The everything about rape topic.

[Homburg]

I have a number of patently problematic fantasies and thoughts and desires, as a perfectly average ape-id-human-thing.

My interest in incorporating them into my sex life usually rates low. I know for most people it rates higher, and that's fine.

But if you ask me not any ol' rape in a movie is hot. Just like not any 'ol kiss in a movie is sexy. Some are hot some are offputting some are just ho hum.

I Was going to make an example contrasting some of the promo still from Irreversible with the actual rape scene from the movie (promo pic was stupendously hot, scene was not), but, well, I got lost in a GIS for Monica Bellucci.

Mmmmmm.

 

[Shankara20]

I had the impression, from your prior post, that you saw the line between rape and not rape as crystal clear. In this post, you seem to acknowledge its fuzzy nature.

caught - I bow to your crafty stills at story set up.

I guess I will admit, given the story you posed, that the subject at hand might have a .000000001% fuzzy factor. That is one of the reasons for my "Not so much as he was not a predictor" answer.

Notice that you did not use a story that included getting her drunk or under the influence of a drug and it did include a rather established and elaborate agreement that fell apart, for her, at a problematic moment. I did not label him a rapist, but allowed that she might have experienced rape. (Does that make it a 1/2 rape?)

Your story had the required elements to file a rape charge in Kansas, as I understand our law. But given all the factors, including that she expects a 97% convection opportunity, our DA probably not file charges.

So fuzzy I am, just a very very little bit.

So, from your point of view, was anyone at fault and require punishment?

 

[Shankara20]

And yet, this Board is filled with examples from s-types who say: "My old dom abused me," or "My prior master made me feel terrible about myself, so I finally left."

Is that a reflection on bad s-types, or unskillful / bad D-types?

 

[Netzach]

Of course it doesn't disprove your point.

I'm just pointing out that consent issues can be (and often are) fuzzy in the kinky world, just as they can be (and often are) fuzzy in the non-kinky world.

The idea that rape has nothing to do with BDSM is an idea that I find silly. If rape = fucking without consent, and consent is a fuzzy issue for interactions of all flavors, it seems to me that the topic of rape is relevant on the BDSM, GLBT, GB, and any other sexual discussion board.

Never said "wow this is of no relevance." It's just weird to me that it's the practically the only sexual paradigm offered you if you're female and kinked. At all. Frankly this remains a large chunk of put-off for me, and I remain feeling freaky in that I've actively tried to work up a good rape fantasy for feeling abnormal not having one.

It's kind of like asking you to work up a good homo fantasy, I gather.

I function more on the "you can't rape the willing" principal in my own bottoming excursion.

 

[Shankara20]

Of course it doesn't disprove your point.

I'm just pointing out that consent issues can be (and often are) fuzzy in the kinky world, just as they can be (and often are) fuzzy in the non-kinky world.

The idea that rape has nothing to do with BDSM is an idea that I find silly. If rape = fucking without consent, and consent is a fuzzy issue for interactions of all flavors, it seems to me that the topic of rape is relevant on the BDSM, GLBT, GB, and any other sexual discussion board.

I agree - talking it out here can be very helpful. I'll admit, hold on to your hats, that even I have learned much from these discussions.

 

[Betticus]

That's the difference between the decent men who don't give into those urges and instead find a healthy alternative, and those filth that rape.

I think that all of us humans have within us the capacity for and willingness to commit every atrocity that has and ever will be perpetrated upon ourselves and others. We are all somewhere inside ourselves liars, cons, thieves, murderers, rapists, deviants, etc...

There is a difference between thinking about it and doing it.

 

[Homburg]

And yet, this Board is filled with examples from s-types who say: "My old dom abused me," or "My prior master made me feel terrible about myself, so I finally left."

This goes back to Marquis' idea that it's not abuse unless the s leaves the D.

--

The idea that rape has nothing to do with BDSM is an idea that I find silly. If rape = fucking without consent, and consent is a fuzzy issue for interactions of all flavors, it seems to me that the topic of rape is relevant on the BDSM, GLBT, GB, and any other sexual discussion board.

Then pedophilia, incest, and bestiality are likewise relevant here, and those people that crusade against such threads here, and against the BDSM boards being used as a dumping ground for any sort of kinky/edgy sexual topics should STFU.

The point I was making, very simply put, was that rape is not BDSM. It just shows up here all the time. Neither is it specifically a GLBT issue. It's a general sex thing. (The GB and rape probably go hand in hand though)

Rape is as relevant to BDSM as dog-fucking is.

 

[Homburg]

I think that all of us humans have within us the capacity for and willingness to commit every atrocity that has and ever will be perpetrated upon ourselves and others. We are all somewhere inside ourselves liars, cons, thieves, murderers, rapists, deviants, etc...

There is a difference between thinking about it and doing it.

I have never once in my life contemplated rape. The rest? Maybe once or twice...

 

[JMohegan]

caught - I bow to your crafty stills at story set up.

I guess I will admit, given the story you posed, that the subject at hand might have a .000000001% fuzzy factor. That is one of the reasons for my "Not so much as he was not a predictor" answer.

Notice that you did not use a story that included getting her drunk or under the influence of a drug and it did include a rather established and elaborate agreement that fell apart, for her, at a problematic moment. I did not label him a rapist, but allowed that she might have experienced rape. (Does that make it a 1/2 rape?)

Your story had the required elements to file a rape charge in Kansas, as I understand our law. But given all the factors, including that she expects a 97% convection opportunity, our DA probably not file charges.

So fuzzy I am, just a very very little bit.

So, from your point of view, was anyone at fault and require punishment?

Ha - I wasn't trying to trip you up, Shank. Just answering your previous "What am I missing?" question. Trying to help you understand why people sometimes see consent as a slippery fish.

From a legal perspective, I don't see two sets of laws - one for those who decide to call themselves M/s, and one for the rest of us. If the non-kinky woman, who whispers "take me home and fuck me" over dinner, has the right to revoke that consent once she gets in the guy's bedroom, then the kinky woman has the right to revoke consent too. If she revokes consent and he proceeds anyway, then it's rape according to my understanding of the law.

From a personal ethical perspective, I don't see this as a clear cut issue. If you're asking me if I believe the guy did something morally wrong, I'd say that depends on the details and circumstances of the case. All by itself, I do not consider "Hey, we're M/s" to be sufficient cover.

 

[JMohegan]

Is that a reflection on bad s-types, or unskillful / bad D-types?

I assume that by "bad" s-types, you mean those making irresponsible decisions or unhealthy commitments.

To answer your question, I'd say it depends on the situation. Perhaps one, perhaps the other, perhaps a bit of both. Or maybe they were just poorly matched. One person's abusive asshole could be another person's dream come true, no?

 

[JMohegan]

Never said "wow this is of no relevance." It's just weird to me that it's the practically the only sexual paradigm offered you if you're female and kinked. At all. Frankly this remains a large chunk of put-off for me, and I remain feeling freaky in that I've actively tried to work up a good rape fantasy for feeling abnormal not having one.

It's kind of like asking you to work up a good homo fantasy, I gather.

I function more on the "you can't rape the willing" principal in my own bottoming excursion.

I don't have fantasies of being raped. Always, I'm the aggressor. So I understand what you're saying here.

 

[Kajira Callista]

I would like to ask something. Will it be taken seriously if I do?


I'm gonna have to do it later though, when I can really word it all properly.

 

[Homburg]

From a personal ethical perspective, I don't see this as a clear cut issue. If you're asking me if I believe the guy did something morally wrong, I'd say that depends on the details and circumstances of the case. All by itself, I do not consider "Hey, we're M/s" to be sufficient cover.

From a legal perspective, no. The guy is fucked. All that it takes to be rape is an accusation made sufficiently forcefully, along with the physical evidence of struggle. And that is not always necessary. The typical M/s scene will provide enough evidence most likely.

From a moral/ethical perspective, and looking solely at whether or not our hypothetical M can look himself in the eye when he's shaving in the mirror the next day, it's not so clear. If he established a no-safeword paradigm, and included resistance play in his usual repetoire, and she gets a bit more combative than usual, it is reasonable to believe that it was a communication/judgement error on his part. That won't stop John Law, but it might mitigate things internally.

 

[Betticus]

Now, Coercion? Persuasion? I'm there. "No no no no no yes yes yes yes" sure thing.

I find that perhaps the hottest part of it (when I run the scenario in my head) is if the victim can be forced or manipulated into sex that she definitely does not want, being the instigator of said sex and having to perform to my satisfaction in order to get something that she does want.

Could be blackmail photos, she needs money to get herself out of trouble, I'm holding her teddy bear for ransom, etc...

And making sure that she knows that the more she hates it, the better it is for me.

 

[ecstaticsub]

So I go to a BDSM play party. I trust the folks that host the party. I'm feeling very submissive and sexual, more so then most other nights. My Dom knows my boundaries and my safewords. We know each other and trust each other. Dom goes to someone we have played with before and works out a forced sex scene with me as the object. Scene takes place - including having fluid boundaries respected. I'm "take" orally and anally several times. I'm bruised and ravished - and very happy when I'm finely taken home = not raped!

I'm in a bar having some drinks talking politely to someone I've noticed in the bar on other nights. I become over intoxicated. I'm taken to his house and fucked orally and anally several times without being asked. No condom was used. I'm bruised. I wake up feeling unclean, violated, and frightened. I make my way home alone = raped!

To me the difference is clear. What have I missed here?

As someone who has been the drunken person in a similar case like your second example it is not so clear, I still felt enough at fault not to even think about calling it "rape" (until recently)

 

[Netzach]

I find that perhaps the hottest part of it (when I run the scenario in my head) is if the victim can be forced or manipulated into sex that she definitely does not want, being the instigator of said sex and having to perform to my satisfaction in order to get something that she does want.

Could be blackmail photos, she needs money to get herself out of trouble, I'm holding her teddy bear for ransom, etc...

And making sure that she knows that the more she hates it, the better it is for me.

Yeah, I get it. I'm just kinked much more strongly to the "I really want things I don't want to want" thing and the more it's wanted, the more it has to be admitted to being wanted, the better.

Resistance, for me, ought to be brief, weak, and laughed at. I'm much more about admission/confession/acceptance than fight. I think I get enough combative interaction that I can absolutely banish it from my sex life happily. Maybe this is one of those binaries people function along.

 

[ZRT]

I'll cut to the chase- my personal belief is that there is no such thing, ethically, as absolute surrender of consent for a person with adequate mental function.

There are take-backs in these circumstances. Call it false slavery if you will, but no means no, regardless.

I'd argue that rape does fit into the BDSM umbrella, too. It's sex and power, which is the larger part of the whole 'lifestyle'. There are valid discussions to be had as to where it fits in as fantasy (consensual rape play), and where such matters fit into the categories of real abuses, such as the above scenario of the pyl changing her mind.

 

[Shankara20]

As someone who has been the drunken person in a similar case like your second example it is not so clear, I still felt enough at fault not to even think about calling it "rape" (until recently)

I understand how you felt. Many in that situation think it is their fault, when, in fact they were victimized.

 

[Betticus]

There are so many little twists and deviations that can either make or unmake the things that I'd like to try that it would be impossible to have them all or even come close.

When it comes right down to what I really need and want. I just want to be in love with someone who is just right for me and vice versa. The rest after that is just fun and I suspect that a lot of the darker things that I think about would melt away into insignificance.

 

[CutieMouse]

I would like to ask something. Will it be taken seriously if I do?


I'm gonna have to do it later though, when I can really word it all properly.

I'll take it seriously KC.

 

[Shankara20]

I'll cut to the chase- my personal belief is that there is no such thing, ethically, as absolute surrender of consent for a person with adequate mental function.

There are take-backs in these circumstances. Call it false slavery if you will, but no means no, regardless.

I have not said much in the past about my feelings, as they are just my feelings, but I am troubled about total power surrender and no safeword relationships. I feel everyone must have a way to say "stop" and have it respected.

This discussions is an example of why.

 

[Shankara20]

From a legal perspective, I don't see two sets of laws - one for those who decide to call themselves M/s, and one for the rest of us. If the non-kinky woman, who whispers "take me home and fuck me" over dinner, has the right to revoke that consent once she gets in the guy's bedroom, then the kinky woman has the right to revoke consent too. If she revokes consent and he proceeds anyway, then it's rape according to my understanding of the law.

Often it is not two set of laws, but how a jurisdiction chooses to apply the law. There is an amount of subjectivity in criminal law application. (Civil law is another matter.)

The BDSM community is not always treated as the straight vanilla community in assault cases.

 

[Homburg]

I'll cut to the chase- my personal belief is that there is no such thing, ethically, as absolute surrender of consent for a person with adequate mental function.

There are take-backs in these circumstances. Call it false slavery if you will, but no means no, regardless.

In my own relationships, and in those that I know well, if the slave starts really saying "NO!" (or seriously struggling, showing alarm, etc), action stops and assessment happens. I've said it before, and I've seen others say it before, I don't like safewords in my own play, as I would just rather listen, watch, and be aware. My girls don't have to safeword to stop a scene. They just talk to me. "My foot is going numb." "I'm really scared." Scene stops, I assess.

I'm sure there are those out there in BDSM-land that don't do this, but I doubt that the utter disregard for communication was all that prevalent in functional M/s relationships.

As to absolute surrender not existing, sure. Rational beings, sans serious damage to the psyche, retain will. You can be tied hand and foot, blindfolded, gagged, etc, and are still able to resist in your own mind. And? Absolute surrender, as strange as it may be to say this in the context of "total power exchange", is not an issue.

We are not engaging in modification of reality. We do not have legally binding, externally-recognised contracts. We are setting up a mutually agreed upon structure for the power dynamic within a relationship. The moment someone says no, it means it is time to reassess and renegotiate. Anything else is taking your chances that a badge will be knocking on your door shortly.

I'd argue that rape does fit into the BDSM umbrella, too. It's sex and power, which is the larger part of the whole 'lifestyle'. There are valid discussions to be had as to where it fits in as fantasy (consensual rape play), and where such matters fit into the categories of real abuses, such as the above scenario of the pyl changing her mind.

SSC = Safe, Sane, and Consensual
RACK = Risk-Aware Consensual Kink

These two acronyms are the by-words of most of BDSM at large, and at least considered best practices by most involved. The common thread between them is consent. Consensual rape play is to rape what consensual slavery is to the slavery practiced in 18th c America.

I can totally see threads discussing revocation of consent, and how this could lead to rape. I can totally see threads on rape play. But, no, we're just flat seeing threads on rape.

--

I have not said much in the past about my feelings, as they are just my feelings, but I am troubled about total power surrender and no safeword relationships. I feel everyone must have a way to say "stop" and have it respected.

This discussions is an example of why.

As mentioned above, "Stop" means "Stop", at least in my relationships.

I think "no safeword" is seen a bit monolithically. It is not practiced the same by everyone, and the lack of safeword does not connote a lack of communication. If anything, it requires more communication, or at least awareness of how the individuals involved function.

I dislike safewords to the extent that a bottom can wail and say no and scream and know that the top is not going to stop unless that safeword is used. That's roleplay to me. I am of the school of thought that says don't say "No" or "Stop" unless you mean it. Sure, some people get off on that sort of play, and more power to them, but that ain't me. If one of mine has a problem, they tell me. The expectation on their part is that they will communicate actual distress, not suffer through it until they get to that point where they would safeword.

I used to dislike No Safeword set-ups until I realised the concepts above. Once I did, I was fine with the idea, and preferred it.

 

[ZRT]

In my own relationships, and in those that I know well, if the slave starts really saying "NO!" (or seriously struggling, showing alarm, etc), action stops and assessment happens. I've said it before, and I've seen others say it before, I don't like safewords in my own play, as I would just rather listen, watch, and be aware. My girls don't have to safeword to stop a scene. They just talk to me. "My foot is going numb." "I'm really scared." Scene stops, I assess.

Your shows are different than my shows. I like safewords, unoriginal ones like 'safeword' because I like a bit of drama and RP, so yelling 'No please stop!' to me means that things are going quite nicely.

Functionally we operate the same way, though. Safeword means something's seriously going sideways and there's a real chance of damage being done, and that's a show-stopper. So long as the stop system is there, it's working under the safe and consensual framework. Everything past that is personal preference.

As to absolute surrender not existing, sure. Rational beings, sans serious damage to the psyche, retain will. You can be tied hand and foot, blindfolded, gagged, etc, and are still able to resist in your own mind. And? Absolute surrender, as strange as it may be to say this in the context of "total power exchange", is not an issue.

We are not engaging in modification of reality. We do not have legally binding, externally-recognised contracts. We are setting up a mutually agreed upon structure for the power dynamic within a relationship. The moment someone says no, it means it is time to reassess and renegotiate. Anything else is taking your chances that a badge will be knocking on your door shortly.

Even without the prospect of the visit from the law, the simple fact is that people can and do change their minds about things. What seemed like an awesome, sexy lifestyle six months ago can be a living hell today, and the opt-out is an ethical necessity.

I can totally see threads discussing revocation of consent, and how this could lead to rape. I can totally see threads on rape play. But, no, we're just flat seeing threads on rape.

Maybe it's more Cafe material than front page material.

 

[nh23]

Our dynamic is like your's Homburg. I don't have a safeword. I can't just say no because I don't feel like doing something. However I'm allowed and encouraged to say my foot is numb, or something doesn't feel right. He wants in plain English what the problem is. He then decides from there if it is something that needs to be changed or not.