This post is on the BDSM Activism web board.
| Wed 16 Dec 09, 12:02 AM Silent_Storm UK(M), 6 yrs     |
Interesting article about consent, its in the U.S. A classic BDSM legal trap. http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2...
*Choose Freedom* Sign up to http://www.caan.org.uk Edited Wed 16 Dec 09, 12:09 AM by Silent_Storm | |
| 16 Dec 09, 12:09 AM bohnanza UK(FK), 12 yrs |
In other words it means bugger all for the law here. Science, the only religion that works even if you don't believe in it. | |
| 16 Dec 09, 12:34 AM Sorceror UK(HU), 8 yrs |
Not really. In the UK any action that results (with the required mental element) in more than merely trifling harm is punishable by imprisonment REGARDLESS of whether the other person consented. The legal issues would be similar here. By the way here consent would have to be before AND during. Of course in reality if neither party goes to the police the police in the vast majority of cases will know nothing and care less. It does raise the importance for both subs and Dom(me)s of picking their play/ sexual partners carefully. S.x. Really annoying grammatical error changed Edited 21 Jan 10, 11:30 PM by Sorceror | |
| 16 Dec 09, 1:18 AM Thistle US, 4 yrs |
Whatever else it is, it may be a good illustration of the danger of relying upon safewords.
The above could be interpreted that the woman was in subspace and therefore wasn't communicating distress or using her safeword. If Jetton's parting comment is an accurate quote, then he clearly knew he'd pushed her too far, but was rules lawyering the safeword construct.
love the brave but avoid cowards, knowing the gratitude of cowards is small ~Praxilla of Sicyon | |
| 16 Dec 09, 1:24 AM Romola UK, 7 yrs |
So, he's being held responsible for ensuring the partner is capable of using the claimed safeword before he uses it as a catch all defence? Good. It's only a weblog | |
| 20 Dec 09, 2:45 PM subbietrouble 2 yrs |
"I am a violation top,” says Steven in his soft-spoken voice. That's someone who works at bringing a bottom past their personal point of comfort or willingness, and compelling them to dwell there. As a lawyer, he's created his own set of rules, which he says keeps him safely within the law when engaging in BDSM. “Consent is essential, but it's also tricky when viewing it through a time table. One can give consent before, during, and after a scene, but the levels of consent between these three can shift and vary. I have constructed a sort of ethical tally of time-states in relation to the act: before, during, and after; in order to live with myself, I require two to be present: “Consent during and after but not before the act is seduction.” “Before and after, but not during the act…That's my sweet spot.”" I find this worrying - surely consent during the act is as important, if not more important, than consent both before and after? How can a sub withdraw consent during an act and the Dom not stop? trouble xxx | |
| 20 Dec 09, 3:06 PM ClassAct2005 UK(N), 7 yrs |
S is right. Sadly it is dead easy for people to make up lack of consent or even make things up , look at that poor doctor all over the papers today who was the victim of a woman who was a serial inventor of "my doctor assaulted me stories and now I'll sue him for damages".
| |
| 20 Dec 09, 3:15 PM Flogher UK(RM), 9 yrs |
The whole article is very interesting: http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2... See above for the full version. Seem it is not only the UK where the laws are muddled and grey. Flogher - I cane, I whip, I cuddle |
