You still haven’t said how my belief that employers are ethically obligated to take all reasonable and necessary precautions to protect their employees indicates that I have some prejudice against sexual submissives. I realize you are not the OP, but that’s the mystery I’m looking to solve here. I am not really interested in convincing others that workplace safety is a good thing, at least not in this thread. I just want to know how this belief of mine (and my related problem with the hypothetical game of “Bambi hunting”) translates to a problem with subs – which was apparently the point of the OP.
ok, i’ll try to explain why i put these two topics together.
i felt that people might not understand that the bambi’s were doing this out of their own free will, uncoerced, even by money. they may actually enjoy it and why not get paid for what you enjoy.
i could see myself doing this job, and the main reason i would enjoy it is because i am submissive in nature. i like to be stripped bare. makes me feel naughty, and if i got hit, i’d feel like i was being punished for not following orders (to run and hide). therefore, i would do whatever i could not to get hit. working hard to obey. all a role play thing. why not make a carreer out of what you already enjoy doing?
yes, there are many more exciting games one could play (i like the dildo limbo idea, protective gear only needed if anal scurvy’s girlfriend is playing 
), but basically, i was just surprised at the outrage over this game. i just wanted to express that and kinda threw in the submissive stuff as an example of why someone might want to play such a game,with or without money.
perhaps i shouldn’t have gotten so fucking specific. just left it at ‘some girls like getting chased and shot at with paintball guns, even if they get hurt, so let them, damnit!’.
Awwww, darn.
Zette,
I don’t have a link for a cite, but in a report I saw on Fox News the “owner” of the game was interviewed, and he stated that the women involved were not allowed to wear any protective gear. He said something on the order of “it wouldn’t be natural, animals in hunts aren’t given protective gear.”
I had an idea a few years ago while I was into paintball: fantasy games. Instead of player vs. player games, a hired team would be the “opposing force” who would dress as the opponent of the day. Nazi hunts (sorry Godwin’s law,) anti-terrorist searches, Civil War re-creations among other scenarios would be staged for players to overcome. I looked at this issue as a test case for the extreme.
I’d still love to do it, but I have no financial backing.
Honestly, jwhee, I had no clue that someone would see it that way. If I were into it I would have to be on the dom side; I hate with a passion being told what to do. (It makes life rough sometimes.) However, if you chose it freely and could leave at any time, I see nothing wrong with an adult choosing to live their life the way they want to.
I did not follow all the “Bambi hunting” threads closely, but I think I did read them all and I didn’t notice anyone expressing outrage over the behavior of the supposed “Bambis”. The people who were upset about it pretty much all seemed to think that the organizer had done something wrong, either by failing to observe reasonable safety procedures or in some more general moral sense. Some people also expressed concern as to what sort of man might pay the huge quoted fee to participate in such a hunt. But the closest thing I saw to criticism of the “Bambis” was people asking why anyone would agree to the job, a question I think was reasonable since, once again, the job as depicted was not safe. Luckily the whole thing turned out to be a hoax put together in the editing room, so the actresses involved were never in real danger.
Now, I don’t doubt that there are people out there who think there’s something “wrong” (either morally or mentally) with a person who’d want to be a sub, or that you’ve heard people say things like that in the past. But I didn’t see any of that in the “Bambi hunting” threads. I don’t think anyone who objected to the idea of “Bambi hunting” intended to belittle subs; I doubt that many ever would have even thought to link the two on their own. You said in your OP that subs have to “tolerate lots of shit, especially here at SDMB”, but I just haven’t seen it. It seems to me that the membership of the SDMB generally has a pretty tolerant, live-and-let-live attitude towards the sexual practices of others. Maybe I missed something big, but your OP looked a lot to me like a case of getting worked up over nothing.
Come and make me stop, then, Mr. Domme, Sir.
SisterCoyote - SAM extraordinaire
Not to speak for jwhee, but I don’t think that’s what she was saying. I think the point was more along the lines of those women weren’t necessarily being exploited, and that they might possibly have enjoyed playing the role that they did in the fantasy. So the outrage expressed towards the organizers of the video is perhaps misplaced. I believe she’s saying that it’s not ipso facto immoral to portray women in a fantasy submissive scenario like that, as a lot of people in the other thread seemed to think.
Jwhee, please correct me if that’s not what you meant.
Steelerphan:
You have to take that with a grain of salt, because he has admitted that the whole thing was a hoax with actors, and that they didn’t actually shoot at the women with paintballs. The women weren’t actually in danger; they were play-acting. His statement on Fox News was just trying to stir up controversy to get publicity for his video. Perhaps unethical in the sense of being dishonest, but not in the sense of actually endangering the health of the women.
The guy obviously believes in the “there is no bad publicity” idea. He could probably get a job in the marketing department for Abercrombie & Fitch.
Drop and give me 20 just on general principles. Then YOU come over HERE and I’ll let you see your options.
Heh–think I’m getting the hang of this! 
first, blowero hit the nail on the head. thank you.
this is the reason i posted in the first place. and i posted it in the pit cause i wanted to be upset about it. damnit. fuck.
yes, it was a personal thread, if not i would’ve put it in great debates (not that i read much there).
and yes, i was using the bambi shit to explain my personal sexuality, guess you could call it a coming out of the closet. (but you better put a leash on me, i’m not trained yet ). just wanted people to know that i’m ok the fucking way i am, and it’s not just me (thank god!), so don’t worry about these poor little bambi’s being taken advantage of!
jwhee has probably run across a few of the people I’ve run across here and on other discussion boards – though SDMB has a much lower count than others I’ve been on – who understand that “no” means “no” but can’t wrap their heads around the concept that “yes” means “yes”.
Did it just tell me what to do?? It TAKES orders! It does NOT give them. If it ever gives me another order, I will lock it in the cage for three days.
Now, it polishes my boots. No, not that way. It polishes my boots with its tongue. Good. Good pet.It takes the lotion from the bucket–
Wait. Probably not the same thing…
{sing song} Somebody’s in trouble, and it’s not me. {sing song}
Oh, I will be behaving this evening since my Lord is sitting right next to me, and yes I do have his permission to be posting.
So there!
LOL!
Yes, we all know now that the whole thing was a complete fake. But if we’re going to discuss why the idea bothered people when it was still uncertain as to just how fake it was then we have to consider the “Bambi hunt” as it was presented. Had the “Bambi hunting” videos been presented as the fiction that they were then there would have been little outrage – and, of course, little publicity. But if things had been as presented then the “Bambis” involved would have been in real danger (they were forbidden to wear protective gear, the paintball guns were unmodified), and that’s why the idea upset people.
People were not upset that submissive women might be engaging in some harmless roleplaying for money, they were upset that someone had (seemingly) set up a business based on endangering the health and possibly the lives of his female employees. Some people may have considered the “Bambi hunt” especially bad because the women were nude and they were (again, seemingly) expected to have sex with the hunters afterwards, but the health and safety issues involved in the hunt alone should be more than enough to make any decent person object to the idea.
I think even defenders of “Bambi hunting” must realize this, as they have all chosen to ignore, gloss over, or alter the “facts” of the situation so as to minimize the risk factors. And then, once they’ve eliminated the real problem with the game, they ask how anyone had the nerve to object to it!
i am sorry. i am still learning, but putting forth my best effort 
Actually, in the above quote, I was responding to Steelerphan’s recent comment, which was made after the incidenct was known to be a hoax. If people want to discuss the ethical/moral implications of the Bambi Hunt video now, they need to do so in light of the fact that it’s fake. You can no longer use the issue of not having goggles, because we now know the women were never in danger of sustaining eye injuries.
I see your point, but I had also seen quite a few comments along the lines of “It’s wrong because it’s degrading to women.” And I think jwhee was just trying to point out that it’s not necessarily degrading or exploitative, because there are women who might enjoy doing it.
As an example, I forget the guy’s name on Comedy Central who has the show where he goes out and films nightlife, but anyway, he has gone to S&M clubs and filmed there. You see both men and women being abused there, but are they being exploited? I don’t think so. They clearly enjoy the experience and don’t object to being filmed.
So, to the extent that people were objecting to what they perceived as very real dangers, I don’t think anyone is disagreeing (although I think people are far too gullible; I suspected the thing was a hoax from day one). But I think it went beyond that; many objected to the whole idea that the women were being subjugated. And sorry to keep speaking for jwhee, but I think that was the thing she was objecting to.
I should add one thing: I still think the guy who made the video is a creep - not so much for making the video, but for lying and pretending it was real just to try to make a buck. Pretty lame.
Sweet jumpin’ jeezus on a pink pogo. You are submissive, not everyone’s servant. There’s nothing wrong with telling one person to shut the fuck up; all the while being submissive to your chosen master.
Trust me.
Well, to add a twist to things, the guy who runs the hunts is currently on Howard Stern saying although some of the videos were faked, you can absolutely book a hunt. They are taking a short hiatus due to some legal issues, but have sold over 20,000 videos and done 2 hunts.
He stated that during the hunts, there is always a guide with the clients to make sure they don’t go crazy, and that the girls do wear sneakers AND GOGGLES. Take that for what it’s worth.
As a side note, they had some of the girls on who participate in the hunts, and one had a penis…:dubious: