it would die very quickly.

To continue the debate, i do not feel that your poll options make clear what you are really seeking to censor on this site, and would suggest that you re-post the poll in a clearer form, so that you can get an accurate picture of the views of site members.

Might i suggest that you offer a range of options starting from 'slight pinkness' via 'well reddened' and 'bruised' to 'slight cane marks', 'severe cane marks' and ending at 'bottom welted, bruised and bleeding'. Such a set of options would give you a far more accurate idea of where within the spectrum of possible markings of a posterior the preferences of the site members truly lie.

I suspect that the majority of members would not think that anything more than a slightly reddened bottom can be catagorised as 'violent and degrading'.

Originally posted by Chopper
You have also made another mistake BG, a big one. To even think that sunnygirl would condone the posting of written material or images of children in spanking or sexual scenarios is highly offensive to me and any other right thinking member of BS. sunny and her family have been guests in my home, I have enjoyed her company many times. You would struggle to find a more pleasant lady, BUT!!!! Go near one of her children, or even suggest that something unpleasant should befall them and I guarantee you would never know a minutes peace from her wrath. I have known briggy ever since I joined this site and I have worked with her several times. Lovely lady and another devoted mother. I could mention several other ladies that are members and are mothers, no need to. They would all defend to the death thier children. They would all also do something very quickly about any post or image that involved children.

You owe the ladies of this site a big apology, in particular sunnygirl. Are you man enough to admit you goofed big style BG? Or are you so arrogant that you cannot see what others are saying without resorting to very unpleasant insults?

Thank-you very much for this Chopper - i value your opinion, and am always grateful for your friendship and support - and my kids think that you are the coolest person they have ever met. I was very upset and insulted by BG's insinuations about my lack of care or concern for children, but am not holding my breath for that apology.

sunnygirl.

PS - you could also add an item to your poll, asking if site members would like to see all links to/advertising by sites offering 'violent and degrading' images or videos featuring adult 'schoolgirls' banned from this site - but i would suggest that you should, at the same time, have some constructive suggestion as to how the revenue from these sources should be replaced, so that this site can remain, as it is now, basically a free site with some extras available to those who become 'Supporting Members'.

Niki Flynn

09-09-2005, 14:36

Niki, I agree that it’s not black and white, things rarely are. It is a question of degree. We tolerate boxing and marshal arts which are certainly violent but we do have rules set the intended level of harm. I say intended because sometimes people do die. You are a professional actress who makes moves that I would describe as sever but I am sure you have your limits.

Of course I do. And I have yet to have them violated. That's not to say it couldn't happen, but everyone I've worked with has been safe and professional.

If you've read Spanner, boxing is protected under something called "manly pursuits." Yes, it's ridiculous, but it's there. Perhaps the way to get What We Do protected by law is to insist on a similar sub-category. Another interesting bit for thought: my Lupus contracts define me as a "stunt person" - ie, someone who takes physical risks and incurs minor physical injuries professionally.

I am interested to know what you think your audience is enjoying in your movies. I wonderer if you feel you portraying consensual erotica, or role playing in a film depicting violence towards women for the sexual gratification of the onlooker.

"Violence towards women" is a loaded term and I disagree with its use in this context. And your either/or choice isn't correct. What I portray are nonconsensual fantasies enacted by consenting actors. I have no desire to be kidnapped, tortured and driven mad in reality, but it's a fantasy I've harbored for years. Playing it out onscreen was edgy, intense, cathartic fun. Yes, no matter how severe it is at the time, at the end of the day, it's ultimately fun. That's why I keep coming back.

It seems to me that as a part of the BDSM community we should self regulate and define what we believe are acceptable limits and develop our own code of conduct before it is imposed. Imposed it will certainly be so perhaps our lobby will go someway to defining the limit of the law.

I think that as individuals we should self-regulate. That's part of being an adult. What's being threatened is not the small group of sickos huddled in a corner wanking to girls-on-meathooks.com; what's being threatened is the individual's freedom to decide for himself what he will or will not view. (Aegean expresses it much better than I can in his thread on responses to the consultation document.)

BTW, I agree with Henry's posts about the faultiness of the poll. It's not for anyone else to decide what I should find violent or degrading (and we all have different limits), but because of the way the poll was worded, I could only tick NO.

Love,
Niki

BerkshireGent

09-09-2005, 18:19

BTW, I agree with Henry's posts about the faultiness of the poll. It's not for anyone else to decide what should find violent or degrading (and we all have different limits), but because of the way the poll was worded, I could only tick NO.

Love,
Niki

Niki

This is where i fundamentally disagree. I feel that as society we decided what is socially acceptable and what is not. That is how we frame our laws. We already have laws that define acceptability in films and the output from Lupus on this subject is not going to be allowed here. In fact I understand that some people have been prosecuted for selling them.

I think we have to set limits to protect ourselves and those of minorities who are not so able to defend themselves. Society as a whole will dictate acceptability or not.

GorBlimey

09-09-2005, 20:50

Hiya Barky

Does this little piccie fit the bill or is it too sarky?

GB :winky

The Ranger

09-09-2005, 21:19

Hiya Barky

Does this little piccie fit the bill or is to sarky?

GB :winky

see http://www.britishspanking.com/forums/showpost.php?p=536149&postcount=15

Thought you were a sad fantacist....this confirms it. So is she from Berkshire or Norway? Mind you, not having met her, you wouldn't know. LOL!

GorBlimey

09-09-2005, 21:54

Hi Rangie

Of course, you are perfectly correct. Yes, you did think that I might be a sad fantasist. I happen to think that you completely missed the point. We are both at liberty to think what we like.

GB :wink

sunnygirl

09-09-2005, 22:10

Berkshire Gent - i have to say that i am disappointed that you have totally ignored the points that i made about your poll, in my last post.

Your poll,as others have told you, gives respondants no real choice - they can either vote that they do want to see violent and degrading images on this site, and be branded as anti-social and amoral, or they can vote no, and put themselves firmly in your camp. Unfortunately, your camp is one where only a slightly pinkened bottom is acceptable, and i am pretty sure that if you expanded the terms of your poll along the lines that i suggested, then you would find that the majority do not want the most extreme and unpleasant images, but disagree that anything beyond a pinkened bottom is 'violent and degrading'.

I also have to take issue with your assertion that it is not the views of individuals that matter, but that it is society that should make the rules that will govern even our most private behaviour. Society is made up of individuals, and if those individuals do not have opinions of their own, where on earth do you think this beast you name 'society' is going to get its views from??

I would also like to question where you think this should all end. If the Government (or to use your term 'society') is allowed to regulate what we can and cannot do in the privacy of our bedrooms and our intimate lives, where will this end? It is not that long since homosexuality was illegal because 'society' thought that it was degrading and dirty - i like to think that we are more enlightened now, but if you open the door that allows 'society' to dictate what consenting adults can do in private, then there will be no end to what they can dictate, and freedom will be the loser.

I hope that i am not wasting my time typing all this. I have given this a lot of thought, and would like to think that you will do me the same courtesy. Sadly the experience of myself and others on this thread is that this is not often forthcoming.

sunnygirl.

Handy

09-09-2005, 22:23

I did warn you, sunny. :o

Chopper81

09-09-2005, 23:35

sunny

I wouldn't bother trying to get a reasoned response from bg anymore. He is obviously of the elite circleof those people that know far better than anyone else on all manner of things. Those same people roll over in bed one day, fall out of bed and bump thier heads. I think it is called a rude awakening or a reality check!!

I feel that nothing you can say is going to make this guy accept that he has put forward a poll that is at best badly constructed and at worst biased to the detriment of all those that take part in it.

bg appears to think that he knows all the answers to all of the questions and cannot comprehend the idea that he is even remotely at fault. Sounds like your average politician. Rude, bad mannered and only interested in his own agenda. You are wasting your breath trying. You can't educate something with a single dimension character despite the character being full of design flaws.

Chopper.

sarahcollins

10-09-2005, 08:13

Re. Handy's post :

From what little I remember of the Bible, it's not short of scenes of violence and degradation itself.

-R

Exactly so just take a look at the extreme, severe and obviously sadistic beating "Jesus" receives during the movie "The Passion Of The Christ" rated 18, the sheer violence and non consensual violence used during this scene turned my stomache. The injuries portrayed are very visible, very bloody yet this dipiction of extreme abuse and sadism is acceptable because it is "religious". Perhaps we should claim that spanking is a religion too!

Hugs all xxx

sunnygirl

10-09-2005, 08:13

So Chopper and Handy, i am flogging a dead horse. Hmm - that definitely sounds like one of those nasty violent and degrading perversions that BG is objecting to, so i had better cease and desist forthwith!!

On a serious note, my main worry with this poll is that BerkshireGent is actually perfectly representative of the vanilla world (being pretty much vanilla in his own views), and it is vanilla politicians that will be making the new laws. Are we going to be able to convince all of them that there is nothing wrong with one adult consensually spanking/caning/strapping another adult in private?

sunnygirl.

HenryIX

10-09-2005, 09:45

BerkshireGent:

May I call you "berk"?

Somewhere back there you laid claim to broad support amongst the members of this site.

Of the first 100 posts, 16 are in favour of your position; one or two are on topic but don't express an opinion; 4 or 5 are off topic. All the rest, from some 30 different members, are against you. Oh, by the way, of the 16 "Pro" posts, 15 are from you.

Are your supporters illiterate, or away at Butlins, or just naturally shy?

M. Martinet

10-09-2005, 09:48

BerkshireGent:

MayAre your supporters illiterate, or away at Butlins, or just naturally shy?

They have probably been washed, deflated, folded up, and put back in their boxes.

BerkshireGent

10-09-2005, 11:36

Hiya Barky

Does this little piccie fit the bill or is it too sarky?

GB :winky

I would say that that is quite acceptable :-)

BerkshireGent

10-09-2005, 11:37

Berkshire Gent - i have to say that i am disappointed that you have totally ignored the points that i made about your poll, in my last post.
.........................................

sunnygirl.

This is my poll on my question. Why dont you post a poll on your questions?

Handy

10-09-2005, 11:41

No, Berk, once you post a poll here it is in the public domain. You started the poll and from then on it beame everyone's. And we all have the right to vote on it, praise it or criticise it.

BerkshireGent

10-09-2005, 11:46

I would also like to question where you think this should all end. If the Government (or to use your term 'society') is allowed to regulate what we can and cannot do in the privacy of our bedrooms and our intimate lives, where will this end? It is not that long since homosexuality was illegal because 'society' thought that it was degrading and dirty - i like to think that we are more enlightened now, but if you open the door that allows 'society' to dictate what consenting adults can do in private, then there will be no end to what they can dictate, and freedom will be the loser.

sunnygirl.

As I have already said I feel that society should act against real harm. We all have to decide. Various groups will lobby for their view as you are now. With regard to Homosexuality society has changed the laws (not quickly enough in my view) which were dominated by religious indoctrination. We have liberalised dope smoking, banned CP in schools, banned fox hunting, banned discrimination and promoted equal opportunity. Its all come from government which we have in turn elected and lobbied.

Our freedoms come not from an anarchistic, I will do what I want society, but from a reasonable organised one that forbids guns for example and gets everyone to drive on the same side of the road.

We want a safe place for us and our kids to have fun.

Niki Flynn

10-09-2005, 11:58

As I have already said I feel that society should act against real harm. We all have to decide.

Our freedoms come not from an anarchistic, I will do what I want society, but from a reasonable organised one that forbids guns for example and gets everyone to drive on the same side of the road.

We want a safe place for us and our kids to have fun.

Utopia never has and never will exist. Murder, rape and crime will still occur in a total Communist state. That's because people are individuals. The proposed legislation isn't about stopping drunk drivers or some other measurable liability. It's about criminalizing what occurs between consenting adults and what is viewed in the privacy of our own homes. No one is advocating anarchy; we just want the freedom to make the choice ourselves not to view images we personally may find violent or degrading. We don't want it defined by someone else.

As has been stated before, there is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that viewing images leads to crime. Many psychologists theorize that the opposite is the case. So until there is some hard evidence that it IS dangerous, I will view the potential law as a crime against freedom.

Love,
Niki

Niki Flynn

10-09-2005, 12:06

RubberDali

10-09-2005, 12:32

HenryIX

10-09-2005, 13:05

Niki is right on this one (and her others actually) :goodjob

in USA they have begun to prosecute sex offenders for video-ing children playing in parks and on beaches- no nudity- no sex- just children playingAnd in Canada too, or at least that is what some Canadians fear. Last summer in Vancouver, I had two entirely unrelated experiences of this kind. In each case, a friend with a video camera, filming his or her own kids, took evasive action in order to avoid catching strangers' children in the shot.

BerkshireGent

10-09-2005, 14:01

One more point: the document states that it isn't looking to censor news reports. But people who get off on images of genuine violence probably find a lot of erotic pleasure in those images. Just as paedophiles will enjoy looking at children in TV ads or simply on the street. The erotic context isn't always necessary. Assuming for a minute that images do lead to crime, do we remove every potential trigger? Do we censor the news and history books and Hollywood films because they might appeal to someone who likes such things?

Love,
Niki

We do censor news, if we didn’t we would be seeing gory details of broken bodies, films are censored according to suitability by age and we have the obscene publications act covering books and films as well.

I am not advocating what people do privately in this poll or thread. Its about violent and degrading images on this site and legislation to protect people from the same.

I wouldn’t expect you to agree that images can affect attitude. You are a person who promotes extreme punishment videos that are illegal in this country.

Out of interest would you expect your daughter to be punished in that manner at school or home?

I would say that the type of films that you have produced have done nothing to promote BDSM activity as harmless fun between adults but has gone a long way to bring about regulation. You talk of sick people masturbating over your the films. Who do you think buys them?

zelie

10-09-2005, 16:39

I think the crux of the matter here is that Berk is openly uneasy about the erotic feelings he attaches to spanking. This type of cognitive dissonance can often be unbearable for the sufferer and i would respectfully request that other members (while holding perfectly valid opinions) should refrain from discussing this issue too much with him.

Here is not the place where he can find help.

Berk, if you speak to your GP you can be referred to a professional counsellor who may be able to help you come to terms with your uneasiness over your sexuality.

warm wishes
z

BerkshireGent

10-09-2005, 18:10

I think the crux of the matter here is that Berk is openly uneasy about the erotic feelings he attaches to spanking. ...............

warm wishes
z

I have no problems with my feelings on sexuality. They have changed over the years however.

What i am uneasy about is the rest of society cominging down hard on our community because of the actions of a few.

zelie

10-09-2005, 18:12

Now it's ok Berk, there's no need to pretend here.

Really, go speak to someone professional - hanging round internet boards is not helping you any :)

Redhead

10-09-2005, 23:10

What i am uneasy about is the rest of society cominging down hard on our community because of the actions of a few.Could BIGBOYM be one of them perhaps?
Observation

BIGBOYM of Berkshire, who last posted Apr. 5 wrote in his thread (after a criticizing a certain member):
When BDSM is used by people who are unable to relate on any other levelhttp://www.britishspanking.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18416
"Think of a man watching this material, why is he doing it? It’s because its turning him on, making him erect whilst he masturbates. Now how do you feel about someone who needs the sight of a severely beaten woman to cum?
With regard to severity for me the test is how I would feel about by daughter being tied down on a frame and beaten till she screams."

BerkshireGent of Berkshire, who first posted on Apr.5 writes in his thread (after a criticizing the same member):
Protect us from extrems [sic] of the BDSM world
"Out of interest would you expect your daughter to be punished in that manner at school or home? I would say that the type of films that you have produced have done nothing to promote BDSM activity as harmless fun between adults but has gone a long way to bring about regulation. You talk of sick people masturbating over your the films."

Errrm, I think is was BIGBOYM who implied that.

Berkshire Gent, would you deny you are indeed BIGBOYM?

And Berkshire, while I find many of my fellow entertainment industry professionals’ work brave, please convince me why I should not find the question you posed unbelievably cowardly and distasteful.

R.

FraDiabolo

11-09-2005, 00:13

saucyminx

11-09-2005, 00:15

Berks, I wonder at your sincerity on this site. After reading your meandering and less than cogent argument(s?), do you really belong here? I have read your criticism of the banners, some of the links, some of the members, and you've been here less than a year! This is a COMMUNITY. If you read the definitions of communities then you will realise that they comprise people of divergent backgrounds, but have often have similar ideals and interests - emphasis on similar!
Please do not fall into Tony's trap of, "You're either with me or against me", as this is the thin of the wedge, slippery slope etc (or any other awful group speak!). Hitler started this way, so did Idi Amin and other dictators of unspeakable morals. This proposed legislation is about restricting free speech and expression.
We should fight it rather than whingeing in the sluice (nursing expression, but descriptive).
Rather than promoting division, why don't you think our about working together.... and try to stop the proposed legislation?

BerkshireGent

12-09-2005, 21:36

Could BIGBOYM be one of them perhaps?
Observation

.................

Berkshire Gent, would you deny you are indeed BIGBOYM?

R.

I am not Bigboym. However i have conversed with him and we seem to singing from the same hymn sheet.

BerkshireGent

12-09-2005, 21:47

Berks, I wonder at your sincerity on this site. After reading your meandering and less than cogent argument(s?), do you really belong here? I have read your criticism of the banners, some of the links, some of the members, and you've been here less than a year! This is a COMMUNITY. .......We should fight it rather than whingeing in the sluice (nursing expression, but descriptive).
Rather than promoting division, why don't you think our about working together.... and try to stop the proposed legislation?

I feel i am working with the group and the pole as it stands seems to be supported two to one in favour.

I think we need legislation to support our position as spankers but in doing so need to self regulate acceptable working practise.

Ignore for a moment this site and look at the wider view of what is available. Then ask yourself what would those who construct legislation would feel about what they see. I don’t see Niky Fline type moves going down to well as being acceptable nor anything that seeks to imply sexual gratification out of violence where it is the violent scenes alone that make the film.

Anyone who finds the naked school girl bent over for a spanking erotic because it is a schoolgirl is really enjoying a sexual scene with a minor under the guise of spanking weather or not it is being acted out by adults...... And that will get stamped on by the legislators.

sunnygirl

13-09-2005, 07:44

Originally posted by Berkshire Gent
I feel i am working with the group and the pole as it stands seems to be supported two to one in favour.
BG - the only reason that your poll seems to be running the way that you want it to, is because it is so deeply flawed. Definitely a case of 'There are lies, damned lies and statistics.'

As has already been pointed out, people are basically being asked, 'Are you the sort of sicko that likes violent and perverted pictures or are you a decent normal type like me?' This is no choice at all, and i am sure that i am not the only person who has not made a choice in your poll because there is not an answer that accurately reflects my beliefs.

It is a typical, underhand trick - to rig a poll so that you can get the answer that you want, and then to claim that this gives you 'popular' support. How much support is there for you in this thread?

sunnygirl.

Ritchie

13-09-2005, 08:03

... I am sure that i am not the only person who has not made a choice in your poll because there is not an answer that accurately reflects my beliefs.You are correct in that belief - there are at least two of us.

-R

Chopper81

13-09-2005, 08:18

I have been reading your posts bg. You have some questions to answer.

If you find this site so abhorrent, why are you a member?

What makes you think you have the right to demand things of a community when your only means of justification is a corrupt, badly worded poll that holds no value?

Do direct questions frighten you?

Are you incapable of giving direct answers to direct questions?

Are you so blinded by your own self righteousness that you cannot see the true picture in front of you?

Are you able to make a valid point without masking your true intentions/motives?

Do you know the difference between honesty, truth and lies?

Are you taking hallucinogenic narcotics?

Should you really be allowed out on your own?

Do you look in the mirror and see a crowd of people?

Did your parents have any children that were normal?

Does your social worker know you access adult sites?

What has trauma has made you turn into the twisted and corrupt individual that you are? Or did you take lessons?

Do you dress up at weekends or when it is dark?

Is your only friend Sam Aritans, or do we have to take the same drugs you do to see him?

Did you lose your seat at the last election?

Do you sing in the church choir?

Do you type with one hand and squinty eyes?

As you live in Berkshire, are you a resident of Broadmoor?

Is your membership here part of your rehabilitation programme?

Do you only talk to your friends at the bottom of the garden?

Do you loiter on footbridges over the railway line, wearing an anorak with huge bulges where you have your hands firmly wedged in the front pockets?

Does your medical team have ANY sympathy for you?

Do let us know.

Chopper.

RubberDali

13-09-2005, 08:20

Originally posted by Berkshire Gent

BG - the only reason that your poll seems to be running the way that you want it to, is because it is so deeply flawed. Definitely a case of 'There are lies, damned lies and statistics.'

It is a typical, underhand trick - to rig a poll so that you can get the answer that you want, and then to claim that this gives you 'popular' support. How much support is there for you in this thread?

sunnygirl.

I'm with S-girl and Ritchie too- I think the the way BG stacked the question should have led to a 90-100% YES vote- but it didn't!

obviously there are quite a few people voting FOR violent and degrading images (which I doubt is actually true) or they are voting NO because they realize the question is flawed and there is no other option in this black and white poll...

BG would you like to try again with a poll that contains options gleaned from this thread?

mikesmad

13-09-2005, 08:20

You are correct in that belief - there are at least two of us.

-R

three and rising...........

............hope that's no too much information, twinnsie!

RubberDali

13-09-2005, 08:28

I have been reading your posts bg. You have some questions to answer.

If you find this site so abhorrent, why are you a member?

....

Do let us know.

Chopper.

Chopman- you missed a few... may I add to your list:

Are you still masterbating to Madonna's Like A Prayer video?

Have you been caught exposing yersel on the bus yet?

:4bounce

BerkshireGent

13-09-2005, 09:04

[QUOTE=...............

BG would you like to try again with a poll that contains options gleaned from this thread?[/QUOTE]

Anything i do will now be used by some of further evidance of my underhandness. May I suggest someone else puts up a pole to counter my argument and see how you go...

BerkshireGent

13-09-2005, 09:08

Originally posted by Berkshire Gent

BG - It is a typical, underhand trick - to rig a poll so that you can get the answer that you want, and then to claim that this gives you 'popular' support. How much support is there for you in this thread?

sunnygirl.

I think it more likly that people are reading the thread and seeing exactly the sort of attitudeds that bring the scene into disripute and vote accordingly.

sunnygirl

13-09-2005, 09:43

I think it more likly that people are reading the thread and seeing exactly the sort of attitudeds that bring the scene into disripute and vote accordingly.
Ermmm - in English please??
Anything i do will now be used by some of further evidance of my underhandness. May I suggest someone else puts up a pole to counter my argument and see how you go...
Be honest - the only reason that you are not willing to amend your poll (please note the spelling) is that you know that it will prove that the majority of site members do not want a site as bland as you seem to want. This is pure cowardice.

sunnygirl.

roddy9uk

13-09-2005, 11:04

You are correct in that belief - there are at least two of us.

-R

Make that three..and I would bet many just clicked on the poll out of curiosity to see the "result", thus skewing it fatally.

RubberDali

13-09-2005, 11:06

Make that three..and I would bet many just clicked on the poll out of curiosity to see the "result", thus skewing it fatally.

Roddy- yer 4

Mike claimed 3 just above!

mikesmad

13-09-2005, 11:44

Och he is never as auld as that, Bouncey Flewr!

RubberDali

13-09-2005, 12:07

Och he is never as auld as that, Bouncey Flewr!

is he no? still a greetin wean is he then?

sunnygirl

13-09-2005, 13:17

For anyone who is interested in expressing their views on this matter in a poll that gives more than two, very emotionally laden options, i have posted a new poll entitled "What constitutes an acceptable image?" I hope that you will go and vote on it, as i believe that it offers a range of options across the spectrum which will allow us to gain a clearer image of the spread of views amongst the site membership.

sunnygirl.

FraDiabolo

14-09-2005, 09:14

Sounds like your average politician. Rude, bad mannered and only interested in his own agenda.
:cool2:
What a nice description...

BerkshireGent

11-10-2005, 06:59

Well its been running some time now and it seems that the proposition is carried 5 to 2.

I have no doubt that others will disagree, but I think there is a general agreement that those who frequent this site would prefer to do so in the comfort of the knowledge that it is safe to do so legally.

sunnygirl

11-10-2005, 07:12

May i suggest that you go and look at my poll - "What constitutes an acceptable image?" where the results are very different to yours.

Having maintained all along (and not alone) that your poll was fatally flawed, being designed to elicit the response that you wanted, i rose to your challenge and posted my own poll.

The results of my poll show that, of the 92 voters who responded, only 12 want either no marking at all or pink/slight reddening only; no bruises/marks/restraints (which is, as i understand it, what constitutes an acceptable image for you). A further 43 want to see bruising and/or cane marks and/or restraints. The remaining 38 want to see images of very bruised bottom/multiple cane marks, fantasy punishment scene, red/bruised bottom, severe fantasy punishment scene, severe bruising/cane marks or extreme fantasy scene, possible bleeding/violence/degradation - with 7 people voting for that last option.

Clearly your poll does not give an accurate picture of the opinions of the site members - but then it was never intended to, was it?? However, i am not surprised that you have not referred to my poll, as it does not back up your findings - and is less manipulative and better constructed than yours!

sunnygirl.

Ritchie

11-10-2005, 07:23

Sunnygirl,

I think we established that your poll was a means of indicating the kind of images that we (those who voted) find acceptable on the site. That's not the same as saying that we "want to see" those images, we were just saying that we have no objection in principle to them being posted here.

-R

Handy

11-10-2005, 07:24

It's all garbage anyway, only Headmaster has the power to change anything as he owns the site.

Sunnygirl is right, the wording of this poll is so heavily biased that it negates its usefulness.

sunnygirl

11-10-2005, 07:28

Ritchie - my apologies if i have not said what i meant - it is early and i haven't had the first cup of coffee yet.

My intention was to compare the two polls, to show that this one did not provide anything approaching a clear picture of the opinions of site members, whereas i hope that mine managed that better.

sunnygirl.

Niki Flynn

11-10-2005, 07:34

Thank you, Sunnygirl, for taking the time and effort to create a truly objective poll that didn't weight the findings in favor of any outcome you may have wanted to see. But you're wasting your breath on BigBoy - er, BerkGent. You can't make someone listen who doesn't want to hear.

And to Redhead: excellent detective work! :cool2:

Love,
Niki

sunnygirl

11-10-2005, 07:45

Thank-you for your kind words, Niki.

sunnygirl.

BerkshireGent

12-10-2005, 08:13

May i suggest that you go and look at my poll - "What constitutes an acceptable image?" where the results are very different to yours.

Clearly your poll does not give an accurate picture of the opinions of the site members - but then it was never intended to, was it?? However, i am not surprised that you have not referred to my poll, as it does not back up your findings - and is less manipulative and better constructed than yours!

sunnygirl.

Our polls asked diferent questions and are not to be compared. My poll was in the context of material to be avialable on a website portraying the ideas of a the spanking community.

sunnygirl

12-10-2005, 09:35

Our polls asked diferent questions and are not to be compared. My poll was in the context of material to be avialable on a website portraying the ideas of a the spanking community.
....And was constructed in such a way as to offer the choice between "I am a decent person who does not want to see such offensive stuff at all" and "I am a sick individual who believes that anything goes and wants to see violent and degrading images here". You relied on the fact that your second option was so extreme that only the most perverted would vote for it, leaving everyone else no option but to vote for your favoured option - even if they did not agree with your definition of what constituted a violent and degrading image, and felt that what was actually acceptable fell between your two options.

This is why i posted my poll, which was constructed to allow people to show more accurately where in the spectrum they fell - and it clearly demonstrates the biased and manipulative nature of your poll, because it did not show that the vast majority of people favour images with little or no marking at all.

As you were told, your poll was constructed in such a way as to manipulate people into choosing the option that you favoured - hence it has no value whatsoever.

sunnygirl.

BerkshireGent

12-10-2005, 22:51

....And was constructed in such a way as to offer the choice between "I am a decent person who does not want to see such offensive stuff at all" and "I am a sick individual who believes that anything goes and wants to see violent and degrading images here". You relied on the fact that your second option was so extreme that only the most perverted would vote for it, leaving everyone else no option but to vote for your favoured option - even if they did not agree with your definition of what constituted a violent and degrading image, and felt that what was actually acceptable fell between your two options.

sunnygirl.

Seems to me that you have difficulty in understanding the issues and can only take extreme examples to try and prove your point. It doesn’t work I’m afraid, on me anyway.

Enough said by me on this subject.

Bye

sunnygirl

13-10-2005, 07:18

Berkshire - i am not the one who used the term 'extremes' in the title of my poll (or 'extrems', to be exact).

And i am not the one whose poll attempted to manipulate the respondants by only giving them two options - and i am not the only person that 'understood' that easily.

sunnygirl.

searcher1

18-04-2006, 21:14

Couldn't agree more. This site seems to me to cater for the nicer end of the market. I used to think that its a subjective thing and each to his/her own etc, but now i am not so sure.
I suspect that many of the beaten and bleeding bums that can be seen all over the internet are carried out against vulnerable people probably desperate fo cash. They certainly do nothing for me but make me feel slighlty ill. Its a bit like child porn, each photo is probably of a victim.
I would happily see no more of that stuff, and i might be wrong but suspect that most members of this site would agree.

Sorry I caught this thread and thought 'heck let it start off again' <g>
Personally I could ramble on for hours but think it wise to put a few things straight IMHO about the vulnerable people and the rest generally.
I'm a little lost regarding these vulnerable people. Can someone show or direct me to something showing them? I think not! Now I dislike canes (in favour of whips) but I bet there are a majority who do like them and the results can be just as bad with 'beaten and bleeding bums'. That state in the quote simply cracked me up and tears of laughter ran down my face.
I've been whipped (and dished it out too) to that level many times and I'm not vulnerable. I go back to say videos and images and ask where all these vulnerable people are. I've seen interviews of 'models' from wha initially you'd think as vulnerable people and they don't show it either. Okay true, they want cash and that's a leading tempter. Some also like the experience for what it is but do need to live so require cash. I even occasionally play (when I can afford it) with some ladies and they want cash to varying levels. Some are low and some are high maintenance as I class them. I've yet to meet one who has said they won't do something and changed their mind on more cash being offered. At the end if someone wants to do something they do it and if not they don't. I don't force them period.
I cannot see how you can mention child porn as a comparison. To me that's an easy excuse and wholly unfair to compare the two. Child porn is revolting, whipping and receiving whipping from consenting adults is not. So what countries or places do this 'vulnerable' people stuff then? From wha I've seen as of late it's the church that prays on vulnerable people and most of their practitioners got away with it!
enough, I've said my thing.
Michael

sunnygirl

18-04-2006, 22:07

Searcher - you might also be interested in another thread, which i started in response to this one. I felt that giving only two extreme options was manipulative, and did not allow people a fair choice to indicate their preferences for the kind of images they wished to see.

This is the poll: http://www.britishspanking.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23348

To me, the results of the poll demonstrated pretty much what i expected - that some people wanted to see either very extreme images involving extreme fantasy scene, possible bleeding/violence/degradation whilst others wanted to see unmarked bottoms only - but that only 8.47% of respondants chose either one of these polar opposites, with the remaining 91.53% spread between.

sunnygirl.

whippetgirl

10-07-2006, 09:24

Well, maybe I'm just learning still, and I'm so not into ugly extremes and hairy tacky
bits, but fantasies that go past spankings that seem more like retrogressive infancy
than fun, well those fantasies, for me, are yummy.

Is it more the males who are into the really horrid extremes?

Thank you sunnygirl for putting this in perspective... Yea...! :girlpower

- whippetgirl:angel2:

*whippetgirl places a magic mint on sunnygirl's pillow*

Dinalt

17-07-2006, 01:12

I've lurked for a long time, but have never felt the need to post until now. BG, who is to decide what constitutes a violent & degrading image, and would the same scenario be less degrading if it involved a male rather than a female ?

Honestly, yes, there probably needs to be legislation in place to protect those who are vulnerable..............but that legislation shouldn't apply to those who participate willingly. I noticed in one of your posts that you mentioned homosexuality had at long last been made legal - by the same token you should also be more tolerant of those who wish to view spanking related material. It's possibly a bad comparison, but I think you're pretty much born a spanker/spankee, as much as somebody is born gay.

As for images or content influencing people, I agree with other posts that categorically say that the interest has to be there first. Take for example the recent world cup (again, maybe a bad example). The media and television were full of images, and you couldn't go anywhere without hearing something about Beckham or Rooney.
Hsa it influenced me at all ? No, I still can't stand football (and I'm probably in a minority, lol), but in all that coverage I wasn't once tempted to watch a game.
And yes, it's tragic that young people take their lives (as mentioned in a previous post) - but laying the blame solely on the Internet is a copout. Sites relating to suicide don't exactly get links from your homepage, so someone would have to have an interest first, and then go searching for what they're looking for. The parents, friends and school should probably take the blame for this in lessening degrees:

1) The parents for not monitoring what an under 18 views on the Internet. If you're unable to monitor, or don't know how to, then don't allow them access to the Internet - simple. Also, there were probably warning signs, as most suicides don't just happen - there's usually an underlying reason, and usually the persons character changes. (Unfortunately I've lost a few friends to suicide, and the signs were obvious in each case).

2) Any real friends should have picked up on what was going on, and intervened.

3) If suicide was seriously being considered, then teachers may well have spotted a downward trend - as depression is so closely linked to suicide, it's impossible to mask it 24/7.

So blaming all societys ills on the Internet is foolish at best. I was interested in spanking a long time before I had access to the net, and didn't even know there was such a wealth of literature about it available.
That said, there are images that I find distasteful, but as an adult I have the choice whether to view these or not. I wouldn't dream of forcing my own views on anyone else, as respecting others opinions is what a 'free' society should be all about.

And as for the poll question, which basically boils down to censorship, it appears that it's your viewpoint that's paramount - a poll with 2 extremely different questions is never going to yield anything other than a flawed result.
And if we consider your viewpoint even further, should these films ever have been released (and they're available as general 18 rating - can even buy them from Woolworths, lol):

The passion of the Christ - probably the most brutal scenes seen in any film, but no doubt released because of the religious aspects.

Secretary - While later scenes would be consensual, the first spanking certainly wasn't - it was a case of bend over and whack.

I can also remember seeing scenes of whipping and caning in several mainstream television dramas over the last 10 years, obviously not graphic, but there.

I won't bother listing any more films by name, but if we're following your doctrine of censoring any extreme or degrading imagery, then how about any of the more graphic horror films released in the last 20 years (and passed with an 18 rating). Films that contain among other things, non consensual torture, removal of limbs and gratuitous use of chainsaws and other items to carry out the first 2. (I think Hostel springs to mind as an obvious example - I haven't seen it myself, but from what I've heard it contains scenes such as mutilation and castration - both non consensual, but it's been cleared by the BBFC as an 18 certificate).
Personally I'm guessing that by your logic, these would be acceptable as these are merely 'acting', rather than 'real'.
(And no, these films aren't something I'd choose to watch, but they're freely available, and I'd defend anyones right to watch them in a free country).
So if you're going to bang a drum about societys ills, then at least encompass other areas, rather than relying on a few ill formed judgements that seem to centre around marked bottoms.
And as a personal note, I'd rather watch somebody getting an otk spanking, than watch somebody being cut up, but hey that's only my opinion. If both you and society see fit to sit in judgement, then at least do us the courtesy of putting your own house in order first. (Maybe you don't agree with these kinds of film either - in which case I unreservedly apologise. But it appears you view legislators and politicians as infallible).

And this is where I have a problem with your version of censorship, as it seeks to moderate what we 'adults' choose to view, or read. It would appear that because you have guilt issues, the rest of us should all feel the same - sorry, but I don't subscribe to that notion at all.

If 2 consenting adults, both of sound mind, decide to enact fantasy roleplay - then that is their decision. Everyone will have different views as to how severe images should be, but as adults we have the freedom to choose which images we view, and which we don't. As a footnote, I can remember the much publicised case of the amercian caned in Singapore for vandalising cars - what's interesting from what I can remember, is how many media outlets were offering money to show his bottom to the world after the event. Personally, I had no interest in seeing it, but it showed societys hypocritical 'holier than thou' attitude was nothing more than a facade. The same people curious about that, are probably the same people who'd criticise our lifestyle, so go figure.

Certainly I can remember reading reports that mention the fact that countries with more relaxed censorship, also have a far lower violent crime rate - just something to ponder on.

To finish, I also find your first post utterly reprehensible. To try and link any community with under 18s is sick, and this point seems to be reiterated by you throughout this thread. From what I've seen, this is an excellent forum that self regulates itself perfectly (and I've been looking in for over a year now).
Your warped comments merely serve to reinforce societys own jaded views, and have no place on an adult forum.

:yo: Sorry it's a rambling first post people, and I probably haven't picked the best examples. But when people start trying to dictate what's acceptable and what isn't, it becomes essential to voice your own opinions.

Whirly

17-07-2006, 01:41

Dinalt

17-07-2006, 02:08

Good post Dinalt,
I will pick up the point on censorship and what is deemed acceptable for public consumption. Over the past decade, things have got tighter as to what we see on television. Various outcries on abusive language and scenes of a violent nature, have reduced considerably. I don't see that changing.
As for us who are "into" the scene being able to decide what we read or see visually or even print, and that it should be a free for all, because we are consenting adults, doesn't hold water. Someone somewhere has to draw a line in the sand where it stops. That line isn't going to be drawn by us.
It's a bit like some of the images posted here. I find a fair number of them to be of poor taste, and depicting what I would see as scenes of extreme violence against another. The fact that all of them were more than likely of a consensual nature. That doesn't stop me and others seeing them in another light, and that is what will be counted, not anyone saying that the "victim" was happy with it. That type of excuse has been used in matters concerning domestic violence before. It doesn't hold water!

:yo: Thank you Whirly, and I take your point about violence and language on mainstream television - things are certainly tamer today in the mainstream, and whether that's a good or bad thing is a whole seperate argument, lol. Although I can't see much language and violance being cut on Satellite broadcasting, which is as it should be. If a film has been passed by the BBFC, then adults should have the freedom to view it as it was originally classified. I certainly don't see any reduction in violence or language in films, so I think it only applies to BBC1 & 2, ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5. (The mainstream channels).

I also agree with you on many images being in poor taste, and in some cases extreme. I haven't honestly seen any on this site, but I think I know the kind you mean. (And I'm not a supporting member, so can't comment on the gallery images here). Many images I find distasteful, although that's only my opinion - again, I haven't seen any on this site though.
But that's where it becomes difficult to draw the line - whether it's by legislators, politicians or individuals. Because everyone will have differing views on what is acceptable and what isn't.

But it's societys hypocrisy itself that galls me the most. We live in an age where we can view boxing, 'ultimate' fighting along with some of the most depraved imagery in mainstream horror films. But a picture of a spanking is viewed unacceptable, while 'ultimate' fighting can show images of fighters being literally brutalised - again, probably a topic for another discussion, but it's the hypocrisy that really annoys me. Being beaten to a bloody pulp (and risking brain damage) is acceptable because it's consensual, but a consensual spanking (with no risk of brain damage) isn't.

But, could you clarify 'That type of excuse has been used in matters concerning domestic violence before' for me. It's not a criticism in any way, but to me domestic violence is something totally different from a light consensual spanking. If there have been images of domestic violence, then of course these should be removed instantly - and it should seriously be considered whether to alert the authorities in such cases. And no, that's not me being hypocritical, but domestic violence is (to my mind) something totally different to light consensual CP. And if there haven't been such images, then maybe using the term isn't very helpful, as mud sticks.
Domestic violence is non consensual, dangerous and damaging, and has no place in society - it is totally different to 2 fully consenting adults engaging in light CP activities. (I hope most adults can tell the difference anyway).

Let me make it clear, that I in no way endorse domestic violence - and I doubt if anyone else on this site does either. The 2 are totally different subjects, at least to me anyway. And again, that's why I stated in my original post that there probably does need to be legislation to protect those who are vulnerable. But such legislation shouldn't intrude into a fully consensual relationship, as what right have we to make moral judgements on someone elses consensual choice ?

Going back to the whole censorship issue though. Obviously there are those who view 'real' spankings as unacceptable - that's just a fact, although at what point is becomes unacceptable is open to debate.
But thinking back to the passion of the Christ for a minute - if a Hollywood studio released a hard discipline film (unlikely, but I guess Secretary slipped through, lol) - would a Hollywood film with computer generated marks or make up effects be acceptable, as opposed to a real film. And if it was acceptable, what comment would that make ?

Anyway, thanks for replying Whirly, excellent post with some really valid points.:yo: