Aswad -> RE: When does BDSM become unhealthy or destructive (7/3/2008 6:09:33 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MasterHermes The issue is the involvement of a second party. Actually, you're dead wrong here. The second party is the party making a decision that they should (IMO) have the right to make. The first party is carrying out what the second party has decided. In that, you have a situation that is little different from if the second party were to do it themselves (in fact, inthe OPs example case, the second party was doing it themselves). And you might want to look a bit closer as to the whole "influence" bit. We are all influenced by events in our lives and the people around us. The extent varies, but the principle is the same. Some of the hypotheticals you mentioned are not merely influencing someone, but actual extortion. Obviously, if you hold a woman at gunpoint and tell her to blow you, that isn't consent, but rape. Sure, she could take the bullet instead, but that choice is a fair bit beyond merely being influenced in a direction: it's extortion. And extortion with violent means to obtain sex is one of the things we call rape. And in interpersonal relationships, we are influenced by love, which many consider the highest aspiration of human endeavours. As such, it seems ludicrous to posit that love is an invalid motivation for sacrifice. For that matter, due to the nature of the process of acquiring language, which takes place at a preconventional stage of moral development, the entire foundation of human verbal communication rests on the characteristic of using words to elicit a predicted response. In effect, the payload is a response, not information. "Manipulation" and "influence" are words used to describe a situation where the response elicited, or the motives for eliciting it, are considered unwelcome by the recipient, or by societal norms. In short, influence is irrelevant. Extortion is not. Health, al-Aswad.
|
|
|
|