Safety; Beyond Slogans.

Pure

Fiel a Verdad
Joined
Dec 20, 2001
Posts
15,135
Safety*** --Beyond Slogans

This thread focuses on one concept, not a whole slogan, in the interests of clarity.

There are legal duties, in normal circumstances, not to do something that brings another into (danger of) substantial bodily harm** or death; or—where there is a duty—to omit to do such a thing.

There are exceptions such as bar fights and boxing matches.

Unless you are saving a person from greater harm, or as a medical person, doing something necessary, you (generally) can't cut off someone's finger. (Even if they ask, request, agree, consent, beg, plead, direct and so on.)

For oneself, there are few or no such duties. It is, for instance, quite legal to cut off your own finger. Or ski down the most dangerous slope in the world after one's first ski lesson.

Consider then, the pervert(top) who wants to or is willing to agree to do something possibly dangerous to another. In one set of cases s/he can minimize or eliminate bodily harm, and so there's no problem. Do not use a whip that's too heavy or for too long.

However, for another set of cases, there may be no possible precautions against some of the harms:

The pervert who wants to inflict serious pain who has connected with the one who wants to experience it, then are in a peculiar situation. It's _unlike_ a fight or boxing match. Rather it's like Kevorkian meeting someone who wants to kill her- or himself. (If they both do as they want, and as they agree with informed consent, they still violate the law.) In a sense the one willing to inflict is often more in danger than the other. (Kevorkian does the hard time.) This was not true in the "Spanner" case, in UK, however, inflictor and inflictee were charged.

The professional dom/me is perhaps more aware of this than the amateur, and will usually be quite unwilling to put someone in hospital (who's consented) and risk being charged. S/he then is sometimes gentler than may be wanted by the 'sub.'

How does one, as inflictor, stay legal: A) Stick with the milder activities, be gentle, and take adequate precautions.

B) Other than being (physically) gentle, is there legal way for one to carry out the inflictions of harsher/more harmful events? The only thing I can think of is for the dom/me to merely attend the infliction of bodily harm, where the sub has self-inflicted it. The dom/me can witness the severing of a testicle, and receive it, but not do the severing.

Perhaps one overall solution, IMO, is to avoid substantive bodily harm. Though bodies may meet, be a mental top only. There are no laws, for instance, against shaming or degrading another; creating uncertainty (though there are laws against making someone afraid, by threatening bodily harm or death).



---

**non trifling impairment of health or normal functioning
*** This is not personal legal advice. I am not a lawyer, but I do read the law and relevant commentaries and literature.
 
Last edited:
personally my view on this is to only do those kind of activities that could get you in trouble with the law, with people you seriously trust and who can trust you.

there are things that i want to do that fall under the category you're talking about. not life threatening by any means-but something the top could be charged for if the cops were suddenly to burst through the door and catch us doing it. (im talking about him doing something to me btw-a physical act to my body that would cause more injury than a light cut or bruise). im not going to deny myself those things i desire because ppl in law enforcement wouldnt understand or care that i consented to it. instead, i choose to find someone, get to know them, get to trust them absolutely and for them to trust ME absolutely (im talking about trust not to go past eachothers limits but im also in this case talking about trust on his part, that i wont decide to go to the cops afterwards and say "this person assulted me". once we've established that trust, then we can do the thing i wanted to do that is technically illegal.

i refuse to deny myself something i want, because the cops wouldnt understand. as long as two ppl are careful and can trust eachother, it shouldnt be a problem. in the privacy of my home and my bedroom, its MY decision what i, and my partner, do with my body :)
 
Fair enough, SSP, but keep in mind that, unlike the marijuana laws, the laws I'm referring to a not likely to change much or soon because of their inherent plausibility.

Further, it's come up in a couple threads, even 'trust' is not key, by itself, so much as 'security'; i.e., if someone or you goes in certain medical places with certain injuries, it could be taken out of the injured person's hands (as is the case with wife abuse).

You do seem aware, as many aren't, that 'consensual', esp. as in the slogan SSC, is not any kind of comprehensive protection, it's no kind of amulet; or 'go home free' card.

In any case, this thread is for awareness only, not to direct anyone to do anything.

:rose:

PS:

in the privacy of my home and my bedroom, its MY decision what i, and my partner, do with my body

This reminds me of the impregnation thread! 'The law isn't part of our world' folks. Though 'sanctity of bedroom' is getting to be a legal concept (i.e, privacy), it's far from fully realized. That sanctity slogan has been uttered by a number of folks who've ended up six feet under or facing four cold stone walls, over the ages, and througout the 20th century. YOUR view/opinion of an activity, even a bedroom one, is not necessarily legally determinative!!
 
Last edited:
Pure said:
Fair enough, SSP, but keep in mind that, unlike the marijuana laws, the laws I'm referring to a not likely to change much or soon because of their inherent plausibility.

Further, it's come up in a couple threads, even 'trust' is not key, by itself, so much as 'security'; i.e., if someone or you goes in certain medical places with certain injuries, it could be taken out of the injured person's hands (as is the case with wife abuse).

You do seem aware, as many aren't, that 'consensual', esp. as in the slogan SSC, is not any kind of comprehensive protection, it's no kind of amulet; or 'go home free' card.

In any case, this thread is for awareness only, not to direct anyone to do anything.

:rose:

PS:

in the privacy of my home and my bedroom, its MY decision what i, and my partner, do with my body

This reminds me of the impregnation thread! 'The law isn't part of our world' folks. Though 'sanctity of bedroom' is getting to be a legal concept (i.e, privacy), it's far from fully realized. That sanctity slogan has been uttered by a number of folks who've ended up six feet under or facing four cold stone walls, over the ages, and througout the 20th century. YOUR view/opinion of an activity, even a bedroom one, is not necessarily legally determinative!!

oh i know the laws arent going to change anytime soon-i wasnt saying they were. i was basically saying i dont give a fuck what the law says becsue i dont beleive the law is right :devil:

its true what you say about if i went to the hospital with certain injuries it could be taken out of my hands.i guess id just be really careful in that situation, not to go to the drs if i have suspicious injuries.

and yes youre right, i totally know that it doesnt meanj ack shit if i said it was consensual. i know "but i :::wanted::: him to hit me" isnt going to makem uch of an impression on the cops.

and on your last point-again, i know my view isnt legally determinative. but i dont care. im going to do what i want to do. id say this differs from the impregnation thread tho cuz im talking about adults consenting to activities..no kids invovled.
 
Reminds me of statutory. In my state of residence at the time, my first couple years of sexual activity fell under the "statutory rape" clause, as my partners were over 18 and I was certainly not. It's shaky ground, and ground on which my partner could have suffered under the law--my parents knew about it and could have taken it into their own hands had they so desired, regardless of the fact that I did not. The trust he and I had in each other only goes to a certain point before we could have been "found out" and exposed if the party wanted to. I suspect it's much the same with non-legal BDSM acts, although I think it's probably easier to conceal the nature of sexual activity than it is to conceal that it happens at all.

I don't have anything profound to offer. It's a decision each person must make for themselves, even if that decision only occurs when they enter a relationship and hand that decision over to their dominant.
 
Good analogy Quint: The love and trust of the 18 and the 15 year old do not 'trump' the law. They are not in an 'own world outside the law', since as you mention, parents can 'pull the plug;' and which world the older male actually resides in, will become quite clear.

The point of this thread is to be aware of the landscape. It's much more healthy, for instance, IMO, to hear SSPrincess say, "Fuck the law; my actions are under wraps" than to hear someone saying "I'm SSC and believe I am legally well protected, since the slogan designers doped out--and addressed-- the (moral and) legal issues."
 
I think that the law is a blunt instrument and there's not a lot you can do about that.

Take hard drugs. People get into it through their friends, they get an induction into what it's about, they have great experiences. If it was legal a naive person in their first year of college could walk into a shop and fuck themself up.

Or age of consent. Obviously, it's not clear cut. You could shag a 16 year old here and it would be legal, or go to Holland and it's 14. But it would be hard not to have an age of consent.

It's good if the legal system can be reasonable and generally leave people alone unless there's a problem.
 
I think the 'taking hard drugs' is a fairly good analogy, and true one may have a great time, if it's not horse tranquillizer. But I'm sure you'd agree that even with 'friends' introducing one, a great time is not guaranteed, nor one free of legal hassles.

It's a good analogy in that your 'consent' (request) to be injected, your 'agreement' that someone inject you, etc., is far from the whole picture and in many cases arguably irrelevant.
 
sigsauerprinces said:
oh i know the laws arent going to change anytime soon-i wasnt saying they were. i was basically saying i dont give a fuck what the law says becsue i dont beleive the law is right :devil:

its true what you say about if i went to the hospital with certain injuries it could be taken out of my hands.i guess id just be really careful in that situation, not to go to the drs if i have suspicious injuries.

and yes youre right, i totally know that it doesnt meanj ack shit if i said it was consensual. i know "but i :::wanted::: him to hit me" isnt going to makem uch of an impression on the cops.

and on your last point-again, i know my view isnt legally determinative. but i dont care. im going to do what i want to do. id say this differs from the impregnation thread tho cuz im talking about adults consenting to activities..no kids invovled.

I have a different take on how i deal with things like this. If your health care profesional is told by you privately what type of lifestlye you live and how extreme, and then you go to see them 'cause you got beat to the point of needing some medical attention, why would they feel the need to involve the police if they dont suspect abuse? Its a win win situation...what you tell them about your lifestlye choice is confidential and since they know your choice its not a reason to think you are being abused. *shrug* ive notived that ppl into this seem afraid to inform their doc that they are. And this is just one way to help you and your partner to be partially safe from the law when you arent doing anything wrong.
 
My idea was that hard drugs are illegal, but there are places where it is well known that people take them here - clubs, raves, and it is usually tolerated unless there is another reason to crack down.

Everyone knows teenagers have sex, but the police aren't searching them out.

Maybe it's the same with shadier areas of alternative sexuality.

I do things that are illegal, but I don't think I want the law changed to make them legal.
 
Interesting analogy and statement, T. (without insinuating anything about you, I've heard it from prostitutes and dope dealers, both).

T: //I do things that are illegal, but I don't think I want the law changed to make them legal.//

I'd go along with this myself, in respect of bodily harm. I think the law draws the line in a pretty good place. If there are some SM folks do not want the law changed, maybe change is even less likely (since many ordinary people don't want a change either.)

The drift here, is quite opposite another thread (SSC and the Law) wherein a 'change the law' project is underway.

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=217567
 
Last edited:
Texture said:

I do things that are illegal, but I don't think I want the law changed to make them legal.

you know what..thats a really good point and one i hadnt thought of. part of the thrill of whats happening to me is that its illegal. that we have to keep quiet about it..that not many people would understand-that they'd think we're crazy or im being abused. that its to the extent that he could go to jail for it if he was caught. yes...i admit, thats a very big part of the thrill. along with the sheer physical sensation, my submission to him ect ect. so i think i agree with you..i wouldnt neccessarily want them made legal . but i wouldnt want them actively prosecuted, either.
 
Originally posted by sigsauerprinces

part of the thrill of whats happening to me is that its illegal

Fair enough. That isn't what I was getting at tho.
 
Back
Top