**
Of course not. If he truly has a mental illness that is causing this behavior it’s not consensual. It may not be consensual even if he has an illness that is not the direct cause of his behavior. He may, hypothetically, have a mental illness that renders him incapable of giving meaningful consent to be treated that way.
However, I don’t think you can presume that he has a mental illness because of the BDSM.
Then the problem becomes : what constitutes mental illness? Or even : what kind of behavior, even apparently consensual, ought to be banned because it’s actually harmful for the people involved? And how to decide whether a particular behavior is actually harmful or not? As I wrote above, I’m myself involved in BDSM, though not exclusively. And for that reason, I already wondered about this issue.
It’s a very interesting issue, but I’m not going to begin this debate. I’d be interested in what other posters would have to tell about it, though.
Notice that I didn’t say jack shit about banning anyone’s behavior. On the other hand, I would have no problem unleashing the mental health authorities on both these guys.
And yes, kevya, I believe I am the first person to point out that the other guy also shows serious indications of mental illness. A little BDSM never hurt anyone 
but the stuff described in the OP, if it really is a full-time thing and not just a shock-the-prudes-at-the-dinner-party event, is not at all sane.
Unleashing the mental health authorities, that is, to check out whether these guys really are as loony as they sound.
Plus, I just really like saying “unleashing” in this context.
If I were the sig line type of gal, I would beg for the quote, “A little BDSM never hurt anyone.”
Well, I learned something I hadn’t known about jarbabyj today. I guess there goes my theory that the female sub is a myth perpetuated by the porn industry. World crumbling here, people.
I have got to imagine that female subs are incredibly outnumbered my male doms and male subs, though. It always seemed to me that it must something about the power relationships in society, and women wanting to fantasize into power roles and vice versa for men…but now I wonder if perhaps the last hundred years hasn’t changed things. Women now are the exclusive distributors of heterosexual intercourse, they hold all the cards in any relationship with regard to sex. Perhaps the female sub really is a role reversal of sorts.
Well, my ramblings are over. As for the gay Asian doggie slave, I would hardly consider that too outlandish compared to some of the stuff we must all have seen at one time or another on the internet. Heck, Conan O’ Brien even did a joke/skit where Joel the announcer had an Asian slave boy. Conan’s edgy, but he ain’t HBO. If it’s that mainstream that it’s on national TV, then it can’t be that shocking.
But if they came to my house, he sure as hell better keep that Asian slave boy’s face out of my crotch. Your mind may vary of course.
That’s right, beg for it, you dirty slut.
I’m going to somewhat talk out of my ass, here, since, as I pointed out in another thread, I’m not at all in the BDSM scene, so I don’t have that much aquaintances in this area. Nevertheless, when you’re interested in something, you necessarily get to know quite a lot of like minded people.
My opinion would be that male Doms and subs outnumber female Doms and subs. But also that that subs of both sexes outnumber Doms of both sexes. Making the female Doms the rarest and most sought after category. But IME, female subs aren’t that rare.
(though discussing on the net, I’m under the clear impression that for some reason female subs are more common in the US than in France. I’m at a loss to explain this phenomenon…perhaps it’s only a “the grass is always greener…” thing, though).
Gentle Gobear,
Mr Manners agrees that tolerance and acceptance of “sexual kinks” is not only appropriate, but to be encouraged. However (you know there would be a “however”, didn’t you?) they were at a dinner party. Dinner parties are not the place to engage in sexplay, foreplay, performance art, etc. unless specifically invited to do so by the host. (And if the host does wish this sort of thing, the guests should be notified in advance so they can politely decline if they so choose. Note that Mr. Manners would say the exact same thing if one of the guests wanted to bring their child prodigy over to perform a recital on the piano.)
Gentle welby,
Mr. Manners disagrees. This is rude behavior because one does not bring one’s dog (whether canine OR human) to a dinner party. Should Doghood wish to attend, he should do so as a human (again, unless the host requested the dog’s presence. And again, if the host didn’t notify the other attending humans, the hosts were rude. Shocking one’s guests is not the hallmark of a genteel dinner soiree). Either the guest was rude for bringing an uninvited pet a dinner party or the guest was rude for putting others in a situation where they had to treat a human as a dog, which most people find objectionable.
If their “BDSM lifestyle” involved Doghood carrying his doggie role to the extreme of being non-housebroken, would the guests/hosts STILL have to accept it?
Fenris
(And why doesn’t Judith Martin ever answer stuff like THIS? 
)
Pleeeeeze. You know Judith Martin has about 15 pony boys chained up in her basement.
Fenris, we are unworthy.
Keithy ,grovelling at the satire-masters feet
:eek:
:: hands Jarbaby a Laurel. And Hearty Handshake for most bizarre mental image of the day ::
Minor quibble.
There are any number of way someone can be humiliated in public without anyone else actually knowing.
It’s the risk that adds to the thrill.
However, if what both Master and sub is open public humiliation, there are appropiate places for said behavior as well where said behavior is not frowned upon.
BDSM is no excuse for rudeness or inmaturity. In fact, quite the opposite.
Aargh…apologies. Preview is my friend.
Second to last paragraph should read:
However, if what both Master and sub seek is open public humiliation, there are appropiate places where said behavior is not frowned upon.
From The Complete Bottoming Book (An excellent resource for these sorts of discussions) in the chapter on “S/M and Spirituality”:
However
(Not, I note, to join the divine, however.)
Piercings and body play are not particularly for me, but okay. Not completely off the chart on that one.
I could have sworn, however, that there was a comment in this book about not drawing others into your play space without their permission. However, I can’t find it and my computer’s about to display the blue screen of death.
[screenplay mode]
The camera pans across an elegantly furnished room with impeccably clean and manicured furniture, white drapes and carpets, and the sound of classical music softly playing on the stereo.
Clacking of high heels is heard coming from the kitchen.
Judith Martin enters the room clad in a leather corset and fishnet stockings, a crop is in her hand. Her hair is done up “schoolmarm” style.
She smacks her left hand with the crop.
Judith Martin: (each sylable crisply articulated, and spoken with urgency) And they’ve all been very naughty boys!
[/screenplay mode]
Just something I saw in my minds eye.
It’s even kind of erotic.
I’m a little late to this thread, and I guess all the arguments are over, but I just wanted to comment that some people are into being assholish in public about their sexuality, whether it’s oversexed teenage guys grabbing their crotches and calling out to passing women, or dogboys sniffing other people’s crotches.
A difference is, though, that there are some people involved in BDSM who specifically enjoy embarrassing vanilla people, and aren’t just ‘playing’ in public to express themselves. If a sub has given over all their responsibility to their master, they can feel like they can do whatever they want, and it’s up to their partner to stop them. If that partner either doesn’t care, or enjoys it themselves … instant assholic couple.
Some of us do both.
:: Clicking the “Submit” button ::
You know the mental-health angle has me thinking. How do we KNOW it is/was consentual? Perhaps the OPer walked away from a person in danger, a person who needed help.
That is more than sad, it is very upsetting.
At what point would you call the mental-health (or ASPCA) people? When you are sure they are swimming in the very deep end of the pool, or when you think they might be?
Someone made a good point. If your host boasted of sticking pins in a real dog what would you do?
Of course if you called the cops I suppose your friendship with your strange host would end. Not that it would matter to me.
(Would this couple possibly enjoy the police humilating them? I wonder, since real danger would be involved, I guess not.)
Bwa ha ha! Thanks minty for making me laugh.