BDSM isn't abuse

[WriterDom]

And if you ever had the opportunity to watch a public scene, and thought things were getting to rough and decided to stop it, you'd get your ass kicked. Not by the Dom, but the sub. The difference between bdsm and abuse, is that with bdsm both partners finish feeling good about the scene.

 

[Siren]

 

[A Desert Rose]

And if you ever had the opportunity to watch a public scene, and thought things were getting to rough and decided to stop it, you'd get your ass kicked. Not by the Dom, but the sub. The difference between bdsm and abuse, is that with bdsm both partners finish feeling good about the scene.

I have never injured anyone but I have to agree with this. I could come up swinging if interferred with at that particular time. ~smile~

 

[bunny bondage]

doms and subs are two parts of the same whole. we serve eachother, pleasing eachother, fufilling eachother's needs and desires. we are like *jumps headfirst into goofy metaphore* yin and yang, night and day, and each of us is incomplete without the other.

 

[Pure]

Siren says,

no the difference between BDSM and abuse

is CONSENT.//


I don't think so. Much abuse is consented to; look at long running abusive marriages, as well as gay and lesbian relationships. To continue to stay with someone you have the power to leave is implicitly to consent to a continuation of what's been happening. (Lacking an unusual evidence of change of heart.) To return to someone who may reasonably be expected to continue is also implicitly to consent (again lacking unusual evidence of change).

So in fact, the 'consent' criterion may rule out rapes, and rape-like, short term assaults, and SM kidnappings and confinements, but is far too weak to cover (exclude) many forms of abuse.

 

[Siren]

 

[Pure]

Well, the original post dealt with 'the difference between bdsm and abuse'. I fail to see any new topic I've introduced. But the discussion can be anywhere of course.

I have in mind something very simple, if you ASK the adult person who's not psychotic or suffering brain disease, 'do you consent to xxx' and they say 'yes' and there is no gun at their head and their kids aren't held hostage, that's consent.

 

[Siren]

 

[artful]

Siren,...

if you consent to certain acts to be performed upon you then it is not abuse.

It is a mutually agreeable situation, scene and circumstance.

Abuse is inherently nonconsentual.
Abuse is using power and acts upon another without consent, without mutual enjoyment and without mutual/balanced ability to participate.
All of which [ consent, mutual enjoyment and balanced ability to participate] are essential to a healthy BDSM scene, relationship or situation.

...I agree,...pretty much my opinion also.

 

[A Desert Rose]

Pure you are soooooooo mistaken it isnt even funny.

to say that the victim of abuse CONSENTS to it, is to minimize the continuing and ongoing non consentual acts of abuse, rape, physical and mental destruction done to the victim by the abuser.

People stay in these situations for alot of reasons, consent is not one of those reasons. People dont consent to be abused, they end up being abused.

This portion of the discussion should probably have a separate thread.......to not sidetrack the original intent of this thread.

Too many do not understand what safe, sane and concentual means. And too many do not understand the dynamic of domestic abuse.

Your point is well taken. This thread is not about domestic abuse or rape.

 

[Pure]

Siren said,
If you consent to certain acts to be performed upon you then it is not abuse.

It is a mutually agreeable situation, scene and circumstance.

Abuse is inherently nonconsentual.
Abuse is using power and acts upon another without consent, without mutual enjoyment and without mutual/balanced ability to participate.
All of which [ consent, mutual enjoyment and balanced ability to participate] are essential to a healthy BDSM scene, relationship or situation.. //[end]
==============================
I do understand your point, and mine has not necessarily connected to domestic abuse.

I'm working with rather simple definitions; you've made your own dictionary. It is simply untrue that 'abuse is inherently nonconsentual [sic]'

Abuse implies injury or harm. It's that simple. Now, has anyone in their right mind ever consented to injury or harm? Is harm ever consensual? Yes, there are dozens of examples.

1) A boxer entering the ring.
2) A professional football player going onto the field.

If you would like bdsm related examples,
3) consider the story in the book 9 1/2 Weeks. the episode was consensual. But it resulted in the woman's mental breakdown.

4) consider the following example from a bulletin board I recently visited. It was a posting by a slave--self labeled. She told of her inner labia being removed in order to give them to her master, and to re-design her body. Apparently this occurred. Further she said she had hoped to give him her clitoris, but for practical reasons, changed her plans.

Now I would say she, her body, has been quite abused. Yet, assuming the posting is genuine, and that it wasn't forced, and that, as she says, the operation was not forced, there was consent.

You will say she is a poor deluded soul, no doubt. You want her to get counselling for a year and re-evaluate. But, again with a simple definition of consent, she would clearly say "I consented to these labia being removed.' Further the posting indicated no regrets--which is sometimes a good way to tell if consent is genuine. (The action, incidendentally, so far as one can tell, passes the test proposed by Writer Dom at the beginning of the thread "with bdsm both partners finish feeling good about the scene.")


Again, making your own dictionary, you may want to say, 'true consent' is based on mental health as you define it, and can be determined after a year of therapy, and is based on what someone 'truly' wants, but that's as complicated and uniquely yours, as is your definition of abuse.

By the way, you might note that we probably do not disagree on the distastefulness or immorality of certain things. We are disagreeing about how to describe them. I very much oppose violence against women, children, the weak, etc., and the use of coercion to bend persons to one's wishes.

Best,
Pure

 

[SexyChele]

I would agree with Siren on this one. She knows this stuff a whole lot better than any one on this board, I would guess.

Pure, Siren is not "creating her own dictionary". I would randomly guess (and please correct me if I'm wrong, Siren), that she is giving us layman's understanding of the legal terms defining abuse.

 

[Siren]

 

[Pure]

Well, Siren, the exchange seems to be going down hill. Whatever the state of your knowledge, your increasing resort to characterizations--uninformed, extremism, disingenuous--tends to call that into question. But I've no wish to trade characterizations.

There isn't a whole lot of substance to reply to, but I'll take just two points:

Siren said,
We are not talking about waivers from abuse as is sports or other activities involving injuries. //

I think we, in bdsm are exactly doing this. The sub who consents to be severely flogged, to the point, perhaps of some permanent scarring, is precisely waiving his normal right, one you and I have, not to be abused.

If you were merely taken from your table at the bdsm club and flogged, you could properly claim both assault and point to bodily harm. The volunteer flogee has given up that right to complain, or press charges, provided the flogging is agreed to be of a certain severity and does not exceed it. Exactly as a football player has agreed to be tackled, but not poked in the eye. If you can remain calm, perhaps you can explain the legal difference in the football play and the bdsm 'play' described.

Notice the state of your back and the flogee's will be exactly the same; a not inconsequential injury, as shown in the longlasting nature of the marks. That, I want to say, because it's injury, is abuse.

As to one other comment:
Siren: There is a clear and distinct difference between safe and carefully laid out rules for situations and relationships within BDSM and out of control, limitless, unsafe, Abusive BDSM.//

My last example, while extreme, seemed clearly planned. It was not, apparently 'out of control', the target was decided before hand. It was not limitless. Further, though somewhat blood chilling, the operation, properly done, is not 'unsafe', in the sense of threatening her life or health. She mentioned no lingering consequential damage.

If you really were analyzing the issues, you would see that the extremity of the example was not material to the point; She could equally have consented to a insertion of a large gauge ring through her nipple, and since that could create nursing problems, we would have to say there was bodily harm. Again consensual.
(and note limits, plans, safety, sanity, etc.-- all your terms).

The simple point is that, for a variety of reasons, people outside and inside bdsm sometimes consent to bodily harm--agreed and specified beforehand-- aka 'abuse'. (Again note that the new and old examples all fit Writer Dom's criterion of proper bdsm, namely the people feel good after.)

Best,
"pure"

 

[A Desert Rose]

There are certain words and terms used in BDSM and for good reason. (Lance has an excellent glossary thread, if everyone has not seen it yet.)


A few Statements about BDSM

*BDSM has nothing to do with violence against a helpless person. To tie up someone and beat him up is not SM but naked brutality.

*A SM relationship is always based on mutual consent and care for the partner, everything else is abuse/rape.

*Communication between the partners is the base of such a relationship, if you are not able to establish a proper communication with your partner about your wishes and expectation keep your fingers off this sexual practices.

*Respect and responsibility for your partner is not only important but absolutely necessary.

*The Power Exchange between two partners can be something wonderful erotic (yes, Power and Erotic have something in common).

*BDSM includes many aspects: Power exchange and Role-playing, love, sexuality, curiosity - the term is a synonym for many aspects of human desires and when you ask 10 people in the scene what BDSM means for them you will probably get 15 answers.

*And advice at the end: Laughter belongs into BDSM too - Fun and joy should be an existential part of our lives. If a "scene/game" does not work well a laugh can save the situation: "Take it with humor".

http://www.bcwsd.com/backroom/library.html

 

[A Desert Rose]

And from the same site:SAFETY

REMEMBER: When you dominate somebody, you need to be INCREDIBLY AWARE of EVERYTHING that is happening in the scene. If you slack on this issue, you could end up seriously injuring your partner mentally or physically. Being a TOP/Dom does have its rewards, but eternal vigilance is the price you pay for being in charge.

*When securing your submissive, pay close attention to how tightly you tie them. Make sure that you do not cut off circulation or stretch muscles too much. Ignoring this can lead to embarrassing hospital trips, not to mention possible permanent damage to nerves.

*When using handcuffs, the standard handcuffs can sometimes cut the nerve of sensation from the wrist to the thumb. Also, handcuffs that do not have a small chain between them (these are usually attached to each other by a hinge that can fold the cuffs together) can be dangerous. If somebody falls while wearing them, they can break a wrist.

*If using hoods or gags, be very sure that the person who wears these objects can breathe freely.

*Always use a safe word or signal to halt play in bad situations (If your partner is gagged a little bell in his/her hand can be very helpful). It can save your relationship or even save your life.
Never leave a bound submissive alone in a room. Not only is this emotionally dangerous, but physically as well.

*If your BDSM play includes sex, always make sure you practice safety measures like condoms, etc. Especially when with different partners, make sure you are tested regularly for STDs like herpes or AIDS and that your partner does likewise.

*When using toys like vibrators or anything that has the possibility of getting bodily fluids on it, make sure you WASH IT after EVERY use. Whether or not you continue to use it on the same partner, you still need to make sure everything is clean. Infection in those "oh-so-tender" areas can be at least annoying, and at most debilitating until they go away.
If you do have multiple partners, it's a good idea to use completely different implements on them.

*Alcohol and drugs do NOT belong into a BDSM scene - NEVER scene with a person under the influence of drugs or alcohol - neither the sub nor the Top have a clear judgement and/or control over the situation - physically, mentally and emotionally.

The message here is to be Safe, Sane and Concentual in your BDSM encounters and that responsibility and care need to be taken by both Dom and sub.

 

[Ishmael]

Well, Siren, the exchange seems to be going down hill. Whatever the state of your knowledge, your increasing resort to characterizations--uninformed, extremism, disingenuous--tends to call that into question. But I've no wish to trade characterizations.

There isn't a whole lot of substance to reply to, but I'll take just two points:

Siren said,
We are not talking about waivers from abuse as is sports or other activities involving injuries. //

I think we, in bdsm are exactly doing this. The sub who consents to be severely flogged, to the point, perhaps of some permanent scarring, is precisely waiving his normal right, one you and I have, not to be abused.

If you were merely taken from your table at the bdsm club and flogged, you could properly claim both assault and point to bodily harm. The volunteer flogee has given up that right to complain, or press charges, provided the flogging is agreed to be of a certain severity and does not exceed it. Exactly as a football player has agreed to be tackled, but not poked in the eye. If you can remain calm, perhaps you can explain the legal difference in the football play and the bdsm 'play' described.

Notice the state of your back and the flogee's will be exactly the same; a not inconsequential injury, as shown in the longlasting nature of the marks. That, I want to say, because it's injury, is abuse.

As to one other comment:
Siren: There is a clear and distinct difference between safe and carefully laid out rules for situations and relationships within BDSM and out of control, limitless, unsafe, Abusive BDSM.//

My last example, while extreme, seemed clearly planned. It was not, apparently 'out of control', the target was decided before hand. It was not limitless. Further, though somewhat blood chilling, the operation, properly done, is not 'unsafe', in the sense of threatening her life or health. She mentioned no lingering consequential damage.

If you really were analyzing the issues, you would see that the extremity of the example was not material to the point; She could equally have consented to a insertion of a large gauge ring through her nipple, and since that could create nursing problems, we would have to say there was bodily harm. Again consensual.
(and note limits, plans, safety, sanity, etc.-- all your terms).

The simple point is that, for a variety of reasons, people outside and inside bdsm sometimes consent to bodily harm--agreed and specified beforehand-- aka 'abuse'. (Again note that the new and old examples all fit Writer Dom's criterion of proper bdsm, namely the people feel good after.)

Best,
"pure"

Hmmmmmmmmm, what we are dealing with here is your definiton of abuse based on your "feelings". Perhaps it is best for you to make this statement up front. "I feel that this is abuse because.............." That way we all understand that you are merely stating an opinion and not facts.

As far as the facts go, legally. It is no secret that Siren is a well established, practicing attorney, that specializes in criminal law. Capital cases to be precise. If you are going to engage her in a 'factual' contest. You'd best do a great deal more homework.

Ishmael

 

[Ishmael]

There are certain words and terms used in BDSM and for good reason. (Lance has an excellent glossary thread, if everyone has not seen it yet.)


A few Statements about BDSM

*BDSM has nothing to do with violence against a helpless person. To tie up someone and beat him up is not SM but naked brutality.

*A SM relationship is always based on mutual consent and care for the partner, everything else is abuse/rape.

*Communication between the partners is the base of such a relationship, if you are not able to establish a proper communication with your partner about your wishes and expectation keep your fingers off this sexual practices.

*Respect and responsibility for your partner is not only important but absolutely necessary.

*The Power Exchange between two partners can be something wonderful erotic (yes, Power and Erotic have something in common).

*BDSM includes many aspects: Power exchange and Role-playing, love, sexuality, curiosity - the term is a synonym for many aspects of human desires and when you ask 10 people in the scene what BDSM means for them you will probably get 15 answers.

*And advice at the end: Laughter belongs into BDSM too - Fun and joy should be an existential part of our lives. If a "scene/game" does not work well a laugh can save the situation: "Take it with humor".

http://www.bcwsd.com/backroom/library.html

I would only add that in it's best form it is an unlimited form of foreplay that leads to a much higher level of sexual gratification for both parties. It requires imagination.

Ishmael

 

[MissTaken]

Sorry to change topic but, people who are in abusive relationships aren't consenting to the abuse. They remain in the relationship out of fear or love, always hoping that they have been struck for the last time. They don't remain in the relationship to be abused, they remain to try to find and keep the good stuff and do away with the bad.

Domestic violence is non consensual.
Many women may tell you they deserve the bad treatment. Again, this is not an indicator of consent. The batterer has so manipulated them as to isolate them and convince them that they are unworthy of anyone else, have no where else to go or that the batterer "can't help" but use his fists out of frustration.

I still stand by the original statement. The difference between abuse and BDSM is consent.

Siren says,

no the difference between BDSM and abuse

is CONSENT.//


I don't think so. Much abuse is consented to; look at long running abusive marriages, as well as gay and lesbian relationships. To continue to stay with someone you have the power to leave is implicitly to consent to a continuation of what's been happening. (Lacking an unusual evidence of change of heart.) To return to someone who may reasonably be expected to continue is also implicitly to consent (again lacking unusual evidence of change).

So in fact, the 'consent' criterion may rule out rapes, and rape-like, short term assaults, and SM kidnappings and confinements, but is far too weak to cover (exclude) many forms of abuse.

 

[Pure]

Ishmael said,

Hmmmmmmmmm, what we are dealing with here is your definiton of abuse based on your "feelings". Perhaps it is best for you to make this statement up front. "I feel that this is abuse because.............." That way we all understand that you are merely stating an opinion and not facts. //
======

"Abuse" v. 1 to use wrongfully or improperly; misuse. _to abuse rights or authority_ 2. to do wrong to; to act injuriously toward
_to abuse one's wife_

_American College Dictionary_ Random House, 1957.

The second definition is the one I'm using. There's abuse if there is (non trivial) injury or harm. The issue of doing 'wrong', is intended to exclude harms/injuries inflicted by those with a right to do so, i.e., police in the carrying out of their duties; not, of course, husbands injuring their wives in 'disputes.'

It's to be noted that 'abuse' in describing treatment of a person, as opposed to 'abuse of office' or 'abuse of process' is not a term found in several online law dictionaries consulted. But here is one example

http://www.petercollin.com/cgi-bin/lsearch.pl

Peter Collin, Dictionary of Law


abuse
1
noun
(a)
using something wrongly
abuse of power = using legal powers in an illegal or harmful way
abuse of process = suing someone in bad faith, without proper justification or for malicious reasons
drug abuse = being mentally and physically dependent on taking a drug regularly
(b)
rude or insulting words; the prisoner shouted abuse at the judge
(c)
bad treatment (usually sexual) of a person; child abuse; sexual abuse of children
2
verb
(a)
to use something wrongly
to abuse one's authority = to use authority in an illegal or harmful way
(b)
to say rude words to (someone); he abused the police before being taken to the cells
(c)
to treat someone badly (usually in a sexual way); he had abused small children

===
Me: It's pretty clear, in referring to 1 or 2 (c), that to explicate 'bad' or 'badly,' one is going to have to use the more common legal notion of injury or harm.

Please note that Siren's definitions, not to say her postings, are, in my opinion, far more reflective of feeling, and have not cited any authoritative sources for her concepts of 'consent' 'abuse' etc. She may well be a fine attorney--and person--, but her postings on this thread, then, do not do her justice, nor does her use of personal characterization. Perhaps the emotionality of the issue is a factor.

 

[Pure]

Supplemental:

Here is a second, online source, in the Merriam Webster _Dictionary of Law_. It explicity makes the connection I've spoken of, between abuse and injury, in part 2(a)

http://dictionary.lp.findlaw.com/sc...com&topic=91/91d0cc37403fbe350fcc69a4b921c4b7

1abuse
[e-'byüz]

abused
abusing


1: to put to a use other than the one intended: as

a: to put to a bad or unfair use
Example: abusing the powers of office

b: to put to improper or excessive use
Example: 1abuse narcotics

2 a: to inflict physical or emotional mistreatment or injury on (as one's child) purposely or through negligence or neglect and often on a regular basis

b: to engage in sexual activity with (a child under an age specified by statute)

3: to attack harshly with words
Example: 1abuse a police officer
Example: 1abuse a debtor


Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law ©1996.
Merriam-Webster, Incorporated

 

[Desdemona]

<snip>

"Abuse" v. 1 to use wrongfully or improperly; misuse. _to abuse rights or authority_ 2. to do wrong to; to act injuriously toward
_to abuse one's wife_

_American College Dictionary_ Random House, 1957.

The second definition is the one I'm using. There's abuse if there is (non trivial) injury or harm. The issue of doing 'wrong', is intended to exclude harms/injuries inflicted by those with a right to do so, i.e., police in the carrying out of their duties; not, of course, husbands injuring their wives in 'disputes.'

It's to be noted that 'abuse' in describing treatment of a person, as opposed to 'abuse of office' or 'abuse of process' is not a term found in several online law dictionaries consulted. But here is one example

http://www.petercollin.com/cgi-bin/lsearch.pl

Peter Collin, Dictionary of Law


abuse
1
noun
(a)
using something wrongly
abuse of power = using legal powers in an illegal or harmful way
abuse of process = suing someone in bad faith, without proper justification or for malicious reasons
drug abuse = being mentally and physically dependent on taking a drug regularly
(b)
rude or insulting words; the prisoner shouted abuse at the judge
(c)
bad treatment (usually sexual) of a person; child abuse; sexual abuse of children
2
verb
(a)
to use something wrongly
to abuse one's authority = to use authority in an illegal or harmful

OK. If we just look at the definitions you have provided for us....
abuse is to use something or someone wrongly. If I want to be flogged to the point that I am left with permanent scars.... if I am turned on by seeing those scars and remembering how I got them, then I wasn't abused. I wasn't used wrongly. I got exactly what I wanted and agreed to.
To carry that further, in the discussion of the second definition, there is reference to a person with a right to do so such as a police officer. If I, as the sub in a D/s relationship, give my Dominant my list of limits, I have my safeword that I can use at any time, and we have both agreed to the aforementioned flogging with resultant scars, I have given this person the right to do this. I don't see how it could possibly be construed as abuse because I have agreed to it and it is what I want.

In my opinion, abuse would occur if I discuss the flogging with the Dominant and I clearly state that I want my skin to remain intact. During the flogging my skin is broken and the Dominant intentionally chooses not to lighten up the flogging and I get multiple open wounds or I use my safeword and the Dominant chooses not to honor it. Under those conditions, it is nonconsensual and therefore abusive. I have been used wrongly.

This is all semantics anyway.

 

[A Desert Rose]

NO shit

it is semantics. And it is confusing the issue, especially for those new to the discussion.

That which Pure is discussing really does not have a place in a typical caring and concentual relationship.

 

[curious2c]

I have a sister that was in an abusive marriage. They finally broke up after many years of him beating her. There are many things involved in the choice to stay in a marriage like that, but consent is not one of them. She had fears from losing all, to losing her kids, to losing her life. He finally went to far and broke some bones because she wouldn't let him bring his girlfriend home with him. She left him then. There is a BIG difference between consent and abuse. I have read a bit here and there and I am certain that in BDSM, MOST Masters or Doms would not force against consent. Matter of fact I am sure of it. There are safe words, permission before the start, and many other things that go into that kind of relationship. In an abusive relationship there is pain, anguish, and a taking from the abusee. Usually love is not included nor is there any thought of the abuser to feel or think for the abusee. It is violent violence at its worst and a control issue gone bad in a real and painful way. The use of force in an abusive relationship is not consenual, it is rape, pure and simple. In a BDSM relationship it is a strong form of love and respect. There is no repsect in an abusive marriage, at all. I know this because I saw what happened to my sister and was more involved than I care to remember at several points. There is a far cry difference between the two for sure and if you can't see that then perhaps a BDSM style relationship is not for you.

This is just my thoughts on the subject and I have a few issues on abuse so forgive me if I come on too strong.

 

[A Desert Rose]

This is just my thoughts on the subject and I have a few issues on abuse so forgive me if I come on too strong.

BDSM is an intense subject all by itself at times. When other issues are brought into the mix, such as domestic abuse/violence, it can become quite emotional, painful and even more intense.

Your feelings, and first hand experiences are very well understood.

Thank you for the post.