 |
| Insistor |
I was invited by the writer of this post to say what I thought of it, so I'll give my own opinion and then say why I think posts like it are inappropriate for this site - or anywhere else for that matter.
My own reaction to the piece is that it is a nasty, inhuman, near-psychopathic tale of the betrayal and psychological destruction of a human being purely for the visual enjoyment of the perpetrator - and claque of “onlookers”.
I have been accused of failure to separate fantasy from fact over this but what is a fantasy other than something the fantasiser has done or would like to do if only he could overcome his inhibitions. The writer of this piece has no such inhibitions. He admits not only that he gets off on thinking and writing about such things but that he has already done something similar to it in reality. We are not really talking about fiction here.
In spite of this some people have argued that, no matter how grisly or disgusting such writing should be allowed on a BDSM site.
I disagree. The name of this site is Informedconsent but there is nothing informed or consensual about this submissive's ordeal – nor is there any way it could be played out in such a context. The victim is not informed nor does she consent. She is simply lied to, betrayed, raped, mind-raped and coldly dumped.
Perhaps encouraging the idea that this is fun is fine with most people here. But, in that case, why not ask for the site name to be changed to psychorapists.r.us or something similar.
I don't think the line is obscure. I used the word “trust” in one of my recent blogs and I think this is key. The writer may not have heard it mentioned (I'm not terribly surprised ) but in my experience the concept occurs a lot in the prelude to a submissive's acceptance by a Dominant.
Personally, I don't call my subs “sweetie”, I call them “cunt”. They are humiliated in a number of ways to our mutual satisfaction but all within an environment of trust. I play tricks, I've even blogged about subs enjoyment of some forms of rejection (and got round denials from some of the harpies now defending this writer).
But with power comes “a duty of care” as one Dom put it to me recently. This piece doesn't even hint at any of this because the victim is no longer regarded as human - or if she is, merely so in order to increase the kick of the perpetrator when she's destroyed. The line about the look on her face reminds me of Ian Brady's exultant remark after he killed Edward Evans with an axe – “did you see the look on his face”
I also didn't like the suggestion of “sweetie's” extreme youth and the talk of taking her back to her parents.
Personally, as I say, I think it's nasty shit that shouldn't be applauded – but please yourselves. You usually do.
| 6 Oct 11, 4:01 PM Peccavi 4 yrs |
I can see your point about the non consensual aspect of the fantasy but it IS only fantasy and is not portrayed as being other. There is a thread running about someone's wife being groped on the tube and the fact that she is believed to have secretly enjoyed it and asking if anyone on IC has similarly unconsensually 'groped' anyone. That to me suggests glorification of actual sexual assault but Admin have allowed the thread to run. Ash is open to the world about how 'dark' his fantasies are and anyone choosing to play with him would be making a very informed choice. He could be leaving himself vulnerable false accusations, however, as a cry of 'rape' can result in the accused having their PC taken and scanned and websites they used looked at for circumstantial evidence. He is thus far more vulnerable in his honesty and artistic expression than anyone else through his blogs. There have been rumblings about sexual violence being censored in word just as it has in image which would lead to more laws governing what we think about. As I said earlier, we can choose what we read on here. | |
| 6 Oct 11, 4:14 PM Insistor UK(PL), 7 yrs |
If it's "only fantasy" why did the writer say he'd done something similar in reality? I don't understand how you think any sub could 'consent' to being betrayed in this way. I mean there'd be no shock for the "Dom" to enjoy if she signed a contract agreeing to it beforehand would there? In any case, the picture of innocent, unsuspecting youth is strongly and deliberately drawn. It is real shock, misery and desolation the writer is after.
BDSM: Boring, Dumb, Sad, Motherfuckers. | |
| 6 Oct 11, 4:23 PM AshUK UK(EN), 7 yrs £ |
I thought we were going to have a debate about extreme fantasies ? I wasn't expecting a line by line critique of my last blog.. Still, if that's what you want to do.. Firstly, I don't think there is any suggestion of the girl's youth. I pictured her as mid twenties, if I'm honest. The idea of dropping her back at her parents would apply to any girl with whom I lived with and broke up with; there is no suggestion at all that she is underage. You say it's nasty, inhuman, psychopathic etc. That may well be true - that sort of comment is subjective. My response would be - it's fiction. I make it very clear that my writing is fiction, not real life. You say that this is stuff I would like to do if I could get over my inhibitions. That's not necessarily true. When I've said that this sort of thing appeals to me, what I mean is that I find emotional sadism fascinates me. It's far more powerful than purely physical sadism - as you yourself seem to acknowledge when you talk about humiliation. I wasn't aware of Ian Brady's comment. I find the comparison you're making ( or seem to be making ) to be outrageous. I'm a writer, not a child murderer. I think you're confusing my fictions with me as a person. I may joke about it, but there are no subs buried under my patio. I'm on good terms with most of the girls I've played with ( Do you want references ? I could give you references ) - I'm sure that wouldn't be the case if I'd brutalised them in the way I write about. You say it's nasty shit that shouldn't be applauded. Maybe that's true. I don't write for applause. I write because I enjoy writing. I don't seek attention for it - I put it on my own blog deliberately rather than on the porn blog board. I'm not trying to ram anything down anybody's throat ( fnar ) Of course I enjoy the comments I get, but that's not why I do it. And that brings me to my main point. I write this stuff and post it on IC because it's the only place where I feel I can explore my darkest fantasies in this way. And the majority of comments I get suggest that people enjoy reading them. What's wrong with that ? Ok, so it may not correspond with your way of doing D/s - but I'm not saying for a minute that everyone should do it my way. Would be a pretty dull ( and/or fucked up ) world if that was the case. I'm not trying to convert IC to my cause - I just write the things I write. Genuinely, I cannot see the harm in what I do. If I thought I was a bad person, or was doing a bad thing, then I'd stop. But - despite your arguments - I just can't see what I'm doing that's so wrong. Bottom line - I write extreme fiction, and post it on my own blog on a d/s website. It's not like I'm a serial killer or something. " Under this playful, boyish exterior beats the heart of a ruthless, sadistic maniac " | |
| 6 Oct 11, 4:29 PM AshUK UK(EN), 7 yrs £ |
Ah, I think we're getting to the nub of it. I genuinely think you are confusing fiction with reality. Sorry it's taken me a while to work this out - it's only because - and don't take this the wrong way - I think I may have been guilty of thinking you were more intelligent than you actually are. Because you keep getting fiction and reality mixed up, no matter what pains I go to to explain that they're very very different. When Shakespeare wrote Macbeth, no-one accused him of actually killing Scottish nobility. When Dickens wrote Oliver, no-one accused him of starving boys in workhouses. Similarly there are a whole raft of crime writers these days who write about gruesome murders all the time - I doubt they've ever had to seriously fend off enquiries from the police. Let me spell it out for you again. My writing is mostly fiction. And when I say mostly, I mean that I may have acted out a couple of the things I've written about, but certainly not the really extreme ones. I've never killed anyone, or broken any bones, or had to take anyone to hospital. Can we put this to rest now ? " Under this playful, boyish exterior beats the heart of a ruthless, sadistic maniac " | |
| 6 Oct 11, 4:29 PM Peccavi 4 yrs |
I have not read any of his fantasy stuff so cannot make an informed opinion on its content other than that it is fiction. Any similarity of his real play with a fantasy speaks for itself really as he has not been arrested and no ripples of gossip suggesting he is dangerous are permeating the scene up north. This is a real person not just a pen name and up to now girl friends, play partners, friends and acquaintances have not noticeably hopped up and down about him as 'unsafe' which says far more to me than online stuff. | |
| 6 Oct 11, 4:41 PM Richtea UK(BN), 2 yrs  |
Having just read it, I have to say I'm not entirely sure what the problem is. As it happens, I don't like it, but that's not on moral grounds, I simply don't like the dark end of whatever we choose to call this spectrum. Another reason for me not liking it, and I do think this is very pertinent, is I'm not a woman, I'm a bloke with vaguely submissive leanings, so it's not written for me at all. I don't blindly subscribe to YKIOK, there are lots of things I think are very much not okay, but, aup and all that. In fiction, however, I totally accept the YKIOK view. I really dislike horror/slasher films, but I believe it's absolutely okay for them to be made...on moral grounds, at least, if not taste. "Me and Kevin, we're just not the same" | |
| 6 Oct 11, 4:57 PM Ember2b1 UK(WV), 12 mths  |
Fantasy - The faculty or activity of imagining things that are impossible or improbable - says it all for me. | |
| 6 Oct 11, 5:11 PM frederick_hende 20 mths |
As an outsider to Ds, who came here to learn, I would ask how is one supposed to know the fiction from the things that folk wish they could do? | |
| 6 Oct 11, 5:28 PM AshUK UK(EN), 7 yrs £ |
Good point. I've added a disclaimer on my weblog to make it more clear. " Under this playful, boyish exterior beats the heart of a ruthless, sadistic maniac " | |
| 6 Oct 11, 5:29 PM lilybee  UK(TN), 5 yrs   |
I often read @AshUK blogs. I enjoy most of them, not all. I didn't comment on this particular blog of his in public. I shied away from doing so as I have issues with how people perceive me. @AshUK knows this. We have talked about how I am unsure why I want UV that I worry about the depths of it. It's why when I read this particular blog I chose to comment via memo to him.
As Ash has said, he is writing from a fantasy stand so the earlier comments made with regards to his taking this too far in real life should have been answered. I do however see another side to the UV writing. At the moment IC is open to anyone to read, though not comment. It is high on Google for anyone who wants to find out about BDSM forums in the UK. Now when we joined we got to read the AUP, we consented to the fact that there is a side on here which may not be to alls tastes and that then in turn gave us the right to ignore. There is a point that I think @Insistor is hinting at that means we could have misperceptions from those who haven't joined who don't understand the nuances, by their ability to read this without warnings of the AUP and T&C's. Now does this mean we should ban it? Not completely, I do think that there could be an option to put it into a “locked” section of IC. A part where it needs you to have joined in order to read? A sort of safe area where people like @AshUK can post their writings knowing that you can read them and those who don't want to, know exactly to avoid them. An extra warning that this is extreme maybe? Sorry on covonia etc, does this make sense? lily |
