Ellen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
um, why do you know this?
--- In [email protected], Eleanor Keyser
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It is repulsive if the situation is what it first appears, but I
wonder if it's possible this couple was involved in a D/S lifestyle
relationship that has now soured. Doesn't sound like it, but
couples in the lifestyle often do have contracts with very similar
specifications and reward/punishment systems. Most of these
relationships are consensual and healthy. In any event, something
went wrong somewhere, and there is NEVER any lifestyle justification
for child pornography (defining child porn however...thornier issue
than you might think.)
>
> Also, did anyone see this story: http://tinyurl.com/gy667. Not
sure how I feel about this one. On the one hand, I believe almost
absolutely in the right to privacy in the home and gender equality,
but on the other hand, domestic abuse cases are difficult enough to
prosecute without adding another layer of red tape and delay.
>
>
> hermespal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: That marriage contract
thing in the update is, as they state on the
> site, repulsive. I think I need to go take a shower after reading
it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
>
Identity
Flag
Guessing
>
> ---------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> Visit your group "weingartenchatters" on the web.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "weingartenchatters" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
