Consent is not the be-all and end-all

If you find a Dom who respects your boundaries and it’s all satisfying fun and games well you are never gonna press charges are you?

But that’s the whole fucking point!

The moment my Dom doesn’t respect my boundaries then it’s no longer consensual and I would press charges.

All I’d really advocate doing is handing all the legal power to the subs in this equation. If you find a Dom who respects your boundaries and it’s all satisfying fun and games well you are never gonna press charges are you?

This.

And that's an extremely poor analogy, and while I support male transsexuals and don't wish them to be discriminated against, harassed or abused, I don't want them in female spaces or claiming to be women either.

I agree with 99.9% of the OP. Unfortunately the definition of sadism/sadistic behaviour has become blurred especially in recent times. Originally the "S" in BDSM referred to the consensual act of inflicting/receiving pain or certain humiliation. Ergo: being spanked, even denying a woman orgasms, cuckolding. Within the community pain, and the whole aspect of sadism, is explored and interpreted and expanded. There are strict conditions, rules and soft/hard limits integrated into any BDSM encounter and put in place prior to the sexual encounter. The birth of fetish forums such as Fetlife have enabled people to detail their experiences and ensure they are being safe and providing security with people able to ask anything (rather similar to MN but on a sexual level) anonymously. Just trying to highlight this point of view, and I have unwavering unconditional respect for women, and consent.

also deeply, deeply, resent men who murder women claiming that they were is BDSM relationships and it was BDSM that killed their partners. No BDSM practitioner I have ever come across has any desire to do lasting or permanent damage to his or her partner.

That's not the point, is it? They're not claiming that women consented to be killed or they set out to kill them. They're claiming that it was accidental in the course of extremely risky sex practices. To get off a murder charge or mitigate.

Let me try and find an analogy.

I haven’t come across anyone on here who has an issue with live-and-let-live-pass-quietly trans men and women. Everyone agrees that they do no harm and should be allowed to go day to day without harassment or abuse.

Everyone, rightly, has a massive issue with TRAs and their allies who want to trample all over women’s rights.

The BDSM community is like the trans men and women in the first paragraph. We just want to get on with our lives in our own way.

This thread is behaving like the TRAs in the second paragraph. Wanting to take away my right to consent on the grounds that we’re the problem. When we’re not. Male violence in all its forms is the problem.

Just don’t criminalise me and mine.

Nobody is looking to criminalise you

However, the dialling back of societal acceptance may feel unpleasant. But unpleasant feelings should be something the community should be able to deal with...

I am reminded of this article:

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.dailydot.com/irl/kink-bdsm-consent-problem/

If some members of the BDSM community cannot see how their own “choices” can provide a smokescreen and cover for abusers of the worst kind I’m really at a loss how to proceed.

All I’d really advocate doing is handing all the legal power to the subs in this equation. If you find a Dom who respects your boundaries and it’s all satisfying fun and games well you are never gonna press charges are you?

I really don’t see what anyone stands to lose in this equation.

And, again, I’d be delighted to see society’s attitudes shift away from a casual acceptance of unwanted sexual violence, in every manifestation.

Just don’t criminalise me and mine.

Again, I have literally no experience if anyone in my community doing this (other than, at a pinch, invitation only gatherings of likeminded people - so certainly not in public).

And again, we aren’t talking about the BDSM community. We are talking about the general societal perception.

So work to shift the societal window, as someone eloquently put it. But don’t criminalise me.

Oh, and what I said 2 posts above that gatherings of likeminded individuals - I meant about celebrating (on indulging in) activities that cause bruises or humiliation.

I have never, ever, ever seen anyone forced to do anything unwillingly.

It isn’t about a single individual’s ability to consent.

Let’s say it again for those not quite getting it.

you can't consent once it's started

I certainly can withdraw consent at any point. It’s what safe words are for. They’re taken very, very seriously. I have two - one to warn that a boundary is close to being crossed and a second to say that the boundary has been crossed and that all activity must stop immediately. I’ve never had to use my second word.

Should we allow people to inflict paraphilias on unwilling participants? No, we shouldn’t. Should we ‘celebrate’ practices that cause injury or humiliation? No, we shouldn’t.

Again, I have literally no experience if anyone in my community doing this (other than, at a pinch, invitation only gatherings of likeminded people - so certainly not in public).

I don’t want my lifestyle validated. I’d be perfectly happy never mentioning it again if, as you say, no-one gave a shit.

But the fact that you’re posting on this thread shows that actually you do give a shit.

What I really, really don’t want is to have my sex life criminalised. Which is what this thread is advocating.

But please don’t patronise me by telling me I can’t consent.

you can't consent once it's started.

And, no, in principal i see no limits to the acts to which a person of sound mind can freely consent.

It isn’t about a single individual’s ability to consent.

It’s about the shift in the societal window of what’s acceptable.

Should we tolerate consenting adults doing whatever in private? Yes I think we should.
Should we allow people to inflict paraphilias on unwilling participants? No, we shouldn’t.
Should we ‘celebrate’ practices that cause injury or humiliation? No, we shouldn’t.

This is the problem isn’t it? There’s enough individuals who go ‘wah, I like being hit and I consent so who are you to say otherwise’ who seem utterly incapable of seeing past their own nose. Literally no one outside of you and your partner give a shit what you choose to consent to in private.

What the posters are saying on this thread is that by making violence against women in sex part of the norm, it enables people who don’t give a shit about boundaries and safe words to hurt women (and men) regardless of consent, say they consented if/when it goes wrong and walk away scot free. By adding to the noise because you want your lifestyle validated, you make it harder for women in general to be safe in sexual situations. The bdsm community should be making a stand if it’s so ethical, rather than whining about misrepresentation and that it’s nothing to do with them.

Blame porn, blame the media, blame abusive men, blame 50 Shades of Shite - I’m with you all the way.

But please don’t patronise me by telling me I can’t consent.

And, just to be clear:

• drunk or high = not consenting
• unconscious = not consenting
• underage = not consenting
• coerced = not consenting

But we already have laws that cover all of those situations.

And, no, in principal i see no limits to the acts to which a person of sound mind can freely consent.

FWIW BDSM people I know were keen to point out the book throws all their "safe, sane and consensual" framework out the window, and is abusive.

There is nothing that is safe, sane or consensual about bdsm.

I agree with every word you’ve written.

But not one single word says anything whatsoever about my ability to consent to what happens to my body by my choice.