Finally a resolution for Empress Ming and Lady Vi

Lady Vi Tweet (@Satanatrix) #1



Lady Vi Tweet (@Satanatrix) #2



Lady Vi Tweet (@Satanatrix)#3



Lady Vi Tweet (@Satanatrix)#4



For those of you who don't know, Empress Ming and Lady Vi were arrested in New Orleans about two years ago for basically desecrating a church (not the actual charges). The priest of the church was actually a sub of Empress Ming's and he invited the two of them to shoot fetish videos in the chapel with him as the sub.

After the shoot was over, some church members noticed that the lights were on and knocked on the door. So, the priest (very stupidly) opened the doors to the chapel and came to speak with the church members, who then (from the private property of the church) could see the aftermath of the shoot (meaning dildos and other equipment strewn around as well as the Dommes in fetish gear).

These church members were very upset and called the cops, who were just as offended as the church members and arrested everyone involved. The prosecutors and courts have not been kind to Ming (who lives in Atlanta) and Vi (who lives in Seattle), forcing them to travel to New Orleans multiple times for court dates only to delay the proceedings and ring up lawyer fees with each step.

While it is absolutely true that what they did was not in the public eye and were there at the invitation of the priest (which means they were neither trespassing nor being publicly indecent), they finally got worn down by the system and took a plea deal just to get it over with. Some of you who are religious may feel that what they did was just wrong, but this case isn't about religion or about whether your personal kinks line up with theirs... it is about OUR place in society and how we as a BDSM community are constantly looked down upon for our private behaviors.

Please join me in helping these two amazing women with their legal bills stemming from the wrongful prosecution of them for being Dommes and pursuing what we all wish to enjoy freely.

Asp

P.s. You can also help, and help yourself, by buying Lady Vi's and/or Empress Ming's content on various platforms... y'know, the kind of inventive and amazing stuff that they were trying to create when this happened.

I hate to see an abuse of the legal system under any circumstances. But, what they did was unimaginably inconsiderate. It is akin to dressing up like nazis in a Synagogue. If they wanted to shoot sacrilegious scenes in their own space, that is no one's business but their own. But, to take it to a place that people hold sacred? I don't blame the people for replacing the alter.

Should they have been arrested when they didn't break the law, however offensive their behavior was? No.

Should they make restitution to the people they so boldly disrespected? Yes.

We all do stupid things sometimes. But, their lack of understanding how inconsiderate their behavior was is shocking. If people look down on the BDSM scene, it is because of this type of behavior. They should have immediately offered a heartfelt apology and restitution to the church. I hate it when fundamental Christians nose into the BDSM world and disrespect our views. It makes Christians, many of whom are well meaning people, look bad. What these ladies did makes us kink players look bad. How can they feel it is okay to brag about the restitution being in $666. installments? They were clearly in the wrong.

I couldn't agree with you more. I was taught that we in BDSM should never involve unknowing, or unwilling participants in our scenes. By vandalizing a church they involved the parishioners in their activities.

They were shooting clips depicting the anal rape of a Priest in the sanctuary. Totally unconcerned about the religious believe of others.

They damaged the parishioners, especially the elderly, and children of the parish.

Make no mistake this was a deliberate act. Father Travis, Satanatrix, and Empress Ming, are guilty of a federal hate crime. Made far worse by their callous and mocking attitudes, after the fact.

The Satanartix, alleges that "We reached a deal: misdemeanor institutional vandalism, NDA and $8k restitution split between @Empress_Ming and I paid to the church over the next 6 months". and "Yes, that is correct. $666.66/per month each".

I find these statements to be utterly absurd. She fails to explain how Felony vandalism, which requires damages over $500, could be reduced to a misdemeanor, requiring retribution of $8000.

She simply isn't telling the truth! She also fails to address the felony obscenity charge, which was reinstated after the felony Institutional vandalism charges were brought.

Don't be fooled by the Smoke & Mirrors. This is a simple case of bad people doing bad things, and hurting innocent people.


Names & Places

https://www.oxygen.com/sites/oxygen/file...g?itok=QhKoU8y1

Thanks for your views. We mostly agree. But, we've got to keep real names out of this. Will you edit your post?

Yes. However their names are a matter of public record.

https://wgno.com/news/crime/starting-tod...we-know-so-far/

https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/priest-who-filmed-sex-on-altar-criminally

https://www.nola.com/news/courts/article_86bb52f6-165c-11ec-bd20-d3507e09ce69.html

https://kjzz.com/news/woman-charged-with...ltar-03-22-2021

https://news.yahoo.com/priest-sparked-calls-vatican-probe-155018232.html

Understood but we should keep with terms of service on forums such as these.

Yes Mistress. A Thousand Times Yes!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQzE8BI4vaQ

You didn't have to do what you did. But you did. And I thank you. ;-)

I understand the point you are trying to make with this statement, but I absolutely disagree with that specific comparison as something "akin to".

The Church as an institution has a very long and very storied history of sexual and physical abuse of both women and children over the 1000 years it has been around (amongst many other crimes against humanity sanctioned by the Catholic church). Over its history, it has almost always been the perpetrator of atrocities not the victim.

The Jews, on the other hand, were nothing but victims of the nazis less than 100 years ago (meaning people in the synagogue probably personally knew victims of the Holocaust as parents, aunts/uncles or grandparents) and groups displaying those symbols today are still actively trying to kill and hurt Jews (see 2018 "Tree of Life" mass shooting as an example).

The point that the parishioners who attend that church were offended by and never would have approved of the activities using their particular church as a movie set for this particular type of shooting (even privately in off-hours) is valid. But you are making a false equivalency between being offended by disrespecting their beliefs and people wearing symbols that actively stand for hate crimes against those specific people.

I'm an agnostic who doesn't care much for organized religion. The abuse in the Catholic church, which has been mostly covered up over the years, is egregious. Perhaps, that is why the priest wanted to defile the alter? Who knows. But, I won't argue flaws with the institution. I just believe it is wrong to go to someone else's place and not respect their views.

Some years back, there was the coolest little strip on the out skirts of Columbus, Ohio, that was home to great fetish shops, adult businesses and a few LGBT owned cafes. It was a clean and safe neighborhood that was out of the way from anyone not looking to be there. A group of churches went in and bought the adult theater. They set up head quarters. Then they began buying up leases and kicking the fetish shops out. Along the way, they harassed patrons of the existing establishments. There was zero respect for the what the alternative life style community held dear, on their own turf. Everyone should stay in their own lane and respect others.

As far as wearing a nazi uniform to a Jewish place of worship, I respect that you do not agree with me. But, I stand by my comment. What they did was equally repulsive, right down to the photos making making fun of the crucifixion. Again, if they did it in their own space, fine. But, in a church? Basic common courtesy isn't much to ask for, regardless of someone's position. The ladies involved certainly do not represent the BDSM scene as a whole. They represent only themselves.

I've been a vegetarian most of my life and do not smoke. I still cook meat for family and friends and have an ashtray outside and away from the house. But, I keep a certain area of my kitchen and butler pantry away from animal flesh. If someone was house sitting for me and invited people in to smoke in my home or put animal flesh in my vegan area, I'd be pissed as heck. I'd feel defiled and replace everything. And, that isn't even a spiritual belief. It is simply a belief that people should respect other's views when in their homes. Religious or not, we all have spaces and beliefs that are sacred to us.

I'm shocked and disgusted that they would have such a lack of respect in someone else's place. If they had apologized, it would have been one thing. People make mistakes. But, painting themselves as victims in the name of bdsm? They are shamefully out of touch.

I agree that BDSM should never involve unknowing, or unwilling participants in our scenes. But I 100% disagree that it "involved the parishioners" since none of them were actually there or involved. It was only after the fact, when they found out that their physical building was used as a movie set, that they were involved in any way and that involvement was just being offended by it.

If someone taking offense at BDSM activities after the fact is within your definition of being involved then you should never participate in any BDSM activity, even in your own home with a consenting partner. We may live in an echo chamber here and our own BDSM communities, but make no mistake that we are a group whose specific sexual interests are considered offensive to the vanilla world as a whole and the "religious" most of all.

It would surprise me that any church has never been used as a place for private sexual encounters. I'm not talking about priests raping young boys, I mean heterosexual encounters between consenting adults (and in many cases consenting teenagers) that is considered to be "normal". That type of encounter is taboo and disrespectful so therefore it is exciting to people. But I've never heard of parishioners destroying portions of their own church the day after finding out that parishioners "did it" in the sanctuary. So, the difference here isn't really about that, it is about their being offended by us as people with our sexual proclivities and that isn't smoke and mirrors.

Disrespectful of the parishioners beliefs? Absolutely... and I will even give you that because of the symbolism to be portrayed in the clips (which, btw, is protected speech under the 1st amendment) it was more disrespectful than people just doing it (but, I would still put it as way less disrespectful than rape, but you may disagree).

A federal hate crime? Hell no... especially since the only actual physical damage was done by the Church itself. There was no specific intent to cause harm to, physically intimidate parishioners or vandalize the physical building. The fact is that if the priest hadn't answered the door (after shooting was completed but before everything was cleaned up), there would have been zero damage to the Church or any knowledge of the goings on from that night to offend the parishioners.

In fact, I would (and have) argued that there wasn't a "crime" at all since being offensive isn't yet a crime in this country (although the police and prosecutors have always tried to use the law as a cudgel, like in this case, when something offends them). There was no trespass because the priest had the legal authority to use the Church and invited Ming & Vi to be there. No nudity or sexual acts were visible within public view at any point. No vandalism because there was no physical damage to any part of the building as part of the activities.



To explain your confusion... That isn't a legal fine for damages as mandated by the law, it is an agreement for restitution between the women and the Church that the court brokered (which is not unusual in vandalism cases). There was also an NDA, which my guess means that the footage can never be shown or used, since Vi announced the settlement publicly. All of this was accepted by the court as part of the plea deal for the dropping down to a single misdemeanor. My guess is the actual legal penalty for them pleading guilty was time served and the fulfillment of the private agreement.

But, yes, you attacking a Domme and accusing her of lying about things that are within the public record (and therefore could be checked) with zero evidence to back it up other than your own general offense and outrage absolutely tracks as true.

I respect your views and think that they are valid even when I disagree with them.

I don't agree with the nazi equivalency but that may be more because I despise people using "nazi" as a term to mean anything bad or they don't agree with politically. This overuse lessens what they systematically did and how cruel they were to not just Jews but also LGBT community members, gypsies and others as groups. The death toll everyone mentions is 6 million, but that is just Jews... the estimate of deaths based on systematic extermination of those they considered to be "less than" is unknown but is estimated to be between 11 & 13 million people (not including those killed in WW2 itself). But, that discussion trends way off topic of this board.

However, iconography of Catholic and Christian symbols is very much a part of art history, as is the "defilement" of those symbols as a push back of all the evil that religious organizations have done and therefore have come to represent in certain communities. As a part of this, those symbols have long been fetishized within the BDSM community (as I am sure you know, the keeping of Christian objects as sacred, specifically to items that Jesus supposedly touched in some way, is where the term fetish originates from).

As an artist, you understand wanting to create different and special content that at times makes a statement. As a content creator who is very much a capitalist, you also understand how that kind of content turns into money for the creators of it. I am confident that was more of what drove them to shoot videos in the church than wanting to "defile the alter", actively offend the parishioners or include them in any way.

As for why a kinky ass sub who just happened to be a priest would come up with an idea that was guaranteed to get him gangbanged by two hot Dommes while also making them extremely happy with him? Totally unfathomable to me...

We are talking about two different things. I'm not referring to the horrors of the holocaust or how people frivolously refer to others as nazis. I'm referring to offending people in a place they feel is their sanctuary and support as such, emotionally and financially. If the ladies wanted to film such scenes in their own place, more power to them. If, as you suggest, they did it to make a few bucks off of videos sales, it is all the worse in my eyes. Some things do not have a price tag and that would include respect for others while in their home. It also includes not lumping an entire community in with their bizarre sense entitlement to do such a thing and unapologetically so.

We've probably said everything we have to say here. I appreciate that we can agree to disagree. There isn't enough of that in the world today.

Concur

I think the conversation on this is really interesting and thought provoking. It’s certainly not a simple, black and white issue.

Hypothetical question, if this were reversed and the priest at a satanic temple let some catholic priests in and they “defiled” the altar by pouring holy water on it, consecrating it, etc. would it warrant arresting them and making them pay for a new altar?

I find the topic fascinating and while I have my personal POV, I get why folks may not all agree on it. But I am way off topic from bdsm, lol.

"Hypothetical question, if this were reversed and the priest at a satanic temple let some catholic priests in and they “defiled” the altar by pouring holy water on it, consecrating it, etc. would it warrant arresting them and making them pay for a new altar? "

You addressed this to Aspx. But, I will chime in and say yes. (In my view.) Everyone needs to stay in their own lane and be respectful of different views, especially those that people hold sacred and in their own house.

I'm curious, are you the official apologist for the unholy three? To quote Cheyenne; "His off the rails defense of these ladies actions and their sense of entitlement makes me wonder if these are his words or they are feeding them to him".

They did not simply use the building as a "movie set". They purposely desecrated the Alter, and vandalized the sanctuary. I'm sure if Father Travis, Empress Ming, and Satanatrix, had desecrated the prayer room in a Mosque, there would be an uproar in woke America.

Virtue signaling by bashing the Roman Catholic Church has become all the rage on "woke" social media.

"A federal hate crime? Hell no..." You are totally incorrect. Perhaps you should read the definition of a Federal Hate Crime. https://www.justice.gov/hatecrimes/learn-about-hate-crimes

Scenario - Religion - Overnight, unknown persons broke into a synagogue and destroyed several priceless religious objects. The perpetrators drew a large swastika on the door and wrote “Death to Jews” on a wall. Although other valuable items were present, none were stolen.

The three unholy musketeers, destroyed an Alter, and vandalized the sanctuary in a Catholic Church. If that's not hate...what is?

You are correct. The final judgment of the case is a matter of public record, and will be posted here.

I disagree

Im not a lawyer but the vandalism charge feels reasonable here. anyone who runs a business has the responsibility to verify ownership of a property before damaging it. And they didnt do that. The priest can invite them in and its not trespassing because he has access to church property and can have visitors. But once they damaged church property it creates a vandalism charge because the priest is not the owner and cant give that permission.

I also think there are many private places to play that seem like a better fit for acting this fantasy out

Im not religious but feel it would be the same for anyone hosting a domination session at their place of employment. If a CEO has a dominatrix over to their c-suite corner office the dominatrix hasn't committed a crime. If she breaks the desk and the window thats vandalism.

In short… if you cant do the time don’t do the crime.

I’ve not read the linked articles, curious was there physical damage to the church or was it that they “desecrated” the church and the parishioners felt they needed to replace the altar?

To use your analogy, did the desk need replacing because the CEO and the dominatrix used it, or because they physically broke it while using it?

I’m certainly no lawyer either, but it seems different if it was actually physically harmed versus some perceived defilement.

This was the core of my earlier hypothetical question. Would the same rules apply if a catholic priest “purified” a satanic altar? Would the satanists be entitled to a new one if there was no visible damage?

" Perceived defilement?" If someone enters your home without your permission and takes a poo on your dining room table or kitchen countertops, that is defilement. The person should pay to have them replaced and, at the very least, own up and be apologetic. And, yes, that certainly goes both ways. Kinksters don't want religious zealots trying to shut down are play parties and businesses. We don't want them nosing into our lives or invading our space. When they do, it is wrong. What these ladies did in this situation was wrong too. Did they break a law? I don't know enough about it to say. The church was certainly within their right to send a cease and desist for the videos they took without proper permission. It may have been a libelous act. I'm not really sure as when I've shot on location, the space was rented and a contract signed.

Bottom line, in the view of most people who have chimed in, the ladies were in the wrong, ethically, if nothing else. Claiming that they were victims is ringing pretty hollow.

Personally I just think it comes down to physical damage and permission.

Though I’m certainly good to move on. I respect everyone’s opinion here and understand folks certainly see things differently than I.

Definitely my last post on this thread and look forward to going back to just chatting about kinky stuff!

Truly appreciate the civil discussion here especially on such a hot button topic imo. (I mean that sincerely, hope it comes across that way).

All of this boils down to the importance of respecting others in their space and expecting the same in return. And, yes, we need to move on.

I started a fun thread on Amazon women fantasies. See you on the other thread that is about fun stuff. In fact, I just might lock this one. The conversation has run it's course.

I have absolutely never defended the priest, his role in this or in anyway said that his behavior wasn't the root of the entire thing. I resent the implication that I did by your lumping him in with my defending Ming and Lady Vi.

I have stated MY opinion that the women were given an opportunity to create what would have been very good, and legal, fetish content by someone who they probably assumed had the authority to allow them to do that in that space. Which, in MY opinion, was the focus of their participation rather all the motives you have assigned to them.

The Priest absolutely violated the trust of his flock in the most basic way. Whether that rises to a violation of the law or not is a different question rather than just a fireable offense, but there is no doubt that it was an egregious violation of his position regardless of whether it was prompted solely by his crotch or his desire to give his Mistress this opportunity as a gift.



First off... Cheyenne didn't say that here, she wrongly speculated that on Max... where I defended myself and she responded "As you say it is your opinion, oka...ntention." Quoting her over here, without that context or linkage, is just poor etiquette on any site.

My full response to her (for anyone that cares) can be seen here.

There I went into detail about why I view things the way I do... But, here I will say that I resent any implication that I cannot think for myself or hold my own opinions on matters.. that idea is deeply insulting.

Also, to clarify over here as well, I started this thread without prompting or communication from either of these women based on the fact that this incident was discussed when it occurred and each time there was an update. I referenced and quoted Vi's 4 Twitter posts (which came across my feed from others since I do not know nor follow her), then added MY OWN opinion on it including the statements that they should be supported by us as a community.

I appreciate Cheyenne reopening this thread so I could respond to your insinuations that I can't or don't speak for myself and will ignore the rest of your statements with one exception since she will be closing it again after I post this.




This is just false. There was zero vandalization or destruction of property by anyone involved that night.

Saying they did something that the church felt "desecrated the altar" and those acts drove the church leaders to destroy the property the next day is valid. Saying that the church members felt violated is valid. But, neither of those things is either vandalism or destruction of property in anyone's definition other than your own.

It couldn't have been easy being a lone voice on such a heated subject. Thank you for being civil yet standing up and speaking your mind. I'm locking the thread back up. The topic seems to have run it's course.

The infamous demonic duo volunteer to testify against defrocked priest!


From the Daily Mail. By JANON FISHER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM

PUBLISHED: 16:47 EDT, 10 August 2022 | UPDATED: 16:58 EDT, 10 August 2022


Professional dominatrix duo Lady Vi and Empress Ming arrested for having sex with a Catholic priest on a church altar plead guilty to New Orleans church sex desecration charges, agree to testify against former clergyman

Empress Ming, and Lady Vi, who offer dominatrix services, pleaded down to misdemeanor charges.

They have agreed to testify against former Catholic priest who was charged with felony counts of institutional vandalism and obscenity

The three were caught with sex toys and a video camera on the altar of Saints Peter and Paul Roman Catholic Church the priest, who was suspended from the priesthood, will go on trial in January

He was also accused of defecating on a rug at the altar of the Pear River church.

A pair of dominatrices arrested for having sex with a Catholic priest on the altar of a New Orleans church in 2020 have taken a plea deal with prosecutors in exchange for their testimony against the kinky clergyman.

X professionally known as Mistress Ming, and X AKA Satanatrix or Lady Vi, each entered a guilty plea to a misdemeanor charge of institutional vandalism.

They also agreed to return to court next year as a witness for the prosecution of the priest. the former pastor of Saints Peter and Paul Catholic Church in Pearl River.

The priest, is charged with obscenity and institutional vandalism, both felonies, for his role in the raunchy romp.

Lady Vi and Empress Ming had also faced felony charges before their pleading on July 26 - the same day that they were issued summonses to appear at the Priest's trial in January, according to the news city NOLA.com.

Both women received suspended sentences and two years of supervised probation. They will avoid any jail time. Empress Ming lives in Atlanta and Lady Vi is based in Seattle, according to their online profiles.

A call to St. Tammany Parish District Attorney requesting comment was not immediately returned. Ming and Lady Vi's lawyers could not be reached for comment.

Lady Vi, also known as Satanatrix, has agreed to plead guilty and will testify against the priest.

Empress Ming, agreed to two years supervised release in exchange for her charges being reduced to misdemeanor institutional vandalism, and will testify against the priest.

The fallen holy man foresaw his alleged partners in crime turn against him and his lawyer filed a motion to split his criminal case from theirs, saying that he believed that they intended 'to exculpate themselves by placing all the blame on the priest for both the institutional vandalism and the obscenity.'

A lawyer for the two dominatrices said that they had been hired for 'role-play' and were performing consensual acts when they were arrested on the night of September 30, 2020.

A passerby noticing lights on in the Pearl River church was stunned at the scene.

According to the prosecutors, the witness saw the priest stripped down on the altar engaging in sex acts with the corseted women in high-heeled boots.

Police seized sex toys, lighting and camera equipment during the arrest.

The attorney who represented both women, said that the acts were on private property out of the public eye.

The case against T going forward seems to hinge on how he vandalized the church.

In one motion filed by the district attorney, they claimed that the former priest 'defecated on the carpet,' according to NOLA.com.

Prosecutors showed a $400 bill that the church paid to clean the carpet, according to the publication.

'Cleaning would be the minimal effort required to restore the carpet's function,' NOlA reported the filing saying. 'Replacement would be ideal.'

The priest's lawyers have questioned whether the acts were obscene or in public view.

'See video,' the prosecutors responded, according to court papers.


Google "Dominatrix pearl river catholic church 2022"

His identity, and what they did, was already pubic knowledge.

Before they pled down to a misdemeanor, they faced up to three years in prison for a felony offense. That's a lot of pressure to cooperate. Testifying may well have been part of the deal to get the reduced charge.

Seriously, this is just a ridiculous statement that should not be acceptable on this site as you are attacking Dommes in a way designed specifically to hurt their livelihood.

We all know that this wasn't a "session" and have endlessly debated the details of the event. You want to call them "Rat Finks" for taking a deal for a reduced sentence after 2 1/2 years of intense legal fuckery by the New Orleans DA? Fine... but, framing it as you have above is designed specifically as a personal attack that has specific meaning in this community (and you know it).

In addition, the reporting in this article from an English news source can be easily seen as bad just by these statements:







That kind of misrepresentation of facts as a "threesome" a "sex frolic" and for "having sex with" can easily put this article into the category of fake news and brings ALL the details within the article into question, so transcribing it here as some authoritative account has little value. But, using their real initials (while adding in their working names) in your transcription is much more suspect. Especially since you gleefully provided the link to the article that blasts their legal identities across the very top of the article.

I thought we were done with this topic and it had been locked, but apparently unlocking a thread to allow someone to blatantly attack and provide links to the real identities of Dommes is now a Domina.ms thing?

At this point, this smacks more of political/religious debate with all the same tricks and BS we used to see in the Politics section before it was dumped for bringing more harm than good to this forum. You hate these Dommes on a visceral/personal level because they offended your religious beliefs with their actions... that's your right. However, personal attacks on Dommes, like you have done, should never be acceptable on this site for any reason no matter how offended you get.

If you wish the content of the article to stand as part of this thread, I am ok with that. I would, however, call on you (or a moderator to force you) to do the following:

1) Remove your personal comment personally attacking Dommes in a way that could effect their livelihood as a Domme from the top of your post

2) Remove the initials of the people involved and only use either a nickname (or their professional name) in your transcription

3) Delete the link to the published article that exposes the legal identities of Dommes (which is really unnecessary if you are already transcribing it)

+1

It was not my decision to unlock this thread. I hadn't wanted to participate. But, I have to ask, please do not include the "Community" in the same category as these women. And this has zero to do with religion or politics. From an agnostic, prodom and long time femdom video producer, what these ladies did was repulsive. It was incredibly poor behavior. Most kinksters have more respect than to enter someone else's home, without proper permission, and film videos that make fun of their closely held belief system. The fact that they did it for profit is even worse. Most kinksters I know have respect for other people, regardless of their belief system, and expect the same in return. Between here and MF, the folks that feel these women had a right to do this, are in the stark minority. The lashing out at the members of the church, for what they choose to believe, smacks of bigotry.

In response to other parts of this thread, I accept this as valid comment.

However, this has nothing to do with to my post that you are replying to... Which is specifically about what should be allowable to be said about ANY Domme or sub on this board.

Posting the legal name of a sub?

Posting the initials of Dommes legal names?

Posting a link to an article that continually outs the legal identities of Dommes?

Posting a statement that indicates booking a general session with a Domme will turn you over to the police?

In MY opinion, all of this should be violations of the communities standards on this type of board regardless of how you feel about the Dommes or subs in question. Period.

As a moderator in general, and the one specifically for this board, it is also MY opinion that you should be correcting his behavior within that particular post and asking him to adjust it to avoid these issues. What your opinion is of the behavior of these women, my "bigotry" or whether I should be allowed to use the word community in a sentence is honestly irrelevant to the general objections I voiced.

I have removed all personal information.

The direct link has also been removed.

Domina.ms does not allow direct links which reveal the personal information of Mistresses or their clients.

This Topic is now closed.