RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"?

RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (Full Version)

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

Message

asubmissiveheart -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/10/2007 4:12:34 AM)
These articles show that playing with strangers is not a smart idea, and getting involved with men you don't know is not that wise either. Whatever happened to home teaching and common sense?

LadyIce -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/10/2007 1:37:32 PM)
There are some sick people in the world, it pays to be careful.

meesekite -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/12/2007 4:49:41 PM)
Hi all... Playing with strangers? Huh? Jodi was no stranger to Mr. Marcus, nor was Mr. Marcus a stranger to Jodi. They had an established consensual relationship. And it WAS consensual. I know that because as I have mentioned, I was in a submissive relationship with Mr. Marcus. Submission, not slavery as being a slave was in no way an interest of mine. Curvy, as I see it, as they consented to what they did, its not abuse even if you dislike the specifics of what was done in their relationship. How do you see it as abusive? The woman who you mention in relationship to the hamburger (not the one who accused him, by the way) has stated that everything she did with him had her full consent. If he was abusive or coercive, you wouldnt have been free to say "NO, not for me". Which you obviously did.

TheDiva -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/13/2007 4:22:11 AM)
No matter what his former slave's motivation may have been, it would have been considerate for him to take the pictures off the website, especially if she asked him to do it so that she could apply for a job as a teacher. I'm sure his refusal to honor her request was taken into consideration when it was time to evaluate exactly how "consensual" their past relationship was.

meesekite -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/13/2007 9:18:26 AM)
Hi Diva... As he had a model release form that she signed, he had every legal right to use those images. IF she was so worried about her career as a teacher, why would she then set up her OWN BDSM website AFTER she left him? A site that was up for quite some time? OK, you can feel he wasnt considerate about his choice to not honor her request. Being non considerate is NOT being non consensual, and it is also NOT illegal. If a woman models for Playboy, and then later regrets it, she also cant tell Playboy to destroy all its magazines, and remove her images. Same principle here, with Jodi. If the jury jailed him for not being considerate, if that was even a FACTOR, well, that shows just how flawed the justice system....and the jury... actually was. Sincerely, meesekite

Jack45 -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/13/2007 5:57:57 PM)
My God this fiend made her click the ad links on his website! Reminds me of those sweatshops in urban areas. 2 years AFTER she left his service she is still going camping with him and his family. Uncle Fed just put the BIG CHILL on doms and subs, hope ya'll are ready for that.

TheDiva -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/14/2007 8:19:57 AM)
meesekite, Unfortunately "She had no right to change her mind; she signed paperwork to that effect" is not a good defense to bring up when the charges against you relate to forcing someone to do something against her will. But ultimately, both you and the jury may ultimately have agreed on one point: Take what you want and pay for it.

meesekite -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/14/2007 9:18:21 AM)
Diva, As much as I respect Maurice (Glenn's attorney), I do feel he made a bad error when he as well said Glenn should have removed the images and he was stupid for not doing so. Maurice should have hammered the fact that a model release form gave him legal rights to use images that have NOTHING whatsoever to do with the charges of forced labor and sex trafficking he was accused of. The fact he did NOT say that may well have confused issues with the jury as you suggest. And, having ones own lawyer say their client was stupid/did a stupid act likely did NOT go over well with that jury. "Take what you want and pay for it"...doesnt apply to Glenn. Glenn did nothing illegal. In fact, to continue the expression, one could say he was robbed. Sincerely meesekite

TheDiva -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/14/2007 9:45:34 AM)
Well, it's a high-stakes game. The possible risks were in line with the possible rewards. I'm not sure how much the pictures or a model release had to do with the two charges that Glenn Marcus was convicted on (sex trafficking and forced labor). However, his former slave asserted that she was forced to do things against her will. His defense seems to have been that entered into an agreement to become his slave, and waived certain rights of her own free will. However, the law does not allow for that. Even if a precedent were to be set one day to make an exclusion for bdsm participants, the case for that would be one where the slave did not allege any mistreatment. Undue influence might have also been considered in this case, depending on what the relationship was between the two when the model release was signed. However, no one can enter his former slave's mind and definitively prove that she did things for Glenn Marcus just because she felt like it at the moment. The alternative explanation seems be that she was upset because he would not remove the pictures, and he felt strongly enough about not removing them that he allowed the matter to go to trial instead of accepting a plea bargain that would have involved no jail time. Why would that be?

curvyslavegirl -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/15/2007 5:08:58 PM)
Funny how the only people defending him are those who got sucked in by him.The simple fact is that people who are mentally unstable are dangerous when they find BDSM. Perhaps the focus should be on finding a way to support the poor, unfortunately creatures who get sucked in when men like that are involved. In abusive relationships, the abused partners usually are consenting to being in the relationship. They stay married, return home, etc. Often they even beg the police not to press charges, even when they are sitting in the hospital with broken bones and knife wounds. Consent does not take away the abuse. His techniques were almost identical to those used by domestic violence perpetrators, only he had a bdsm definition to hide behind.

MisPandora -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/16/2007 9:20:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Missokyst I used to watch these people in aol chat rooms for years. I have to say though I found GM to be too extreme for my taste, the women who became his did nothing but praise him. In the end when the issue became money for the website. He is under investigation for a criminal charge, and civil litigation. I think its been ongoing for 2 yrs now. Kyst I remember GM from back 10ish years ago online. Never bought into their "style"...but whatever floats your boat. Sadly, when you play mindgames with people that border on the consensual/nonconsensuality line, someone's going to take offense and pitch a fit. He never struck me as a malicious guy, really. Perhaps this was another SM foray gone wrong for half the parties involved. (That's all it takes.....)

meesekite -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/16/2007 10:07:34 AM)
Actually, Curvyslavegirl, Its funny to me reading these boards. The people defending him are the ones that actually know him and have interacted with him to one degree or another. Even those who never met him in person but spoke to him on line have said "seemed entirely consensual to me". Thats hardly someone who was "sucked in". As for me and all the other women the FBI interviewed, no one collaborated Jodi's tales of non consensuality. ALL the women involved with him whom the FBI spoke to said he acted completely consensual. That should tell YOU that Jodi is the one who lied , manipulated, and sucked the federal government into her web of deciet. In abusive relations, the women dont consent to abuse, though they do stay. It isnt a pre arranged consensual event, the abuse and the violence are NOT what was contracted to. Thats VERY different than Mr. Marcus's case, where informed consent was one of the most important pre requisites he had. Sincerely, meesekite ([email protected])

TheDiva -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/18/2007 5:42:35 AM)
meesekite, What do you think GM could have done differently to avoid the charges and/or the conviction? Edited to clarify that I am particularly interested in meesekite's response, but would like to get the input of others reading this thread as well.

Jack45 -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/18/2007 9:00:37 AM)
The victim is GM, he never hid his concept of Ds nor did he misrepresent what service to him would be like, and he always told the girls that flocked to him: if you cannot serve me with joy I don't want you, leave. He had many girls and they knew beforehand how he was and so there is a lot more here than meets the eye.

EgosumDominus -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/20/2007 9:10:41 AM)
Abuse is a sign of weakness and a lack of self control. Not to mention quite foolish.

curvyslavegirl -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/20/2007 12:35:44 PM)
There is really nothing you can say to change my mine meesekite. Although I think you already know that :) I was present with a girl who definately was scared for her life and not serving him with joy who had to endure intense therapy and left BDSM ultimately because of her ordeals with him and she is not the victim that this lawsuit is about. I think the real question for me is should what he did be illegal or not. I don't necessarily feel like what he did broke the law. When I work with abused women in general, they all have very similar relationships patterns. Although the emotional abuse and deconstructing of their self worth is definately damaging, it is not grounds for legal action. They have the right to return to their homes and be with their abusers should they choose to. In gm's case, i think it is similar. Should women who are emotionally abused have the right to return to their abusers when it is clear that their mental status is questionable? As a free speech and civil rights activist, I tend to lean on the side of yes, but I also deeply believe that outreach, therapy and education needs to be a viable option for these survivors as well. Usually by the time someone realizes that a relationship is bad for them, they're stuck whether it be emotional, financial or logistical. Perhaps a good community response would be to increase outreach and support to new submissives who are at risk of entering relationships that may be unhealthy. Similar to the way that domestic violence organizations provide access to hotline numbers and support groups. I don't believe that "she knew what she was getting into" is always enough justification for a lifestyle. People do ALOT of stupid things knowingly! That doesn't make them healthy or right.

meesekite -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/20/2007 4:57:37 PM)
Hello Curvyslavegirl... No, I dont think I will change your mind, and honestly, thats not my goal here. My intent is to raise community awareness at this unfair and unjust prosecution that threatens us all. I do enjoy discussing various and different views and opinions, I must confess. This is though, of course, deeply personal for me cause its GLENN and he is a good friend to me. Curvy, your friend who claims she was damaged....why didnt she testify? Do you know if she was interviewed by the FBI? A woman (or a man) may percieve things (or mis percieve things) that just arent so. Knowing Mr. Marcus as I do, I can state again, no abuse. I am sorry the woman you know FELT as if she was abused by him. The Diva... You ask what Glenn Marcus could have done differently to avoid this. Well, if we invent a new theory of space and time, he can go back to the past and never have accepted Jodi's begging and pleading to be a slave of his. Newspaper articles state she went to the FBI because he wouldnt take her images down. So maybe you feel he should have done so at her request. I do not, as he had every LEGAL right to use em. Taking them down would have ruined his site. Its not as if Jodi is a child (though the Court painted her as such) and needs protection as she cant choose her own acts or face the consequences of her decisions. She made a choice to be on that site, as did I. She signed a release, as did I. If a woman poses for Playgirl or Playboy, can she then change her mind and insist all copies of the magazine be destroyed? No, and I feel neither Jodi nor myself can do the similar act. I aggree with Glenn's choice to not accept that plea bargain. He knew he was innocent, why should he (or anyone else) confess to a crime he did not commit? Prior to trial, if he had taken the plea, he definately would have been a convicted felon. At least in a trial, he had the chance of an acquittal. Yes, he took the chance of a jury, and he did lose. But if he had taken the plea, it would have been a loss even before any chance of exoneration. I have alot of respect for Maurice, Glenn's attorney. His mental dexterity as he argued points before the Judge was pretty amazing to witness. However, I think the case could have been handled alot...differently, and I think that (and I cant get into details) was a large aspect of why Glenn was convicted. Basically, Maurice went on the presumption of innocence, and I think that in cases such as this and others that touch on sex and sexuality, an area where the vanilla world is largely repressed, Maurice from the getgo should have been trying to proove Glenn was innocent instead of presuming it. The jury was stacked against him from the start, I feel...the psychology alone was against him. (Big male vs petite female...society is geared towards the female ) And no, dont tell me the jury was non biased...I will never believe ANY group of humans can set aside deep held beliefs such as ones regarding sex and sexuality. Sure they may have answered the jury questionaire satisfactorally, but once they saw those images, I feel impartiality was out the window. Sincerely meesekite

TheDiva -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (4/21/2007 2:58:18 AM)
OK, two things are becoming obvious here. 1. The two people who know exactly what the dynamics were in the situation are not here to lend their insight. We don't know what their perception of the relationship was unless they say so. And with "consensual nonconsensuality" being involved, the waters are furthered muddied. 2. GM seems to have been successful in cultivating unquestioning loyalty in his slaves. It's as if he can do no wrong, and that may have been the tacit understanding between him and his slaves. meesekite has stated that taking Jody's pics down would have ruined his site. If the site was a major source of income to him, I can understand how it would have been tempting for him to ignore her request even though she was no longer his slave. He may have been GMyourgod to his slaves, but the excommunicated members have no right to sever their ties to his "church"? I'd love to be able to see that model release (I hear that he never did produce the original though.) Maybe he should have future slaves sign a billion-year contract? He didn't want to be a convicted felon, so he chose to take his chances with a jury. I'm sure he couldn't reasonably expect to find a jury of his "peers"--how many infallible people are there? Maybe the Pope, but he can probably get an excuse from serving jury duty pretty easily. I guess no one understands him. The jury didn't find in his favor, his (reportedly skilled) attorney let him down, former slaves betrayed him by asserting rights that he had decided they no longer had. But it's great to know that he still has undying, unquestioning loyalty from at least one person. Others will still question, and it's their right to do so.

LetUsGoThen -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (7/24/2007 11:52:58 AM)
Jodi was vile to do what she did. GM should've taken down the pictures. Want a reason? I can think of about 30 reasons, 30 to life.

Estring -> RE: What think you of this New York "S&M Svengali"? (7/24/2007 12:24:33 PM)
I am certainly not going to lose any sleep worrying about the police coming after me next. The people defending this guy seem to forget that the BDSM world is a small minority of the real world. I don't care how consensual it was in him starving a caged girl, when society gets wind of it, they will react negatively. Why would you expect any other reaction? It is obvious to me that there was plenty wrong with this guy and his slaves. And to those that say he was a great guy, well Mansons' followers felt the same about him. I will not defend this guy. He in no way represents me. He is exactly why BDSM gets such a bad rap.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875