A barefoot conundrum concerning boundaries (D/s)

[violettahatesoperatta]

If anyone can help me figure this one out I would really appreciate it as I can't seem to come to a conclusion.

So living apart from my ex. I have a new guy. He has a new woman and I am genuinely very happy for him. The other fact is that all four of us are in D/s relationships; indeed my ex was my first Dom. Ex and I have two kids, 7 and 9.

Right so. Ex lives with new woman in the house that we both own. Now my ex has a very specific fetish; a foot one to be precise. He especially likes heels and very much likes barefoot women.

The new lady enjoys walking around barefoot and I do genuinely believe that this is something she has always done. However, ex is obviously 'over the moon' that she is this way inclined. The trouble is; they are doing this around the kids.

So in autumn last year, my youngest, DS1, comes to me and says that they all went for a walk in the local woods and the new woman was barefoot.

Now on the face of it, you can say 'what's wrong with walking around barefoot'? and that is absolutely correct; it's a natural state to be in. But.. but.. this is a fetish of my ex's and try as I might, there is something about this that disturbs me. Believe me, I am very very broad minded. But this is different; these are my children.

This all escalated last night when, again, DS2 comes to me and starts describing the new shoes the woman has. It wasn't clear if he was talking about pointe shoes or fetish ballet boots. Cue a monster argument this morning. They were ballet shoes. Pointe shoes. I would not be suprised that the ballet lessons she is meant to be taking though are in order for her to wear those fetish shoes as, guess what, that is another big one of his. But regardless; DS2 had found them and wanted to try them on which he did.

I really don't care what they get up to; truly I don't but I am obviously really concerned about any impact it might have on the kids. I appreciate that this really is a very fine edge to this situation. It hinges on perception.

So, I have talked to him about the barefoot issue and he has minimised it, as I expected he would do.

So; what do I do? What can I do? Am I a raving loon?

I admit to not having read the whole thread so this POV may already have been expressed, but as a non-BDSM, and non-fetish person, feet on show or ballet shoes is no big deal and are seen everyday. I'm assuming the OP's children don't share the same fetish so are unlikely to have a clue, that is an important distinction. I am also concluding that being mentally turned on by someone in the room when kids are present does not mean that a parent will act on this in a physical way in front of them -where would we be if we all acted on our carnal thoughts at the time without filtering.
I sense some jealousy issues here, but not sure the OP is likely to admit to them.

Well aren't you quite the submissive if you think my comments have been scorching.

Actually they have been quite mild. But I would like to point out how unnecessarily rude you are being. Would you care to share why? Because obviously something I have said has got right up your nose hasn't it?

If you look back at the comments made on this thread, I don't believe one has called me 'sanctimonious'. Indeed, one might further say that by me claiming to be so broad minded, an insult of 'sanctimonious is designed to sting. It doesn't. Sorry.

I really am hitting a nerve.. non?

Smorgasboard I really don't believe I am jealous and indeed I tried to explain why I wasn't in the last post or so. But I am, and I have said, I am open to all points of view on this.

It is difficult to explain to those who don't necessarily have the same point of reference on why fetishes can be very important.. or not important. :-)

Thanks PushingThru :-)

Ok, maybe not quite jealousy but you did make a large (capital letter) point of her being in YOUR house, rent free suggesting that you may be being generous begrudgingly. Perhaps there is some moving in, free of charge, on your turf issue. Somewhat unusual arrangement if your ex is still living in a house you own, maybe sort that out as it is a tie that binds you and your ex together that you could both do without.

Flanks you say it ok for wife to wear something attractive in front of both your child is fine.
You are are together . It is both you decide what you both should wear.

Would it be ok for if a caregiver for your child that wife has picked walked around in aa pair of swimming trunks( where could see everything) in middle of winter.

The would be step mum or step dad has to dress carefully as they a around children they are not related to.

Smorgasboard Please go and read again. I really could create an absolute stink about that issue regarding rent but I am choosing not too. And yes you are correct - it is a bit of an odd situation.

I am really not being generously begrudgingly.. but I do take exception to bending over backwards for people who don't appreciate it.

But.. the issue with rent and the issue regarding the barefootedness are not the same thing.

This is a difficult one.
Hmm I would just hope it stays at this relatively benign stage. If it starts to ramp up / like if he Nagano to be more rampantly turned on or touch her feet n front of them I would say something strong.

*began

Hmmm. Fine line I think here.

I have a friend with a corset fetish. I haven't felt uncomfortable around her and her partner while she's been in a corset on nights out, or that I was being inadvertently or surreptitiously involved in their sex life in any way.
But I can definitely see why you would be uncomfortable here, and I think I would be too.

^ you're not a child, I presume.

Sticking purely to the foot issue. You don't like it as you know it's significance to your ex. Your children happily won't have that significance attached to it.
You have asked them not to display feet and ballet shoes around the DC's, and it sounds like they are not going to change.
Not a lot you can do to bend their will on this. You could wait it out, as you seem to think the relationship won't last. Focus on what the kids think, counteract the implication that it may be ok to walk barefoot in the woods or the street. It seems your DS has already sussed this is a risk, affirming he is right and what the risks are is all you can do.
Observe the situation, if the children are not being actively encouraged to take risks with their feet outdoors, it is doubtful that they would have any ongoing trauma around it. They are more likely to be affected by your ex moving a partner in too quickly, then realising that the relationship is not going to last, just as the DC get used to the set-up. That sticks out as more of a concern than what footwear they are choosing, and that is where most would focus their concern. 7 months to moving in is quick.
There you go, I've diverged from the feet again, it just goes to show that to others there are bigger concerns than feet regarding DC, it is hard to see why the feet are your focus. Your DC don't share the fetish, it really doesn't seem as important against other things that would be more upsetting for them.
This is upsetting for you, likely not upsetting for them, it's a non issue, as their POV is what counts ultimately. I can't see why it would upset them, I can see how other things would, but I'd let this one lie.

I'm surprised people don't get why the OP is weirded out by knowing her kids are being cared for by a couple more or less openly showing off their fetishes. The fact that the kids don't yet see what they are, doesn't really make it better.

And I think the fact that it's feet is a red herring. If her ex had a real fetish for women in dinosaur onesies, and they had a routine where they spent all weekend cuddled up on the sofa as a family while the GF wore a dinosaur onesie, I'm sure OP would feel the same.

There is a world of difference between people being incidently turned on when they see their partner bend over to take something out of the oven, or when one of them takes off a top they've spilt water down, and ACTUALLY WEARING/NOT WEARING SOMETHING YOU KNOW DRIVES THE OTHER PERSON WILD. That is setting out to feel aroused or arouse another while you're actively supposed to be out as a family or caring for the children. To me that is blurring the lines weirdly between stuff you do around your children and stuff you don't do. And I'd worry that one or both of them find this slightly exciting and might see how far they could push it before they get "caught". What do you think OP?

(To be clear I'm not saying they're sexually interested in children at all, obviously. Just that the "risk" factor of doing sexual stuff with an "audience" might be something they enjoy. Which puts the kids in a very weird and uncomfortable position.)

And I'd worry that one or both of them find this slightly exciting and might see how far they could push it before they get "caught". What do you think OP?

In all honesty? I hope that isn't the case and I suspect it isn't

BUT

If that was the case and it could be proven I would seek 100%. No question. It is abhorrent.

Smorgasboard

Thanks for input. It's clear that we are all divided on this. I think going forward that this is a watching and waiting situation as you say. If it happens again then I will tackle again.. but not before explaining fully how silly they were being to the children (which I didn't before as I was doing a 'live and let live'.)

Thank you