Ugh, "going back on her word?" What absolute BS.

Agreed. What "word" did she give? "I promise to walk anyone and anything, not just dogs?" sheesh.

Bad dog!

Someone's been reading The Perry Bible Fellowship: https://pbfcomics.com/comics/friendly/

@Urgutha @3, that made me spit out my drink, nicely done.

He may or may not have a kink. He definitely gets off on violating others.

@7 Or jerking off at the fantasy of it but having no other outlet for his fantasy, and so acts out inappropriately.

@7,

That was my first thought too. And mission accomplished honestly, as I got a pretty genuinely good laugh at his claiming she'd not notice after a while given his appearance. Doesn't mean he's not also an asshole.

Oy.

Like a student with a part-time job needs this shit. Dog Dude -- find a good pro dom or go on Fetlife. LW -- you seem like a nice person. Keep your eyes on your books and the actual canine canines you're in charge of and pay no mind to this crap.

There’s a word for this: workplace sexual harassment (OK that’s three words but you get my drift). Even if it’s meant as a joke.

Here’s another phrase: solicitation of prostitution. If sex work is going to be criminalized, we can at least use those laws to bust a creep or two.

It’s not cute or funny or kinky. It’s abusive. I agree with Dan: report his ass to whoever will listen.

@1: Seriously, fuck that guy ten ways to Tuesday. As Dan notes, LW's response is perfect, far better than he deserves, and he responds to that consideration with entitlement and (transparent) reality-denying attempted manipulation.

@7: Intent isn't exculpatory, though; it's sexual harassment either way. If anything, being actually-horrible to other people "as a joke" rather than for some sort of more serious reason is WORSE. For example, punching someone in the face because you think it's funny is reprehensible, while punching someone in the face in self defense is allowable (though avoiding blows is ideal). I find people attempting to use "it's a joke!" as a defense of bad behavior confusing as a result - they're implicating themselves further, not excusing themselves.

This sorta reminds me of the old-school obscene phone calls, where someone would call random numbers to find some woman (usually) to harass while masturbating. Getting off by talking dirty to the victim of course, but even more so in the power play of offending/involving someone in the caller's fantasy without their consent.

I'm sure these calls still happen, though thankfully it appears less often, at least in the "classic" sense. However, in newer "modern" ways such as this LW's experience, boy howdy have these people found new venues to be awful.

But it shows, that even with the less invasive messaging rather than actual interactions like a spoken conversation, it still is very uncomfortable for people put in the LW's position by these jerks. Transgressing in the not-fun way on behalf of the recipient of the behavior.

The poor LW was a saint in how they responded and deserves all the support they are getting. Kudos to you for having more patience than I would have had - but remember, you do not have to continue to be polite to bullies. And pushing past appropriate social mores forcing someone to respond to one's violation of your boundaries is bullying behavior - bullies bank on people being socialized to be nice or polite - or just plain overwhelmed by that behavior to push back. Tell that person that this is inappropriate - and report them to whatever platform they contacted you with.

LW (& anyone else in that position): Pushing back against this behavior can be polite. Because it is a socially appropriate response to that behavior. Therefore the height of civility - and perhaps, the offender may learn to mind their manners a little better in the future. Let us hope.

Swat him on the nose with a rolled up newspaper. Or agree to walk him and take him past the house with the unleashed dobermans in the yard.

Ugh. Besides being an asshole trying to engage someone vanilla running a small side-business, he's a narcissist who things that EVERYBODY would just love to see him in that position. [Why would I say that? Unfortunate experience.]

@15: nah, he would probably enjoy that.

Ignore him. That would make him realize that he's a bad--person.

Nicely stated @13 "they're implicating themselves further, not excusing themselves."

"Kinda weird that you're going back on your word"? This guy, I'm sorry, is dangerous. If he's this manipulative and entitled in a message to a stranger, imagine what he would do to someone in person. I agree he should be reported, to whomever one can report someone like this to. I'm not sure anything would make a narcissistic asshole like this realise that he's a bad person. Shudder.

I agree that this is most likely a troll and not a legitimate kinkster. Yes, lots of creepy kinksters exist (creeps cross all borders) but they'll be bothering people on kink-specific site, not randomly bothering vanillas. LW, don't feel like you have to be supportive of this. 99% chance he's just some jackass that gets off on harrassing women, the sort who would have done obscene phone calls (like Jinxie @14 says) before the days of caller ID. On the 1% chance he's not, he's still a creep and no self-respecting pup-play fetishist would approve of his behavior.

The only unclear thing about this situation is the question of who came up with the signature. LW quite neatly avoided gender specifications in the letter; the closest was "master" in Creepy's responses.

I just re-read the messages the LW shared. What a knucklehead this guy is. Oy.

Dan's reply is spot on, and Helena @16 makes an excellent additional point: the mutt is looking to inflict his kinks (puppy play and exhibitionism) on the general public. Not at all cool.

Since it was a text conversation, it's likely that the mutt got WLKRS's number from an advertisement, and it probable WLKRS is not the only walker that the mutt has harassed. The mutt is being a public nuisance, and WLKRS has his phone number...

Incidentally, non-consensual play is a very common kink, but ironically, you need consent in order to practise it ethically. It's called consensual non-consent (CNC), and CNC parties are quite popular.

Can't this guy just go on Fetlife and find someone to walk him at kink parties or orgies or something? Even if he's a straight dude, maybe if he can't find a female dom to do this he could get humiliated by a male dom instead -- it's not like he'd see who's holding the leash if he's walking on all fours. I suppose it's possible he lives in a rural area without a kink scene.

I agree that seeing a man on a leash in general public areas would be disturbing to many people. Except maybe certain places in New York. I could totally imagine someone walking down the street like that in certain areas of Manhattan or Brooklyn and no one even looking at them. (I think it's less that people in NY have seen everything and don't think anything is weird and more that it's embarrassing to be caught off-guard by anything because New Yorkers are supposed to be used to anything -- if you're caught staring, everyone knows you're not a real New Yorker.) They'd get beat to a pulp on Staten Island, though.

I'm what they call a bridge-and-tunnel-er -- I live in the suburbs and take the train or drive into Manhattan. I know I'm not a "real" New Yorker (even though I was born on Manhattan) because I grew up and still live in the suburbs, but if I saw a human dog being walked in the city I would definitely try not to look surprised. I wouldn't be so concerned about being nonchalant if I saw it where I live in the 'burbs.

Now that I'm thinking about this, I hope this guy does find someone to walk him in public but tries it in New York and no one even looks at him. The disappointment about not being humiliated and not shocking anyone would serve him right. (Assuming he actually wants to be humiliated and his real kink isn't skeeving out this poor student.

WLKRS seems really nice and very thoughtful, which shows not only in her letter, but also in her text messages. She obviously handled this exchange very well, so there is no critique I would make as to her response. It is easy to tell that she learned a lot from read or listen to Savage Love.

)

Asking was inappropriate, but even worse was the rude reply "Okay?" and irrational suggestion the dog walker had gone back on their word. They seem sociopathic.

I wonder if they wanted pushback to be humiliated by?

CalliopeMuse @25: You might as well ask why guys catcall - do they really think that it'll get them a date? The answer is the same: it's about harassing someone, not about trying to meet someone but being confused about how to approach people.

I read this as someone who possibly does want to be walked like a dog, but at least secondarily wants to be degraded in general. Seems like he was trying to get a rise out of LW. In that case it would be no lose for him to aggressively ask for his kink to be fulfilled and rudely respond to a no. Worst case someone tells him off and that gets him off.

Definitely report him if this is on an app, it's undoubtedly not his only attempt.

Calliope @25, I agree with Traffic @31 that since this guy approached a walker of real dogs to ask for pro Dom services rather than look for kinky people, he probably is engaging in the electronic equivalent of the obscene phone call, thanks to Jinxie @14 for making that connection. His real kink indeed would seem to be shocking people, making them flustered. I still find the aggressive entitlement disturbing, and agree that "it was only a joke" doesn't make it any better.

Kind of you LW to be so thoughtful to such a man. Do not engage at all in future, if someone tries it on again. I’m with Fan above, he started to sound very creepy very fast. Say nothing. Don’t engage.

100% this was a prank text... not someone who actually wanted to be walked, but some bored preteen kid.

Would someone with this kink really try to force people who aren't into it to do a scene with them? This creep sounds more like an incel.

I read an article about a study in the UK that found more than 20% of women reported that they have been slapped, spit on or choked during sex without their consent during hook-ups. It's really disturbing. The researchers theorize that the men doing this are copying what they see in porn, and might not be people that are part of the BDSM community, and don't care about consent.

It's entirely possible that this is a prank along the lines of this one:

http://dontevenreply.com/view.php?post=79

LW handled it fine, and unless the caller tries to follow up there was no harm done.

"Going back on your word"? What the fuck.