We Can't Consent to This: all the "sex game gone wrong" defences

[WomanDaresTo]

Hello - doing this under my semi-public NC.

On FWR we've been grimly collating the stories of women killed by men who claim they've died in a "sex game gone wrong". Given Natalie Connolly's killer's sentence has received rightful outrage, and given even the excellent Harriet Harman thinks this is an unusual defence, I thought it time to pull them together in one place:

www.wecantconsenttothis.uk

It's not a fun read, of course. I know it's not also complete - will keep updating but do of course let me know of other cases, and mistakes.

But perhaps we can help get to a place where women are not deemed to have consented to bodily harm, or to death.

and unmumsnetty Christmassy hugs to the families and friends of these women.

if anyone wants me I'll be having a humungous

Thank you for doing this, OP

Slightly off topic... NZ have made strangulation a separate offence (I read) Recognising how often it is used in dv and giving courts power to prosecute on a specific offence that is known to escalate to death in such situations. I wonder if that specific offence protects against the sex game gone wrong defence if caused by strangulation.

If the UK is so keen to copy self-I'd and trans laws around the world, perhaps we could follow NZs lead in this.

Thanks for compiling the list OP.

I don't know how to protect my daughters from this.

BoreofWhabylon

Thanks - it was very traumatic, not only because of the shocking nature of the crime, but because of the difficulties of getting what I believed to be justice for the victim. And it doesn't bear thinking about what her family and friends have suffered.

The police in this case were incredibly frustrated by the CPS. They told me that it was either a matter of going along with the fairytale story the CPS preferred or not having a prosecution at all. I now wonder how often that happens.

With regard to lack of jury sympathy, I noticed in the months after it happened that a lot of people seemed to think it sophisticated to say 'ah...sex game gone wrong, well, those are the risks' in a nod-nod-wink-wink kind of way, as if striking that attitude marked them out as knowing sexual outlaws (or something). These people had no idea of the level of violence inflicted.

This could be such an important campaign. Things have gone way too far, and the 'sex game gone wrong' defence has become a killers' charter.

That is a beautifully simple and heart wrenching website. I have shared it with friends and hope it will be shared far and wide.

Holy fuck dotdot. Thank you so much for telling us that.

I'll process properly over the next few days- for now.

There's a thread on AIBU which is, in some ways, about the issue of "deemed consent".

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3458137-Just-a-rant?pg=1

One of the parts of it is that if women sign up for dating sites, even if they are veteran enough to state, "No dick pics" in their profiles, they receive them. Because that is the new social reality, from teenage through to older users.

So, in a world where a high number of women on a general dating site (I assume some of the more niche ones might not) receive unsolicited dick pics...does this reinforce the landscape that women are incorporated into men's sexual fantasies and sense of permissiveness and entitlement, no matter what? And, if this is accepted, does this reflect part of the difficulty in getting a jury to convict?

Yes I think, given how "easy" it is for "rough sex games to go wrong" and the woman to end up dead, then we should campaign for strangulation and any force that is enough to cause injury to be illegal.

I am trying to think of equivalents here which are considered risky and might cause harm if it goes wrong - speeding, class A drugs, flying without a licence?

I don't think those are very good examples!

Bungee jumping is the equivalent I've been thinking of Sonic

"Omg bungee jumping might be fun"
"I totally want to try bungee jumping"

But that implies there should be safety rules and obligations for sexual strangulation - and tbh I don't think you can make it safe.

Heartbreaking to read. I had no idea quite how widespread this defence has become.

I fucking hate men right now.

There's also the fact that women and girls are pressured/groomed into thinking that 'violent sex' is what they have to do to please their (abusive) partners. So often when they are consenting to it, it's not often (usually? Ever?) for their own pleasure.

Me too Seahorse. A friend of mine worked for Women's Aid and one day she said she fantasized about taking a machine gun and shooting men on the street because they were all guilty of something. She was in no way serious about the gun but I got exactly what she meant.

It doesn't stop it being made, but there are already laws around porn that prohibit filmsthat show things like strangulation and other abuse. I'd argue a strict liability should apply to any banned act that results in real life harm - so it doesn't matter whether the injured party consented or not, if you hurt them, you are culpable.

As an aside, it's interesting reading some of the coverage from the time that the law was changed to ban these additional acts from UK porn - "they're not dangerous, you're just being prudish" seems to be the common theme, such as in this Independent article

Jeez, that article, Olenna.

the measures appear to take aim at female pleasure.

Then follows a list of things like:

Strangulation
Fisting
Physical and verbal abuse
Aggressive whipping
Humiliation
Role-playing as children ("non-adults")
Penetration by an object associated with violence...

Yeah, that all sounds really pleasurable for women. We'll really miss being able to make or watch porn that include those activities.

And I'd suggest that the fact that these acts are being described as being things females enjoy is why we have such a high proportion of teens and young men who have no idea what enjoyable sex is, and why we keep hearing about incidents where a woman is injured after rape being described as "consensual sex".

Fuck sake.

It shouldn't be allowed to be used as a defence.
It isn't a defence.
Even if the woman was into BDSM, a man who does her harm must be held completely responsible for his actions.

That was a very disturbing read.

I might be being stupid, but I don’t understand how legally the “sex game gone wrong” defence actually works? I’m not being obtuse, I genuinely don’t get this.

If I gave someone a lift in my car and cause an accident by driving dangerously and my passenger dies, I can be prosecuted for Death by Dangerous Driving even though the person got into my car willingly.

Surely by entering into a “sex game” which means there’s a use of force, the person in control has a responsibility to manage the situation in order to avoid bodily harm (or worse) to the other party?

The CPS needs to be questioned very closely about why it went for manslaughter rather than murder - very violent murder.

Sick at this case and all the others.

WomanDaresTo
Can't Consent to This: all the "sex game gone wrong" defences

Thank you for doing this. It is a totally sick defence.

Well quite, Sonic

Of course I'm sure we all remember that Jane Fae led a campaign against the extreme porn law. The same Jane Fae that said most femicide was just domestic violence gone wrong and blamed women for our eggshell skulls.

Funny how that phrase 'gone wrong' pops up again. Such a neutral term but also implies that anything up to murder is just fine. It only goes wrong if the woman dies.

We urgently need an overhaul of the laws around sexual assault.

OP can you change the font colour on the section pictured? Viewing on Chrome mobile.

Such a shocking and heartbreaking read. All absolutely awful, two things stood out to me 1) how many of these men had just met the women they killed. 2) how many killed them by strangulation.

OP can you change the font colour on the section

Yes, thanks so much for this. Should be fixed now.

And HAPPY CHRISTMAS