I would really hope that doms would have the common sense to exit the scenario for reasons other than use of the safe word. I understand that this is a really strange line to walk - someone asking to get treated in a way they might not like or find uncomfortable, and if you break role because they seem to be uncomfortable…well, its a paradox, which is why you set up safe words. All the same…she’s the professional in this situation…she needs to be able to read the situation. If she isn’t able to read him well enough to provide a satisfactory experience for him, its a business relationship best severed…and if he wants to say “she provided poor service” - well, she didn’t do a good job reading him. If that impacts her business, then she isn’t very good at it. If that isn’t part of her business, then people who frequent doms will be the first to say “this is like complaining about the bad coffee when you get your oil changed.”
So what do you call someone who is paid to shove things in a clients ass for the purposes of sexual pleasure/orgasm?
I don’t care about contracts that aren’t enforceable in law, it’s a perfectly reasonable request. But she’s free to refuse to service him in the future, if she wants to be authentically bdsm whilst also making money.
If I engaged in prostitution I wouldn’t define it as prostitution either. If prostitution is pejorative isn’t it due to the act itself, and not an accurate description of the act? The guy was paying a woman to engage in sexual activity for money. Is there a more neutral word for that than prostitution?
A prostitute. And that’s the dividing line: intent and outcome.
Why do you insist that someone who is paid to shove things in a client’s ass for the purposes of control and/or humiliation necessarily falls under the same job title?
I answer questions for a living. Does that make me a librarian or Magic 8 Ball?
Sounds to my ear like what the fellow in the OP did was violate the etiquette of the BDSM subgroup, but as to passing judgment on whether he was right or wrong in this, I have no more firm opinion than if we were discussing the finer points of Druidic rituals.
I suspect though that, within the context of that group, he was being rude.
Well I agree, but the contention was made that it was somehow “dangerous” to stop a session and ask for a clean dildo.
Are you really saying that inserting a dildo into someone’s ass isn’t a sexual activity? The control and humiliation aren’t sexual in nature?
Not sure, how often are you correct? 
Cite?
I don’t care who you are, that’s funny right there.
Calling all sex workers prostitutes is about as obnoxious as calling all people who work with computers typists.
(Bolding mine)
What “dangerous” things are going on in the middle of this session which make it somehow hazardous to stop and ask for a clean dildo?
To everyone who keeps mentioning ‘the scene’: Humans know about context, but diseases do not. Why should a ‘contract’ allow some unwitting third party to contract a disease?
That was an analogy, Dio. :rolleyes:
Please show me where someone suggested the issue under discussion had an element of danger to it in being interrupted. Everyone who has said SHEESH was in the wrong, as nearly as I can see, has said it was wrong essentially because it violated the contract, not because it caused a dangerous situation.
She’s not denying that it’s sexual, she’s denying that it’s prostitution. A stripper’s work is sexual in nature, but is clearly not prostitution. A pro dom is sexually stimulating her client, but is not having sex with them. AIUI, they’re almost never naked during a session (although they’re not exactly wearing their Sunday best, of course.) I’d think that, for someone to be a prostitute, you’d have to at least be able to see their genitals.
In this case? What’s wrong with “Dom?”
Did you miss the part where she was talking about using a dildo on him in their next session? She wasn’t about the peg him on the spot. There was no immediate danger of disease transmission. The complaint against the sub is that he interupted the current scene to wrangle over sanitation issues, instead of waiting until it was over.
He should absolutely be sure that what he is doing will not give him a disease. I fully agree with that. I’m neither a sub nor do I want dildos used on me, but if I were I would certainly ask about the sanitation issue. I just wouldn’t do it at the time that he did.
Asking is not the issue, breaking out of the scene without the proper context (using his safe word) is.
So when she introduces a new idea for next week, why is it inappropriate for him to ask then and there if he can either bring his own equipment or see proof that hers is clean? She brought this idea up, not him. Why is he not allowed to ask about the parameters for it?
Holy jumping Jesus, Dio, how many times do you have to have this explained to you: it’s not what he did, it’s when and how he did it. He violated the contract they had.