Modern Day

This is a file published and hosted on sinpages.com Please - Do not reprint, repost, or otherwise duplicate these files in full, or in part without express written authorization of the copyright holder, to do so is to risk criminal persecution and contempt of the community at large. If you replicate without consent, the rest of your site is trash - Safe - Sane - Consensual - Informed - Fun - Between adults - keep it healthy.

Modern Day; Ignorance Inspired Witch Hunts

1998 in Thornhill there was a wonderful and inspiring Lady who was a Domme, who ran a "Bondage Bungalow" Her own little perverts paradise. According to Her and Her clients there was no sexual contact, and indeed I have never heard the police say there was. What they took issue with however was adult activity, of a provocative nature, in a private and location, and the exchange of funds going on in that private location. On top of this; they then published Her personal client list in the news papers, and completely disrespected the lives and privacy of not only Her clients, but that of their families, and associates as well.
In Canada we have laws about prostitution, and the laws say that sexual acts for money is not an illegal practice. What is illegal in this regard is public, indecent acts (i.e. sex acts in cars, flashing, oddly private swingers clubs however are legally tolerated), communication for the purpose of procuring sexual acts (no conversations about a price, write it out), and living off the avails or running a common bawdy house; or evidence that a person lives with or is habitually in the company of a prostitute, in the absence of evidence of the contrary, proof that the person lives on the avails of prostitution.

What this means is anyone involved in running a Dungeon is on police radar as a prostitute. This in turn means you have no rights. You are allowed to make money, you are not however permitted to spend it, as anyone accepting such funds is seen as "living off the avails." Having a job, living with, or being married to a Domme who has a bevy of slaves will not alleviate this concern. Ask Terri-Jean Bedford, a.k.a. Madame de Sade of Thornhill Ontario.

She can work to buy groceries, but if the grocer accepts the money he "lives off the avails," if someone else brings Her food then it is a sex act in exchange for predetermined goods, either way it's a no win. She is not legally permitted to feed Herself or have a place of residence. She can not buy gifts for people, nor if seen as a prostitute is She permitted to commune with them. Not even Her family.
This then effectively ostracizes Her completely from any form of respectable bearing, position, or life. To compound this with the publicity of the case and the numerous issues it addressed, or attempted to address, is to place the curse of death upon Her head, and Her stable.

The law has proven to be a cancerous leach upon the heart and soul of responsible and understood D/s. They have worked tirelessly to have us despised, denied, and deprived the same rights which so many others readily enjoy.

Do you think it would be possible post year 2000 to be charged with the crime of murder, without a body, with no blood or DNA evidence, no murder or dismemberment weapon, no more than a theory, in North America?
It has happened, and the unfortunate Woman who it happened to was also a professional dominatrix operating out of Her own condominium. Barbara Asher, the 56-year-old woman calling Herself Mistress Lauren M in Quincy Massachusetts was charged, and fully persecuted for the murder of a man who may not even be dead.
He may have been a client at one point, as he had Her information noted. This is as far as substantiation goes. Try as I might I can't even see if this guy ever even met with this Woman. But I'd be curious about their "theory" on what happened to his personal items such as watches, wallet, dentures, vehicle, etc. They don't need evidence or theory on that part apparently.
The need a justifiable concern, that's it. And their concern might as easily be you are outspoken, you are acquiring slaves of power, you are talented and will "grow" beyond their ability to stem you, you are a non-conformist and thus a threat to the "system." The point is their concerns need not reflect your own, your slaves, your community, or anything other than their own self serving denunciation of the lifestyle on the whole. The louder they can make this message heard, the happier they will be.

My story didn't make the papers, but I am not alone, they are not alone.
If you practice this lifestyle do be aware of the risks. You need not have anyone within Your stable cause any problem, you just have to have your ad noted in a publication, and you're fair game. Top or bottom, male or female ... Your life is on the line, in more ways than you know.

We are the Other Sexuality, and we deserve recognition and acceptance as much as all other forms of sexuality have garnered. We are human beings, deserving and desiring a withholding of judgment until you actually know and understand us, our lives, and your facts.

* Madame De Sade - Was a professional Dominatrix not engaged in sexual activity. What went on with the members of Her immediate "family" and within Her Home is hardly the business of the courts, and yet here it is made an example of.
* Madame De Sade - Had all of Her property and assets seized in this "Seizure of property" situation over $100 000 worth of dungeon equipment and home was taken. She was also fined an additional $3,000. She was put on the street.
* Madame De Sade - If She returned to this position of care, security, compassion and comfort would once again be persecuted, and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
* No one in the scene would have a problem with this Woman, Her practices, or Her methods.
* Mistress Lauren the whole thing so far as can be discerned is a fabrication, but the first actual concern would be the claim of having left the room with a slave in bondage, any experienced player, let alone one of 40 years would know better than to bind a slave and leave without a cam or some other method of supervision in place. This claim on the part of the police and the remainder of the story further prove the single-minded, irresponsibility displayed on the part of the prosecutor in the case.