Goth on a lead denied use of public transport

[MrE]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/23/ngoth123.xml

I found this article quite interesting and it has been under heated debate on quite a few websites that I visit. I was wondering what people thought here about these things and if people think that they should be allowed to use a lead in public.

It made me think that intolerance of things like this from the public might be a sign of intolerance of fetishes and alternative things from people. Also it made me wonder if this had any connection with us or me as a DL in the way people would react if I was either discovered or came out to certain people...

Discuss...

 

[Charlie]

(lead=leash if anyone's wondering)

I think the bus company make a good point about the safety hazards of wearing a lead on the bus.
Although:
"We are writing to Mr Graves to apologise for any distress caused by the way this matter was handled"

That means that the bus driver was a pr*ck, who basically told them to F-off just because he didn't agree with what they're doing.

I don't know what I think about it... I'm inclined to take the side that bus driver isn't on, because you get so much attitude of bus drivers I've grown to despise some of them as much as they despise the world. But actually, I think you shouldn't go around wearing a lead on a bus... buses are filled with old people and kids, and they don't need to see that! It's pushing your fetish into other people's faces.

(And who takes a dog on a bus? Come on, you're meant to be taking it for a walk!)

 

[Kams]

the bus driver was a pr*ck, who basically told them to F-off just because he didn't agree with what they're doing.

I agree, if I were the driver, I might have thought to myself that they seem a little weird, but I wouldn't have denied them like that!

 

[Target]

I can't believe it.
I've some goth friends but they are allowed to use public transport .
The driver must have a very closed mind

 

[ayanna]

I have to take the side of the bus company (although the bus driver might have handled it a little more politely...if indeed those were his words). A lead around the neck is a hazard not only to the person wearing it but to other people on the bus.

That said, I would have no problems if the person was using a lead similar to those used on children (and dogs too) which is a harness with the lead attached at the back. It's still 'dog like' without being hazardous to one's health.

 

[Vladimir]

I agree with aya, it's dangerous and... I'd be kinda freaked out if I saw someone like this in the bus.

 

[MrE]

Personally I think they have every right to have a lead and use it. I think there is hardly any safety issue and the only reason they said that was to cover the bus driver's back and stop it looking like blatant discrimination.

It doesn't harm anyone else and it isn't overtly obscene therefore I think the bus driver was 100% at fault.

 

[Peachy]

I've seen two goth girls, one leading the other on a leash (seen them twice, several weeks apart). I didn't think it was too strange. I also fail to see how that could pose a harm to other passengers. I've seen people taking whole wardrobes, crates of beer, a kazillion animals and what not on buses or streetcars, and no one gave a crap.
Unfortunately, I agree with Charlie - most drivers do have an attitude and think they own the world, just because they own the button for the doors. I'm glad I rarely have to face them, as most of them don't know their own company's rules.
Personally, I think the driver deserves a swift kick in the ass and, as punishement, has to spend a day on a leash.

By the way: When I first read the title of this thread, I thought it was someone on a leash claiming she was a dog and only wanting to pay dog fare on the bus.

Peachy

 

[Dawes]

I've been a part of the Baltimore "goth" scene for a long time and I've seen that kind of stuff every weekend for the past ten years. I've also slowly begun to become disenchanted with the "goth" scene, for as I've gotten older (and hopefully a bit more wise), I've realized just how absolutely inane this freedom of expression is that so many "goth" people cling to.

People would think I'm a poser "goth" -- is that because I wear khakis and button-downs when I go to work and decide to look socially presentable when I'm in public? I don't know. I reserve the black clothes and chains and metal for the club-scene and when I'm playing shows. Otherwise, when I leave that club, I leave my "goth" persona behind. Why? Because people judge me if I dress like that. I expect them to.

I take the side of the bus company on this. If you want to lead somebody around on a leash in public, then you should certainly expect the social repercussions. There needs to be a line drawn between what you do in the privacy of your own home and in the company or your friends and what is generally socially acceptable.

Would I go out in public with the waist-line of a diaper clearly visible above my pants so that others could see? No, I wouldn't -- but if I did, I would expect people to look at me strangely. I don't see this situation much differently.

I agree with Ayanna's expression about safety. There are too many liabilities there.

If I could talk to the girl and her boyfriend? I don't care if you're "so goth you're dead", I don't care if you want to live like a dog. At least have enough respect for yourself to know that not everyone is going to accept a public display of bondage like that.

... and if you want to be treated like a dog? Remember, most public transportation in America doesn't allow large pets on board, either.

 

[Raccoon]

I have to take the side of the bus company (although the bus driver might have handled it a little more politely...if indeed those were his words). A lead around the neck is a hazard not only to the person wearing it but to other people on the bus.

That said, I would have no problems if the person was using a lead similar to those used on children (and dogs too) which is a harness with the lead attached at the back. It's still 'dog like' without being hazardous to one's health.

I agree with the driver on safety grounds too - but not according to some arbitrary interpretation of dress code. If one of the couple tripped and choked the transit co. would be held partially accountable. Just as if the driver allowed someone with an untethered dog on and it bit someone. What if the bus crashed? A leash (or lead in the UK) could certainly contribute to injuries.

As to the dogs and freaks comment, the driver is totally out of line and should be dunned for that comment.

Funnily enough, among people whose costume is a badge of their particular subculture I have found that goths keep to themselves and don't cause trouble. I used to frequent a bar where live roleplayers met weekly, and most of them came to play Masquerade (vampire game) dressed appropriately. Many got into the game as an adjunct to full-time gothery. Others were just gamers dressed for the part. There was never any trouble among them or between them and the regular patrons... The bar even sold red-tinted beer, for a little extra... The bar was a mainstream chain restaurant. (I suspect the management had a deal with the Ventrue to keep an eye on the Malkavians... lol)

Back to the bus: collars are fine; collars with big spikes are not: and so on. The transit authority is responsible for people not hurting themselves or others accidentally within their power to prevent such. If a country has a subway a leash could cause the dom & sub to be caught either side of the door, and dragged off, so obviously that would be a nono. And a rule on the subway would extend to surface transport since it would be a company-wide policy.
Schools here have taken to banning faddish toys (pogs, pokemon cards, bey-blades) - anything where the gameplay involves one kid ending up with the play-pieces of the other: plainly trouble waiting to happen. So 17 year olds can find their pokemon cards confiscated if they play them during a spare. And they might be, like, wtf? We're 17 & causing no trouble, and mature enough to be responsible players... and the school is like, it is a school-wide policy, enacted for specific circumstances but applied generally. If we let you play then the 14 yo's will cry foul; if we let them play the 10 yo's will cry...
You might cry that a policy that is sensible on the subway that isn't sensible on the bus should be waived. But corporations (public or otherwise) prefer to have simple policies; having exceptions causes confusion.

 

[ayanna]

For those of you who don't see how a chain attached to a collar around someone's neck doesn't pose a 'threat' you really need to wake up and smell the coffee. First of all if the bus stopped suddenly that girl gets thrown forward, chain pulls taut, girl is strangled...yeah...no threat there.

And we don't even need to get into the whole "a chain is a weapon" thing.

And like someone else mentioned...in America (and Canada too) the only 'pets' allowed on public transportation (unless they are inside a CRATE) are guide dogs (for the blind/deaf/etc). Soooooo unless the boyfriend who looks a total sop wants to lug his gf who looks kinda chubby around in a large dog crate...they should either lose the leash or stay off the bus! (Note: I said in my previous post that if the driver said what they claim he said then he should be reprimanded...that's a pretty big IF tho'!)

Sorry, but there has to be a line drawn for public safety somewhere.

Anyway, maybe I'm just deluded into thinking all bus drivers (public transportation personnel) the world over are as nice and polite as the ones here in Canada (at least all the ones I've ever come into contact with and they would number in the hundreds).

 

[Raccoon]

Yeah, I am one of those people that has never had a bad experience with a cop one on one and very few with transit drivers...

 

[Fender]

Well you're allowed to take a dog onto buses over here in Scotland but it is a safety issue for a girl to be wearing a lead on a moving vehicle. The driver should have been a bit more tactile and should apologise in person. I personally reckon the 2 goths should be sentenced to 3 months sodding off and growing up, they can do whatever they like in their own home but shouldn't push their fetish on everybody else. Harsh opinion I know but theres really no need for it in public.

 

[Raccoon]

If one's "fetish" is a style of dress that is worn in an unusual manner (eg. some sort of garb worn by usually only by certain persons or worn on particular occasions) that is acceptable to be worn in public in particular then it is ok to wear it in public in general. Wearing a black trenchcoat over black everything else, and crosses and black lipstick is just a variation of normal dress. Cross-dressers can go out in public (or pre-op tg's) whether they look like pepperpots (Monty Python: guys dressed as older ladies) or guys looking simply like a guy in a dress (New York Dolls, say,) or whether they really could be taken for ladies. So yeah, people CAN flaunt their fetishes within those guidelines.

Let's not pick on goths. They don't offend me.

 

[Fender]

I just think that as raccoon correctly pointed out you can go out dressed in a perhaps fetishistic manner and a few people may object but really only to your clothing, not the fact that it depicts a fetish but its not entirely crossing the line. Treating somebody like a dog in public does tread over the line because it is fetish behaviour. I don't object to people doing it in private but you shouldn't really expose people to it in public.

 

[MrE]

Indeed, some humans need to use such transportation.

Humans don't, however, need to be led around on a leash. The idea of a human pet having the same rights ... well, is it me, or does that completely defeat the purpose of being a submissive human-pet anyway?

"I'm led around on a leash and prefer to be seen as sub-human, but hey, I deserve the same rights as everybody else!"

Most 'adult' humans don't need to wear a diaper. (excluding medical conditions) But most of us on this site still choose to wear one now and then. I think it's slightly hypocritical of any of us to decide that they should not do something because there's no point.

 

[ayanna]

Most 'adult' humans don't need to wear a diaper. (excluding medical conditions) But most of us on this site still choose to wear one now and then. I think it's slightly hypocritical of any of us to decide that they should not do something because there's no point.

I didn't say it was obscene although I do tend to agree that the whole leash thing should be kept private not public...after all...do "Most 'adult' humans" who wear diapers without needing them flaunt their diapers in public? Nooooooooo....well other than that weird guy in the US who prances about in diapers and baby-doll dresses, but he's an exception to the rule, and everyone pretty much agreed he was "over the top".

There's enjoying your fetish and there's pushing it in the face of others. I don't think pushing one's fetish into the face of others is a good way to go about having it accepted universally.

 

[Peachy]

Most 'adult' humans don't need to wear a diaper. (excluding medical conditions) But most of us on this site still choose to wear one now and then. I think it's slightly hypocritical of any of us to decide that they should not do something because there's no point.

I tend to see people's reactions here as a good old "clash of cultures". Most people in favor of the bus company seem to be from the American continent, most people with the "who cares?"-attitude are primarily European.
As I have explained in another forum some time ago: Europeans tend to have a "comfort zone", i.e. you can deviate from the mean by a certain amount without facing any anger, harm or repercussions. Americans tend to only think in black of white, right or wrong, rich or poor etc. and way too many of them tend to have negative feelings towards anyone who doesn't quite fit into their own definition of "normal".
Being European, I still stand by my opinion - the metal chain / leash does not harm me or inconvenience me in any way, nor does it pose a thread to anyone on the bus (in that case, people could not take bags, phones, loose coins on the bus as they could fly through the vehicle when the driver breaks hard and injure others). If the girl gets hurt herself from her own choice of clothing...tough luck for her - it was her choice to wear it!
And as long as the girl does not expose stuff of her body that's not meant to be public, I have no right to tell her what to wear either. I don't go around criticizing people's clothing after all.

Peachy

 

[Dawes]

Most 'adult' humans don't need to wear a diaper. (excluding medical conditions) But most of us on this site still choose to wear one now and then. I think it's slightly hypocritical of any of us to decide that they should not do something because there's no point.

I'm not trying to say what I'm about to say to insult you, Mr. E, because I respect your opinion and your ability to express it.

... but I guess I just don't see how you can't see a safety issue in someone wearing a collar and a leash being on a vehicle that does not require individual restraint (seatbelts). Even a minor accident could be considerably deadly to that young woman. Have you ever seen hidden-camera videos of people on busses getting tossed around by the bouncing and going-over-bumps and what-have-you? It's a frightening thing and I wouldn't wish riding on a bus to anybody, leash or not.

There are simply too many legal liabilities there for any company -- whether of public use or private institution -- to want to take under their wing. Had I an interest in blood-letting (a fetishist activity in which one cuts themselves or others, with permission, to draw small amounts of blood), would they let me do it on the bus? No. There are some lines to be drawn, otherwise, we would have no standards to adhere to.

And those goth clothes are expensive-as-shit! If they can afford all of those slick rags, why the hell can't they afford a license or a car?

"It's so grim to ride the bus, man. Only the blackest souls use the MTA! Cars are for the conformists, so I'll wear the stylish in-and-current Hot Topic rags, rip the system, and ride the bus!"

(Sorry, I have this thing against these typical goths who think that our society is as open-minded as it is. If the civil rights movement was any indication of our country's tolerance, do you think there'll be any true progress in the next four-hundred years?)

But aside from that, this isn't a witch-hunt against goths or fetishists or people who wear collars or leashes. It was a driver who was looking out for his own job, the integrity of his company, and the safety of the services they provide. What about that doesn't make sense? Better he be safe than sorry.

Better for the girl's life, however sub-human she desires to be, that he was safer than sorry.

 

[Charlie]

I still think that the major problem with this that they want to flaunt their fetish in front of old people. OAPs are sour enough because they can't drive any more, the last thing they need is to see is this!

Wearing a collar is fine, being led around on a lead is going that bit too far IMO. Just like the difference between being diapered in public, and being diapered in public with the diaper showing really obviously.

There are some things that some people don't want to see, I think it's a bit disrespectful to be offensive in a public place. It's a bit like swearing on a bus, generally people who might swear in a normal conversation tend to say things a bit cleaner on a bus. Or if you have an offensive sexual joke, you'd say "I'll tell it in a minute".
It's a bus!