======= ======= ====== ====== ====== ===== ==== ====== ====== ===== ==== ======= ======= ====== ====== ====== ===== ==== ====== ====== ===== ====
Well, it looks like we’ve got another sordid tale of carnal misdoings coming out of Germany this week. At this point, I believe it’s safe to say that Germany is the Florida of Europe.
A German court has ordered a dominatrix to pay 200 Euros to a local charity as a fine after one of her submissives accused her of “hurting and robbing him.”
Okay, those accusations are a little confusing to me. I understand that she may have run afoul of the law if she robbed him but what is the problem with ‘hurting’ him? Isn’t that what a dominatrix is supposed to do?
I guess it all depends on what they agreed upon during their pre-play boundary negotiations. If she failed to honor the safe-word while she had his gadget hooked up to a defibrillator, then I can see his point. Or if he only hired her for a cream-pie cleaning session and she started to put out her Benson and Hedges on his pubicle sack, then I believe the charges are warranted.
But if he’s upset just because she left a few identifiable scratches on his back, then the charges seem frivolous.
Unfortunately, we’ll never know. The court was unable to determine what exactly happened because each party had ingested “too much cocaine during their evening together” to be deemed credible.
The Plaintiff accused the domme of – among other things – holding a knife to his throat and demanding the PIN number to his debit card.
I know hindsight is 20/20, but agreeing to a power exchange with a machete-wielding dominatrix who is amped up on the Devil’s Dandruff might not have been the wisest decision of the evening.
The domina denied these allegations and added that “the Plaintiff had also asked if a transsexual colleague could join them.”
I think my favorite part of the whole story is that the dominatrix referred to her fellow shemale sex-worker as her ‘colleague.’ I like the ring of that. It makes it seem like they work at a Big Four accounting firm instead of Portia’s House of Pleasure and Pain.
So, who do we believe?
Well, all we know about the Plaintiff is that he is a 49-year-old undertaker. Obviously, that is an interesting little wrinkle to the story, but I don’t know how that relates to his credibility. I do give him credit for choosing to perform his perverse sexual dalliances with another live human being instead of visiting some sort of sexual malfeasance upon the recently deceased.
Some would say that is setting the bar pretty low but I think it speaks to his integrity.
So, he’s got that going for him.
On the other hand, the defendant is a 35-year old mother of four. So, while she is out tooting rails and forcing grown men to clean her piss off the toilet seat with their tongues, her children are at home asleep?
I don’t mean to get up on my soapbox but I’m going to have to side with the undertaker on this one. Though I can’t vote for her innocence in this case, I can give her my vote for the Andrea Yates Parent of the Year Award.
The court didn’t really know what to do either, so they eventually dropped the charges but ordered the lady of the night to pay the ‘penance money’ to a charity that supports crime victims.
Well, at least there was a happy ending.