RE: A Civil Collaring Ceremony - Legal recognition for D/s (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

stellauk -> RE: A Civil Collaring Ceremony - Legal recognition for D/s (3/31/2011 1:42:22 AM)

Thank you everyone for responding to this so far. I personally feel that this is possibly overthinking things and going in the opposite direction to what is necessary. I have a major issue with the 'minorities' concept of diversity as I feel it puts way too much emphasis on labels.

It's like 'black and ethnic minorities'. I have an issue with seeing 'black' as a minority, given the reality that the majority of people in the world can be considered black and also that everyone has ethnicity. You could argue that women are the largest minority because they face discrimination, but then if you call women a minority then what about men who also face discrimination?

I also have the opinion that everyone, i.e. every human being, is in some way kinky and that kink is a part of human nature.

I am in favour of marriage equality and the freedom for someone, anyone, to gain legal recognition of their relationship irrespective of how that relationship looks. I am also in favour of pro-choice here, and feel that anyone should have the freedom of choice between a marriage and a civil partnership.

I see it pretty much in the way of a business. You don't need to be a legally recognized business to wash someone's car for them, but if you want to set yourself up as Acme Car Wash you can. What should it matter if you only wash sports cars, or indeed if you replace tyres as well?

This is why I have a major issue with an organization such as the National Organization for Marriage, because it is all based on assumptions, the assumption that God is in some way human (I've yet to see any evidence of this), the assumption that people who engage in same sex relationships are making a choice (and if so, then when did heterosexuals make that same choice to engage in relationships with the opposite sex?) and also the assumption that marriage is the same deal for everybody and should be the same as it was 2,000 years ago.

I have a much simpler concept of minorities, just two categories, people who accept human individuality and diversity and people who don't.

Why can't we all just be human, accept that other people are not all like us, and leave it at that?

It's bad enough the way it is in society what with needing different proof just to get simple tasks done, proof of ID, proof of utility bills, etc. Oh and not being able to do stuff without having to answer meaningless security questions. For example (and this is a real question I was asked)

'Can you tell me the number you just dialled?' If anyone can explain to me how that verifies my identity I'd love to hear it.

I mean, what next? Proof of sexual orientation to get married?

Maybe I should have known better than to start such a thread, but it did genuinely throw me for a while and I just needed to make sure.



InsaneSerenity -> RE: A Civil Collaring Ceremony - Legal recognition for D/s (4/1/2011 8:15:01 AM)

Just to add something, being recognized by the government is a two way street, and not a good one. Homosexuals in the USA are realizing their are other issues when you choose to do something 'legally' rather than just informally.

Anyone can go to a lawyer and get a contract, for pretty much anything. It is a much safer way and the lawyer will generally make you aware of everything you need to think about, rather than the government telling you nothing.



Prinsexx -> RE: A Civil Collaring Ceremony - Legal recognition for D/s (4/2/2011 3:58:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SirRussellP

I think you all missed the fact that she didn't say it was to be combined with a marriage but to be a civil ceremony acknowledging the D/s or M/s relationship only.  Though I do suppose that some would want both.

Think of that in terms of acceptance by the public and the law.  Here is the states we are probably decades away from anything like it.  I would say think though of the protection it would offer both parties to this union, no fear that one or the other would be arrested because of an uptight ER Doc or nurse, a means to spell out in the public record what you are contracting too. 

Russell


I understand you understand what the OP was talking about.




Prinsexx -> RE: A Civil Collaring Ceremony - Legal recognition for D/s (4/2/2011 4:20:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: stellauk


Why can't we all just be human, accept that other people are not all like us, and leave it at that?


Stella: because of the psychological paradox of needing to be differemt and yet conformist at the same time.
Whilst kink is becoming more and more connformist, fashionable and acceptable. personal power dynamics, being a function of two (mono) or more than two (poly) will never become more conformist because in its irreducub;e form is is an experience of energy exchange. Meaning that  a complete account of the relationship cannot be possible at any simpler levels of explanation other than that exchange.

My personal belief is that any personaly bond such is perceived as socially threatening because it undermines other forms.

There's absolutely nothing to fear surely about a cicvil collaring save in what it is perceived to represent. Now I'm more interested in talking about what it might be perceived to represent. Much like women being perceived as heretics during Tudor reign just because they could read books. Or women's franchise perceived as inherently threatening. Or homosexuals being a national security risk.

Bdsm would not and could not be deemed as illegal whilst there is a legally sanctioned and witnessed agreement to consent? aha mayve that's the real issue.

I'm sure that's what the core of incessant reactionary politics is all about as well.



leadership527 -> RE: A Civil Collaring Ceremony - Legal recognition for D/s (4/2/2011 4:37:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prinsexx
I'm sure that's what the core of incessant reactionary politics is all about as well.

Perhaps. Or perhaps some of us just recognize how incredibly hard it would be to write those laws in a such a way as to allow the stuff we'd like to allow and disallow the stuff we don't want to allow.

Call me "reactionary to reality" if you must.

I think some vanilla people are worried because it "undermines the sanctity of marriage" or somesuch... just like the arguments with gay marriage here in the US. But that's not MY concern. My concern is that I just plain don't know how to write the laws in such a way as to accomplish what I'd like to. Where are you planning on stopping? Sadism is OK? Slavery is OK? Murdering one's slave is OK if they signed a TPE contract? Where are you going to draw the new boundaries?



LafayetteLady -> RE: A Civil Collaring Ceremony - Legal recognition for D/s (4/5/2011 8:22:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

quote:

ORIGINAL: Palliata
Shouldn't it be up to them to decide whether they want to accept the situation as it is or have the courts intervene?


No, it shouldn't.

Dick and Jane have a fight.  Dick slams Jane around for a while, which prompts Tom to call the police.  The police respond (here's where your tax dollars come in.)  The police see Jane with injuries that need medical attention.  The ambulance gets called and she's taken to the hospital.  It's obvious that a crime has been committed.  Had a stranger on the street beat the shit out of Jane, would you be sitting there asking if it should be ok that Dick can beat the crap out of her and not go to jail?

Let's try your method.  Jane says it's ok for Dick to beat the piss out of her.  How do you know that she's just not scared shitless of what Dick will do to her next?  The nice policeman go away.

Until next week when Dick is beating the crap out of Jane again.  This time, Larry calls the cops.  The cops come again.  This time, Jane's face looks fine, but she's holding her side.  The cops know how Dick and Jane are, so they leave.

Next week, the cops come to Dick and Jane's place because another neighbor calls.  The cops are getting used to the address from going there so much and have a pretty good idea of how it's all going to play out.  Wasted time because Jane won't press charges.  No big deal and no hurry.

When they get there, Jane's dead.  During the investigation, the police find out just how damn scared Jane really was of that Dick.  How he always told her that he would kill her if she ever pressed charges. 

That's why it works like that.




For those talking about contracts, who do you think enforces them? The courts (as in government). People seem to be under the mistaken impression that if it is written in a contract, that makes it binding. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Any part of a contract that violates local laws is unenforceable. As most of us know, that is why BDSM contracts are not legally binding.

I'm all in favor of people being able to live their lives as they choose, but as LadyPact so eloquently stated above, "consent" is a slippery slope when it comes down to it. As we all know, the bottom half of any D/s or M/s relationship has the power to withdraw consent at any time. With a legally recognized union, how would one withdraw this consent? How would legislation define what is consensual and what is not?

Back to the contracts....having a contract that says "A will do B's bidding and be subjected to x, y and z should they fail to obey and should the relationship end A leaves with nothing regardless of the length of the relationship," would be shot down pretty quickly in a legal dispute. Matrimonial Laws, and hopefully Civil Union Laws will be equal, define the basics regarding support and such while protecting each partner's rights in the process. To attempt to do the same with a BDSM relationship, for which each relationship's bare basics can be so drastically different is just not going to work.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
3.222656E-02