Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
LL Cool J
___ and ___
Posts: 765
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 10:01 am UTC
Location: Melbourne

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby LL Cool J » Sun Oct 04, 2009 5:24 am UTC

SummerGlauFan wrote:
Brooklynxman wrote:
Gelsamel wrote:Gawker is an exceedingly wishy-washy news site.

Seems like a satire of modern art exhibitions where they do stuff like starve a dog etc. Meh, it's all in the eye of the beholder I suppose. This hypothetical guy's eye is pretty screwed up though.


There is a modern art exhibit where the STARVED A DOG!? WTF!?


Yep. My University even bought art from a guy who did this, though the art we bought was not that (it was a caterpillar statue we bought). Still, quite a few of us students, and the larger community, were appalled that our University had supported such an artist.
As far as I knew, that incident was reported pretty vaguely. Did anyone ever prove they actually starved the dog? I checked snopes and a few other places, but everywhere says that there is absolutely no evidence that the dog died anywhere near the gallery. The gallery says the animal was fed and watered when the public weren't viewing it.
Rippy wrote:Slogan: "Beauty. Grace. Fluticasone propionate. Inhale twice daily."

User avatar
SummerGlauFan
Posts: 1746
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:27 pm UTC
Location: KS

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby SummerGlauFan » Sun Oct 04, 2009 6:35 am UTC

__jess wrote:
SummerGlauFan wrote:
Brooklynxman wrote:
Gelsamel wrote:Gawker is an exceedingly wishy-washy news site.

Seems like a satire of modern art exhibitions where they do stuff like starve a dog etc. Meh, it's all in the eye of the beholder I suppose. This hypothetical guy's eye is pretty screwed up though.


There is a modern art exhibit where the STARVED A DOG!? WTF!?


Yep. My University even bought art from a guy who did this, though the art we bought was not that (it was a caterpillar statue we bought). Still, quite a few of us students, and the larger community, were appalled that our University had supported such an artist.
As far as I knew, that incident was reported pretty vaguely. Did anyone ever prove they actually starved the dog? I checked snopes and a few other places, but everywhere says that there is absolutely no evidence that the dog died anywhere near the gallery. The gallery says the animal was fed and watered when the public weren't viewing it.


Actually, he shot it. Quite a few people on campus and in the community were upset that the University bought his art.
glasnt wrote:"As she raised her rifle against the creature, her hair fluttered beneath the red florescent lighting of the locked down building.

I knew from that moment that she was something special"


Outbreak, a tale of love and zombies.

In stores now.

User avatar
LL Cool J
___ and ___
Posts: 765
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 10:01 am UTC
Location: Melbourne

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby LL Cool J » Sun Oct 04, 2009 6:39 am UTC

I thought Gelsamel was referring to this incident.

Edit: Back on topic a little. I can see that the idea of the hoax was to comment on art, not to comment on rape. The bad taste is the point. I don't know how I feel about that. The tone of the articles the OP linked, however, definitely disgust me. "Now can someone get to work on building this Rape Tunnel?" is just fucking awful.
Rippy wrote:Slogan: "Beauty. Grace. Fluticasone propionate. Inhale twice daily."

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Diadem » Sun Oct 04, 2009 2:01 pm UTC

Philwelch wrote:
podbaydoor wrote:I believe then, the name of the piece is wrong. It's not a "rape" tunnel (since rape by definition does not include consent) it's the "sex conducted in a rough fashion" tunnel. This also means that if consent is withdrawn at the end of the tunnel, the artist must stop.


But the artist has declared he will continue regardless of what you do or say once going through the tunnel. In that case, it is still rape (unless you consent the whole way through).

If you get on a rollercoaster, you consent to being on it. If halfway through you suddenly thing "shit, this is too much, I don't want this anymore" the thing won't stop for you. You'll be forced to sit out the entire thing. If you're on a train, and halfway you realize you don't want to go to your destination anymore, you're not allowed to pull the emergency brake either.

So there are plenty of situations in the real world where consent, once given, can not be withdrawn. That not mean something is wrong.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Sun Oct 04, 2009 2:07 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:So there are plenty of situations in the real world where consent, once given, can not be withdrawn.

And sex is not one of those situations. So...
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Diadem » Sun Oct 04, 2009 2:31 pm UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:
Diadem wrote:So there are plenty of situations in the real world where consent, once given, can not be withdrawn.

And sex is not one of those situations. So...

And why is that?
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby podbaydoor » Sun Oct 04, 2009 2:35 pm UTC

Because one human being raping another human being is perfectly capable of stopping at any time.
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Diadem » Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:13 pm UTC

Not if you don't know if the other wants you to stop. Which is the problem here. If you do not have a previously-agreed-upon safety word or signal, then there is no way for the 'rapist' to know if his victim is withdrawing consent. No way. Yelling 'no', or 'stop' or struggling, may all be part of the fantasy. So in theory you can withdraw consent, but if you partner does not know, and can not know, that you are, then he won't stop. And you can't expect him to. So effectively you can not withdraw your consent.

And no, that is not an imaginary situation that never happens. Rape fantasies are extremely common. People acting out those fantasies are less common, but it still occurs much more often than you'd think.

Anyway, that's why you should always use a safety word. Especially with someone new. But if you don't, if that's a risk you want to take... Well, then, no, you can not withdraw consent once you started.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Sun Oct 04, 2009 4:44 pm UTC

And yet, the hypothetical rape tunnel is not a form of BDSM. It's telling that you have to wander into unrelated topics to try to justify the concept of irrevocable consent here.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Diadem » Sun Oct 04, 2009 6:09 pm UTC

Of course such a tunnel, if it actually existed, would be a form of bdsm. What else would it be? If you consent to being raped, it's not real rape but rape-roleplaying. Which falls under bdsm.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Mon Oct 05, 2009 12:36 am UTC

When you do BDSM, you have a safeword, or a quality of relationship that makes it easy to communicate retraction of consent without needing one. Characterizing this tunnel as a BDSM space, absent any relationship or provisions for retraction of consent, is simply absurd.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Diadem » Mon Oct 05, 2009 12:53 am UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:When you do BDSM, you have a safeword, or a quality of relationship that makes it easy to communicate retraction of consent without needing one.

Both of those are true most of the time. But not all of the time. Definitely not all of the time.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

Philwelch
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:33 am UTC
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Philwelch » Mon Oct 05, 2009 1:27 am UTC

It seems to me that we're playing semantics with the term "BDSM", which is an entirely unfruitful discussion.
Fascism: If you're not with us you're against us.
Leftism: If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Perfection is an unattainable goal.

User avatar
Ghandi 2
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 8:40 am UTC
Location: Williamsburg, Virginia
Contact:

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Ghandi 2 » Mon Oct 05, 2009 3:29 am UTC

Wow, this discussion is even funnier than the hoax.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Mon Oct 05, 2009 3:32 am UTC

Philwelch wrote:It seems to me that we're playing semantics with the term "BDSM", which is an entirely unfruitful discussion.

Rather agreed. Regardless of whether the tunnel can be considered BDSM, the fact that there is a point of no return makes it a Bad Thing.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Diadem » Mon Oct 05, 2009 10:03 am UTC

Well I don't care about terminology. Call it what you like.

However there being a point-of-no-return is not necessarily a bad thing. That is where we disagree. And this is not merely academic either. There are (plenty of) real world situations where this applies. There are plenty of people who do not use safe words in a bdsm context (though the vast majority does). And even in more mundane situations like getting on a train or signing a contract there are points of no return where, once you've given consent, you can't retract it.

What you are saying is that a perfectly consensual activity between adults is not ok, because it does not fit your narrow definition of what people are supposed to do. There is even a term for judgements like that. It is YKINOK. Your kind is not ok.

Please be a little more openminded. As long as people harm noone, their kink is ok.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
Hawknc
Oompa Loompa of SCIENCE!
Posts: 6986
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:14 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Hawknc » Mon Oct 05, 2009 10:14 am UTC

Diadem wrote:What you are saying is that a perfectly consensual activity between adults is not ok, because it does not fit your narrow definition of what people are supposed to do.

Man, you don't even pay attention. If it's consensual, this conversation is pointless because then it's consensual sex. If you withdraw consent, it ceases to be that. Listen closely, because so many threads have touched on this but people still don't get it:

There is no "point of no return" with sex.


Sex is not a train, you do not endanger peoples' lives by pulling the emergency stop. If one person withdraws consent, the other person stops. There's very little grey area here. We're not talking about kink, we're talking about an actual revocation of consent.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Diadem » Mon Oct 05, 2009 10:28 am UTC

Hawknc wrote:If you withdraw consent, it ceases to be that.

If you want to play wordgames, ok: If you cannot withdraw consent, then it cannot cease to be consensual sex.

Listen closely, because so many threads have touched on this but people still don't get it:

There is no "point of no return" with sex.

I disagree.

More importantly: Reality disagrees.

Kind of ironic that you accuse me of not paying attention when you consistently fail to grasp that point. There are plenty of people who engage in sexual activities where consent, once given, can not be withdrawn. You obviously don't, and I personally don't either. But there are certainly people who do. And the ones I know or heard of seem perfectly happy and sane.

Obviously prior consent is needed. Including consenting to not using a safeword. But if that requirement is met, then who we to judge such a kink?
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
Aikanaro
Posts: 1801
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 1:43 pm UTC
Location: Saint Louis, MO

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Aikanaro » Mon Oct 05, 2009 12:05 pm UTC

Hell, any kind of sex in which one partner is bound, gagged and blindfolded.
Dear xkcd,

On behalf of my religion, I'm sorry so many of us do dumb shit. Please forgive us.

Love, Aikanaro.

User avatar
Box Boy
WINNING
Posts: 1356
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Box Boy » Mon Oct 05, 2009 5:49 pm UTC

Diadem, shutup.
If someone wants to withdraw consent at any given moment, they have the right to.
No matter what you can withdraw consent from sex, even if you're tied up, playing a rape fantasy and have no safe word you can retract it. Maybe it's not as simple as saying "Stop this, I do not want to have sex" maybe instead you have to shout "FOR FUCK SAKE LET ME OUT NOW I CHANGED MY MIND AND DONT WANT TO HAVE SEX!", but you can still do it.

User avatar
Aikanaro
Posts: 1801
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 1:43 pm UTC
Location: Saint Louis, MO

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Aikanaro » Mon Oct 05, 2009 6:49 pm UTC

Box Boy wrote:Diadem, shutup.
If someone wants to withdraw consent at any given moment, they have the right to.
No matter what you can withdraw consent from sex, even if you're tied up, playing a rape fantasy and have no safe word you can retract it. Maybe it's not as simple as saying "Stop this, I do not want to have sex" maybe instead you have to shout "FOR FUCK SAKE LET ME OUT NOW I CHANGED MY MIND AND DONT WANT TO HAVE SEX!", but you can still do it.

Past a ball gag? That's some impressive vocal talent.
Thought, just to be fair, I bolded the part you're correct about. Just because you have the right to, though, doesn't mean you CAN do so.
Dear xkcd,

On behalf of my religion, I'm sorry so many of us do dumb shit. Please forgive us.

Love, Aikanaro.

Philwelch
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:33 am UTC
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Philwelch » Mon Oct 05, 2009 7:04 pm UTC

Aikanaro wrote:
Box Boy wrote:Diadem, shutup.
If someone wants to withdraw consent at any given moment, they have the right to.
No matter what you can withdraw consent from sex, even if you're tied up, playing a rape fantasy and have no safe word you can retract it. Maybe it's not as simple as saying "Stop this, I do not want to have sex" maybe instead you have to shout "FOR FUCK SAKE LET ME OUT NOW I CHANGED MY MIND AND DONT WANT TO HAVE SEX!", but you can still do it.

Past a ball gag? That's some impressive vocal talent.
Thought, just to be fair, I bolded the part you're correct about. Just because you have the right to, though, doesn't mean you CAN do so.


Consent is a mental state, you can withdraw consent even if you can't communicate it. Though if I was bound and gagged I would flail and try to tap out and resist as hard as I can.

And if you don't have some type of tap-out signal that your bound partner can use, you're being irresponsible.
Fascism: If you're not with us you're against us.
Leftism: If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Perfection is an unattainable goal.

MrGee
Posts: 998
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby MrGee » Mon Oct 05, 2009 7:49 pm UTC

Hawknc wrote:Sex is not a train, you do not endanger peoples' lives by pulling the emergency stop.


What about blue balls?

The reason you can't stop a train is because of public policy. It would ruin the system. There is nothing about having a safeword that ruins the system of sex.

Couples without safewords should be reprimanded, not used as an excuse for rape.

Philwelch
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:33 am UTC
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Philwelch » Mon Oct 05, 2009 8:00 pm UTC

MrGee wrote:
Hawknc wrote:Sex is not a train, you do not endanger peoples' lives by pulling the emergency stop.


What about blue balls?


You can wank. Excuse yourself and go to the bathroom if she insists.
Fascism: If you're not with us you're against us.
Leftism: If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Perfection is an unattainable goal.

MrGee
Posts: 998
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby MrGee » Mon Oct 05, 2009 8:04 pm UTC

But...I'll go blind!

User avatar
TaintedDeity
Posts: 4003
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 7:22 pm UTC
Location: England;

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby TaintedDeity » Mon Oct 05, 2009 8:19 pm UTC

Joking about that is not terribly funny.
You can withdraw consent at any point, people change their minds.
I don't see why there's an argument on that point.
Ⓞⓞ◯

User avatar
Marbas
Posts: 1169
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 4:01 am UTC
Location: Down down down at the bottom of the sea
Contact:

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Marbas » Mon Oct 05, 2009 10:52 pm UTC


Consent is a mental state, you can withdraw consent even if you can't communicate it. Though if I was bound and gagged I would flail and try to tap out and resist as hard as I can.


What if you have signed entered into a contract saying "I will have sex with this person at _____ time and ____ place." Then decide you don't want to go through with it during the act?
Jahoclave wrote:Do you have any idea how much more fun the holocaust is with "Git er Done" as the catch phrase?

Philwelch
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:33 am UTC
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Philwelch » Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:04 pm UTC

Marbas wrote:

Consent is a mental state, you can withdraw consent even if you can't communicate it. Though if I was bound and gagged I would flail and try to tap out and resist as hard as I can.


What if you have signed entered into a contract saying "I will have sex with this person at _____ time and ____ place." Then decide you don't want to go through with it during the act?


I already covered this: contracts require consideration (i.e. a benefit to both parties), such a contract would most likely constitute prostitution. Even if it didn't constitute prostitution, it would probably be an illegal, unconscionable contract and would not be upheld by the court. Even if it was upheld by the court, the court would only reward monetary damages.
Fascism: If you're not with us you're against us.
Leftism: If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Perfection is an unattainable goal.

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Malice » Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:16 pm UTC

Marbas wrote:

Consent is a mental state, you can withdraw consent even if you can't communicate it. Though if I was bound and gagged I would flail and try to tap out and resist as hard as I can.


What if you have signed entered into a contract saying "I will have sex with this person at _____ time and ____ place." Then decide you don't want to go through with it during the act?


The contract is non-binding. There's nothing special about signing a piece of paper versus kissing back--either way, you're just indicating your willingness to consent to upcoming sex, and withdrawing later. Rape is rape is rape; you can't sign away your right not to be raped any more than you can voluntarily become a slave or a murder victim.
Image

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Diadem » Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:36 pm UTC

Malice wrote:any more than you can voluntarily become a slave or a murder victim.

In my country, you can voluntarily become a murder victim. But admittedly that's sophistry and entirely besides the point :D

Box Boy wrote:Diadem, shutup.

Telling me to shut up does not make you right.

Box Boy wrote:If someone wants to withdraw consent at any given moment, they have the right to.

TaintedDeity wrote:You can withdraw consent at any point, people change their minds.
I don't see why there's an argument on that point.

Both of you entirely miss the point. Yes, of course you can change your mind at any time. And yes, of course you have the right to do that. But if you change your mind, and you do not communicate that to your partner, then you can not expect him to stop. And it will not be rape if he does not stop.

In a situation where you are playing a rape fantasy without a safe word, you can not withdraw consent. That's why most people use safe words. For precisely that reason. Because it's the only reliable to way to communicate that you are withdrawing consent. That's why they are so important.

But some people chose to play without safe words. Well, if they chose to do that, fully aware of the possible consequences, that is their choice. They are not harming anyone. And Aikanaro's example is even better. Any situation where your partner is bound and gagged is one where he can not communicate non-consent. Now that I think about it I can name even more examples. I always use safe words and I never use gags, so most of those situations do not apply to me, but now that i'm thinking about it I remember that I once tied up my former girlfriend and then left the room for half an hour. She sure was not able to withdraw her consent during that time.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

Philwelch
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:33 am UTC
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Philwelch » Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:51 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:Both of you entirely miss the point. Yes, of course you can change your mind at any time. And yes, of course you have the right to do that. But if you change your mind, and you do not communicate that to your partner, then you can not expect him to stop. And it will not be rape if he does not stop.

In a situation where you are playing a rape fantasy without a safe word, you can not withdraw consent. That's why most people use safe words. For precisely that reason. Because it's the only reliable to way to communicate that you are withdrawing consent. That's why they are so important.

But some people chose to play without safe words. Well, if they chose to do that, fully aware of the possible consequences, that is their choice. They are not harming anyone. And Aikanaro's example is even better. Any situation where your partner is bound and gagged is one where he can not communicate non-consent. Now that I think about it I can name even more examples. I always use safe words and I never use gags, so most of those situations do not apply to me, but now that i'm thinking about it I remember that I once tied up my former girlfriend and then left the room for half an hour. She sure was not able to withdraw her consent during that time.


First off, don't tie someone up and then abandon them, it possible for ties to slip and cause injury or death, in which case you would be liable for criminal negligence. I am going to hope and assume that you were discreetly checking on her even when you were gone.

Secondly, being bound and gagged doesn't eliminate every possible way for the person to signal to you.

Thirdly, since you're being so pragmatic about the issue, here's some pragmatism--if you ever do BDSM without a safeword and your partner decides she really does want out, then it's your word against hers and yours loses. In pure legal terms, you're also probably guilty of criminal negligence if you don't have any way for your partner to communicate a withdrawal of consent.
Fascism: If you're not with us you're against us.
Leftism: If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Perfection is an unattainable goal.

MrGee
Posts: 998
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby MrGee » Wed Oct 07, 2009 2:21 am UTC

I'm with Phil on all three points. Also, what kind of weird sex life do you lead? What do you do while your partner is bound in the other room for 30 minutes--play cribbage? Did she have a time-wasting fetish? :P

Philwelch
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:33 am UTC
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Philwelch » Wed Oct 07, 2009 5:32 am UTC

Eh, it's mostly a control thing. The idea is that the tied up person is helpless and at your disposal whenever you feel like getting around to them.

But jesus christ, stay in the same room and play cribbage just so you're there in case they get hurt.
Fascism: If you're not with us you're against us.
Leftism: If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Perfection is an unattainable goal.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Diadem » Wed Oct 07, 2009 5:21 pm UTC

She was tied spreadeagled to the bed with wrists and ankles bound. That is only slightly less comfortable as lying normally in your bed, and about as dangerous. I really cannot think of a single risk that she was subject to that you are not also subject to while sleeping.

But this is offtopic

Philwelch wrote:Secondly, being bound and gagged doesn't eliminate every possible way for the person to signal to you.

I'm sure that you can think of ways to signal disconsent in specific situations. But in general you cannot do that while bound and gagged. Which is the point, because we were talking about situations where you can not signal disconsent. Not situations where you can.

Philwelch wrote:Thirdly, since you're being so pragmatic about the issue, here's some pragmatism--if you ever do BDSM without a safeword and your partner decides she really does want out, then it's your word against hers and yours loses.

Legally perhaps. But not morally, which is what I'm talking about. In many countries bdsm is against the law even if your partner consents and continues to consent afterwards. So fuck laws. It's what is ethical that counts.

Philwelch wrote:In pure legal terms, you're also probably guilty of criminal negligence if you don't have any way for your partner to communicate a withdrawal of consent.

Again, I don't care what the law says. Ethically you're not negligent if your partner did not want to use a safe word and you obliged.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
Box Boy
WINNING
Posts: 1356
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Box Boy » Wed Oct 07, 2009 5:36 pm UTC

In that situation I can understand your point, I assumed you meant that once consent was given to rape fantasy-style sex it couldn't be taken back no matter what.
However in a situation where using a safeword, and thus talking, is possible I can't imagine any possible series of events where consent can't be taken away at any time.

Philwelch
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:33 am UTC
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Philwelch » Wed Oct 07, 2009 7:14 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:She was tied spreadeagled to the bed with wrists and ankles bound. That is only slightly less comfortable as lying normally in your bed, and about as dangerous. I really cannot think of a single risk that she was subject to that you are not also subject to while sleeping.


I can.

Diadem wrote:
Philwelch wrote:Secondly, being bound and gagged doesn't eliminate every possible way for the person to signal to you.

I'm sure that you can think of ways to signal disconsent in specific situations. But in general you cannot do that while bound and gagged. Which is the point, because we were talking about situations where you can not signal disconsent. Not situations where you can.


I'm saying that unless there is a way to signal discontent that your partner will respond to, you are legally and morally negligent towards their basic human right to withdraw consent. You can't give away your right to withdraw sexual consent—ever. Morally speaking, not using a safeword or some type of signal to stop is outright abusive of your partner's basic rights as a human being.
Fascism: If you're not with us you're against us.
Leftism: If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Perfection is an unattainable goal.

User avatar
TaintedDeity
Posts: 4003
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 7:22 pm UTC
Location: England;

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby TaintedDeity » Wed Oct 07, 2009 8:51 pm UTC

I think what Philwelch is saying: Yes, you can go without any way to withdraw consent, but that's not cool both legally and morally.
Ⓞⓞ◯

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Diadem » Thu Oct 08, 2009 12:30 am UTC

Box Boy wrote:In that situation I can understand your point, I assumed you meant that once consent was given to rape fantasy-style sex it couldn't be taken back no matter what.
However in a situation where using a safeword, and thus talking, is possible I can't imagine any possible series of events where consent can't be taken away at any time.

No, I'm certainly not saying that. Ordinarily you can withdraw consent at any time. I'm just saying that in some situations you can't. Some people do not want to use safe words. Some activities make safe words inherently impossible - or at least very problematic - such as tying someone up *and* gagging him. And thirdly some people are just incapable of using safety words even when they ought to. It's one thing to agree with your partner that she'll say 'red' when things get to rough, but your partner actually saying that is quite another. The dominace and submission that are played with in a bdsm context are not make-believe, they are real. It's hard to stand up for yourself while submitting.

So in short: Safe are generally a good idea (and I personally always use them). But sometimes they unwanted, impossible or ineffective. In such situations the idea that you can retract consent at any time simply fails.

Philwelch wrote:
Diadem wrote:She was tied spreadeagled to the bed with wrists and ankles bound. That is only slightly less comfortable as lying normally in your bed, and about as dangerous. I really cannot think of a single risk that she was subject to that you are not also subject to while sleeping.

I can.

Well then, go ahead. Surprise me.


Philwelch wrote:
Diadem wrote:
Philwelch wrote:Secondly, being bound and gagged doesn't eliminate every possible way for the person to signal to you.

I'm sure that you can think of ways to signal disconsent in specific situations. But in general you cannot do that while bound and gagged. Which is the point, because we were talking about situations where you can not signal disconsent. Not situations where you can.


I'm saying that unless there is a way to signal discontent that your partner will respond to, you are legally and morally negligent towards their basic human right to withdraw consent. You can't give away your right to withdraw sexual consent—ever. Morally speaking, not using a safeword or some type of signal to stop is outright abusive of your partner's basic rights as a human being.

Legally, I don't know and I don't care. But morally? Please give me some arguments of why this would be a morally bad thing? Most major theories of morality (Utilitarianism, Kantianism, Contractarianism (or however you properly -ism that theory)) out there will not condemn such activities. So I'm curious about your arguments.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

Philwelch
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:33 am UTC
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Philwelch » Thu Oct 08, 2009 1:07 am UTC

Diadem wrote:
Philwelch wrote:
Diadem wrote:She was tied spreadeagled to the bed with wrists and ankles bound. That is only slightly less comfortable as lying normally in your bed, and about as dangerous. I really cannot think of a single risk that she was subject to that you are not also subject to while sleeping.

I can.

Well then, go ahead. Surprise me.


What if there was a fire in the bedroom? Sleeping people can get out of bed if there's a fire. Or a wasp. Or a leg cramp. Or a sudden urge to urinate. Or a medical emergency. Or a burglar. Or....

Diadem wrote:
Philwelch wrote:I'm saying that unless there is a way to signal discontent that your partner will respond to, you are legally and morally negligent towards their basic human right to withdraw consent. You can't give away your right to withdraw sexual consent—ever. Morally speaking, not using a safeword or some type of signal to stop is outright abusive of your partner's basic rights as a human being.


Legally, I don't know and I don't care. But morally? Please give me some arguments of why this would be a morally bad thing? Most major theories of morality (Utilitarianism, Kantianism, Contractarianism (or however you properly -ism that theory)) out there will not condemn such activities. So I'm curious about your arguments.


The experience of someone else using your body sexually without your *present* consent is traumatic and horrifying. That should be reason enough for you to require a safeword--to mitigate the risk of your partner having a traumatic and horrifying experience should they change their mind after being bound. Yes, human beings have limited rights to obligate their future selves. But there are limits to that right. When you weigh the suffering of a helpless person being raped when they really, really, seriously don't want it anymore against that victim's supposed obligation to her rapist, it doesn't balance out. And I shouldn't even have to go this far, because if you have the slightest bit of human compassion for anyone, you won't inflict that suffering on them. Much less someone you like and trust enough to have sex with.
Fascism: If you're not with us you're against us.
Leftism: If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Perfection is an unattainable goal.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Trigger:Sometimes you fail me modern art....

Postby Diadem » Thu Oct 08, 2009 1:39 am UTC

Philwelch wrote:
Diadem wrote:
Philwelch wrote:I can.
Well then, go ahead. Surprise me.

What if there was a fire in the bedroom? Sleeping people can get out of bed if there's a fire. Or a wasp. Or a leg cramp. Or a sudden urge to urinate. Or a medical emergency. Or a burglar. Or....

All of those are equally dangerous while sleeping. A fire is in fact more dangerous when asleep, because you die before you wake. So even if there is a risk, it's the same risk you face everytime you go to sleep. And besides: Against fires we have fire alarms, wasps, leg cramps or sudden urges to urinate are merely uncomfortable, and burglars can't fly. Finally there's always the 'scream at the top of your lungs' trick to get attention, no?

Your perceiving risks that aren't there. But even if there are risks (some activities, such as suspension bondages, breath play, or electroplay are inherently risky), if you decide to take those risks together, that is fine.

The experience of someone else using your body sexually without your *present* consent is traumatic and horrifying. That should be reason enough for you to require a safeword--to mitigate the risk of your partner having a traumatic and horrifying experience should they change their mind after being bound. Yes, human beings have limited rights to obligate their future selves. But there are limits to that right. When you weigh the suffering of a helpless person being raped when they really, really, seriously don't want it anymore against that victim's supposed obligation to her rapist, it doesn't balance out. And I shouldn't even have to go this far, because if you have the slightest bit of human compassion for anyone, you won't inflict that suffering on them. Much less someone you like and trust enough to have sex with.

Supposed obligation? You're still utterly missing the point. There is no obligation. Merely an impossibility to signal disconsent. And comparing accidently going past the line where your partner is stil ok with the things you do to rape is ridiculous hyperbole. You're comparing a horrible crime with an accident. And you still haven't given any argument as to why it is morally wrong. You merely rephrased what you said earlier. It's wrong because there are limits to what you can rightfully do? That is +1 for circular logic.

I mean sure it's traumatic when it goes wrong, but that's not an argument. Iceskating is horribly traumatic when it goes wrong as well. Dangerous too. People die from iceskating accidents. So is that immoral too? Of course not. The benefits outweigh the risks. The estimation of what activities are worth it, ie. for what activities the benefits outweigh the risks, is entirely subjective, and different people arrive at different answers. I don't see how anyone can get to make that call for someone else.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests