|
candystripper -> Magicial Thinking and Risk (11/3/2008 2:22:01 AM)
|
The term 'magicial thinking' refers to a belief which is based on flawed interpretation of data or misplaced assumptions about the existence of data. A belief that no one of Spanish descent can suffer heart disease is an example of 'magicial thinking'.
Risk, for the purposes of this Op, is exposure to the consequences of criminal transgression.
IMO, many people on CM have some 'magicial thinking' about risk.
Men seem to believe they have nothing to fear, particularly from women.
* Some men have profiles with statements to the effect that 'I have not uploaded a picture here because I need to be discreet, as I have a promnent position in my community'.
To a malevolent reader, this telegraphs that a CM member may be a desirable target for blackmail, extortion, etc.
* Some men have profile pictures of themselves in front of expensive vehicles or homes. Many go on to state in their profiles 'I am a very successful man, both financially and in my personal life'.
BDSM is not going to insulate anyone from identity theft, etc.
* Many men have stated they will travel to meet a woman in another city and hope to 'play' with her on a first date.
* Many men have profiles which state that 'they want the submissive to live with them' and 'would be willing to help her move'.
To a malevolent person, these statements reveal that the man is willing to be face to face, behind closed doors, with a stranger.
It's a myth that all serial killers are male. Because this myth is often taken as an article of faith by law enforcement as well as the general society, it seems inescapable that the linkage between victims necessary to identify an active predator is not made as often when the victims are male.
There are an unknown number of battered men in this country, just as there are battered women. (Unknown because most pundits believe it remains highly underreported and underprosecuted when it is reported.) Most battered men are battered by women, it is believed.
The impluse to batter a partner is a relationship is not a consequence of alcoholism or poverty. The causes of such criminal behavior are not well-understood, but probably mirror the 'causes' forensic psychology has 'identified' for other types of serious sexual sociopathy.
A batterer is nothing more or less than a type of sexual predator who has a victim preference and signature in which he or she *prefers* to batter the one they are *in a relationship with* and to do so over and and over. It's unusual to for a criminal to *prefer* to victimize the same target over and over, but it's not unheardof either. This is similar to what stalkers do.
Like male batterers, the first step a female batterer takes to acquire a victim is to *isolate the target from their support and resources*. When a man invites a stranger into his home or hotel room, he has self-isolated -- the predator need not go to great lengths to accomplish a part of the process of victim acquisition.
Without going into as much detail, IMO, other types of magical thinking float around CM and BDSM in general.
* The belief that *we* are a community and as such, we are disinclined to harm one another.
Violent criminals are, pretty obviously, not people who conform their conduct to the expectations of their society. People with the sociopathy to commit violent crimes are not unintelligent. They go where the victims they prefer are likely to be found and they are likely to escape detection.
As a group, we are *conditioned* to believe *your kink is okay*. Violent acts that society at large will not accept don't raise our eyebrows. This makes *us* desirable to criminals as a victim pool, because we may not react to deter or report violent crimes in a way other people might.
* The belief that anyone can *know* anything about a stranger they have not met.
The truth is, without the ability to reality-test, none of us can *know* facts about a stranger. Reality-testing is extremely difficult to do at a distance. Statements such as "I had his work and personal infomation before I met him' are flawed. Until you meet someone and observe them in their environment, it is very, very hard to *know* whether anything claimed about background, education, marital status, financial status, etc., is actually true.
A better way to put this would be "I hoped what he told me was true, and I had no signal that it was not'. Indeed, it is likely that the assertions made are true. IMO, the chances are better than 50/50 that anyone here is just what they claim to be and seeks what they claim they seek. By the same token, I think the risk that misrepresentation is occurring is high too; maybe around 25/75. While a majority of those who engage in misrepresentation are obviously not criminals, some are.
* The belief that some characteristic claimed by a CM member renders them 'safe' or somehow unable to commit crimes.
Haven't we learned from the Catholic priest scandals, etc., that no matter what outward characteristic or role a person may have or fill, we cannot blithely assume they mean us no harm?
Statements like 'it is safe to meet a Pro Domme', IMO, are flawed. No one is above suspicion, regardless of what may be *known* about them. When we use such statements, we telegraph to a malevolent reader that such-and-such might be a most exellent pose to assume in order to transgress without consequence.
* The belief that we are not at risk of violence when a 'scene goes wrong', ' my safeword was ignored' , 'my submissive disobeyed me', etc.
If you have not consented or withdraw your consent to any touching, you have been transgressed against just as anyone else in this society would be. IMO, *we* often speak of *'relationship issues', 'differences in the dynamice we need', 'trust issues' in ways that cloud the fact that what happened was some form of sexual violence.
There is no insulation from the risk of rape or other type of criminal violence *merely* because the perpetrator cloaks themselves in the grab of BDSM. How could there be? If that were true, wouldn't defense lawyers be arguing all their clients were into BDSM?
It is not an excuse to any crime that the victim consented if in fact they did not.
*Tips hat to another poster for the idea for this Op.
candystripper [sm=pole.gif]
.
|
|
|
|
