Blood Play......Thoughts?

[bloody_rose20]

So, I was browsing some sites, and I have seen that a lot of people have some pretty risky and out there fetishes..I myself have some that I know many would find dangerous, or wrong, or gross..but I was curious to see what people think about one of them; Blood Play. Now, I find it a very sexual bonding experience. Brings you closer, at least in any of my experiences.

If you are wondering what exactly I mean, I can explain. Blood play for me, is cutting someone else, and either "playing" in the blood after, or licking it off. And, them doing the same back. This I would reccommend when things are being sexual, that way the pain tolerance is higher. Also, using a sterilized non serated blade. Also, I do know, to not ingest too much blood because it has a result like ipakak lol. And yes, it is very dangerous to be messing with blood, I know that because of all the desieases and whatnot, but I only do blood play with guys that are recently tested.

Okay lol after saying all of that (because I know some of the responses I will be getting lol), I am curious of those of you who have tried it, who want to try it, or whatnot. I'm curious of your experience and opinions of it.

[Sue]

I've heard of it, but I'd never do it. That in my personal opinion is too much.

[Punk.of.Ages]

I had a girlfriend once who was very into this...

She would cut my tongue before we made out, she'd claw me until I bled while I fucked her, and she even once talked me into letting her cut my dick open before she gave me head.

I don't really mind being on that end of it. Pain can be a very erotic thing. I don't like the taste of blood at all though, so no lapping it up for me.

[bloody_rose20]

Well thats one of the cool things, you can enjoy the pain part of it, and let the other person enjoy the blood part of it. There are different ways people do it. I used to only have the guy cut me and lick it off, then kiss me with the blood still in his mouth. Or, he would cut himself and I would lick it up...but, recently me and the guy that I am with decided to make it a two-way deal. He likes being cut, and whatnot so I had to get a little out of my comfort zone and do it back lol. See, I am a total sub. I like being told what to do during sex, and I like sex rough. Spanking, hair pulling, choking, face slapping...lol. So me having to deliver some pain was different for me...but I did like it :-)

[Punk.of.Ages]

Yeah. Usually I'm the one who delivers the slapping, hair pulling, choking, etc. That girl was really my first experience with being a masochist.

I'd have to say I do enjoy the domination role more, but submission can be a great thing too.

[JStrider]

I've never been very interested in it... just thinking about it doesnt really do anything for me.

I wouldnt be opposed to trying it if I was in a serious relationship and the girl wanted to.

[Bear Cub]

Tongue/genitals are off limit. Rest of me is fair game though. Kind of wish I could find someone who was into it just to try. Masochism from blades/needles is very therapeutic for me, whereas most pinching, etc just doesn't do anything.

[bloody_rose20]

Yeah I would have to agree, the tounge and genitals would be off limits for me too with the cutting O_O That would hurt like hell lol.

[Punk.of.Ages]

Originally Posted by bloody_rose20

Yeah I would have to agree, the tounge and genitals would be off limits for me too with the cutting O_O That would hurt like hell lol.

Not as bad as one would think actually...

I was quite surprised at how little both hurt.

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by bloody_rose20

Okay lol after saying all of that (because I know some of the responses I will be getting lol), I am curious of those of you who have tried it, who want to try it, or whatnot. I'm curious of your experience and opinions of it.

I enjoyed it. It wasn't vampirism and I didn't get into that whole menstrual blood scene (ick), but there's a powerful BDSM aspect that worked well. You're right that it can bring people closer, but I found that true of most sexual experimentation.

Remember to be safe, kids. Blood play absolutely requires clean blood work and good health.

[bloody_rose20]

True. And yeah, I am into blood from cuts. The whole menstral blood is a big no on my part. lol. And, If you say that cutting the tounge and genitals doesn't hurt much, then thats good :-) I still don't think I could go there....then again, it doesn't take much for my man to get me to do things lol. I don't think I have ever said no to him yet hahaha, its horrible that he has that power over me XD

[Punk.of.Ages]

Originally Posted by Willravel

...I didn't get into that whole menstrual blood scene (ick)

I don't mind sex while a girl's menstruating, but I got my red wings once and ick is really an understatement...

Originally Posted by bloody_rose20

True. And yeah, I am into blood from cuts. The whole menstral blood is a big no on my part. lol. And, If you say that cutting the tounge and genitals doesn't hurt much, then thats good :-) I still don't think I could go there....then again, it doesn't take much for my man to get me to do things lol. I don't think I have ever said no to him yet hahaha, its horrible that he has that power over me XD

Second thinking my last post, we do not have the same genitalia and from what I hear it would probably hurt you a lot more than it hurt me...

[bloody_rose20]

haha yeah, I can say sex while a girl is on her period is fine. But it can't be a heavy flow because I won't let a guy near me then. And I can imagine ick is an understatement haha you poor guy *hugs you*

[Xerxys]

I would do it. I've always reveled in pain. Never cut myself. I'm the kinda guy who flinches when you step on but in the sack, I LOVE the PAIN ... I WANT IT!!!

I need help.

[FuglyStick]

Not a chance. "Blood play" is the result of some over romanticized notion about sex or intimacy, and it's juvenile in my opinion. But whatever floats yer boat.

[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.

[Punk.of.Ages]

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.

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?

[ShaniFaye]

juvenile? thats an interesting thought, not one that I share of course because its a part of our BDSM relationship....Dave and I have done this many times, to us its one the heights of intimacy and extremely erotic.

[Daniel_]

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.

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.

[Strange Famous]

In terms of my own view, rather than just talking about the law...

I think there is a matter of degree. In terms of someone being whipped... if someone is flogged and badly hurt (ie - lasting marks, broken skin, broken bones) - I think thats assault even if they asked for it.

If someone is hit on the arse with a paddle to sting and redden the skin but cause no lasting injury, I think common sense says that thats probably not an assault - IF there is consent, although it is an action that clearly can cause emotional damage and humiliation even if there is no real physical harm done and this needs to be taken into account.

In terms of gender, I guess we have to be realistic. I cannot say, 100% that it is IMPOSSIBLE for a woman to assault a man, and Im am sure someone can quote me an example of it, but in real life we all probably understand that instances of that are pretty rare. Most of the cases of assault within relationships are unfortunately males attacking women, and in my view the law has to be heavy with these criminals. If a woman does assault a man, and real harm is done, that woman should be punished - but we probably do have to consider is society served by women (often mothers) being thrown in jail? In the worst cases there is no choice, but we should more careful about handing out grey days to a woman than to some thug who beats up his girlfriend.

I understand some people find his sexist, but in my view if a woman is assaulting a man (1) the assault is likely to be less serious and (2) there are far more likely to be aggrivating factors and (3) the woman may have emotional problems which are better addressed through counselling and community service.

[Willravel]

Assault requires intent. Blood play has no malicious intentions, and is fully consensual, therefore I don't think it should or even can be categorized as assault.

[Redlemon]

Originally Posted by Strange Famous

In terms of gender, I guess we have to be realistic. I cannot say, 100% that it is IMPOSSIBLE for a woman to assault a man, and Im am sure someone can quote me an example of it, but in real life we all probably understand that instances of that are pretty rare.

My local newspaper, today: Handcuffed husband files for divorce - The Connecticut Post Online.

[Strange Famous]

Originally Posted by Willravel

Assault requires intent. Blood play has no malicious intentions, and is fully consensual, therefore I don't think it should or even can be categorized as assault.

Ok, but in the UK it is, and has been prosecuted as such.

I understand that this forum mainly has North American members, but those of us from other countries obviously inform our positions with our own legal systems.

The case that Daniel was talking about, which was well known in the UK at the time, was the Spanner case/Operation Spanner.

[Daniel_]

Originally Posted by Strange Famous

Ok, but in the UK it is, and has been prosecuted as such.

I understand that this forum mainly has North American members, but those of us from other countries obviously inform our positions with our own legal systems.

The case that Daniel was talking about, which was well known in the UK at the time, was the Spanner case/Operation Spanner.

Thanks mate, couldn't remember the name.

More detail here: Operation_Spanner which includes information about the legal basis for the trial.

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by Strange Famous

Ok, but in the UK it is, and has been prosecuted as such.

I understand that this forum mainly has North American members, but those of us from other countries obviously inform our positions with our own legal systems.

Where's the line between cutting an rug-burn? Or a bump on the headboard? Or any other injury either passively or actively taken away from sex? Assuming it's consensual, and I think for the sake of this thread we should assume that, where's the real harm? Even if you think it's perverted, so long as it's done responsibly there's no real danger. So it's consensual and safe... what else is there? Am I missing some damage done to person, property, or society?

[Xerxys]

Ahem, this is tilted sexuality ... I want depraved, not prude discussion. Because the legalities involved are very interesting, could you kindly start another thread to that effect?

[Willravel]

I dunno, Miss Rose asked opinions about blood play. I may not aggree with StrangeFamous's on this topic, but I'll die for his right to post them!

[Xerxys]

Originally Posted by Willravel

... but I'll die for his right to post them!

OK, OK, but go die in another thread ... I would rather it not disrupt my train of thoughts!!

[Punk.of.Ages]

Originally Posted by Strange Famous

In terms of my own view, rather than just talking about the law...

I think there is a matter of degree. In terms of someone being whipped... if someone is flogged and badly hurt (ie - lasting marks, broken skin, broken bones) - I think thats assault even if they asked for it.

If someone is hit on the arse with a paddle to sting and redden the skin but cause no lasting injury, I think common sense says that thats probably not an assault - IF there is consent, although it is an action that clearly can cause emotional damage and humiliation even if there is no real physical harm done and this needs to be taken into account.

In terms of gender, I guess we have to be realistic. I cannot say, 100% that it is IMPOSSIBLE for a woman to assault a man, and Im am sure someone can quote me an example of it, but in real life we all probably understand that instances of that are pretty rare. Most of the cases of assault within relationships are unfortunately males attacking women, and in my view the law has to be heavy with these criminals. If a woman does assault a man, and real harm is done, that woman should be punished - but we probably do have to consider is society served by women (often mothers) being thrown in jail? In the worst cases there is no choice, but we should more careful about handing out grey days to a woman than to some thug who beats up his girlfriend.

I understand some people find his sexist, but in my view if a woman is assaulting a man (1) the assault is likely to be less serious and (2) there are far more likely to be aggrivating factors and (3) the woman may have emotional problems which are better addressed through counselling and community service.

I just don't see how you can draw a line between one type of pain and another when it comes to consensual sex. I understand the legalities of it in the UK, but I think a case of assault should really require a malicious intent to harm someone.

I can see what you're saying about emotional damage and humiliation, but that's why people should communicate properly and be sure it's what they both want to do. The way I see it if you're too weak to say no to something you don't want, you deserve emotional damage and humiliation.

On the subject of the women/men bit, I asked that question because, as I said, it was the girl that I was with at the time that liked to cut me. I never cut her. It seems to me that you don't consider that as bad as if it was the other way around. It's really no different though. She cut me just the same as I would cut her, and she had to get me to agree to, which could be construed to she had to manipulate me into it.

I can understand what you're saying about women usually being the ones that are sexually assaulted, but this is completely different than sexual abuse and its just as easy for a woman to bring the pain as it is for a man.

Originally Posted by Xerxys

OK, OK, but go die in another thread ... I would rather it not disrupt my train of thoughts!!

We don't need another thread to discuss what we're discussing here. The OP asked for opinions on blood play. That's exactly what we're discussing.

[bloody_rose20]

Its true, I did ask what others thought. I knew this would stir up some not so good ones, and even some prude opinions. Its a pretty risque fetish, and not many people I know actually like it, so seeing how many people who actually would do it, and who wouldn't, I still see that the ones not into it out-weigh the ones that do. *shrugs* Maybe, if those of you that want to only talk about the good side of blood play and pain fetishes, we could start another thread based just on that? I wouldn't mind. :-)

[Strange Famous]

I dont see the that there is a good side to assault or wounding.

The difference between a stabbing and a carpet burn is fairly obvious to a person who has been stabbed or carpet burned their knee. What we call assault is in every case a matter of degree - and in every case we consider injury's caused, the intent of the person committing the crime, and aggrivating factors.

So called consent can only be considered as an aggrivating factor... in my opinion I broadly agree with the UK Law - that if someone consents to be wounded their consent should be assumed as coerced or not given responsibly unless there is strong evidence otherwise. Whether I think the activity if perverted is neither here nor there, the case is whether the person involved has been hurt badly, and whether they have a right to be protected from being hurt badly (even if it means protection from themselves).

I am not saying either than women should be somehow immune to prosecution in these cases, only that in actual reality the cases which in consideration of the damage done, the intent of the criminal and the aggrivating factors - 99.9% of the time the criminal will be a man. There really are very very few female violent criminals. Im not saying it cannot happen, but it does not happen very often.

In relation to the OP, my view is that if a man is shown to have coerced consent (based on our judgment of what a sane person would consent to) from a woman to cut her for his own sexual gratification - I would recomend 18 months inside for this: and also that this man is given counselling. I am not a killjoy, but taking sexual pleasure from harming someone is in my opinion a moral wrong, a slippery slope that will if unchecked most likely lead to worse actions. Without wanting to be over the top, most serial killers demonstrate this characteristic.

And the difference between a "normal" man who might give his partner a spank which is meant as titiliation, and an "abnormal" man who will wound his partner with a knife as a sex game is - quite simply, in the line that is crossed. The line is when the action becomes ABH or wounding (ie - between the immediate application os a stinging or slightly painful sensation, and a lasting injury)

[bloody_rose20]

lol, was I just compared to a serial killer? *laughs* Let me just get this strait first. Me and my man don't do blood play every time we have sex. Its a very rare thing. To think that if it were up to those of you that obviosuly don't even know the meaning of an open-mind, that you would throw someone in jail for enjoying Blood Play. And first off, with serial killers, they start off with killing small animals. I can assure you, I would never do that. I love animals. So just because I enjoy cutting and being cut as a form of sexual release, doesn't mean it would in the future lead to me becoming a serial killer. People like you are rediculous. Try living life for once, rather than dumping on someone else's form of sexual fun.

Hey, I tired being nice about it all, but I'm tired of it. No need to keep dumping on something you have never even tried.

[Nisses]

Seems like in the end, you weren't quite ready for any of the not so nice replies. (In fact, SF is the first one to actually voice a dissenting opinion and stick with it... while staying nice)

However, Strange Famous, you allways have considered women to be somehow elevated above men, and to be protected (from alot of your posts in the past). I don't think you'll ever change that opinion, but I disagree with you there. They should not get a special treatment most of the time, including in this one.

I'd also like to know where you base this one on:

Without wanting to be over the top, most serial killers demonstrate this characteristic.

As far as my opinion on the OP goes, I agree with FuglyStick,

It seems overly romanticised, to the point where it has little bearing on any kind of reality.

[Strange Famous]

I didnt say that every person who takes sexual pleasure from inflicting pain on another person is a potential serial killer: but I do beleieve that it is unhealthy, and can lead down a dangerous path. I dont say that all serial killers have a sexual obsession with blood, but I believe that most serial killers are sex criminals and link sex and pain in their minds

[bloody_rose20]

Well they do, but I can garuntee you that what I do won't lead to anything dangerous down the path. We are very careful with what we do. And like I said, we don't do it often. Just as a little change now and then. And maybe I am fucked up in the head for linking pain and blood to pleasure lol *shrugs* At least I don't like any of the worst kind of kinks out there.

[Strange Famous]

Well, everyone might take their own view. I personally broadly feel that if someone is wounded then its going too far and the person being wounded should be protected by the law. Thats all I can say. If two people really find this kind of thing enjoyable I find that pretty remarkable - but I cant deny it because I'm not them.

There IS a line that has to be drawn on consent... and I do want to make myself quite clear on this point.

I am NOT saying that people on this board who might practice wounding for sexual pleasure are killers, or are like killers, or are potential killers.

In Germany there was a case a couple of years ago of a man who consented to be murdered. He wanted to die, and found someone online to kill him and canibalise his corpse. I think that we all in this case would say that the fact of consent did not stop this being a murder. When someone says they want to be killed in this way, the consent is not valid because it cannot be judged as sane.

Then you might like an assisted suicide, when someone consents to be given poison because they are very sick. Many of us may see this as a valid form of consent and not a case of murder.

But some assisted suicide cases have involved conditions which were not life threatening, and which were more based around mental illness than physical illness... most of us here say that consent is NOT valid.

Again - I am not saying that people here are like this, or it is the same thing - I am saying that when we think about it I believe we all accept that in some cases clearly given consent does not prevent a crime being committed. (in the case or the murder, in the case of a child... but in the UK a child is 15 and in the US they are 17 - so does where a 16 year old stands depend on what country they live in?)

My judgment is that wounded crosses the line. Other people have been invited to make their own call, and that is the point as I see of the creation of this thread.

[SabrinaFair]

Personally I don't see the appeal. I get a little nauseated around blood.

That being said, I would never judge someone else for what gets their rocks off, so long as they're doing it with a consenting partner. Sexuality is complex. I don't pretend to understand it in its entirety.

[lostgirl]

I like rough sex, but I have to draw the line at drawing blood. It's not my thing, but everyone has there thing and that is okay.

I would be open to trying it once if my current SO asked me to. I will do almost anything he asked me to.

[genuinegirly]

It just doesn't sound appealing to me. Makes me a bit queazy at the thought.
I guess it's not for everyone.

[Punk.of.Ages]

It's for most, I would say, but I hardly think those of us that take pleasure out of pain, no matter how extreme, are on our way to serial killing.

I see your argument Strange, but I don't think that comparing this to consented murder is quite the same thing. I could never murder somebody, even with consent. Especially if it involved cannibalism. I could wound somebody, and I don't think that's an insane quality. Violence is bred into all of us. It's primal nature. To channel that into sexual pleasure is not a damaging thing in my opinion.