Hey, Can A Woman "Ask To Get Raped"?

1987, that's really bang up to date, anything since?

So you do wish to set the rules for adults consensual sexual conduct and send those who do not obey those rules to prison.

Thanks for coming out of the closet.

It still is the current law of your nation..

it is clear that a whole lot of us were overly optimistic when we proclaimed that the government was getting out of the sex regulation business when we decriminalized homosexual acts. The minders are back in force, worse than we have seen in a long time. Britain and Australia are the two worst offenders I think, but the good ol USA is not far behind.

There are people like Izzy and Firefly that for whatever reason wish to control other adults consensual sex lives under the color of the law.

With special note of Firefly wish to turn adult women into children that need legal protections from themselves as well as their partners.

As I said, this is all about your concern with your preference for BDSM sexual activity.

However, this thread is not concerned with people's sexual preferences--whether it's for BDSM or exclusively oral or anal sex--it's about existing laws that govern the illegality of sexual contact without consent.

Until a legislative body in the U.S. actually proposes or debates a law saying one cannot consent to being abused, you are complaining about activity that is apparently not currently illegal here. BDSM is also an issue that involves many forms of physical contact which have nothing to do with actual sexual contact per se, even though sexual arousal might be involved. Consenting to physical abuse is a quite different issue than consenting to sexual contact. So your concern, while of obvious importance to you personally, really has little or nothing to do with this particular topic.

Consensual has been redefined...it used to mean "I agreed", now it means "the government mandated procedures for procurement were followed".

it has everything to do with the topic.....who decides what me and my partner do, us, or the government?

This topic is about sexual contact--particularly sexual contact that violates sexual assault/rape laws. And the law defines and describes the type of sexual contact involved in sexual assaults/rapes.

Physical abuse is not sexual contact--it's contact of a different sort.
The issue of whether one can consent to physical abuse is quite different and apart from issues of consent involving sexual contact.

If you get erotically aroused by being beaten, and you experience orgasm simply from being beaten, you have not engaged in any sexual contact, as sexual contact is defined in the sexual assault laws. No one would be charged with any violation of sexual assault law.

I see nothing in the sexual assault laws that pertains to anything having to do with sexual arousal, or methods of sexual arousal--these laws pertain only to actual sexual contacts and when these contacts are deemed illegal. Physical abuse is an entirely separate issue.

You can't find anything more recent than 1987. The Archery law is still the law of the land but you're not kicking up a song and dance about that.

I don't give a monkeys what people get up to in their own rooms. If someone is maimed because the other person went too far, beyond what originally consented to, then they should have the protection of the law. Consenting adults don't go to the police, and can always refuse to testify against their assailant.

You're saying that people like Hawkeye should be able to whatever they want to do, as long as they claim they got consent. "She consented to having her throat cut with piano wire, it was one of her fantasies."

Sorry your nation laws have turn a whole class of your citizens into criminals due to their private and consensual sexual conduct where any law enforcement officer can get a bug up his ass one morning and arrested them.

Not a comfortable position for anyone to be in.

Hawkeye is trying to promote acceptance of behaviors that can cause serious or permanent injuries or even death--and he wants these acceptable as legitimate legal sexual behaviors between consenting adults. But, in fact, the types of things he refers to are not sexual contacts, they are forms of physical abuse. That he finds such things sexually arousing is quite beside the point, abusive physical contacts are not sexual contacts as sexual contacts are legally defined.

I knew someone who engaged in "consensual" asphyxiation with a partner, for purposes of sexual arousal. Unfortunately, on one occasion, it went too far and the partner died. Did it matter that this was allegedly the outcome of a consenting activity between two adults? No. The person I knew was arrested, charged, prosecuted, and convicted, for causing the death. And it wasn't regarded as a "sex crime--it was considered a reckless act, without sufficient regard for the welfare of another, that resulted in a death, and it was prosecuted under the murder laws.

Hawkeye is trying to claim that physical abuse is the same as sexual contact, simply because abuse is sexually arousing for him, but he's making an illogical connection in that regard. They are two separate issues--legally. Which makes his concerns about the legality of consenting to physical abuse way off the topic of this thread.

This thread, as you understand, but Hawkeye and BillRM don't, is about the issue of consent regarding sexual contact as it is defined in the sexual assault/rape laws. Those laws have nothing to do with physical abuse, or consent for such abuse.

I am claiming that the government has no juristiction in our bedrooms (erotic life) except in extreme cases once all parties either agree to activities beforehand, or fail to depart those activities.

You're a paranoid idiot. Do you have problems sleeping?

There's a club in SF where you can watch people do this. It's a Bondage / Sadio seeming set up wherein consenting adults, in various stages of undress, whack each other with whips or canes and whatnot.

If your "erotic life" involves all sorts of tools and techniques for inflicting physical pain and abuse, you are not talking about the reality of sexual assault/rape laws, which have nothing to do with such things. The sexual assault/rape laws pertain only to clearly defined sexual contacts, not to other types of physical contacts, including physical contacts involved in the infliction of pain, which would come under criminal battery laws.

Because you choose to include things in your "erotic life" that go beyond what the sexual assault laws pertain to, does not make these things sexual contacts as the law defines those. You're concerned about consenting abuse, I started this thread to discuss the issue of when sexual contacts violate sexual assault/rape laws.

If you want to discuss issues regarding consensual physical abuse, and when physical abuse should not be seen as violating criminal battery laws, then start your own thread to do that. That's not what this topic is about. And, if you can't understand that, you really don't understand this topic either.

Sure the UK government keep laws on the book for the fun of it but at anytime they could get bore and employ any of them.

As far as the UK S&M laws are concern they the same as the former do not ask and do not tell gay laws in the US military as long as you fly under the radar you are likely to be safe but do now dare to be as open as anyone else can be about your sexuality or you could find yourself in a jail cell.

Not a good way to have to live in my opinion.

Hawkeye is well into the BDSM scene, Lash. I'm sure he could tell you about a lot of places like that one.

And his concerns that the law will brand him a criminal for his BDSM activities, have nothing to do with sexual assault/rape laws. It's all about the fact he fears the infliction of physical pain, which he enjoys, will be made illegal. So, he attacks all sexual assault/rape laws, even though they have nothing to do with the infliction of pain or its legality, they pertain only to actual sexual contacts, and not to other physical contacts or other physical assaults, done for sexual arrousal.

Did you see this post by Hawkeye:


None of the above has anything to do with sexual assault/rape laws. Sexual assault/rape laws pertain only to sexual contacts not to other types of physical contacts, or physical abuse. When you're talking about "beating tools", you're talking about physical assault and battery, not sexual contact as sexual contact is defined in the sexual assault/rape laws.

FF,

I have to say immediately that I think that BDSM behavior can easily be linked to sexual contact and sexual abuse issues. Certainly quite compelling that consenting adults are being told what they can and cannot do in their privacy!!? Are you kidding?

However, if you just don't like this aspect of your topic, it is your thread. I won't talk about it more here.

there are actually quite a lot of people justifying government control on the argument that people who are abused often latter go into BDSM. The argument goes that all "consented too" BDSM activities that take place after the abuse are conditioned responses caused by the abuse, so anyone taking part in these ostensibly consensual acts with the "victim" is actually a "re-abuser". This train of thought is a continuation of a pattern of behavior that we see with the rape feminists, where they insist that control must be removed from the "victims" in order to save them. You see this too in the demand that we cant be sexual after drinking or doing drugs, women need to be "saved" from sex that they might latter regret by criminalizing sex while under the influence. The fact that it is only the men who are punished is a nifty ancillary benefit, as it is always a good time to beat on men.

If they get away with this next up will be forbidding us from being sexual if we are not in our " right mind", what ever they determine that to be.

Now is the time to set down some boundaries, now is the time to tell the feminist/government alliance to butt out.