Quote:
Originally Posted by Strange Famous
In UK law, consent in relation to violent sex games is NOT a valid defence against assault.
My honest view, and Im not trying to offend anyone, is that as the skin is broken this is a clear case of wounding. Any man doing this to a woman - 18 months inside minimum. Even if the women is persuaded against her better judgment to give actual consent - when you are cutting or stabbing someone that's more than a bit of harmless horseplay (as a light spank on the arse would be considered) - and the man carrying out this act should definitely face grey days. It is not safe or sane or wound someone for sexual pleasure.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punk.of.Ages
I think that's a very interesting response to this Strange.
I have a couple questions just to try and understand your logic better:
You say specifically that men should be punished by the law for doing such things to women. What about a woman doing such things to men?
What about tying someone up and using whips and other such devices that are meant to hurt beyond a light spanking but do not draw blood? Do you consider that assault also, even if done as part of consensual sex between two adults?
|
Hi Punk, I have to reitrate what SF has said about British law, with the extension that it is gender (or orientation) specific. There was a case in the UK where a group of men hurt each other sexually (as I recall it was CBT) and caught it on video. The tape was used subsequently as evidence in all of their prosecutions, depite them clearly consenting.
The point being that UK law deems if you are dumb enough to allow someone to stab you in the nuts, then you are not competent to decide for yourself.
I'm not sure how a court would view someone becoming excited by being pierced...
Personally, I've not wanted to bleed for love, but I can see the level of intimacy it demonstrates as comforting and exciting.