BDSM as political topic

[Knize.Vladivoj]

Wel, well, well. I´m surprised that no-one came up with this, but it´s much intertwined with freedom.
How about BDSM? I mean, now the position is "Keep it home" in Europe with certain states even criminalizing voluntary acts. Why is it so prude? Why is the state even regulating what consenting ndividuals are doing? And why can´t I take my slave out on a leash without being harassed by police? (Indeed so, I am BDSM practitioner and Master)
Let the flame begin!
And move it anywhere it fits, Admins.

[Visna]

Which voluentary acts are being criminalised? Where in Europe are you talking about?
Unfortunately some still view sado-masochism as a mental illness, much like homosexuality was (and still is in some places) until fairly recently. Or it's simply a matter of failing to distinguish between the consensual environment necessary for it to be BDSM in the first place, as opposed to the real, non-consensual emotional and/or physical abuse.
Compared to the LBGT community who have done a major amount of legwork to adress the stigmatization associated with their sexuality, the BDSM community has been slacking a bit. But it's getting there, give it a few more years. Ideally you should be no more herassed by the police if you look like you're on your way to a fetish-party than you should if you're openly homosexual. I can't speak for all of Europe, but at least where I live you're not herassed by the police.

[Knize.Vladivoj]

About the legality, England and I somewhere discovered that Austria and Germany are also strict on BDSM when discovered, as it is considered breaking laws about corporal safety.

[Visna]

About the legality, England and I somewhere discovered that Austria and Germany are also strict on BDSM when discovered, as it is considered breaking laws about corporal safety.

Sauce, please?

I suspect it has more to do with the whole consensual/non-consensual element than it has to do with being prude. Some people think it's fun to be suspended from the ceiling in meathooks, but if you add a non-consensual element to it, it's not fun, but torture. Same principle applies to many other parts of the whole BDSM universe, roleplaying for example. Many women have rape fantasies, and some live them out in a controlled environment. Does that mean they harbor some kind of twisted idea of how fun it would be to be raped for real? Of course not.

[Knize.Vladivoj]

Sauce, please?

I suspect it has more to do with the whole consensual/non-consensual element than it has to do with being prude. Some people think it's fun to be suspended from the ceiling in meathooks, but if you add a non-consensual element to it, it's not fun, but torture. Same principle applies to many other parts of the whole BDSM universe, roleplaying for example. Many women have rape fantasies, and some live them out in a controlled environment. Does that mean they harbor some kind of twisted idea of how fun it would be to be raped for real? Of course not.

Well, my point is, why an individual who wants to be enslaved/suspended on meathooks/raped/whatever and confirms it by contract or something like that is automatically considered weird and why that contract is not consodered valid?

[Brain_in_a_vat]

Funny how you're a sadomasochist, yet you're against gay adoption.

Strange, strange world.

[Knize.Vladivoj]

Hell, I see that something got wrong - why can´t my slave just sign a contract. She is (or will be, as the case may be) adult, so what? - was not meant to signal that I am in a relationship with a minor, it just meant that I recently broke with my slave for last 4 years and that my next slave would be perhaps also intersted in subscribing such contract.

[trance]

Hell, I see that something got wrong - why can´t my slave just sign a contract. She is (or will be, as the case may be) adult, so what? - was not meant to signal that I am in a relationship with a minor, it just meant that I recently broke with my slave for last 4 years and that my next slave would be perhaps also intersted in subscribing such contract.

As long as she is able by law to consent, and she's not suffering from psychological disorder or unhealthiness that's completely alright and a good idea (with the contract) - so long as you keep it from the public space. And I have no issues with that, but abusing a girl who've engaged in self harm is essentially encouraging more of that behavior, and not okay. So can I at least ask you to conisder this when you search for your next slave? (that sounded rather hillarious )

[trance]

Well, that's not entirely up to political entities nor the "tolerance brigade" to answer. Sadism is a trait often found amongst people with narcisstic tendencies. Masochism is oftenly tied with low self esteem, a history of self mutilation and/or suicidal thoughts. Psychological motivation varies greatly however, but the pain = pleasure part is oftenly deeply rooted in a feeling that "I deserve this treatment" "I'm a bad person - punish me", i e low self esteem. Most of these people need counselling and help rather than being tolerated for that matter.

Question lies whether we should allow it so it is contained and controlled, or if it should be criminalized on the grounds that it encourages more of this behavior. I don't have any valid research on either position. If any of you do I'd love to see it.

[Knize.Vladivoj]

Well, not that I have scientific research on my hand, however I know that most of the BDSM-active I know are not sick (and if anyone else calls me sick, pervert or misogynist, I will go outside and shoot those tree-loving pieces of on random). But I know that it´s a common misconception that anyone BDSM-positive is a sick perv.

[Visna]

Well, my point is, why an individual who wants to be enslaved/suspended on meathooks/raped/whatever and confirms it by contract or something like that is automatically considered weird and why that contract is not consodered valid?

I think it's simply because people can't relate to it if they don't share the fascination. There are a ton of things people do that I find weird. Fishingtrips, camping, golf or motorsport on TV, Star Wars conventions, Jesus camps etc etc. It's a subculture like so many others and eventually it'll be just as accepted. If it isn't already, I mean unlike Star Wars conventions sado-masochism has a sexual element to it which tends to make things a bit more private to a lot of people.

Well, that's not entirely up to political entities nor the "tolerance brigade" to answer. Sadism is a trait often found amongst people with narcisstic tendencies. Masochism is oftenly tied with low self esteem, a history of self mutilation and/or suicidal thoughts. Psychological motivation varies greatly however, but the pain = pleasure part is oftenly deeply rooted in a feeling that "I deserve this treatment" "I'm a bad person - punish me", i e low self esteem. Most of these people need counselling and help rather than being tolerated for that matter.

A common misconception. BDSM is not abuse. And abuse is not BDSM. People who tolerate abuse because they feel they deserve it can benefit from councelling, sado-masochists can not. Its like Live Action Roleplay for consenting adults. Within the community there are differences in degrees and how far they're taking it, but the principle remains the same.

Question lies whether we should allow it so it is contained and controlled, or if it should be criminalized on the grounds that it encourages more of this behavior. I don't have any valid research on either position. If any of you do I'd love to see it.

How about none of the above?
Would you consider banning homosexuality because it encourages more homosexual behavior? Is the only reason gays (to a large extent) are no longer discriminated against in overwhelming portions of the developed world because of some nefarious plot to contain and control them? I hope I don't have to explain why both of those views are absurd.

[trance]

A common misconception. BDSM is not abuse. And abuse is not BDSM. People who tolerate abuse because they feel they deserve it can benefit from councelling, sado-masochists can not. Its like Live Action Roleplay for consenting adults. Within the community there are differences in degrees and how far they're taking it, but the principle remains the same.

How about none of the above?
Would you consider banning homosexuality because it encourages more homosexual behavior? Is the only reason gays (to a large extent) are no longer discriminated against in overwhelming portions of the developed world because of some nefarious plot to contain and control them? I hope I don't have to explain why both of those views are absurd.

But when do we draw the line for LARP? Are we going to let people kill eachother?

No, it's no misconception. Some people enjoy the torture because of strong feelings of inadequacy, these people do need help, as the treatment may still hurt or traumatize them. They are NOT really sado-masochists, and may still engage in such activites because of low self esteem. Since violence and pain is involved, the lines are blurred. You must see this from my perspective, I can certainly see it from a proponents point of view.

[Knize.Vladivoj]

But when do we draw the line for LARP? Are we going to let people kill eachother?

I love those who need to draw the line. Guy, if whoever wants to be castrated and confirms it by signing a contract in front of an authority, then why the hell should he/she/it be judged if it is normal?

No, it's no misconception. Some people enjoy the torture because of strong feelings of inadequacy, these people do need help, as the treatment may still hurt or traumatize them. They are NOT really sado-masochists, and may still engage in such activites because of low self esteem.

The keyphrase being "they are not really sado-masochists". My previous slave, for example was a quite ok girl with self-esteem in norm and she involved in BDSM for she was aroused by it.

You must see this from my perspective, I can certainly see it from a proponents point of view.

I just love guys saying "You must see this from my perspective". And for record, from your posts, it looks like you are quite far from my point of view.

[Phier]

I was unaware that BDSM was a political issue at all.

If it comes to 'unconventional sex' in politics I'd say it goes ....

#1 Homosexuality
#2 Porn
#3 Prostitution
#4 Swingers
and somewhere below that BDSM.

Local governments try to get private swingers clubs closed all the time, often on trumped up violations, because it looks good in the local paper, but I've rarely heard anything about BDSM being an issue.

[Enemy of the State]

If it's voluntary, it's fine. Shouldn't be an issue, mind your own ing business.

[Lancy]

Taking your 'slave' out on a leash might be confusing for the local authorities. If I were a police authority I'd certainly wonder just what was going on, for what purpose this poor fellow/lady was on a leash. I'd probably feel obligated to intervene in order to establish if this is voluntary, which some might consider harassment.

[Knize.Vladivoj]

As far as I can judge, no kidnapper is dumb enough to lead his/her victim to streets on leash.

[Lancy]

I'm just waiting for the first.

[HansDuet]

BDSM is a political topic?

Its totally cool between two consenting adults who are in agreement. Its a no issue.

[Dr. Oza]

i loled at the thread title..

and bdsm is not illegal .. unless it is involuntary..