Right and Wrong, The Ethics of the Lifestyle

[Amanda_T]

Ok. This is intended as a fairly esoteric topic of discussion, and honestly I didn't do a search to see if this had already been discussed. Why, you ask? Because frankly, on every site I have ever been on, no one cares.

What I mean by that, is people identify what they want, and come to believe that because they want it, and because someone else wants to give it to them, then it must be right.

Others, say "there is no black and white, only grey."

I have my own views that often irritate people. I do in fact believe there IS a right and a wrong. Not any hard and fast rules, but at least general principals that apply in some manner.

Though I try not to judge how others live it there are certainly a lot of things involved in some of the ways that some of the people live the lifestyle, that if someone tried to apply to me, or asked me to apply to them as their Domme, I would feel a little ill. In that sense, I certainly feel that though there may be no hard and fast rules for right and wrong, period. There are at least general principals, that apply specifically to right and wrong within a given relationship.

So, in the interests of something interesting to talk about, what are Y/your views on morality, and ethics, and right and wrong, within the lifestyle?

 

[Stella_Omega]

Edit-- ah, sorry, I suddenly understood that you are asking about personal limits.

Me, I don't do emotional abuse, and I don't do heavy humiliation. I have physical limits, related to my lack of stamina.

I don't do anything I don't know about.

 

[graceanne]

yes, it is right. Not for you, but you are not them.

Everything boils down to informed consent between the interested parties.

Other than that-- it's no one else's business. That's why people say "it depends."

Are you thinking of something in particular?

I actually agree. As long as their is INFORMED consent, and the person is capable of making an informed decision, I consider it that person's business and no one else's. Don't get me wrong, I believe there are blacks and whites in morality. There are some things that are just wrong, and I don't care what your reasons for them are. Like molesting children and rape. But when it comes to the lifestyle, there are a crap load of grays in the rules of right and wrong.

 

[Amanda_T]

yes, it is right. Not for you, but you are not them.

Everything boils down to informed consent between the interested parties.

Other than that-- it's no one else's business. That's why people say "it depends."

Are you thinking of something in particular?

Please forgive me for taking an obstinate tact, but the seeming narrowness, in your thinking, requires me to be somewhat uhm, blunt. But honestly, there is some whacked stuff out there. So I want an actual discussion rather than just a blunt, "ya, if they like it, it's cool." Cause honestly, everybody get's to that point of belief, even the catholic priests that like little ones.

Say, for example, that one persons idea of what is right, is to be able to torture to death, and then eat, their slave. And they find someone that really digs that.

You saying that is "right" for them?

 

[Stella_Omega]

I actually agree. As long as their is INFORMED consent, and the person is capable of making an informed decision, I consider it that person's business and no one else's. Don't get me wrong, I believe there are blacks and whites in morality. There are some things that are just wrong, and I don't care what your reasons for them are. Like molesting children and rape. But when it comes to the lifestyle, there are a crap load of grays in the rules of right and wrong.

Actually, I misunderstood the OP. She's wondering about each of us, where our own limits are.

I just thought of another thing that squicks me, which is mainstream hetero D/s. Unless they are people I know and know as trustworthy, all I can see are those same old shitty hetero dynamics being played out. Intellectually I understand how deeply that stuff resonates for people-- I just can't be around it much.

 

[Amanda_T]

Edit-- ah, sorry, I suddenly understood that you are asking about personal limits.

Me, I don't do emotional abuse, and I don't do heavy humiliation. I have physical limits, related to my lack of stamina.

I don't do anything I don't know about.

Well, informed consent, is a very grey area. I have been in the position of "slave" to a Lady. I was so, long enough to realize that I was not a slave by any definition of it

But some things came up, and I saw some things, and learned some things, that made me question, even the nature of what "Informed consent" even is.

So I am kind of wondering what people's beliefs are in this area. A simple "ya, if they like it so it's cool" isn't really enough in any discussion of ethics. Is it?

 

[graceanne]

Actually, I misunderstood the OP. She's wondering about each of us, where our own limits are.

I just thought of another thing that squicks me, which is mainstream hetero D/s. Unless they are people I know and know as trustworthy, all I can see are those same old shitty hetero dynamics being played out. Intellectually I understand how deeply that stuff resonates for people-- I just can't be around it much.

Ah. Ok. For me it's anything to do with pee, poop, and blood. Yuck. I mean, I have no issues with other people liking that stuff, but it just totally squicks me. I also am not into emotional abuse or humiliation, that sort of stuff just ticks me off. I also have physical limits, due to my health problems. I can't do anal, not won't, can't because it tears my ulcers open. However, I have no issues with it and have done it before I got sick.

 

[Amanda_T]

Actually, I misunderstood the OP. She's wondering about each of us, where our own limits are.

I just thought of another thing that squicks me, which is mainstream hetero D/s. Unless they are people I know and know as trustworthy, all I can see are those same old shitty hetero dynamics being played out. Intellectually I understand how deeply that stuff resonates for people-- I just can't be around it much.

Well, I am not so much asking for your personal limits, but more what personal "Principals" guide you, in your beliefs as to what right and wrong are, within the context of the lifestyle.

And what general principals, might even hold across all of the lifestyle "society". Because, well, if there IS no right and wrong, not even in a general way, then, uhm, ethics and morality, and right and wrong have no meaning within it. Would they?

 

[graceanne]

Actually, I misunderstood the OP. She's wondering about each of us, where our own limits are.

I just thought of another thing that squicks me, which is mainstream hetero D/s. Unless they are people I know and know as trustworthy, all I can see are those same old shitty hetero dynamics being played out. Intellectually I understand how deeply that stuff resonates for people-- I just can't be around it much.

I know I already quoted you, but I just reread what you wrote and I have a question. What do you mean by same old shitty hetero dynamics?

 

[graceanne]

Well, I am not so much asking for your personal limits, but more what personal "Principals" guide you, in your beliefs as to what right and wrong are, within the context of the lifestyle.

And what general principals, might even hold across all of the lifestyle "society". Because, well, if there IS no right and wrong, not even in a general way, then, uhm, ethics and morality, and right and wrong have no meaning within it. Would they?

Number one principal you will find most of us abide by is consent. Whether it's SSC or RACK, most of us insist on consent. I can see the question going, so I personally think that anyone with an ounce of sense would want to make really sure the person involved knows what they're getting in to, because otherwise they're risking jail time. Communication is also a huge principal I've heard touted by those who I would consider responsible, but I have to say I don't see that it's something common in the community at whole, as some dom's (lower case d on purpose) will tell their subs that they know what's best for them, and not to ask questions.

 

[Amanda_T]

Number one principal you will find most of us abide by is consent. Whether it's SSC or RACK, most of us insist on consent. I can see the question going, so I personally think that anyone with an ounce of sense would want to make really sure the person involved knows what they're getting in to, because otherwise they're risking jail time. Communication is also a huge principal I've heard touted by those who I would consider responsible, but I have to say I don't see that it's something common in the community at whole, as some dom's (lower case d on purpose) will tell their subs that they know what's best for them, and not to ask questions.

ya. that's one of my issues. I have experienced a certain amount of that. I did not know what I was getting into, even though I thought I did. The person in question, attempted to brainwash me, into thinking that everything that person said was true, and right, and in the end, right and wrong didn't matter because everything was grey.

Now. I am going to tell you the reason I ask. I an ordained Minister. I am a druid preistess acolyte and bard. I have spiritual convictions, AND, I have reason to believe that my life serves the Divine.

And since my childhood was very much an experience of trying to hold myself together while "society" tried to convince me that I was evil, or demonic, and twisted and etc, because I am trans, I developed a method of actually thinking, about what I do, and the consequences that what I do, have on other people. Regardless of whether what I do involves the lifestyle, or the vanilla world.

It has been my experience that most people vanilla or lifestyle, don't actually think about right and wrong. Those with power, do their best to convince others that what they want is right, and those without power, do their best to please the one they serve. (As is a subs nature.)

So. How do you rationalize, think about, consider, ethics and morality, within your life, and specifically, within the lifestyle part of your life.


Ok. This is all pretty heavy and tainted with my own personal experiences.

Let's move it to a more defined idea. Here is a question for people. What is the difference between human trafficing, and the non consensual consent, in lifestyle slavery?

 

[graceanne]

ya. that's one of my issues. I have experienced a certain amount of that. I did not know what I was getting into, even though I thought I did. The person in question, attempted to brainwash me, into thinking that everything that person said was true, and right, and in the end, right and wrong didn't matter because everything was grey.

Unfortunately, it happens. I'm sorry it happened to you, though.

Let's move it to a more defined idea. Here is a question for people. What is the difference between human trafficing, and the non consensual consent, in lifestyle slavery?

The key here is informed consent, which we discussed before. Unfortunately, too often people just jump in without doing the research or they choose to believe their dominant over the thousands of other people screaming DON'T DO IT. This is not only true in BDSM, but the world at large. How many people, over the entire history of the world have chosen to do something they're warned not to do? Staying informed is the responsibility of everyone involved.

 

[Amanda_T]

Ok. Let's talk about informed consent then. How does a sub, especially within a certain dynamic that is that other than declared limits, which an inexperienced sub or slave, really has no clue, that everything else the Dominant says, goes.

Another question. What is right and wrong? Is there even such a thing?

 

[Stella_Omega]

Ok. Let's talk about informed consent then. How does a sub, especially within a certain dynamic that is that other than declared limits, which an inexperienced sub or slave, really has no clue, that everything else the Dominant says, goes.

Another question. What is right and wrong? Is there even such a thing?

Well, I have a superhero costume and I fly around a lot saving innocent subs from themselves. Weird how they usually run right back into the arms of SirDomlyDom. I just don't get it.

Really, the question isn't so much "what is right and wrong?" as "What the fuck are you doing about it? And, how effective are you?"

I tell almost every person who shows up on this forum to read the essay linked in my sig. And I've blogged versions of it at a couple of "How to be a proper submissive" blogs because most of them don't even know.

 

[Stella_Omega]

There's a group in Los Angeles that has actually taken steps to address this issue-- at least, amongst the M/f crowd. http://www.boldcon.com/2014/bold-writings/mdhl/

How about you, Amanda, do you have any thoughts on what, if anything, you want to do? What people might accomplish?

 

[Sir_Winston54]

I have my own views that often irritate people. I do in fact believe there IS a right and a wrong. Not any hard and fast rules, but at least general principals that apply in some manner.

Though I try not to judge how others live it there are certainly a lot of things involved in some of the ways that some of the people live the lifestyle, that if someone tried to apply to me, or asked me to apply to them as their Domme, I would feel a little ill. In that sense, I certainly feel that though there may be no hard and fast rules for right and wrong, period. There are at least general principals, that apply specifically to right and wrong within a given relationship.

So, in the interests of something interesting to talk about, what are Y/your views on morality, and ethics, and right and wrong, within the lifestyle?

How can you say you believe "there IS a right and a wrong," and in the next sentence say, "Not any hard and fast rules, but at least general princip[les] that apply in some manner?"

Right (in the ethical sense of the word) is right, and wrong, wrong, according to the ethical foundation upon which an individual decides to live his/her life. The problem here seems (to me) to be that you desire that everyone else should adhere to the principles *you* espouse.

For *my* system of ethics, I go back to an old R.A.Heinlein book where a society's laws and ethic are essentially boiled down to one simple statement: "You can do whatever you damn well please, as long as you don't infringe on anyone else's right to do what THEY damn well please."

You seem to have some conflict regarding, specifically, the ethics/right and wrong of people who live within the BDSM culture, and the potential for some people to abuse the rights of others within a BDSM life. Let me assure you, the same people who abuse the rights of others within in a BDSM relationship would do so if they were the vanilla-est bean in the bag.

You also state, in a later post,

It has been my experience that most people vanilla or lifestyle, don't actually think about right and wrong. Those with power, do their best to convince others that what they want is right, and those without power, do their best to please the one they serve. (As is a sub's nature.)

I think you may be right that "most people... don't actually [spend a lot of time] think[ing] about right and wrong" (with the minor changes I inserted into that sentence). And yes, people with power (or money, or influence, or political capital) try to "sell" their utopian visions to the masses, who in turn try to please their bosses, so they can pay their bills, build a family/career/both, and potentially aim their kids toward a better life than *they* had, which is WHY they don't have the time to contemplate the whichness of the why, the ultimate dichotomy between right and wrong, or the number of go-go angels on the head of yonder pin.

In the long run, for most people, the practicalities of living their lives far outweigh the personal importance of discovering and revealing the philosophies of a moral/ethical foundation for the world to embrace.

And now the dog wants to go sniff grasses and branches and pee on other dogs' markings, so *my* ethics require me to end this and let her relieve herself.

 

[Amanda_T]

How can you say you believe "there IS a right and a wrong," and in the next sentence say, "Not any hard and fast rules, but at least general princip[les] that apply in some manner?"

Are you one who believes that any "rule, law, or regulation" can be so perfect as to take in every possible circumstance and situation? I take it that you don't understand about "situational ethics" nor the principal that no rule can perfectly apply in every circumstance or situation?


Right (in the ethical sense of the word) is right, and wrong, wrong, according to the ethical foundation upon which an individual decides to live his/her life.

The problem here seems (to me) to be that you desire that everyone else should adhere to the principles *you* espouse.

Principals that I "espouse"? What principals have I "espoused"?

And, are you saying that there is fundamentally no real existence of "Right and wrong"?

I am not proposing any "system" of ethics. I have not actually proposed a single idea on which to base an ethic. Have I?

I have been asking what people think of Ethics generally speaking.

For *my* system of ethics, I go back to an old R.A.Heinlein book where a society's laws and ethic are essentially boiled down to one simple statement: "You can do whatever you damn well please, as long as you don't infringe on anyone else's right to do what THEY damn well please."



That's a pretty good idea right there. However, in our society, in the vanilla side of it anyway, there is an awful lot of stuff that others have decided is "wrong" and therefore people go to jail for things like smoking pot. So, in my view, there is obviously a problem. Especially since HSBC get's caught smuggling billions in drugs, and after they pay off the fine, there is still plenty left over to pay everyone involved a hefty bonus.

This world is full of people who "do as they damned well please" while actually affecting others right to do the same.



You seem to have some conflict regarding, specifically, the ethics/right and wrong of people who live within the BDSM culture, and the potential for some people to abuse the rights of others within a BDSM life. Let me assure you, the same people who abuse the rights of others within in a BDSM relationship would do so if they were the vanilla-est bean in the bag.


Ok, there is one thing I'm going to take back. I tend to generalize a lot, and my statement that "those with power tend to...." well, obviously it isn't always true.

And you are right, if they are like that in the lifestyle, they would be like that in vanilla. But does that make the question or discussion of ethics any less worth discussin?

Anyone who does not sense any conflict between the sense that says to them, "I want this, no matter what it means for anyone else" -- and their own consciences, is not fit to be human. We are imperfect beings, who are conflicted, multifaceted beings, with desires and dreams, and qualities, and faults, that any thinking being understands that these are occasionally in conflict with each other.

You also state, in a later post,


I think you may be right that "most people... don't actually [spend a lot of time] think[ing] about right and wrong" (with the minor changes I inserted into that sentence). And yes, people with power (or money, or influence, or political capital) try to "sell" their utopian visions to the masses, who in turn try to please their bosses, so they can pay their bills, build a family/career/both, and potentially aim their kids toward a better life than *they* had, which is WHY they don't have the time to contemplate the whichness of the why, the ultimate dichotomy between right and wrong, or the number of go-go angels on the head of yonder pin.

The people in this world with the "Money and power" as you put it, already have their "Utopia". They have everything they want, except, well, MORE. They aren't trying to sell it to anyone anymore, they are merely maintaining the status quo. Because everyone bought into it a long long time ago and it is self perpetuating.


In the long run, for most people, the practicalities of living their lives far outweigh the personal importance of discovering and revealing the philosophies of a moral/ethical foundation for the world to embrace.

If practicality is what one bases one's existence on, then it's a sad state of affairs. And while I actually agree that some of the worlds practicalities, such as earning a living to feed your kids etc, are probably more important than thinking about ethics-- at least in the short term, I am sure that someone such as you who had the time write all of that, has plenty of time to think of beyond those practicalities.



I ain't preachin. When I do preach, you will know it. I am having a discussion. I have said nothing to indicate that I believe "you all" should live "like me". I have opinions, as I am sure everyone does. But this was meant to be a discussion on the subject, rather than something that degenerated into a "You're whacked cause you're preachin."


And now the dog wants to go sniff grasses and branches and pee on other dogs' markings, so *my* ethics require me to end this and let her relieve herself.

I wanted to know not only "do people think about it", and "what do people think about it", but "if" "People think about it."

People, even myself, are revealing far more of themselves and their beliefs, than they may be aware of. We all look at everything through our own particular coloured glasses and that helps us evaluate and interpret things we read, hear, and see.

 

[graceanne]

Ok. Let's talk about informed consent then. How does a sub, especially within a certain dynamic that is that other than declared limits, which an inexperienced sub or slave, really has no clue, that everything else the Dominant says, goes.

Another question. What is right and wrong? Is there even such a thing?

The sub doesn't get into that dynamic without doing the research FIRST. And I don't mean read an article or two, and then jump headfirst into a bdsm relationship. Too often someone thinks they're kinky and then fall into the arms of the first moron who calls themselves a dominant, and then they're surprised that their so-called dominant is an abuser. Anytime you plan on letting someone tie you up, or have complete control over everything in your life, you need to be VERY VERY careful. Honestly, if you got out alive, you [general you] were lucky, because BDSM is a common cover for serial killers.

Really, the question isn't so much "what is right and wrong?" as "What the fuck are you doing about it? And, how effective are you?"

Yeah. This.

 

[Amanda_T]

The sub doesn't get into that dynamic without doing the research FIRST. And I don't mean read an article or two, and then jump headfirst into a bdsm relationship. Too often someone thinks they're kinky and then fall into the arms of the first moron who calls themselves a dominant, and then they're surprised that their so-called dominant is an abuser. Anytime you plan on letting someone tie you up, or have complete control over everything in your life, you need to be VERY VERY careful. Honestly, if you got out alive, you [general you] were lucky, because BDSM is a common cover for serial killers.


Yeah. This.

I was not worried about the person in question being a serial killer. and I didn't just jump in. I have been in the lifestyle, or around the edges and doing research, for more than a decade.

I should have realized that this topic would go this way.

Have a good night everyone.

 

[graceanne]

I was not worried about the person in question being a serial killer. and I didn't just jump in. I have been in the lifestyle, or around the edges and doing research, for more than a decade.

I should have realized that this topic would go this way.

Have a good night everyone.

Dude. Chill out or don't ask questions you don't like the answer to. I said you [general you] which means it wasn't directed at you specifically, so put your ego back in your pocket. It's not all about you.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Believe me it's a lot better now than it was thirty years ago. There's information, cross-community discussion-- Back in the 70's when I needed it so desperately, there were these rumors about some secret societies (that were in other cities besides the one I lived in). where people were doing what I wanted to be doing.

Everything was unsafe. Nobody talked about consent-- not that there was any talk anyway, all there was really, was 'the story of 'O' and De Sade-- and the Velvet Underground had a couple of songs...

I was well aware that if I let someone tie me up I would be helpless, and I simply never let myself talk about it. I popped a guy's wrist pretty badly through not knowing how to tie safely, around 74-ish. I didn't try rope tying again-- until just a couple years ago, THANK YOU KNOTTY BOYS!

Yes, I do think about it. And what I think about, I tend to do, or try to do...

So, anyway, what is it, more exactly, that you want to talk about? Your own past experience? Because you will get plenty of sympathy and attention here, really.

 

[Amanda_T]

first let me state, that some of what I have used as examples, are hypotheticals. meant to see if people have thoughts on the issue or right and wrong and ethics and such.

And second, some of what was my personal experience was tainted by my own perspective, and that this person in question meant no actual harm, and no actual harm was done, but a lot of what I see now of the "training" I was given could be seen in a negative light, if one looks at it in a certain way.

And you know what is really weird? Every time, and in every place, I ask questions that adult human beings should have long ago asked themselves, everyone goes all weird, as if I am using words that have no meaning.

I am very much afraid, that despite the fact that all I wanted to talk about was "ethics, morality, and right and wrong" this has become something that people are being really weird about.


Mods, if you could delete this whole thread, I'd truly appreciate it. I am just going to learn to shut my mouth.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I've been reading your words as carefully as I can, and I do NOT think your concern is with any sort of universal moral code. To me it seems that, although you say you came to no harm during your period of submission, something about it bothers you.

I'm thinking you're trying to distance yourself from something.

But if in fact you honestly are trying to get a bunch of stranger kinksters to agree with you that there is some sort of ethical code beyond "An It Harm No One, Do As Thou Will" let me assure you that most of us have hammered this shit out for ourselves, and you've been getting personal statements for a reason.

C.F "Sex Positivism"

 

[njlauren]

It think it actually is an interesting question, and I think it is very, very hard even to express our own beliefs in it, and I thank you, Amanda, for bringing it up. It isn't just limited to kink, I ran into this in my own life as a trans person (I was faced with the very real reality of my own needs/protecting myself, and what I thought I needed to do, versus what that would do to people I loved very much, and in the end had a very difficult decision to make, and took a lot of shit for my decisions from people in the so called T community for the choice I did make, so I more then understand the dilemmas, and also the emotions Amanda and others are expressing...put it this way, just writing this dredges up a lot of old pain)

The answer is I think everyone thinks about this in a personal way, they think about their own lives (a dominant with a sub/slave, a sub having a hard time reconciling what they do versus what society tells them), and I think that comes down to trying to do what is right for ourselves, which is all said and good.

I think the hard part is looking at it outside our own experience, and that is where it gets difficult. I agree totally about the idea of as long as it does no harm, it is good, or that it is consensual, but you still run into gray areas, and it is where personal morality/ethics, clash with what others do, and is what makes it so hard.

For example, there are people on here who practice what is called meta consensent D/s relationships, where in effect the only consent the sub has is to say yes to the being the sub/slave. If the dominant wants to do anything , the idea there is consent, no matter what, and according to some, that would include the scenario if the sub really being hurt, psychologically, physicallly, whatever (one urban myth story, ensconced in plenty of fictional tales, of the dom who sell his sub into true white slavery, or breaking bones or whatever). For many, including myself, that would break the bonds of libertarian thinking, that white slavery is illegal, selling someone is illegal and the act turns the sub from being a person to being truly an object, or with breaking bones or killing, obvious harm.......and to be honest, to myself personally, I would have a very hard time about situations like this, if I knew about them/saw them in personal life, it would be very hard not to act, even if the sub claimed they consented to it.....I haven't quite faced that in real life, but it would be hard, because my first instinct is to protect people from when I think things are over the line.

On the other hand, where do you draw that line? There are people, for religious grounds, who think that BD/SM itself is evil, who think they are doing evil things, they are very sincere about it. The religious right believes in their hearts they have a duty to enforce biblical morality (or their idea of it) on everyone else, that gays should be put in jail or concentration camps and so forth,and they believe this is right. There are types who believe you can never consent to the kind of activities we do in BD/SM play, and will prosecute if they get a complaint, and it isn't just the bible belt. A case happened like that in NYC, where the kink community is not exactly underground or non existent, where a guy was prosecuted for sexual and physical abuse in what apparently was a consensual tryst. The ADA in the case, who headed the sex crimes unit at the time, basically stated that it didn't matter, that abuse was abuse ). Thanks to a judge from the cro magnon period, e-mails from the 'victim' that showed it was consensual, were suppressed (on apppeal, the appelate court censored the judge for doing that) and the trial was thrown out and Morgenthau refused to bring it to trial again. But the point is, the ADA, who I know of directly through a relative who worked for her,was sincere, she really believed that when it came to sex, that the burden of proof that it was legal rested on the perp to prove, not the other way around, and that certain things couldn't be consented to...the BD/SM community breathed a sigh of relief when she retired). They are just sincere it is right and wrong...

My answer? In a broad scale, you weigh what you see as right and wrong, weigh that against what others are doing, wrestle with the right of others to live their life as they see fit, give a lot of weight to that right, and then, and only then, act if you absolutely feel it is wrong..and be prepared to take shit from someone for doing what you felt was right. Individual freedom is such a strong thing, especially in the BD/SM community, and it has to be a major factor in looking at others relationships.And yes, it is hard to judge others and not think "but then, who am I to judge", but in my case, and I speak for myself, it takes where I truly believe someone is getting truly hurt that i would step in and hope I am right.

There was a discussion on another board in a slightly different way. There is a case in NYC that was just finished, where a cop has fantasies of kidnapping women, killing them and eating them. The guy was arrested after his wife found out about his stuff (on the net I believe...), which included her in the list of his fantasies. Key to the case, the cop had used a federal database supposedly for official business, to look up some of the women on his 'list', he actually met some of them in cafes and such, and he talked to other people online about it, and asked for help.. He also supposedly offered someone else 5k to help act this out... He was convicted. His lawyer argued that it was nothing but a fantasy, that actually planning it, talking to people about it, researching it, was all part of the mega fantasy. Most people, like myself, disagreed, that when he stepped over the line of talking or fantasizing but started to act, especially using a work resource to illegally search for 'victims', he stepped over the line.

At least one person argued that he was arrested for his fantasy, for his thoughts, since he hadn't actually done anything. Legally, the cops were within their grounds, but his argument was basically we don't know if it ultimately was a fantasy or not, that he could have even if planning to really do it, stop at the last moment, but we won't know because he was arrested in the planning stages. He argued the cops should have tailed him, waited until he tried to act and nail him. (course, I think he watched too much law and order, and didn't realize it isn't that easy, and is time consuming and expensive, and he could wait them out, till they pulled off, and then struck). What I said was this is a matter of personal safety, that it is all great and good to say arrest someone only when they have committed a crime, or are caught in the act, but when it comes down to public safety you can't take that risk. If a husband hires a hit man to kill their spouse, they can't argue nothing happened, or that 'he probably would have called it off......the other guy kept saying the guy was convicted for a fantasy, though, and there is a point there, and what it boils down to is that there comes a point where his right to a fantasy ends and protection of others rights to not be raped, killed and eaten are.

Amanda, thank you, it is a hard topic and I think it is valuable to talk about it. It also gave me some pain as well, but that isn't a bad thing, either, other then some tears on the keyboard.

PS- What Stella was referring to is the reaction more then a few women hasve with male dom/female sub/slave relationships, that traditionally women were in effect slaves to their husband, that he was assumed to be dominant , 'in charge', and that seeing a D/s like that brings up images of that tradition to them, and makes them uncomfortable that the F sub is 'playing out' the traditional role.(all you have to do is look at the Southern Baptist and evangelical ideas of what a wife is, to see what she means, where God meant a man to be in charge, it is a wife's duty to obey, you name it......). I can understand it, but one thing I have learned about most f subs, and being an s myself, few of them are playing it out 'traditionally', they are usually pretty strong, intelligent people who know what they want and need..not all, but that is true of male subs, too, more then a few headcases there, too

 

[graceanne]

.

And you know what is really weird? Every time, and in every place, I ask questions that adult human beings should have long ago asked themselves, everyone goes all weird, as if I am using words that have no meaning. .

I didn't get weird. I explained it to you as I see it. You didn't like my answer, so I'd say you're the one who's getting weird. Get over yourself, you aren't the first person to ask these questions - you're not that special. And if NO ONE is answering your question, then maybe it's YOU who needs to work on you communication skills.