Spanking Blog Editorial Policy Notes

No spanking here — boring stuff to follow.

In the last couple of days, I’ve had a rash of people trying (with varying degrees of surface politeness) to influence the editorial policy of this spanking blog. I thought it might be time to say a few words in regard to what I’m all about and what I’m doing here.

To begin: I’m utterly horrified by narrow-minded, prudish, uptight, or censorious kinksters (when I can stop laughing at them). There’s an inherent contradiction in saying “I’m perfectly OK with my own kink, but those people should stop what they are doing at once — no self-respecting kinky person should have anything to do with people who have that fantasy or do that activity.” (Sometimes this comes out as “people like that aren’t really members of our community/shouldn’t be allowed in our community/shouldn’t be respected/shouldn’t be discussed.”) Such narrow-minded and exclusionary kinksters remind me of the cat in that shaved cat picture that floats around in email. When you see the picture, you’re horrified that anybody would shave a cat — but you can’t help laughing at how silly the offended cat looks. That’s how I respond whenever a kinky person denounces somebody else’s fantasy — it’s both horrifying and hilarious to watch.

Thus, whenever I encounter a censorious kinkster, I can’t decide whether to laugh or get mad. But I do know that I don’t believe in shunning kinky people whose kinks squick me. That’s why I won’t participate in delinking campaigns, or change my editorial behavior when one is aimed at me.

Know ye also: I don’t do this for the blog traffic. It’s true that I value all my readers, and I’ll miss anybody who decides they don’t like my content and won’t be back to read it. That said, traffic from blogs makes up a miniscule percentage of my total traffic — well under one percent of the total. That’s why I literally laughed out loud the other day when someone accused me in my comments of trying to stir up controversy in order “to keep the circulation up.” Nothing could be further from the truth. I value your links, folks, but I’m not going to change what I do in order to keep ’em.

Furthermore, I’m an absolutist about free speech. Among other things, that means I have a knee-jerk reaction to pressure. Tell me not to link to something, and I’ll be more inclined to link to it. Criticize my decision to link to or discuss something, and I may choose not to be polite. Why should I be? My blog stories and links are my business. Read or don’t, click or don’t. No skin off my nose. No skin off yours, either. And if you do decide to try and influence my editorial choices, I probably won’t see your busybody input as anything but a rudeness. I may forgive you, if you’re also charming and witty or a friend; but I might also (or instead) choose to mock you. If you can’t take it, don’t dish it out.

Let me amplify that. I believe that telling someone what they “should” blog about is horribly rude in function, no matter how polite you are when you share your unsolicited opinion. It’s like a nephew I have, who thinks he can say the most horrid things with impunity as long as he uses polite words. He can’t understand why people think it’s rude when he says something like “No offense, but why does your breath smell like garbage?” Sorry, but superficial politeness cannot rescue fundamentally rude behavior.

Moving on: I do have my own editorial standards. Generally speaking, I don’t usually blog about the spanking of children, even in fantasy or ageplay; I don’t usually blog about spankings where there is a strong and explicit lack of consent, unless the fantasy context is very obvious; I don’t usually blog about spankings that result in open wounds or flowing blood; I don’t usually blog about men getting spanked; and I don’t usually blog about spankings accompanied by substantial verbal abuse or deliberate and extreme humiliation. The reasons for these policies (mostly having to do with my own tastes) seem good to me, although I sometimes make exceptions. Sometimes, too, I get flak for my inconsistencies — as in the infamous case of the flash game (a freakin’ interactive cartoon) that featured either cartoon welts or cartoon cuts, depending on your interpretation. (Yeah, go figure. I’m still scratching my head about that one.) Nonetheless, at the end of the day, I get to decide whether something is beneath my standards. My bandwidth, my sandbox, my toys, my rules.

I truly don’t understand kinky people who think their tastes should be universal, and who try to enforce those tastes on others. For example, age play by consenting adults happens to squick me out, so I don’t much write about it. But I’m not horrified when other people do it or write about it. It would strike me as unutterably bizarre to email such a blogger and castigate them for their preferences. My distaste is my own, and I try very hard not to inflict it on anybody else. Same with blood play or verbal abuse. I figure I’m free to ignore these things without stepping on any toes. But I can’t imagine writing to another blogger and telling them they shouldn’t fantasize or play that way, or that they shouldn’t write about what they do. And when I get a letter like that (about once a week), I can never decide whether to laugh or to respond with a hearty “Fuck you.”

Often, I do both.

That’s more than enough for now. I’ll be happy to carry this conversation forward in the comments, but I won’t pull any punches when it comes to folks who want to tell me what I should blog.

  1. plezurscry commented on March 10th, 2005:

    I agree with you SpankBoss. Early in my exploration of spanking I came across a group that did things that were somewhat heavier than I, myself enjoyed. I did not participate in those things, although at times I would watch for curiosity sake and was comforted by the fact that the people acting on these desires were enjoying it. YAY for them! Once I began feeling pressure to do the same I stood up strong and firm and said HELL NO! All of a sudden, I was labeled not a submissive, blah blah blah! Whatever! If you like that sort of thing…more power to you. I have no right to judge. I don’t think I’ve ever been to the russian site and I’m not going now cuz it does make me uncomfortable. You however have every right to have it there. I am glad that Bliatz feels strongly and doesn’t put it on hers. Its her right also. How would we feel if the situation was reversed and she received a letter stating to remove her site/link/whatever from anything you do because I saw a picture there that really bothered me. Its simply not fair and absolutely is scensorship. All that to say….GO SPANKBOSS. I love your site and will be here as long as you are.

  2. Louise commented on March 10th, 2005:

    How jealous is Beth? I’d love to meet a man who sounds so tolerant and laid-back, and yet will spank me if I get out of line. Sounds bliss!

  3. Emma commented on March 10th, 2005:

    We at Pain Toy would like to lend our support and encouragement to the abuse of eastern european women. The painful torture sadism and cruelty that befalls those forced into a life of degredation and near slavery has certianly been a boon to the adult industry. As Americans, we feel, the exploitation of other countries should not merely be confined to oil companies and fundamentalist missionary groups. With the molestation of eastern european women, and teenage girls, the god given right to exploit those weaker than ourselves has come to the adult industry and I say ‘ABOUT TIME’ No longer are we forced to rely only on heroin addicted run aways, and underaged call girls, for our severe bdsm depictions. This wonderful new avenue should not only be encouraged but it should be applauded. Kudos to you sir! Kudos!

  4. Charis commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Kudos on the free speech thing, Spankboss — it doesn’t defend itself. And even though I love your site, and read it regularly, I just wanted to add : if you get to link to things YOU like, and defend that as free speech, then us readers get to comment when we see something we don’t like. It works both ways.

    That said, I love your site!

  5. SasseOne commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Thank you for this entry concerning ‘kinks’ and choices. I have always maintained an ‘if you don’t like it don’t read it’ attitude concerning anything online. No one is forcing anyone to click any links on any blogs and if you do click on one you don’t like then don’t go there again, that is your choice. Truthfully, I also looked at the ‘woodshed’ site and it was a bit strong for me so I choose to not go there again but that doesn’t mean that others should not have access to that link and be able to view the pictures if they want to. Keep up the good work on this blog, SpankBoss, it is one of the best around.

  6. slingoddess commented on March 10th, 2005:

    You tell ’em, Boss! Whoever is bugging your blog deserves a sound whippin’!

  7. urbanstud commented on March 10th, 2005:

    I have read your response to the post Bliatz made concerning the link to the “woodshed” site with some surprise. I had you down as a sensible person with strong views on individuality (which is good imo), but endorsing probably poor russian women being severely exploited by linking to that site is something that I just don’t understand.

    Not that I’m trying to tell you what to do – it’s your blog, but when you “go public” with a blog that carries such links you gotta accept that some people get offended…

    As you stated, you won’t link to all sots of kink – mainly because it’s not YOUR sort of kink. Does that mean that YOUR kind of kink includes whipping underprivileged women bloody for money? If so… then I’m outta here!

  8. Spankboss commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Don’t let the door hit ya on the ass on the way out, Urbanstud.

    I find it utterly bizarre that people would assume the advertising on my site reflects my tastes. Severe whipping is not, as it happens, particularly to my taste, but there are several nice folks on my blogroll who happen to love it. I don’t see anybody whining about my links to them. Sites involving harsh whipping don’t violate any of my hard limits, so why shouldn’t I link to them? Paying the models doesn’t change that.

    To me, the issue of money is irrelevant — almost everyone in the world does things for money that they wouldn’t do for free. That’s not exploitation, it’s just reality. Are you exploited every time you go to your job?

  9. Jeff commented on March 10th, 2005:

    I formulated the idea that when I saw the ad that read”most severe movies”that it might be a little rough.
    I was not able to glean from that ad,the presence of blood,or how poor the models actually are or were.
    Finally,I think several of us know individuals who relish being the recipient of severe punishment.Not only does one run the risk of judging those who would watch such a thing,but also those who enjoy being the recipient.
    I prefer to let other adults decide if being paid for a severe beating(or just getting one for the fun of it) is what they truly want,and let them live with their decision

  10. ~ commented on March 10th, 2005:

    I’m generally a lurker around here and never have much to say but as I started reading the most recent couple of posts I wanted to step up to the plate for Boss’ defense.
    My routine every morning consists of grabbing my caffeine and heading to my puter to see what’s new on the blog and for the last several days it’s been nothing but criticism for what’s listed here which doesn’t make “good” morning material. I think what’s posted here is awesome and those that don’t like it can click elsewhere! In reference to the woodshed photo, it has been referenced in my house a couple of times mainly after I’ve been really bratty and complaining about my sore bottom hubby has told me to stop complaining and be glad my botton doesn’t look like that! So in other words if you don’t like it don’t click on it just enjoy the other stuff on the site.
    Well off my soapbox for now. Here’s to happier postings in the future!!!

    Give ’em hell Boss!


  11. Bliatz commented on March 10th, 2005:

    I’m not questioning the content of this blog. You may have experienced criticism before, and maybe you just wanted to sum up your frustration in a post?

    That being said, I must say that your response put me off a bit (yeah, who cares if it did and FUCK YOU !!).

    If you think I’m a prude, and if you believe this is (merely) a matter if kinky “taste”, think again.

    This has got absolutely nothing to do with freedom of speech. You can say what you want. We all can. But that has got nothing to do with the ethics of what is on that website.

    The problem here is that none of us truly KNOWS if these women walk away from there unharmed. Or with money in their hands. We don’t KNOW. And that doubt is enough for me.

    I have lived in the Eastern block. I know some of the “pornography” that is produced there. That knowledge is enough for me. The doubt of what really goes on when producing “The Old Russian Woodshed” haunts me.

    I bet some of your readers would like to see something a little rougher? Something a little more “non-consensual”, maybe? Or maybe some snuff too? Hell, that’s just their prefs. Don’t judge them. Provide what they want!! Who are we to say their “tastes” are problematic??

    If there’s no possibility to discuss ethics or the circumstances of the women involved, if we can’t discuss right and wrong, then there’s no reason to discuss any further. Everything is allowed. Everything can be included as freedom of speech.

    Rant on, SpankBoss. Rage about censorship and “fake” kinksters judging others. Be proud to do what you want – without ethical concerns.

    Yeah! Give ’em hell!!

  12. Spankboss commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Charis, I’m not saying people don’t have the right to comment on my blog — that would be stupid. What I am saying is that I find it funny, stupid, and rude when people try to tell me what I should blog about.

    Bliatz, if “doubt” is enough for you to condemn something, that’s fine for you. But I still don’t see where you get off demanding that everyone else adhere to your doubt-based ethical standard. You remind me of a Morman teenage girl, who not only refuses to drink caffeinated sodas (based on the teachings of her religion) but also lectures her secular classmates on the evils of Mountain Dew. You fail to accept the possibility that people of good will could possibly be operating under an ethical structure different from your own.

    There’s certainly no doubt that you are one of the prudish kinksters I like to mock. You’ve made your choice, and you’re eager to condemn everyone who doesn’t agree with you. May you have joy in your narrow-mindedness.

  13. katy commented on March 10th, 2005:

    The problem here is that none of us truly KNOWS if these women walk away from there unharmed. Or with money in their hands. We don’t KNOW. And that doubt is enough for me.

    Spankboss does not truly know if I walk away from my sessions with Master unharmed, so he’d better de-link me too. Come to think of it, I’m don’t truly know that Spankboss doesn’t keep Bethie locked in his basement between paddlings. *snicker*

  14. Claire commented on March 10th, 2005:

    It discourages me to watch two bloggers I like flinging somewhat extreme charges at each another.
    This I must say: having read Bliatz’ blog for many months now, I can certify that she is about as far from prudish as they come. Idealistic, high-spirited maybe, but narrow-minded or prudish or unfair, NEVER.

  15. Spankboss commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Katy, heh! Why do you think Bethie posts so rarely? ;)

    Claire, I don’t know Bliatz very well, but I’m basing my charge of narrow-mindedness on her rant against me. By their works shall ye know them. She’s leveling condemnation at me (and attempting, not that I care, to get me shunned by her community) based on the fact that I refuse to share her extreme precautionary principle. Condemning others because they disagree with you is the very essence of narrow-mindedness.

  16. Jeff commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Murder is a crime,in any country.Legal issues like murder really are unfair to use to bolster an argument.One could win any argument on moral issues by extenuating the circumstances to include murder.No one can prove these Russians walk away compensated,just as it cannot be proved that they did not.
    Im curious if the same amount of ire is gathered for a site that obviously includes Russian men recieving severe action.I suppose that its just a given that those men LIKE that stuff or it wouldnt happen

  17. ~B commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Ok since we’re still on this darn Russian website here I go again…..I have seen several other sites and movies from various countries (US included) where the punishment is VERY severe. Has anyone looked at some of Mood’s movies or RSI’s films? Some of these are fairly graphic also and nowhere on any of these sites does it say whether the women (or men) are involved because they are submissive, a little on the masochistic side, or just looking to make some extra cash. Also nowhere on those sites is there any proof that the women (or men) have been duly compensated for they’re involvement. My point being….. as none of us are involved in this type of filmaking (to my knowledge anyway)we have no clue who is being compensated where or doing what against they’re will! We all click on various sites, banners, and links for entertainment (or whatever other purpose)not really knowing what goes on behind the scenes so I don’t understand why this particular site is being overly scrutinized. That being said one of the things that keeps me (and hubby) returning to this particular site is that we can find a link for whatever mood we’re in…very mild OTK to very severe caning which leads me to believe that Boss must be the OPEN minded one considering we find this variety on his site. Maybe all the sites and links he has posted are not taste specific to him, you, or me but there’s something for everyone, Spanko and Spankee alike, whatever your varying degree of taste is. And I for one am all kind of ready to get back to the fun, quirky, and often informative posts and comments that keep me coming back here.

    Not to mention the mood definitely needs to lighten up before it turns into a discussion here at home because I seem to be very opinionated of late and my own bottom will undoubtedly be suffering soon!


  18. Jim commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Come back Mary Whitehouse all is forgiven.

    I am surprised that such high-handedness occurs in the scene. Well done spankboss for standing your ground, if you had of given in it would not have been a moral decision, but conformity and if there is one thing people with a kink should understand it is that we don’t all conform to what is normal!!

    Had never been on the russian site before now, but did so to see what the fuss was about. So Bliatz in your moral crusading attempt to censor people you scored at least one own goal today.

  19. Bliatz commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Conformity. Normality. Freedom to be kinky, freedom of speech. Censorship. Ridicule and scorn …

    We all agree (?) that paedophelia is out of bounds. I hope so, at least. So am I a prude if I get angry discovering child abuse? Or what?? You have boundaries too. You don’t accept child abuse. Is that censorship?

    The Russian Woodshed may be a grey zone. Getting a turn on from inflicting pain on someone who doesn’t like it, spankings until the blood runs, no that’s not my kink. But taste is not the issue. Sexual preferences like this brings out a lot of questions, which I had hoped to discuss further. About ethics.

    I may be a prude. I may even be such a prude that I deserve the treatment above. I am not sensitive, and I love a good fight. I just wasn’t aware, that when entering the realm of “not quite normal” sexual practices, I was forced to accept whatever I see here.

    What I don’t understand is why talking about ethics can be turned into a rant about “tastes” or censorship. Some tastes simply shouldn’t be expressed. You can call it censorship or moral judgement. My humble opinion is, that if we’re unwilling to discuss where the boundaries are … we’re losing the one thing that makes this world of kink a safe one.

    I’m really sorry it ended up like this, because this discussion is really important.

  20. Spankboss commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Bliatz writes: “Some tastes simply shouldn’t be expressed.”

    That’s why I call Bliatz a censorious prude.

    Some tastes mustn’t be acted on — such as the pedophilia example. But expression? Words hurt no one. I will fight people like Bliatz(who seek to suppress expression with which she disagrees) until my dying breath.

    There are things I’d prefer not to discuss (like age play). That’s my personal choice. I become a censorious prude when I say to someone else that they should or must choose as I do. When it comes to expression, there are no universal boundaries — just your boundaries and my boundaries. You can disapprove of mine, and I can disaprove of yours — but expecting others to respect ones boundaries of expression is indeed narrow-minded. I’m not willing to discuss “where the boundaries are” because I reject, with every fiber of my being, the idea that there are any boundaries on my expression but the ones I choose.

    And Bliatz? You are not “forced to accept whatever you see” on my blog. You can not visit here, or not click troubling links. And of course you are free to condemn anything here, at the cost of being known as an opponent of free expression. What you cannot do is attempt to impose your ethical preferences on me, while expecting that attempt to go unchallenged.

    And let us be clear: Bliatz, you did not open this exchange by attempting to commence a discussion of ethics. You opened it thusly: “I hereby encourage everybody who has links to the spanking blog to either delete that link, or write to it’s owner asking him to remove that banner.” Not a word about ethical discussion there. Nope, you just exhorted people to shun me or, in the alternative, ask me to comform my expression to your preferences.

    Bliatz, I’m not really sorry it ended up like this, considering how you started it.

  21. Bliatz commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Alright, then. Bye, bye. *grins* Hope your blood pressure is okay?

    But do recall that I never, ever called you, personally, anything! At all. And it’s a bit difficult actually discussing anything, when you have to dig up proper arguments from deep under a shit load of verbal abuse and name-calling.

  22. Bliatz commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Oh … and by the way .. I didn’t mean “expressed” as in “don’t talk or write about it”. English isn’t my moher tongue so that was am error. I meant “expressed” as in acted out. For real.

  23. Spankboss commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Emma, LOL! You got me giggling, and that ain’t a pretty sight.

    Folks, Emma and Alebeard’s site is proof that severe bdsm depictions don’t have to be about abuse or exploitation. I’m sure their lovely models have pocketed some cash, but if there’s a heroin addicted runaway or underage call girl in the bunch, I’ll eat my hat.

  24. Patty commented on March 10th, 2005:

    sigh… never saw an interblogging flame before. I should keep my mouh shut, but…. naw… without taking sides at all I’d like to answer one question with my observation…

    Bliatz asks “What I don’t understand is why talking about ethics can be turned into a rant about “tastes” or censorship”

    Because you didn’t just question ethics hon, you attempted to apply pressure to influence someone else’s blog content. And you asked friends to join you in a de-link campaign…

    In my book I would say that is why the tide shifted from being just a difference of opinion regarding ethics, and became about censorship and tastes.

    You are well within your rights to make a post like that on your own blog, but then so is Spankboss within his to reciprocate with his own point of view.

    just my unsolicited opinion…

  25. Bliatz commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Yeah. Maybe that delinking stuff was a little over the top. I’m a terrible hothead when it comes to violence against women. But besides that, the tone here soo quickly got hostile and personal, that I’ve to take the discussion elsewhere.

    Still think there are so many issues which should be discussed. Such as dehumanization by distance. And ethics. And such.

    But it seems everybody agrees that the only victim in this discussion is SpankBoss.

    My sense of proportion somehow works differently. Is all.

  26. Mr. Bowen commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Bliatz, it would help if you would learn some logic. Your original post (and almost ever comment you’ve made since) has been shot through with a complete inability to argue logically. The precautionary principle from which you argue in this comment thread is but one example, asking your readers to refrain from action unless they can prove that which they have no power to prove.

    Logic, my dear, is the key to winning arguments, not anectdotes and emotion.

  27. Nadz commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Well it looks like the battle has already been won so no need to add further :)

    But I just want to say I’m quite happy with this blog and have been for the last 2 months where I check it every 2-3 days. I haven’t visited all the links from the blog because some of them don’t look like sort of thing, but the fact the links are there doesn’t bother me or put me off reading this blog in the least.

    So keep the posts coming Boss, and um while taking care of this little matter … don’t forget about Bethie will you?? :)

  28. Screamer commented on March 10th, 2005:

    “I bet some of your readers would like to see something a little rougher? Something a little more “non-consensual”, maybe? Or maybe some snuff too? Hell, that’s just their prefs. Don’t judge them. Provide what they want!! Who are we to say their “tastes” are problematic??”

    Yes, let’s jump right from “Spanking for Dollars” into Snuff! Yes! Let’s rile up the troops in our behalf!


    If you believe everything you read on a site called “russian woodshed” perhaps you get what’s coming to you in the end.

    Consent – be it for orgasms or cold hard cash – is still consent. Let’s not pretend it’s not, and try to Heart and Flower the entire BDSM community, eh?

    Thanks in advance (Go, Spankboss, Go!)

  29. CUF commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Consent is consent is consent. Play (in whatever form it takes) is play is play, is play. Almost everyone has limits and they are free to choose to view/read what they wish (at least before the Bushites get to us all).

    Personally, I love your blog. I find it entertaining and erotic and hell, it’s given me more than a few ideas of which myself and lady friend have loved…ok maybe me more than she *wink*.

    I’m always amazed when “kinksters” choose to try to censor within their own community. HELLO?!? You would be censored to an extreme degree if the moral majority had their way and what fun is that?

    Anyway, so long as no one get hurt in a non-consentualy way then who the hell is anyone to say otherwise?

    Keep it up my friend. The world is opening and needs more of what you do.

  30. Spankboss commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Thanks, Shimmer. I do appreciate all of the folks who have spoken up with understanding of my point here.

  31. misschief commented on March 10th, 2005:

    I might as well just bend over and grab my ankles by saying this, but I’m with Bliatz.

    No, I’m not trying to influence the content of this blog, which I enjoy.

    But the owner must take responsibility for his content, including the links. By providing a link to a site, you’re promoting it, you’re driving traffic to it, perhaps you’re sparking a new, darker fantasy. As Cuf just said, on the topic of this blog:
    “I find it entertaining and erotic and hell, it’s given me more than a few ideas of which myself and lady friend have loved…ok maybe me more than she *wink*.”
    Kink can be like drugs or drink – one’s tolerance goes up, it takes more and more to achieve the desired effect. Today, I get off on spanking a slightly reluctant “brat” OTK with my hand. That gets old after a while, I need something harder. It escalates until eventually “slightly reluctant” isn’t good enough, and I need to draw blood.
    I’m not going to “that site,” because simply clicking on it encourages it.
    And posting a link actually promotes it. Mr. Spankboss is just dusting off his hands and playing the 1st amendment card. But he’s responsible for the content of his site, and his endorsement of ALL content and links is complicit.

    The KKK has a right to demonstrate in public, but what if they asked you to put a sign in your storefront window, listing a number to call for information on the KKK? Are you an enemy of the 1st amendment if you refuse?

    rhetorical questions. carry on.

  32. Spankboss commented on March 10th, 2005:

    LOL, I endorse nothing, friend, I just put it out in front of consenting adults for them to make independant judgments about. These are *ideas* we are trafficking in, not chemical substances that induce physical dependencies. If seeing harder kink makes you crave harder kink (and it doesn’t work like that for me) that’s your mental choices and your responsibility, not mine.

    So which is it? Am I morally equivalent to a drug dealer, or am I just a KKK sympathizer? Never mind, those are just rhetorical questions.

    That *splat* noise you just heard was my ass hitting the floor after I laughed it off.

  33. shimmer commented on March 10th, 2005:

    Bliatz said:
    “Getting a turn on from inflicting pain on someone who doesn’t like it, spankings until the blood runs, no that’s not my kink. But taste is not the issue. Sexual preferences like this brings out a lot of questions, which I had hoped to discuss further. About ethics.”

    rambling *on*
    My Master loves to cane me. Sometimes he particularly likes it when I am struggling hard with it. He works hard (at times, not always) to insure that I go nowhere near subspace and that I feel every stroke. He gets hard at my tears and struggles. I don’t like it. There are times when he beats me till blood appears. I do like that.

    Is this then questionable? Are we unethical? Is our kink not ok? Should we be put on the “banned website” list too?

    I am rather emotionally befuddled these days but consent is just that, by acceptance of money or by implicitly saying “Yes Sir, I want another please”.
    Saying the Eastern European women may not be able to leave and are hence subjugated is almost the same as saying the same about the poor (most likely Hispanic) individual who is at this moment currently picking the green beans that go into your can of Jolly Green Giant.

    *shrug* Bad analogy, but then I have a good excuse these days. I know I had a point in there somewhere.
    rambling *off*

    Ultimately – don’t like the site? Don’t read it. Don’t like the links? Don’t click em.

  34. Spanking Blog » Blog Archive » More Kinky Censorious Prudes commented on July 8th, 2005:

    […] I’ve fulminated before against kinky people who think that their own level of kink is just peachy, but are quick, even eager, to condemn other kinky people who may take the game a little further. Normally I just laugh, but when these kinky prudes graduate from mere condemnation and start trying to marginalize and silence other kinky people by stirring up an attempted de-linking campaign, I tend to get pissed off. […]

  35. sixofthebest commented on October 1st, 2012:

    Spankboss, I like the way you conduct this blog. For me it informative, photo, drawing, or written material wise. Please keep it this way. I am in your corner, all the way. Thank you.

Leave A Comment

Maximum Comment Length: 2500 characters (about five paragraphs)

A Popular Spanking Blog Post:

Elise Strapped And Spanked

Elise Graves hard over-the-knee spanking
"...first he reddens her bottom with the thick leather strap..."