This post is on the BDSM Activism web board.
| 15 Dec 11, 10:03 PM skadii UK(W), 5 yrs  |
I think we've vanished up our collective own arses here. The proposals will bring England into line with Wales. That's all - Wales already has this definition, and AFAIK the stasi are not yet knocking on the door of every Cardiff kinkster. It may do some good. The problem we've now got is that legal aid is to be withdrawn from people who want divorces / non-molestation orders / injunctions etc. unless they can prove that they are at "high risk" of domestic violence. Anybody who has ever worked with victims of domestic abuse can see the headline now. "Woman* refused legal aid murdered by husband*" The various agencies that work with DV victims - and that is not just the police - would be helped by this. That's refuges, it's family legal advice centres, it's county courts, it's the immigration service, the Forced Marriage Unit, and on and on and on. In order to access these services the victim must first complain. If you think your partner is likely to approach the police / a lawyer / a refuge / the Forced Marriage Unit and complain that you are a coercive monster, then perhaps consider that kink: ur doin it rong. If not, this is not going to affect you, and is certainly nowhere near as restrictive on WIIWD than the laws on assault, which ARE exclusively in the criminal arena and which CAN be prosecuted without a victim's complaint. *Usually but not always this way round. | |||
| 15 Dec 11, 10:49 PM Romola UK, 7 yrs  |
Acknowledging skaadi's point that there will be no prosecutions without a complaint, and accepting for the sake of argument that consensual DD and O&P relationships won't be affected, I still disagree with the new definition. I think it infantilises women. I have worked with many victims of DV of this kind and DO agree that it is DV. However, that doesn't mean that I think it is a suitable area for legislation. The law is a blunt instrument and I think this is close to becoming a micromanagement of human relationships and choices that is effectively removing the right to make bad choices, escape them and learn from them. It's only a weblog | |||
| 15 Dec 11, 10:52 PM emark UK, 9 yrs |
Wales has a different definition to England, but AFAICT it's more a longer description, and not one that's significantly different. This consultation talks about adding "coercive control" to the control - which is *not* listed in the Welsh definition. Maybe what they mean by "coercive control" is what's talked about in the Welsh definition, but I am unable to see what it is that's different to what's covered by the briefer English definition. Whilst they give the Welsh definition as an example, it doesn't state that this is what will be adopted - a new definition isn't given at all. I agree this probably won't mean much, but more because the change seems to mean nothing at all (and the media reporting is wrong too, not just the people posting here). Sign the Consenting Adult Action Network's statement Edited 15 Dec 11, 10:54 PM by emark | |||
| 15 Dec 11, 10:57 PM emark UK, 9 yrs |
But I thought you were arguing that, in practice, non-consensual sex tends to look different to consensual sex - in which case, I would argue that in practice non-consensual assaults look different to consensual "assaults" by at least as much.
| |||
| 16 Dec 11, 1:05 AM Doghouse_Reilly UK(MK), 6 yrs |
The fear from some folks when women get even a sniff of extra protection from the law is palpable. It's really not a big deal kids. You can still do whatever the fuck you like to a female significant other short of killing her and chances are the law won't touch you. And I know it doesn't sound too nice in those terms, but it's not a nice reality. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. | |||
| 16 Dec 11, 9:07 AM emark UK, 9 yrs |
Sign the Consenting Adult Action Network's statement Edited 16 Dec 11, 9:08 AM by emark |
