The Interesting news thread

[dreaming_lilith]

LOL!

That thread about swedes has animalsex was not very serious..nor true.

It is not by law illegal (i don't support it, i think it should be) but it if someone is busted having sex with an animal you can classify it as cruelty to animals. It is certainly not legal to abuse an animal and turn it into the vet to just have help. They will check up what and who did it of course.
And it is a fact that it is mentally damanging for a dog to have sex with its owner as it gives a heavy identifycrise, the dog needs to identify itself as the leader or having a leader. If the leader is fucking the dog, the dog gets mental problems....well, put as an very easy expaination at least. That was a sidenote tho.

And just one thing, one of the sources in that article is a swedish newspaper called Expressen. It is a sensionalistic paper, it is not serious journalistic, more about gossip and rumors. Refering to that is not giving a very good impression.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Women With Big Boobs Are Smarter

Francisco.
PS. Catalina has really big boobs.

 

[catalina_francisco]

This one is really sad and true.

Bay Stops Auction Of Vietnamese Girls.
Online Auctioneer Strictly Forbids Sale Of Humans

Francisco.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Rejection affects us all in different ways it seems..

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,8986843%5E13762,00.html

 

[InnerDarkness]

Women With Big Boobs Are Smarter

Francisco.
PS. Catalina has really big boobs.

I KNEW I had something to be proud about LOL!
Boobs AND brains...what more does a gal need?

 

[InnerDarkness]

This one is really sad and true.

Bay Stops Auction Of Vietnamese Girls.
Online Auctioneer Strictly Forbids Sale Of Humans

Francisco.

that is frightening...and sad

 

[catalina_francisco]

I KNEW I had something to be proud about LOL!
Boobs AND brains...what more does a gal need?

LOL, I Love a women with a brain and I always knew that my obsession with boobs had a reason.

Francisco.

 

[FungiUg]

Bring back big-boobed bimbos!

 

[catalina_francisco]

Who ever said your virginity isn't worth anything.

GIRL WHO SOLD VIRGINITY

Francisco.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Would not like to be these people waiting out the next couple of months.
http://www.couriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,9295845%5E1702,00.html

Catalina

 

[catalina_francisco]

Bump....

Lethal Enema

Catalina

 

[catalina_francisco]

Online Dating Success

Online Commitment - interesting that findings showed people moving away from webcamming and concentrating more on the getting to know the person....sounds familiar LOL.

Catalina

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

Rights body steps into world of sexual quirks
The complainant says Vancouver police discriminated against him

Ian Mulgrew
Vancouver Sun

Friday, December 30, 2005

The B.C. Human Rights Tribunal will investigate sexual practices involving "bondage, discipline and submission, sadism and masochism" to determine whether a self-described pagan was discriminated against by the Vancouver police department.

In a preliminary 18-page ruling issued Thursday, the tribunal said there may be merit in Peter Hayes' complaint that he lost a potential limo driver's job when a police officer refused him a chauffeur's permit seemingly because of his religious beliefs and sexual preferences.

Lindsay M. Lyster, who wrote the decision, said she wasn't completely sure of the "precise nature of Mr. Hayes' lifestyle, practices and preferences, nor the parties' use of the term BDSM (to refer to bondage and discipline, domination and submission, sadism and masochism) or other related terms," but it sounded like he had a legitimate beef



"That Mr. Hayes suffered an adverse impact as a result of the respondents' actions is, on the facts alleged, clear, as he was denied a chauffeur's permit and lost the opportunity to work," she wrote.

"It is also reasonable to assume, for the purposes of the present decision, that invasive questioning and judgmental statements about his sexual practices would have had a subjectively negative impact on his dignity."

Hayes filed his complaint in early summer after applying for the permit required for the job he had been offered with a limo company.

At the VPD, Hayes said the officer on duty, Kevin Barker, kept him waiting 90 minutes while serving five other people, including two who arrived after him.

Eventually, Hayes maintained, Barker took him to a small room, asked why he was wearing black clothes and told him he was being denied the permit because a woman in 2003 suggested he was involved in a cult.

No one from the force ever called Hayes about that complaint and the cult named was actually the title of a science fiction book -- Tarnsman of Gor by John Norman. The woman, Hayes insisted, was an angry former lover.

Hayes said Barker wouldn't give him many details, except to say the concern had to do with paganism, Wiccan magic as well as role-playing, master-slave sexual practices. He added that he was told he posed "an extreme risk of recruiting passengers/customers into my cult during my work hours if I were granted the chauffeur's permit."

The police department, however, argues that Hayes' behaviour does not fall within the meaning of "sexual orientation" under the human rights legislation.

"In our submission, sexual orientation is separate and distinct from preferences or behaviours while engaging in sex," the department said. "The legislature has not gone so far as to prohibit discrimination on the basis of preferences or behaviour."

If you ask me, that borders on a wilful misreading of the law.

The courts have long said consensual bondage or sado-masochism is part of normal and acceptable adult sexual behaviour that does not offend community standards. To start splitting "orientation" and "behaviour" is to enter the realm of angels and pinheads.

Such a point of view would limit protection on the basis of sexual orientation to discrimination on the basis of being gay, lesbian, bisexual or heterosexual. The heterosexual North Vancouver student taunted with false homosexual slurs, for instance, would have been denied redress.

Human rights legislation, as the B.C. Supreme Court has said, is intended to preclude and rectify the wrongful oppression of the weak by the strong and the disadvantaged by the advantaged. The Court of Appeal has emphasized the focus of human rights analysis should be on the effect of the impugned conduct, rather than the intent of the perpetrators.

Those are the issues here.


Still, while aware of that legal history, Lyster said she would allow the VPD a chance to buttress its case.

"Before the tribunal decides if it should accept the complaint based on the grounds of sexual orientation the parties are invited to make submission about whether the facts, as presented, if proven, could amount to a contravention of the Code, on the protected grounds of sexual orientation," she wrote.

Lyster suggested the tribunal solicit expert evidence to determine whether those who practise BDSM have "like homosexuals, historically been subjected to disadvantage, stereotyping and discrimination; and whether those who are drawn to such activities, like homosexuals, share 'a deeply personal characteristic that is either unchangeable or changeable only at unacceptable personal costs'. . . ."

For me, that the VPD is defending in this manner the alleged conduct of the officer is a scandalous waste of tax money; that the tribunal could not find a less expensive and more effective way to handle this situation is equally sad.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Not sure this earns the title of interesting news so much as disgusting and just more evidence of the inept George Bush left unsupervised to play with his boy toys.http://home.scarlet.be/~js088697/wildewesten/15wildewesten.gif

Catalinahttp://members.home.nl/animation.world/index/honden/honden3.gif

 

[AngelicAssassin]

Congrats to one of the "boy toys" on a job well done .

 

[catalina_francisco]

Congrats to one of the "boy toys" on a job well done .

And you would welcome the same comment from an Iraqi about an attack on civilians on American soil? Your own family being the casualty perhaps? I doubt it. Still can't get past how there is so much evidence this was not a legitimate war, and that it goes against the history of the western world in that we don't attack other nations and civilians, (of course before Vietnam) and that Bush repeatedly admits and is shown to not have a clue (like continuing to read fairy stories to children after hearing of 9/11 because hedidn't know what he should do without someone to advise him),, and still a few believe it is all in the name of peace.

 

[AngelicAssassin]

And you would welcome the same comment from an Iraqi about an attack on civilians on American soil? Your own family being the casualty perhaps? I doubt it.

About as much as i welcome the political agenda of a mod on a thread up until this point that had something to do with BDSM.

Nice edit. My original comment still stands.

 

[catalina_francisco]

About as much as i welcome the political agenda of a mod on a thread up until this point that had something to do with BDSM.

LOL, would think even you know there are countless thread in Cafe that don't have BDSM content and to which you have also contributed..and yes, I am a mod, but also a human with an interest in what is happening and if the US decides to attack Europe or any other nation I imiagine Bush is not going to make a list of moderators on porn sites who are to be protected.

C

 

[AngelicAssassin]

C

perhaps, but this, one at least, hadn't had that done yet ... had it.

 

[alice_underneath]

Congrats to one of the "boy toys" on a job well done.

And you would welcome the same comment from an Iraqi about an attack on civilians on American soil? Your own family being the casualty perhaps?

I despise war, and this one in particular makes me queasy for a lot of different reasons. But your shot at AA was misaimed, Catalina.

From the article to which he referred with his comment "well done":

"Gazing through the telescopic sight of his M24 rifle, Staff Sgt Jim Gilliland, leader of Shadow sniper team, fixed his eye on the Iraqi insurgent who had just killed an American soldier.

His quarry stood nonchalantly in the fourth-floor bay window of a hospital in battle-torn Ramadi, still clasping a long-barrelled Kalashnikov."

http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/01/01/wirq01.xml

This "civilian" shot and killed an American soldier, and in doing so set himself up to be shot and killed in return.

Further, I find the fact that he was shooting from a hospital to be utterly disgusting. Was he attempting to protect the patients? Somehow, I doubt it. More likely, he was assuming (correctly, I might add) that the nature of the building would, to a considerable degree, serve to tie the Americans' hands in responding to his shots.

Regarding this specific instance, I agree with AA. It was a job well done.

Alice

 

[catalina_francisco]

So killing an Iraqi is right because killing an American is wrong? By whose judgement? Perhaps if the allied forces were not in another's land though it wouldn't happen Alice? This is not a war based on defence and honour, it is invasion and no amount of sanitising particular events can change the fact that the invading forces are in someone else's country minding someone else's business and imposing their own view of how things should be. We also have a bit of a vested interest in what happens to those forces as one of the troops is a RL sub of ours....that does not mean though that if he is killed in the line of action, and he is in the thick of it, that killing the one who kills him is correct or going to fix the wrong already done, or bring him back...it just means there are 2 more senseless deaths added to the already long list which developed from George Bush's egotistical and ignorant actions. Would you or any American stand by and not take action if it were your country and you were invaded by another nation, would you not perhaps kill those you saw as the enemy?

Catalina

 

[alice_underneath]

So killing an Iraqi is right because killing an American is wrong?

Interesting twist of my words.

Please look again at what I said: This "civilian" shot and killed an American soldier, and in doing so set himself up to be shot and killed in return.

By whose judgement?

No judgment here. Just common sense. If you shoot at a group of armed people, you should expect to be shot at in return.

Perhaps if the allied forces were not in another's land though it wouldn't happen Alice?

No disagreement from me on this point, either in my prior post or this one.

This is not a war based on defence and honour, it is invasion and no amount of sanitising particular events can change the fact that the invading forces are in someone else's country minding someone else's business and imposing their own view of how things should be.

We are not debating the basis for this war. We are merely discussing one specific incident, involving exactly two people: a sniper, and his target.

The question at hand is not: Should the US, UK, et al have invaded Iraq?

The question at hand is: Was this specific shooting a "job well done"?

We also have a bit of a vested interest in what happens to those forces as one of the troops is a RL sub of ours

No matter what your sub thinks about Bush or the "reasons" for war, he has a responsibility to protect his own life, and those of his comrades. That's his job.

The American sniper killed an Iraqi who was armed and shooting at others. The Iraqi was killed with a single shot to the chest. There was no damage to the hospital patients or the hospital itself.

I stand by my original comment.

Regarding this specific instance, I agree with AA. It was a job well done.

Would you or any American stand by and not take action if it were your country and you were invaded by another nation, would you not perhaps kill those you saw as the enemy?

This question is irrelevant, in my opinion, to the topic at hand. But I'll answer it anyway.

Like anything else, it depends. Most notably, it depends on the risk involved to myself or my family, and an assessment of what I might reasonably hope to achieve with the killing.

Alice

 

[Xelebes]

Congrats to one of the "boy toys" on a job well done .

I think Canadians still got them beat with 1.4 km (0.85 mi) shot.

 

[brioche]

I think Canadians still got them beat with 1.4 km (0.85 mi) shot.

Yeah. We rock.

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

Pleasure Principles

Pleasure Principles
Enfield dominatrix Michelle Silva´s business was busted, her gear confiscated. What was her crime? Police appear to believe it could have e been ¨prostitution.¨ But experts say that could be hard to prove.

by Meir Rinde - December 29, 2005
COURTESY EMPRESS M
Feature
Silva has described a police raid on her home last month as an attack on her free speech.
Enfield dominatrix Michelle Silva has described a police raid on her home last month as an attack on her free speech rights and a scare tactic by a town straining for a justification to shut her down. But initially no one knew for sure why the police searched her home on Nov. 16 and seized her computers and bondage furniture, since the search warrant remained sealed.

Now the seal has expired, and the warrant is very clear: it states that the "promotion of prostitution" constitutes the bulk of the charges Silva could face.

Silva, 33, operates an S&M website, EmpressM.net, that offers bondage photos and videos that she argues she has the legal right to distribute. But the warrant barely mentions the videos; rather, it is Silva's other business as a dominatrix who invites customers to visit -- and pay hundreds of dollars for services -- that drew attention from police.

The investigation was prompted by an anonymous e-mail police received in January. "I thought you would like to know that you have an S&M prostitution house in your town," the e-mail said, according to the warrant. When Enfield Det. William Cooper looked at Silva's website, he found pictures of "'EmpressM' with nude males, 'slaves' in obvious states of sexual arousal," the warrant said. S&M practitioners, or sadomasochists, derive sexual pleasure from inflicting pain on others or themselves.

"It is clear that B&D (bondage and discipline) practitioners can receive sexual gratification for a fee as a fully developed rate structure exists," Cooper wrote in the warrant.

When told last week by the Advocate about the potential prostitution charges, Silva responded with a puzzled e-mail. "So who were they looking for? And still no charges É", she wrote. "Did they make this up? I need to call my attorney."

In earlier postings on an online forum for people who run pornographic websites, she appeared unaware that she might be charged with providing sex for money. "No one was charged with prostitution nor was it ever referred to by the cops, that is not why they raided my home business," she wrote after the raid.

The search and seizure of Silva's property prompted a vigorous discussion on the forum, called "Greenguy and Jim's Ultimate Adult Webmaster Board." When the warrant was still sealed, other posters on the forum looked at some of Silva's websites, which included EmpressM.net, Northeastgoddess.com, and Fortressofpain.com. The web posters read descriptions of the services she provided at rates ranging from $300 per session to $1,000 for an overnight stay, and came to a similar conclusions as the one that police may have come to.

"Gonna be hard to fight the prostition (sic) rap when you accept donations or tips for sexual services, whether it involves intercourse or not," one poster wrote.

The questions of what constitutes prostitution and sex could end up determining Silva's fate. State law defines prostitution as engaging in "sexual conduct with another person in exchange for a fee." But the phrase "sexual conduct" is pretty vague, said Todd Fernow, a law professor and director of the Criminal Law Clinic at the University of Connecticut.

Fernow said a Connecticut judge tried to define sexual conduct in a 1980 case involving an alleged prostitute charged with soliciting a New Haven police officer. The defendant claimed the phrase was unconstitutionally vague, an argument the judge rejected. But borrowing from Webster's Second New World Dictionary, the judge defined sexual conduct as involving "sex, the sexes, the organs of sex and their functions, or the instincts, drives, behavior, etc. associated with sex." That's still pretty vague, and it's the dictionary, not the law.

State laws defining abuse, assault and other sexual crimes are much more graphically descriptive. One section of the criminal code states, "'Sexual intercourse' means vaginal intercourse, anal intercourse, fellatio or cunnilingus between persons regardless of sex. É Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete vaginal intercourse, anal intercourse or fellatio and does not require emission of semen. Penetration may be committed by an object manipulated by the actor into the genital or anal opening of the victim's body."

Again, that definition of sex applies to assaults, not to prostitution. Indeed, the criminal code also offers a definition of sadomasochistic abuse: "flagellation or torture by or upon a person clad in undergarments, a mask or bizarre costume, or the condition of being fettered, bound or otherwise physically restrained on the part of one so clothed."

But consensual sadomasochism isn't mentioned in the law, and is apparently legal. It's certainly practiced widely in Connecticut, by amateurs and by professionals who charge for their services. Whether it is considered "sex" or not still remains a matter of opinion.

The relationship between consensual sadomasochism, often called BDSM, and sex is a vexed one. In an article on BDSM published in the Hartford Advocate earlier this year, some practitioners were at pains to explain that at its core, flogging, binding, wax play, role-playing, humiliation, and the whole range of BDSM activities are intended to create intimate connections between the participants, and not necessarily sexual ones ("Slaves and Masters," July 21). At the same time, they admitted that BDSM sometimes involved sex.

"I have an opinion that's not popular among a lot of BDSMers," Dr. Gloria Brame said in an interview last week. Brame, an Athens, Georgia, clinical sexologist, is an S&M advocate and author of the book A Different Kind of Loving . "I say it's sex, and the hell with it. I say nobody is going to pay to go somewhere if they're not going to get turned on. They're paying to get turned on."

Brame said in an ideal world, consenting adults could have sex or perform BDSM or engage in whatever combination they like, without having to worry about police raids. But she also said that someone who has a business like Silva's has to be aware that things get tricky when the clothes come off, and it's smart to check everything with your lawyer, well before the cops come knocking.


We want your feedback.
Email mrinde@hartfordadvocate.com
Email editor@hartfordadvocate.com

Footnote : Not certain I am comfortable posting BDSM News directly in line of a thread that covers news of War and the associated and very serious implications of such . Might resume posting the specific genre of news back on the thread I initiated yesterday. Any opinions ? Goes to think on it awhile........