Well, we know these “Bambis” wouldn’t do it anyway, because the whole thing was a hoax. If they’d been willing to do it, it wouldn’t have needed to be faked – unless the man behind it just decided to fake the videos because he has enough decency or legal prudence to realize that it would be a very bad idea to really shoot paintballs at people who have no protective gear.
Does one of the contract stipulations require the guitarist to place his or herself in danger of serious bodily harm?
**
If they got paid to do it with the stipulation that one team not be allowed to wear padding or helmets it would be wrong.
I note you added goggles. That’s changing the scenario. If proper protective gear that would prevent serious physical injury is included then the moral issues involved change dramatically. I think I’ve been pretty clear that the main problem here is that these women were not allowed (or rather were portrayed as not being allowed) to wear any protective gear at all. If you change it to “Well, but what if they were?”, or make comparisons to other activities that either carry little physical risk or where protective gear is used, then that’s apples and oranges.
but in the post of yours i was responding to you said:
bolding mine. i was talking about the scenario being faked, not the hoax part of it.
i understand that you are worried about the dangerous part. ok. i was just trying to point out that just cause someone gets paid for something, doesn’t mean they wouldn’t do it without pay.
i dont’ think you’ve been clear on that at all. and you have no idea if there are any other precautions taking place. when you said in your first post,
you never mentioned it would be ok if they were wearing goggles. you seem to think that the only reason someone would do this is for the money. tis not true. but why not get paid for doing what you enjoy? they like getting bruised and bloodied from paintball, why not let them? maybe loosing an eye is a risk they are willing to take, or have been trained to avoid.
for the record, i do think the precautions are a good idea. that was not the point i was trying to argue. for all we know, the girls have safety training. paintbal guns can also shoot at varying velocities. perhaps they make sure that it’s not strong enough to put out an eye. we don’t know.
No, this is not a legitimate conclusion from the premisies you present. Just because there were women who’re willing to be the quarry, (which there obviously are), doesn’t necessarily mean that there is a legitimate business in hunting bambi.
Cool RoundGuy, I just wanted to let you know that some cases aren’t pure laziness and didn’t deserve harsh words.
But I guess if harsh words are to be used this is the place.
jwhee, feel free the e-mail me IM me anytime.
I am tend to ride both sides of the fence for most things. Just to warn you.
I have an adoring Lord who spoils me rotten even though I tend to be highly unruly and his favorite pet name for me is “pain in my ass”.
I have also played the part of Mistress in that sense but prefer the role of pet.
thanks Kricket! i don’t have a real sir, but hopefully that will change one day. and i also have played a Domme role, but prefer to be the subbie, although switching roles is rather interesting. gives a wider perspective. like bisexuality. i prefer men, but if a cutie girl shows up and shows interest, well, i’m all over it nice to have another female pet to email.
i’m pretty unruly myself. i hope someone starts training me soon, i need it!
If proper safety gear were used (which might involve more than just goggles, like helmets), it wouldn’t be very risky now would it? People play paintball in proper safety gear all the time, and it is my understanding that serious injuries are very rare.
**
I don’t care why someone would want to do it, because I am not interested in the ethical implications of playing “Bambi”. That is why, you will observe, I have said nothing on the subject. I certainly have not said that it is wrong.
What I think would be wrong would be offering women money to run around completely nude, with no safety gear, while people shoot at them with paintball guns. Can you understand that? It’s the paying people to do something that could blind or possibly even kill them that I have a problem with here. Perhaps it has not occured to you that people could object to “Bambi hunting” for reasons other than prejudice against the BDSM community, but there it is.
If you eliminate either the element of pay or the element of serious physical danger then you are talking about another sort of situation altogether, one that would be far less objectionable to me and to most of the people here who expressed outrage over the idea of “Bambi hunting”. Why you wanted to read that outrage as an attack on the submissive lifestyle is beyond me, because the two have very little to do with one another.
Lamia, who asked you to be the mommy of the world? Adults don’t need your concern, they really don’t. They make their own decisions, whether that entails riding a motorcycle sans helmet, taking paintballs in nude with no protective gear, or participating in Jackass like stunts- for money or not. I have no idea what being paid has to do with anything here. There are people in this very thread saying they would participate in an identical activity without pay! Show me where the women in these (theoretical) videos are being forced to participate or where they’re denied the use to protective gear (perhaps it would have been offered, or they refused to use it?) and I’ll agree 100%. But until then, it’s not my place or yours to say an activity that poses no danger to anyone but oneself should not be participated in.
And I have no idea what subs have to do with the “Bambi hunting” hoax. I’m still waiting for jwhee to explain that one. I admit I did not follow all the relevant threads closely, but contrary to the subject line I didn’t see anyone bashing the “Bambis”. I saw people express outrage over a business (one that has since proven to be phony) that apparently paid women to engage in an activity that put them in serious physical danger, an activity that could easily have been made fairly safe by the use of some basic precautions.
For some reason jwhee took this as a criticism of her lifestyle. Her OP seems to be accusing anyone who objected to the idea of “Bambi hunting” as being opposed to safe, sane, consensual (if perhaps painful) BDSM sex play in general.
And where did I say that? The only activity I’ve objected to is one that poses a threat to others – bribing people into performing dangerous stunts for money. It’s one thing to voluntarily endanger yourself, and quite another to attempt to lure others into danger. If people want to get shot at with paintballs for fun, or ride motorcycles helmetless for fun, then that is largely their own business. You are not, however, going to convince me that it is ethically A-OK to pay people to do these things for the amusement of others.
Tell me one legitimate business that pays people to engage in activities that put them in serious physical danger, but that refuses to make use of simple, cheap, and effective safety gear that could minimize this danger.
Being a police officer is a dangerous job, but the police force at least does all it can to protects its officers. And then there’s the whole, you know, benefit to society thing that comes with most legitimate hazardous work, but I don’t expect that argument to carry weight with everyone.
I wrote an article once about a bunch of bondage games that I tinnk submissives would enjoy a lot more than naked paintball prey, which strikes me as fun but kinda … abstract.
Frex, there was “Dildo Limbo.” It involves two parallel poles on the ground placed increasingly far apart, while the participants must walk with their feet outside both poles, with a strategically placed dildo that must not be allowed to fall to the ground. Perhaps some spanking and or paddling as they go. Hands tied behind back of course. Winner is the one who goes the farthest down the poles at their widest separation without any dildos falling to the ground.
So, the point of this … this point of this is … I’m SURE I had one … um, whyncha subs play some nice, safe Dildo Limbo instead of that nasty ol’ Paintball Prey? Milk and cookies after, you betcha!
In defense of the OP while not in agreement with it in practice.
It is true that a subs nature is to please her Master/Dom, ie: the kajira’s pledge/oath taken from Jogn Norman’s GOR series (real name John Lang, a lit teacher from Princeton NJ, who seems quite unlike his archetype Tarl Cabot on the phone, btw). If the Master wanted to chase his stable through some bushes with a paintball gun then it would be in the nature of a true sub to not only do this task but to derive great pleasure in the doing.
I would think, however, that the welts and bruising as well as the probably abraison the slave would recieve in the hunt would lessen the value of the slave. Hence the variety of whips and other implements of training and correction used by the Master, often designed to sting with no mark. Now a taser, when properly used would probably be a better hunting tool as it is less likely to leave large ugly purple marks. Even then the act of falling is likely to abraid the skin of the pet and a rigorous hunt is likely to tire it out overmuch.
Now, if you had a stable of slaves kept strictly for the purpose of these hunts that might be optimal. A new class of silks. White silk, red silk, camoflage silk.
Another problem is one of conditioning, as it is in the creature’s nature to please Master, it may presume that the fun is in the pain itself (you may even find out that rather than a regular sub you have a painslut who wants to get hit with a paintball) and simple not give a good hunt.
I think nude laser tag would be the best choice for something along these lines.
That having been said, I doubt that these women were submissives working for a Dom or Master.
Just because the women who were depicted didn’t HAVE on gear doesn’t mean it wouldn’t have been an option. I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree, because you believe a basic premise of this situation that I do not- that they’re somehow forcing people do participate through bribery. I see no such thing. When you see an activity on television, for example, those people are called “actors” and are paid to perform for your entertainment. Same for people in the adult entertainment industry- they’re paid to perform some action that people want to see or participate in. I’m not going to bother going over a list of jobs that are dangerous where proper gear isn’t used- if you can’t imagine any, we’re clearly talking about two completely different subjects. I’ve said what I need to- read it again. There’s no point in retyping.
I think if submissives formed an association or union of some type that sentence could be part of the pledge they recited at the beginning of each meeting.
