Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site

Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Alternative Lifestyles in the News

Message

sskitten -> Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (10/13/2009 10:06:08 PM)
One description of the case is here: http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/13/scotus.sex.trafficking/index.html What are your thoughts/reactions to the story? Do you have any prediction about the outcome of the case and how the outcome might affect the BDSM community (if at all)?

TheHungryTiger -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (10/14/2009 7:06:55 AM)
quote: .....(if at all)? It wont. First of all, the headlines only put 'sex slave' into the headline for sensationalist value. The actual case itself is actually a procedural question regarding split enactment issues in Ex post facto law. The rules of what is or isn't admissible evedence is unclear in this case. Second of all, even if it was a 'sex slave' trial (and its not) the scope isnt goign to be as far reaching as what the fearmongers in the kink comunity make it out to be. John Robinson was running around claiming that what he did was BDSM. Even called himself 'master'. Sought out his victims from within the bdsm comunity too. But when he was found guilty it didnt have any impact on the BDSM comunity. It had so little impact that even among kinksters the name is hardly recognized now just a few years later.

sweetsub1957 -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (10/14/2009 8:31:11 AM)
My thoughts are if "she felt like a prisoner and she could not escape her situation," it was non-consensual and WIITWD is consensual. Anyone can do something awful to someone else and claim it's consensual but that doesn't mean it IS. As for there being some kind of "employment contract," sex can't be contracted for legally unless one considers the sexual part of legal marriage, and slavery is illegal, so a contract for sexual slavery shouldn't hold up in court. Not everyone who is sadistic is a bdsm'er. These are my [sm=2cents.gif] .

Falkenstein -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (10/17/2009 2:29:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHungryTiger quote: .....(if at all)? It wont. First of all, the headlines only put 'sex slave' into the headline for sensationalist value. The actual case itself is actually a procedural question regarding split enactment issues in Ex post facto law. The rules of what is or isn't admissible evedence is unclear in this case. Second of all, even if it was a 'sex slave' trial (and its not) the scope isnt goign to be as far reaching as what the fearmongers in the kink comunity make it out to be. John Robinson was running around claiming that what he did was BDSM. Even called himself 'master'. Sought out his victims from within the bdsm comunity too. But when he was found guilty it didnt have any impact on the BDSM comunity. It had so little impact that even among kinksters the name is hardly recognized now just a few years later. "Tout va très bien, Madame la Marquise" as we would sing over here. I envy your optimism, but I cannot share it. This is exactly the kind of publicity we cannot afford. The judical aspects are perfectly irrelevant, the fact of the matter is that it is going to the supreme court, and thus under the headlights of media. "Prosecutors claim he manipulated and forced the woman to undergo the punishment". They know as well as you and me the "ante lex nihil lex" principle, but they chose to move forward, although technically, their case is moot. Why did they?

Nikki323 -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (10/19/2009 11:39:05 AM)
I think that if what she says is true that he needs more than 9 years of jail time. BDSM is about consent and the; slaves, toys, pet, sub; whatever we are must consent or the tops have to withdraw. When in Rome after all or in this case when in the US follow the sexual partner and labor laws. And if it staarted out the way he said and ended that way; and if she just wants to get paid for her work?.... Well that should happen too. It is against the law to work for free unless it is a volunteer work and even that is taxable if profit is taken. I pay my taxes and I have no sympathy for those who play games with others money and time. sage101.com I will be writing an article about the courts finding so I will be staying tuned in to this one

rockspider -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (10/24/2009 3:58:04 PM)
The case remind me a bit about one in Germany a short time back. A couple had staged a rape scene over the internet. It was all consensual and she actually left the door open for him. When the scene was over and the guy left she phoned the police and layed a charge agaainst him. He was arrested and charged but the court found him not guilty. I am not aware about he has sued for damages.

GreedyTop -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (10/24/2009 5:40:26 PM)
Despite what Jodi says NOW, she was entirely consenting during her alleged imprisonment. Anyone who spent time in AOL chatrooms at that time knows that. I hope Glenn gets kicked free.

LPslittleclip -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (10/26/2009 8:38:52 AM)
the information in the article is scant and if it is a case of her changing her story to gain attention or financial gain as opposed to him saying it was consensual and arraigned. as far as the reason that he was arrested on a law that was not fully in place at the time is the issue going to be decided on. the outcome of the case will only be a matter of how the law is applied, as far as how it will affect the lifestyle it should have little impact to those of us that do it consensually.

ResidentSadist -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (11/7/2009 2:15:51 PM)
The Jodi & Glenn Marcus saga continues I see. Maybe he never should've called himself God and upset all those religious fans. quote: ORIGINAL: GreedyTop Despite what Jodi says NOW, she was entirely consenting during her alleged imprisonment. Anyone who spent time in AOL chatrooms at that time knows that. I hope Glenn gets kicked free.

KateyCaine -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (11/15/2009 10:05:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sskitten One description of the case is here: http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/13/scotus.sex.trafficking/index.html What are your thoughts/reactions to the story? Do you have any prediction about the outcome of the case and how the outcome might affect the BDSM community (if at all)? I don't like the fact that the phrase "the shadowy world of BDSM"....has been used in the first paragraph of this article. THAT smacks of a gross generalisation that automatically brands people like us as being in the same category as Glenn Marcus, whose activities were clearly NOT safe, sane or consensual. The woman testifying did NOT consent to this, by the sounds of things; and i think it is wrong to put all of the BDSM community and Master/slave situations into the same class as this case, which appears to be pure exploitation. k.

xssve -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (11/21/2009 6:23:08 PM)
The guy was sceneing online, that's not shadowy, many of us work hard at being shadowy, this guy was hanging up billboards.

KateyCaine -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (11/27/2009 4:11:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sskitten One description of the case is here: http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/13/scotus.sex.trafficking/index.html What are your thoughts/reactions to the story? Do you have any prediction about the outcome of the case and how the outcome might affect the BDSM community (if at all)? As an aside, sskitten, LOVE the avatar !!! cute wee hairball.... k :)

Lizbetbathory -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (12/5/2009 8:37:49 AM)
ugh this is just one of those things where it could be one thing or the other PLUS the media freaking every one out about things that arent very common any one know what site it was?

sissyshoefetish -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (12/30/2009 4:31:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sskitten One description of the case is here: http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/13/scotus.sex.trafficking/index.html What are your thoughts/reactions to the story? Do you have any prediction about the outcome of the case and how the outcome might affect the BDSM community (if at all)? i think this is a reminder to people to always be sure about the basis for your relationship and not to assume consensuality because you are used to it being there. its also a reminder not to mix business with pleasure without care.

Pygromanche -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (1/7/2010 5:50:10 PM)
I think that it's ridiculous.....honestly I don't believe it wasn't consensual. I don't believe her...why go through the trouble of "caging" someone who doesn't actually want to be there when there are slave / submissive girls out there who actually want a Master who will rp humiliation for them in that way. Not to say I'm going to blame the victim but there are holes in her story and things that just don't add up.

Ashcroft -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (1/7/2010 8:21:33 PM)
Holes in a story and bits that don't add up can be attributed to stress, emotional trauma and so on. The psychologists couldl have a field day with a girl like this citing all kinds of syndromes and issues that could explains those holes. Not to say that I'm arguing her case. I wasn't there, I wasn't involved so I can't say for sure what actually happened or didn't happen or the level of agreement involved. The biggest fear I have with the lifestyle is coming across someone that preys on others by claiming agreement and then going off and laying charges. I've heard more than enough horror stories of people spending quite a bit of time in prison over the fact that a play partner decided to press charges for a consensual act. I don't understand the thought process that makes a person decide to do that but I do understand, objectively, that it does happen. Unfortunately the kink community is somehwat Shadowy as someone furth up the thread mentioned from the article. Many member don't discuss it openly with family, friends and so on and so forth. The very nature of American Society and the community itself neccesitates that the BDSM community is an underground community. Yes it's becoming more well known. Yes there are munches, discussions, groups, forums and so on and so forth. But for the majority of the vanilla world it is something dark, disturbing and they don't understand it. Unfortunately people frequently, fear and distrust what they don't understand. That puts us at a distinct disadvantage in many ways. I can begin to speculate on what, if any, impact this particular case may have on the community but I do feel it will impact it somehow. Even if it's just by creating discussions exactly like this one. That is impact in and of itself. It's got people talking, and thinking and that changes everything, doesn't it?

CherryLipps -> RE: Supreme Court to hear case about "sex slave" web site (2/6/2010 12:57:44 AM)
OMG I happen to be one of those who frequented AOL bdsm chatrooms and had the unfortunate experience of running into this jerk. He is a SICKO who plainly said in front of many others that he considered his "slaves" brainless animals that he had the RIGHT to use in any way he saw fit. His former AOL sn GMyourGod says it all. I hope he rots in prison and anyone that supports a lifestyle member that would treat submissives and slaves the way that he did is just as sick.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125