#100744926 added by leal at I don't care if you're gay or straight,

-22

has deleted their comment [-]

Reply0

(08/23/2013)[-]

Look I've got nothing against a public display of affection, regardless of who is being affectionate with whom, but there is a limit and there are laws of public decency for a reason. Assless chaps, a leash, and making out in a retail store is going a bit too far.

When you are an employee at that location, ignoring them is not an option, because customer complaints could be filed due to their actions. I don't like the ******* way this "confession bear" crap plays out, because it seems to be directing at one subgroup of people and not at the overall concept of public tip-toeing on the line of indescent exposure, so I see where you're coming from but just can't agree.

Sorry leal.

#296 to #286 - leal

-1

has deleted their comment [-]

#301 to #296 - teranin

Reply0

(08/23/2013)[-]

HA! you know what, I totally just assumed that from the "fully clad in leather" part.

#303 to #301 - leal

-1

has deleted their comment [-]

#304 to #303 - teranin

Reply0

(08/23/2013)[-]

It seemed like the implication was that it was naughty, but OP could be a total prude. Tell you what, if OP meant it was revealing leather that was naughty, I stand by what I said, but if OP just meant like... leather jacket and pants that were reasonable and stuff, then yeah I can agree wtih you.

#307 to #304 - leal

-1

has deleted their comment [-]

#312 to #307 - teranin

Reply0

(08/23/2013)[-]

It depends entirely upon what is being revealed. And all I'm saying is an argument can be made for decency, especially in a store. Ignoring it might prove dangerous for the employee in question due to possible charges brought by angry parents.

That being said, still don't like the way it is presented in this content.

#142 to #103 - daniboyi

Reply0

(08/23/2013)[-]

Never seen the cross dressing people before. Sure that is not just a rumor.

#144 to #142 - leal

-8

has deleted their comment [-]

#166 to #144 - Sunset

has deleted their comment [-]

#167 to #166 - leal

-3

has deleted their comment [-]

#233 to #167 - Sunset

has deleted their comment [-]

#236 to #233 - leal

-1

has deleted their comment [-]

#238 to #236 - Sunset

has deleted their comment [-]

#239 to #238 - leal

-1

has deleted their comment [-]

#240 to #239 - Sunset

has deleted their comment [-]

#244 to #240 - leal

-1

has deleted their comment [-]

#245 to #244 - Sunset

has deleted their comment [-]

#246 to #245 - leal

-1

has deleted their comment [-]

#160 to #144 - tylosaurus

Reply+2

(08/23/2013)[-]

#162 to #160 - leal

-5

has deleted their comment [-]

#105 to #103 - daniboyi

Reply+5

(08/23/2013)[-]

That is about as logical as saying we should ignore people, who has sex in the streets or ***** up the window of mcdonalds while people are eating.

#107 to #105 - leal

-15

has deleted their comment [-]

#109 to #107 - daniboyi

Reply+17

(08/23/2013)[-]

There is a difference between fat people and two people exploring their bondage fetish in public.

#110 to #109 - leal

-17

has deleted their comment [-]

#111 to #110 - daniboyi

Reply+7

(08/23/2013)[-]

acutally not. I fully believe that intercourse, except a kiss or two, should be kept inside in privacy. Lesbian, homo or just standard. All are equally bad to look at when in public.

#270 to #111 - theinvisibletheift

Reply-4

(08/23/2013)[-]

Lesbian, homo, standard. Lol. Homo, homo, or normal? I think I'm laughing a bit too hard at this.

#114 to #111 - leal

-16

has deleted their comment [-]

#115 to #114 - daniboyi

Reply+6

(08/23/2013)[-]

Making out? They were in collar and tight leather suits, that is far beyond just making out.

#117 to #115 - leal

-16

has deleted their comment [-]

#119 to #117 - daniboyi

Reply+7

(08/23/2013)[-]

That is the same as saying that there is no problem with going out in public in underwear.
When it is a collar and lether suit there is a problem.

#129 to #119 - leal

-8

has deleted their comment [-]

#130 to #129 - daniboyi

Reply+3

(08/23/2013)[-]

Well... She could use a diet, but she isn't doing anything improper in public, so yeah.

#131 to #130 - leal

-9

has deleted their comment [-]

#133 to #131 - daniboyi

Reply+3

(08/23/2013)[-]

That is true, but still the collar is going too far.
I would agree with the clothing, but not that she should stay inside because she is overweight.

#134 to #133 - leal

-7

has deleted their comment [-]

#136 to #134 - daniboyi

Reply+2

(08/23/2013)[-]

Because exploring fetishes in public is a clear 'no no' in every rule about common courtesy and manners.

What if it was people with a fetish for being naked in public? Would that be ok?
By your own words it would be ok. 'even if it's a bit weird'

#137 to #136 - leal

-8

has deleted their comment [-]

#138 to #137 - daniboyi

Reply+3

(08/23/2013)[-]

nudist have beaches.
That are private and made for that purpose.
If bondage people want to go in public and do that, then they should get the same thing.

#139 to #138 - leal

-8

has deleted their comment [-]