Did anyone else watch the programme on C4 at 10pm last night?

DanE2010

kittiej wrote: »

I think you've got me mixed up with someone else mate in all of your ranting. I don't believe I said I thought they were mentally impaired or deprived, what I actually said was I think they are of a sub-human species.

You seem to be getting all steamed up about the subject so I can only imagine that you are a participant - otherwise why all the fuss and bother?

Can I ask that should you quote me in future you stick to the facts and point out when you have highlighted the original text. Thank you.

I suppose it could be argued that the women who charge for services have at least got some business sense and they don't tend to have multiple people watching and joining in.

all of this dogging stuff reminds me of the biker parties from the 70's where a couple of girls would go to all male parties which were normally held in fields and everyone would 'have a go' with them.

Dan you need to calm down before you do yourself a mischief.

Lol I was waiting for someone to fire back with that comment just because I support people's right to choose. If I was taking part in dogging id have no qualms about saying I did, its you and others who are so hung up about other people's private lives.

Deprived, mentally impaired, sub human, its all under the same umbrella as in seperating them for normal everyday people, the point I was making but you so obviously missed was that normal everyday people are doggers, normal people who go about their business and partake in abit of dogging on the side. Same can be said with those who sleep with hookers, are they sub human? They often get down to it in their cars parked up somewhere, what about them? Pat the hooker on the back for having good buisness sense and keeping her overheads down?

Just because its not for you doesnt make it sub human and I also highlight your hypocrisy in that you think hookers are ok because they charge for it, but those who do it because they simply enjoy it are subhuman! Lots of hookers charge for people to watch, join in, lots of hookers dont, same with doggers id imagine people do whatever suits them, must you try to put them all into 1 box? Why cant you accept every person on this earth is different and what works for some does not for others?

I am in no way getting worked up about it im merely debating the subject matter im sorry to dissapoint you there, but this is what happens when people are debating and have difference of opinions, your entitled to yours as much as I am mine, no need for you to get quite so arsey about it is there?!

Hilarious :rotfl::T i'm not the one getting worked up over what grown consenting adults do in their private lives.....

thorsoak

DanE2010 wrote: »

I think its disgusting that you have made the comparison between consenting adults and child abuse! Not to mention how hypocritical you come across, so its ok for women to sleep with any Tom D!Ck or Harry for money but not ok for them to do for free because they enjoy it?! Where is the logic in that?!

Absolutely

It is disgusting that she had to make a living in such a way yes - as she says it put bread on the table! She made money out of men - is that what you find disgusting?

If people do it because they enjoy it - it should be in a non-public place where unsuspecting members of the public do not have to witness it.

And how can you be sure that all of the "consenting participating adults" are over the age of consent?

marisco_2

thorsoak wrote: »

But hey - they aren't hurting anyone ......... that's what people were saying about "breaking in" underage children a few years ago.......

I dont see how you can compare the two. Dogging is consensual sex between adults choosing to express themselves sexually as they wish to. They aren't harming anyone. Child abuse is a whole different scenario. Your comments above really undermine that.

kittiej

no need for you to get quite so arsey about it is there?!

Now it's coming out. When people run out of ways to get their point across they resort to swearing / 'having a go' at the other party because they have nothing credible left to say. Soooo predictable.

FYI I was offering a reason for prostitutes charging money, but then you are so wrapped up in your incessant ranting that this completely flew over your head.

Also FYI mental impairment does not equate to a reason for engaging in acts of sexual deviance. I'm certain there are plenty of as you put it 'mentally impaired' people who do not partake of such activities.

I am not at all 'hung up' on the private lives of others, but I wish their lives would remain exactly that - private and away from public areas.

I can assure you I am in no way being 'arsey', I don't need to be

DanE2010

thorsoak wrote: »

It is disgusting that she had to make a living in such a way yes - as she says it put bread on the table! She made money out of men - is that what you find disgusting?

If people do it because they enjoy it - it should be in a non-public place where unsuspecting members of the public do not have to witness it.

And how can you be sure that all of the "consenting participating adults" are over the age of consent?

*sigh* I was referring to your comment about 'breaking in under children' a few years ago.

I have no problem with prostitution in general, I dont find it disgusting, as ive said if it is not hurting anyone and both parties are consenting that is fine. The problem is crimminals use it to make money, sex trafficking, pimps, drug dealers etc, that side of it is unacceptable and unfortunately comes with the territory, id rather we legalised brothels so the women (and the many male prostitutes were safe).

I agree I dont think dogging or hookers should do it in places where the unsuspecting public should come across it, although id say they probably dont want to be caught either. Its what they want to indulge in but not everyone wants to come across that, but im sure dogging areas are probably in places where they know people arent going to stumble across them?

Tropez

thorsoak wrote: »

It is disgusting that she had to make a living in such a way yes

But she didn't have to make money that way, she chose to do so... unless she was trafficked and/or forced into it?

She made money out of men - is that what you find disgusting?

I don't, personally. In fact, I think it would be better for all concerned if the UK adopted the approach to prostitution that exists in areas of Nevada (notably excluding Las Vegas) which involves licencing, regular health testing, including for drugs as well as diseases, and out of the way establishments for the purpose. In my opinion, that would make the business safer for both client and service provider, result in fewer attacks on working girls, help to cripple the criminal gangs who currently thrive on trafficking girls into the UK because every working girl would need to be licenced and thus verified as a British citizen and provide economic benefits.

But that's another matter.

If people do it because they enjoy it - it should be in a non-public place where unsuspecting members of the public do not have to witness it.

They generally do it in out of the way car parks at unsociable hours, not in the middle of Tesco's car park at 3pm. Those who would frequent such places, aside from doggers, at those particular times are likely to be drug dealers and junkies. The average well to do individual has no need to be there. I certainly struggle to think of a reason why I would choose to enter an out of the way car park at 1am for any sort of "normal" purpose.

Those who do engage in it in a place where there is a high probability for an unsuspecting member of the public to witness it are rare and the majority should not be judged by the actions of a minority.

And how can you be sure that all of the "consenting participating adults" are over the age of consent?

Legally speaking, a child cannot consent, hence age of consent.

But I understand what you mean but by the same token as you read this there is likely to be an underage girl or boy somewhere engaging in sexual activity behind closed doors. Logically speaking if you are to use that argument then all we can do is use it against everyone who has sex, regardless of the location, unless they can prove otherwise, no?

Once again, the majority should not be judged for the actions of the minority.

thorsoak

I know of several areas where it is reported that this unsavoury activity has stopped people walking their dogs in public parklands and woodlands

It has been suggested that a few large "bouncy" dogs allowed offlead might dampen the ardour of some!

DanE2010

kittiej wrote: »

Now it's coming out. When people run out of ways to get their point across they resort to swearing / 'having a go' at the other party because they have nothing credible left to say. Soooo predictable.

FYI I was offering a reason for prostitutes charging money, but then you are so wrapped up in your incessant ranting that this completely flew over your head.

Also FYI mental impairment does not equate to a reason for engaging in acts of sexual deviance. I'm certain there are plenty of as you put it 'mentally impaired' people who do not partake of such activities.

I am not at all 'hung up' on the private lives of others, but I wish their lives would remain exactly that - private and away from public areas.

I can assure you I am in no way being 'arsey', I don't need to be

*sigh* I really think your the one reading my tone wrongly and getting worked up about it (hense my arsey comment) You are the one calling people sub human etc, there is no reason for this thread to descend into a slanging match, please take your own advice and calm down, if you cant then I will just put you on ignore as this is an interesting topic and there is no need for the aggro.

I dont know what your going on about here, someone said they were mentally impaired for partaking in such acts, I said those that partake in such acts are normal everyday people, and its rude to insult them just because its not your cup of tea, you didnt call them mentally impaired you called them sub human, which is still insulting them and seperating them from normal everyday people, I said nothing about mental impairement being an 'excuse' for such acts or that all mentally impaired people partake in dogging....
prostitutes, doggers, voyers, they all partake in outdoor activity, let them get on with it, it doesnt effect you, if they are in places where the public can stumble across them then I dont agree with it, but as ive just said im sure they dont want to be caught either.

marisco_2

When I watched the programme I got the distinct impression, that part of the thrill of indulging in dogging for these people, was to be able to cut themselves off from the limits and restrictions of every day life. They were living out their fantasies. Not just in their sexual practices but also by using the make up, masks and outfits.

So they venture out, meet up with like minded people and indulge in sexual activities that they enjoy. I doubt very much that they would wish to infringe on jo public or have anyone come across them that would have disdain for what they were doing. That could be the equivalent of taking a cold shower.

kittiej

Nope Dan, there is no slanging match going on only debating remember? And as I recall you were the one to jump on my postings because you don't like what I have to say so you have yourself to blame for that. Feel free to put me onto ignore, I am not disappointed by you because that would mean I have some kind of relationship with you - which I don't because you are merely words on a computer screen.

I am perfectly calm, I'm sure it would be apparent if I wasn't. I do believe you find this an interesting topic because it is something you are thinking of doing so of course you want to defend it.

Thorsoak - the bouncy dog thing might turn out to feature in a whole new CH4 programme :eek: