CallaFirestormBW
Posts: 3651
Joined: 6/29/2008 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark Does not exist. It's used to make BDSM more acceptable and presentable. People make the claim that a BDSM relationship is completely consensual. It might be consensual (at a streatch) between the couple(or more if poly) involved, but if it was completely consensual - then why are people so concerned what others think? How many people have families and are involved in BDSM? How many orphaned people with no friends who would be no burden on the 'system' are there practising wiitwd? If BDSM is so consensual - why isn't it accepted? the.dark. The concept of -legal- consent is, in fact, a fallacy. In most places it is not -possible- to consent to assault/battery. Therefore, if one is being -struck- or emotionally, physically, or mentally battered (according to the legal definition of those terms), whether or not one consented to the act in question, there is no legal recourse. The -concept- of legal consent when applied to WIITWD is a fallacy. On the other hand, there -is- the issue of 'voluntary acceptance/voluntary agreement' in BDSM (also called 'consent', which becomes very confusing). It is not a -legal- concept, but -does- acknowledge that person A did -agree- to what is being done to hir. This is the -only- context in which the BDSM term 'consent' makes any sense. It is not a -legal- term, but is a term of convenience, noting that person A recognizes what is happening, and accepts the occurence by either verbal statement, written acknowledgment, or by continuing participation. Under these terms, what is happening in relationships like props -is- consensual. Despite the fact that there is no -legal- ground on which to stand (just as there cannot be legal ground in -any- case revolving around BDSM, if the individual in question agrees to continue to participate, then xhe is -giving- consent. Calla Firestorm
< Message edited by CallaFirestormBW -- 9/26/2008 3:47:11 PM >
|