Well put Aangelica, you said better what I was trying to say. It is possible that such a contract could exist within a safe sane consensual relationship. That said, I do also doubt that the man in question is safe or sane. Such extreme BDSM ideas as 24/7 role play would only occur between people who really know each other well, and the contract would only be drawn up if the couple were already sure that it would be agreed to. Secondly the submissive in a couple would want the contract to give ways in which he/she can receive punnishment, puinnishment would rarely if ever be sex (since if this were safe sane and consensual, sex would be a pleasure for both) but instead the form of correction the submissive enjoys (spanking, bondage, etc.). Third the rule about tieing her down and doing what he wants does not sound consensual at all, I doubt there was any plan for the use of a safeword or similar by which the submissive could control those events.
Now in a real BDSM relationship such a contract might be written up, where it was unwritten and known between the couple that a safeword would always be allowed, and where tieing to a bed is a fettish of the submissive. The submissive would also more often than not break and stretch the rules in order to gain the dominating attentions of the dominant partner.
Thanks, I was having difficulty with that sentance.
“Secondly the submissive in a couple would want the contract to give ways in which he/she can receive whatever he/she is into.” is more wordy and confusing, but what I really meant.
Uhm. I really mean no offense, but no, you’re not. I’m not saying you’re totally off-your-head nuts, you clearly aren’t, but you do not reach the “normal” level of sanity. A totally sane person would have no disorders. I’m sure your personality is just as strong or whatever as anyone else - but you have an anxiety disorder. You are not “as sane as the next person”.
I think of “mental illness” or “insanity” as some kind of full blown psychosis- a condition where an individual has an impaired ability to perceive or process or understand objective reality. Not every mental or emotional disorder affects the ability the perceive reality.
This probably wasn’t directed at me, but I would like to address it.
I’d agree with you on that definition for insanity - but not mental illness. You call some non-life threatening or life-changing physical problems illnesses - why should mental illness be reserved for only the strongest and most affecting cases?
True. But it’s a scale, with totally sane at one end and totally insane at the other. Most of the time it’s impossible to actually draw a line and say “this person is exactly this much insane”, but having a mental disorder definetly does move you further away from the “totally sane” side of the scale. Distortion of the perception of reality is certainly a long way down towards totally insane, but you don’t have to be that far down for a mental illness to have a significant effect on your life.
From the sentences above that, it sounds like it might be okay if she says she doesn’t want to do something painful as long as she suggests an alternative. But if she starts something, she has to finish, even if it becomes painful. That’s really messed up.
This right here tells me you just don’t get it. When people enter into voluntary slavery it’s not just a “fantasy” it’s the way they live their life. You don’t have to get it though, because you don’t have to participate in it. But try to realize that just because it’s not your kink doesn’t mean the practitioners of it are mentally ill.
Even if it’s “the way they live their life,” it’s still a fantasy in the sense that if the sub says “Ok, stop it for real” (or words to that effect), the dominant person had better untie the person or whatever or face prosecution. A real slave (like in the antebellum south) does not have that option.
It’s entirely possible that Mr. and Mrs. Frey had a dom/sub relationship and she happily served him for some time. In that case, the “wifely expectations” document doesn’t mean that he’s done anything at all wrong. Plenty of women (and men) would be extremely turned on by receiving such a document.
So you can’t conclude that he’s a sicko or anything like that.
If you admit that SM play is a consensual playacting of violence and control, and defend it because its consensual, voluntary, and kink, then why is it so hard to recognize that the real thing, NON playacted, is bad? I don’t think there’s anything wrong with vore fetishes. But if you go out and actually eat women, that’s probably a bad thing. Right? Get it?
shrug Well, whatever else he may be, he can’t have been too good at the domination thing if he couldn’t even get her to sign the contract. Don’t like his odds of having gotten her to comply with anything else.
