8 Feb 10, 6:02 PM
crimbo_clitpump
UK(WV), 4 yrs
 |
fluffy_welsh_angel wrote:
Libertine_67 wrote:
fluffy_welsh_angel wrote:
wonderer wrote:
And thirdly I don;t think a prison sentnce is as cushy as some are suggesting.
|
Oh I don't know, many of the people I have spoken to say they would rather go back to prison than their current location. And have spoken really quite fondly of prison saying it is 'well cushy'
|
depends what their "current location" is really most of the people i speak to cant wait to get out of prison
lib
|
I can't really say where it is, though they far prefer prison which they perceive as less restrictive, and actually like it there. Odd but each to their own
|
i wouldnt say like cat c or d prisoners with enhanced status may enjoy a fairly liberal time compared to tight licence conditions on the out side but from my experiance if the can keep to those conditions then the chance of reoffending reduces significantly but i am going a bit off thread
lib
|
8 Feb 10, 6:44 PM
lima_pink_tigress
3 yrs |
Praxilla wrote:
lima_pink_tigress wrote:
And I do think that taking a blatant risk by committing an offence knowing full well what the penalty could be is (albeit not directly) consenting to that punishment upon conviction (Risk Aware Consensual Crime? Consenting to commiting a crime whilst being fully aware of the risk of punishment? As in BDSM we consent to the activity with a full awareness of the possible risks).
|
I think there's a huge dividing line between a legally sanctioned and managed punishment and a consensually negotiated BDSM one.
In BDSM, I may also be subject to my dominant's determination as to how justice should be meted out, but in a healthy, functioning relationship, he will have made that determination based upon the limits he knows my consent is subject to. I may, in fact, consent that he has the right to cane me bloody as a punishment if he deems it appropriate. If I then disobey him, and he does strip the flesh from me with the beating, I have unambiguously consented and I quite likely won't be so disobedient again.
Under the law, however, all people within that jurisdiction are subject to the potential punishment. There is no negotiation, no acceptance and no specific or individual consent. That we are subject to laws is, in my opinion, not the same thing as consenting to them. That's why I'm uncomfortable comparing presumably informed behavior with informed consent.
|
I see your point about your Dom deciding on your punishment with your input and agreement. I had been going to reply with a lot of stuff about democracy but can't put it any better than kitiara did so would only reiterate what she's said about it.
I think that by living as a citizen within a society and being afforded the freedoms of that society (i.e. the right to vote, freedom of choice, freedom of speach etc) one is agreeing to live by the laws of the land.
Praxilla wrote:
I'm not trying to change your point of view. I appreciate the opportunity for discussion and spirited debate and I think it's good to be able to talk about the similarities, the differences and as MissP brought up, the fantasies surrounding government sanctioned judicial punishments and BDSM oriented ones.
|
I realise you're nbot attempting to change my views and haven't taken anything you've posted as personally or as 'having a go' (even if I had, I seemed to have developed the skin of a rhino since joinging IC ... I wonder why ) and I agree, healthy debate is healthy 
[/quote]
In order to know virtue, we must first aquaint ourselves with vice - Marquis De Sade
|
8 Feb 10, 6:51 PM
The_Perfect_Sadist
UK(PO), 4 yrs
|
lima_pink_tigress wrote:
[
The thing that really pissed me off in the origonal thread was the poster who got a bee in her bonnet about the *supposed* 'non consnsuality' of a criminal being punished for commiting a crime and went on to compare that to the non consensuality of someone being raped. That, to my mind, and I'm sure most other people with an ounce of common sense who sit and really think about it would agree, is complete and utter bollocks! There simply is no comparison.
|
I understand your outrage here, Tigress, but I feel you are overstating the case when you say that there is NO comparison.
I know this is the perennial topic here, but surely if every single aspect of your play was totally consensual, you'd be bored stiff - or should I say bored limp. This man has decided to become an outlaw, or one who makes his own rules and has been caught out.
When I tie up a girl, gag her, pick up a whip and torture her, it's consensual in that we've met here, emailed, met in real life, liked each other and decided to play. But that's it. The fact remains that I am torturing her because I am making up my own rules, not because I'm conforming to Her Majesty's Rules and Regulations for Consensual Kink (or whatever acronym is fashionable this week.)
In my mind there is every room for comparison and to make this man "the other" and criminalise him in some way that is different from what I do is, IMO wrong. To think that he is wrong and bad because he was sentenced by a court and I am OK and legitimate because I'm open about what I'm doing is very dodgy ground. I could get far worse judicial pubishment for what I do than anything he's done, simply by changing the viewing angle of the prism.
There is more than one way to skin a cat but there is only one try per cat
Edited 8 Feb 10, 6:52 PM by The_Perfect_Sadist
|
8 Feb 10, 7:16 PM
rubberroy
UK(TN), 6 yrs
|
Ho, nice to see a bit of healthy debate here.
As for the victim of the j/c not consenting, as I said at the start of the thread, he knew what the punishment could be for whatever he done. What is it they say, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
I for one don't consent to the punishment meted out here of £60 and 3 points for going a bit too fast here and there; I don't suppose James Hanratty consented to being hanged until he was dead for a crime he may not have committed...but that's the society we live in, the law of the land and all that.
It could be that 20 of the best is better and quicker than rotting in a Malaysian jail for 2 years.
ISTR last time this thread was brought up, a number of dominant people here were discussing the pros and cons of the protective wear afforded to the criminal to protect vital organs! Rubber Roy
|
8 Feb 10, 7:29 PM
MissP
UK(EN), 8 yrs
|
rubberroy wrote:
Ho, nice to see a bit of healthy debate here.
As for the victim of the j/c not consenting, as I said at the start of the thread, he knew what the punishment could be for whatever he done. What is it they say, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
I for one don't consent to the punishment meted out here of £60 and 3 points for going a bit too fast here and there; I don't suppose James Hanratty consented to being hanged until he was dead for a crime he may not have committed...but that's the society we live in, the law of the land and all that.
It could be that 20 of the best is better and quicker than rotting in a Malaysian jail for 2 years.
|
Succint and perfect!
www.thedivinemissp.co.uk
|
8 Feb 10, 7:34 PM
rubberroy
UK(TN), 6 yrs
|
Thank you for those kind comments, MissP. Rubber Roy
|
8 Feb 10, 7:34 PM
lima_pink_tigress
3 yrs |
The_Perfect_Sadist wrote:
lima_pink_tigress wrote:
[
The thing that really pissed me off in the origonal thread was the poster who got a bee in her bonnet about the *supposed* 'non consnsuality' of a criminal being punished for commiting a crime and went on to compare that to the non consensuality of someone being raped. That, to my mind, and I'm sure most other people with an ounce of common sense who sit and really think about it would agree, is complete and utter bollocks! There simply is no comparison.
|
I understand your outrage here, Tigress, but I feel you are overstating the case when you say that there is NO comparison.
I know this is the perennial topic here, but surely if every single aspect of your play was totally consensual, you'd be bored stiff - or should I say bored limp. This man has decided to become an outlaw, or one who makes his own rules and has been caught out.
When I tie up a girl, gag her, pick up a whip and torture her, it's consensual in that we've met here, emailed, met in real life, liked each other and decided to play. But that's it. The fact remains that I am torturing her because I am making up my own rules, not because I'm conforming to Her Majesty's Rules and Regulations for Consensual Kink (or whatever acronym is fashionable this week.)
In my mind there is every room for comparison and to make this man "the other" and criminalise him in some way that is different from what I do is, IMO wrong. To think that he is wrong and bad because he was sentenced by a court and I am OK and legitimate because I'm open about what I'm doing is very dodgy ground. I could get far worse judicial pubishment for what I do than anything he's done, simply by changing the viewing angle of the prism.
|
I'm not sure I fully understand your post and think (actually hope) that something has been lost in the translation (so to speak). I'll reply to it how I've interpreted it and please correct me if I've misunderstood.
I have given consent for Ollie to do whatever to me, and I've done that because I've known him for a year and trust him not to anything that would cause me harm or distress. he knows my likes and dislikes and more importantly my boundaries (similarly he's afforded me the same freedom) so, no I wouldn't expect to give or recieve specific consent for each individual 'thing' that we do.
Now this is where I become confused. The way I'm reading your post, you seem to be comparing what you do (therefor what WE do to rape??). You recieving consent from someone to do things to them without them knowing exactly what you will do is a million miles from you attacking and raping someone. I would assume that even after giving consent which admittedly may not be fully informed conent but is consent none the less), a submissive can at any time withdraw that consent. I would also expect that you, having that consent, would make every effort not to overstep any boundaries or do any thing tht would cause her physical, emotional or psychological harm?
If that's the comparison you were making then that makes even less sense to me than the comparison between the non-consensuality of punishment with that of rape.
As I said, I'm not sure I've read your post as you intended it. In order to know virtue, we must first aquaint ourselves with vice - Marquis De Sade
|
8 Feb 10, 8:05 PM
The_Perfect_Sadist
UK(PO), 4 yrs
|
It's not really the details of whether this or that kink is consensual, or how far consent stretches, that I'm posting about but how it seems to me that the guy in the video has been made into "the other" - a criminal who deserves what he gets, because he knew what he was getting into and crossed the line.
I'm just saying that I (and I guess there are many here) who cross the line. But we're not criminalised because we're educated, middle class and know how to play the game.
It's specifically the vehemence of your assertion that there can be "no comparison" that I'm questioning (while I fully understand your honest anger at a "real" rapist who doesn't care about his victim.)
I think there is a tendency for me and others of my kind to think we're fundamentally different from him - and I don't think that's really true.
I notice that today the MPs who have been charged with fraud are trying to claim immunity through Parliamentary privilege. Not so long ago, they would have got away with it, because it would have seemed that "there was no comparison" between an MP who overclaims his expenses and a burglar who climbs into a ground floor window. Today, though, we can see there is a direct comparison.
lima_pink_tigress wrote:
The_Perfect_Sadist wrote:
lima_pink_tigress wrote:
[
The thing that really pissed me off in the origonal thread was the poster who got a bee in her bonnet about the *supposed* 'non consnsuality' of a criminal being punished for commiting a crime and went on to compare that to the non consensuality of someone being raped. That, to my mind, and I'm sure most other people with an ounce of common sense who sit and really think about it would agree, is complete and utter bollocks! There simply is no comparison.
|
I understand your outrage here, Tigress, but I feel you are overstating the case when you say that there is NO comparison.
I know this is the perennial topic here, but surely if every single aspect of your play was totally consensual, you'd be bored stiff - or should I say bored limp. This man has decided to become an outlaw, or one who makes his own rules and has been caught out.
When I tie up a girl, gag her, pick up a whip and torture her, it's consensual in that we've met here, emailed, met in real life, liked each other and decided to play. But that's it. The fact remains that I am torturing her because I am making up my own rules, not because I'm conforming to Her Majesty's Rules and Regulations for Consensual Kink (or whatever acronym is fashionable this week.)
In my mind there is every room for comparison and to make this man "the other" and criminalise him in some way that is different from what I do is, IMO wrong. To think that he is wrong and bad because he was sentenced by a court and I am OK and legitimate because I'm open about what I'm doing is very dodgy ground. I could get far worse judicial pubishment for what I do than anything he's done, simply by changing the viewing angle of the prism.
|
I'm not sure I fully understand your post and think (actually hope) that something has been lost in the translation (so to speak). I'll reply to it how I've interpreted it and please correct me if I've misunderstood.
I have given consent for Ollie to do whatever to me, and I've done that because I've known him for a year and trust him not to anything that would cause me harm or distress. he knows my likes and dislikes and more importantly my boundaries (similarly he's afforded me the same freedom) so, no I wouldn't expect to give or recieve specific consent for each individual 'thing' that we do.
Now this is where I become confused. The way I'm reading your post, you seem to be comparing what you do (therefor what WE do to rape??). You recieving consent from someone to do things to them without them knowing exactly what you will do is a million miles from you attacking and raping someone. I would assume that even after giving consent which admittedly may not be fully informed conent but is consent none the less), a submissive can at any time withdraw that consent. I would also expect that you, having that consent, would make every effort not to overstep any boundaries or do any thing tht would cause her physical, emotional or psychological harm?
If that's the comparison you were making then that makes even less sense to me than the comparison between the non-consensuality of punishment with that of rape.
As I said, I'm not sure I've read your post as you intended it.
|
There is more than one way to skin a cat but there is only one try per cat
|
8 Feb 10, 8:18 PM
El_Presidente
UK(G), 4 yrs
  |
There are some mighty strange comparisons flying around here!
Consent is of course pivotal to the legal and moral standing BDSM play, and indeed to that of any sexual act, and so it is perfectly fair to compare non-consensual BDSM with rape.
However, judicial punishment (i.e. that which is actually prescribed by law under certain jurisdictions), unlike sex or BDSM, is not justified by an agreement between consenting adults. It falls under the completely different legal and moral framework of criminal punishment, which does not rely on the concept of consent to make things either lawful or right. |
8 Feb 10, 8:26 PM
crimbo_clitpump
UK(WV), 4 yrs
|
El_Presidente wrote:
There are some mighty strange comparisons flying around here!
Consent is of course pivotal to the legal and moral standing BDSM play, and indeed to that of any sexual act, and so it is perfectly fair to compare non-consensual BDSM with rape.
However, judicial punishment (i.e. that which is actually prescribed by law under certain jurisdictions), unlike sex or BDSM, is not justified by an agreement between consenting adults. It falls under the completely different legal and moral framework of criminal punishment, which does not rely on the concept of consent to make things either lawful or right.
|
judicial punishment is consentual see kitiara s post above its democracy
|
