I just didn’t think there would be a legal issue here. I’m amazed.
I’ll take a sack of money and the hope diamond please.
**
I’m not upset, I’m just amazed. It’s a very rare day in the life of a SexyWriter that someone says, “You’re right, I concede your point.”
So much so, that I’m not sure what I’m going to do with this soapbox now.
No need to argue about that line drawing as far as I’m concerned. Frankly, I have a feeling we’d draw it at approximately the same place. Besides, it’s a moot point.
Thanks for a good discussion in any case.
-L
(I don’t mean to sound short or sarcastic with you…so please note that I’m only making a joke.)
Where in the OP does it say, “Laura, please support your own personal sexual interests and explain why they’re acceptable”?
Your opinion is duly noted and is very rational. I appreciate it very much. If I was going to date you, I would certainly be willing to adhere to that standard. If this were a Great Debate about the usefulness of safewords, I would probably side with you in most respects.
However, unless you’re showing up Friday to take me to dinner, I don’t think I need to go into my own preferences any further.
-L
Sexywriter,
Thank you for both answering my question and defining your limits on the subject.
Hmmm… Friday, Well, I don’t have anything scheduled, but Boston’s just a little distant for a first date without lots of getting to know each other before as far as my limits go 
(Ok, so ya weren’t really askin me, but right now I’ll take a virtual almost bein asked out on a date by a wonderfully intelligent and sexy lady as a pick me up anyway.)
-Doug (in Minneapolis)
You seem really into this thread, something we should know ?
eh eh, nudge nudge, wink wink ?
I’m coming into this thread late, but I think that aynrandlover has let you, SexyWriter, off too lightly (in the sense of not asking you, politely of course, to clarify what “certain limits” are. Being a gentleman I, of course, will step into the fray.
OK; if I read the above correctly, we have one endpoint. Even if both parties agree, and even if the receiver agrees and begs for it (not mercy killing, but for pleasure), it is not permissible for one party to kill another for purposes of sexual pleasure. Cool.
Now let’s squeeze the endpoints a bit. Is it permissible for one party to maim another? Say to cut off a limb? Specifically, to cut off a leg or an arm? I point out that this is not purely rhetorical; there have been several stories in the news recently about people going into hospitals and asking for limbs to be amputated for purposes of sexual pleasure (see News of the Weird for the past several months). So, I ask again: should it be against the law for people to cut off each others limbs in a BDSM situation, with full consent of both parties, and where complete precautions to prevent loss of life are taken?
I think it’s only that we have politely agreed that those “certain limits” would be differently defined by each person and therefore, not a matter on which we can come to any agreement in this forum.
Personally, I believe anything involving “cutting” or any type of blood ought to fall in the “out of bounds” category. However, I personally know numerous people who would heartily disagree with me.
In my opinion, the person who wants a limb removed CLEARLY need psychological assistance. Much MORE clearly, in my opinion, than someone who wants needles run through their nipples. Though, as you can see, this is a matter of degree.
I feel fairly comfortable in asserting that this is WRONG…that laws undoubtedly cover this type of maiming. However, I see that it’s only another issue of “protecting one from oneself.”
The answer is…I don’t have an answer.
-L
Maybe we should require the maimer to get a license. Otherwise, we’d have a real problem with back-alley maimings. (I’m not kidding – weirdos trying to saw off their own limbs don’t tend to live very long.)
Is it a date, then? 
Yeah, but this is a “Bald man problem.” Would you draw the line here? Draw the line here? Draw the line here? My limits would extend not just to bloodletting but to bruising (I honestly don’t even like hickeys, but mainly because they’re ugly) or, in the case of bondage, a lack of circulation.
That is, most likely, far too tame for many practicers of these arts. And they’re probably ok (heck, who am I to pass judgement when I lived fight club?) to do so, but I don’t want sex mixed up with those things (bruising, bloodletting, poor circulation).
Indeed, nor do I. But you can clearly see that 1) you have judged people 2) for their sexual deviance 3) which was only a matter of degree different from yours.
Now, perhaps the “only” there is a little understated (little?-you say?), but you see the idea here… we clearly have an opinion about what people should and shouldn’t do as healthy individuals.
I don’t like the idea that the government would involve itself in my private life either; I also don’t like the idea that people are hurting themselves. Rock and a hard place anyone?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by jmullaney *
**
And what about those people who are into that whole self-trepining thing?
The thing is, this is WAY off topic. If you will permit me to make a heavy overgeneralization here, I’d like to point out that your average, run of the mill submissive, or even masochist isn’t interested in being scarred, maimed, abused outside of the context of the BDSM encounter, or otherwise harmed. Those people who ARE (IMHO) do not fall under the category of “harmless kink.”
Sawing off a limb or cutting a hole in your skull is beyond a healthy sexual interest in playing with power exchange and roles. Thus, it’s not really a matter that can be justified by claiming it’s your right to engage in whatever type of sex you wish. I consider it more akin to remaining married to a truly abusive partner, self-hatred, or any of a number of serious psychiatric disorders. None of which is covered by an interest in BDSM.
Back to where we draw the line? Where does BDSM cross into a pathological desire to be harmed? It happens when one does such things out of self-hatred, or when one is unaware of the reasons behind their actions. It happens when someone becomes obsessed with more and more extreme pain and there is no end in sight for them.
I personally know a man who pierced holes behind his achilles tendon. He then gradually increased the size of the piercings until they are now approximately the size of a silver dollar. Why did he do this? So he could be hung from his feet like a piece of meat on a hook.
I do not defend his “right” to do this the same way I would someone who was aroused by the fear and sting of a piercing needle. Instead, I believe he needs help.
-L
Unfortunately, this only goes so far; for example, the extreme case of one person killing another, even with mutual consent. There are some limits where we, as a society, say, “This is out of bounds, not as a personal decision on the part of each individual person, but as a corporate decision on the part of society as a whole.” From your previous post, I had inferred (I hope not incorrectly) that you agreed that at least killing falls into that category. I was trying to see if we could edge that end point any further. However:
And thus you aren’t letting me move that endpoint (regardless of the status of the law; I am applying for your permission to impose a law on all members of society.)
Pretty loose endpoints, even if your refusal is on the basis of not having an answer. Loose enough to frankly scare me a little; I am not part of the BDSM scene, but if your attitude is common, then even though you would avoid such extremes assiduously, the fact that you hesitate to impose even such extreme limits is a little surprising to me. I learn a lot on these boards.
But I will say this: it is awfully hard to craft a law that only prohibits what you want it to, but no more. Police tend to use laws as they want to use them and not as they intend to use them. Your example of a well intended law against assault is a case in point; something intended to protect women was obviously used against something that the officer involved personally disapproved of. Feh.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by dlb *
**
Oh no…I’m perfectly willing to impose my version of “health and safety” on everyone else. I really am. I’m just hesitant to give my own personal outline here because of the fear of starting an entire new conversation about how I’M personally qualified to make such decisions, where I get off telling others what’s healthy, etc.
For the record ARL, I agree with you. I certainly DO impose my own values on others. As I’ve said before, I’m simply a little fearful of putting the law making capacity in someone’s hands who isn’t ME. As I think most people are when it comes to things that affect their own rights.
Just for the record:
My law: Anything involving death, or actual HARM to a person is against it. Plain and simple. If you’re too stupid to tie your partner up without cutting off circulation in the hands, thus causing harm, you’re under arrest: you have no business engaging in this activity, even if your partner was ALSO too stupid to be concerned about their own circulation. This is only one example of potential harm, of course.
If you’re engaging in any BDSM activity out of anger: Jail time. And just so you don’t have any fun, NO handcuffs will be involved.
Cutting, I’m a little nervous about. Because…well…a lover pierced me. So, since I consider myself a healthy, normal human being, I find anything I do pretty damned acceptable. Whereas anything involving a blade breaking skin, I find reprehensible. So while this might be something I’d argue belonged under the “jail time” list, I think it should be decided on a case by case basis.
And of course, consent issues. Any person who is intoxicated, mentally disabled, or otherwise incapable of giving consent shall be considered a “victim” rather than a “participant.”
Those are “Laura’s Rules of Kink.” Or at least, the ones I can think of at this point that seem pertinent.
However, I think some of my problem with this discussion is that I don’t see the things you’re talking about as a natural extension of BDSM. I don’t consider removal of limbs to be just another kink on the continuum. Therefore, I’m not sure that Laura’s Laws of Limb Removal belong in a discussion in which I defend my desire to be tied up and spanked.
Also, it is actually my opinion that matters of “sex” should be kept out of proceedings in Laura’s Court of Law. For example, if you harm a lover in the process of a BDSM act, you are being tried for whatever the harm was. You are NOT being charged with being a pervert, which is perfectly acceptable under Laura’s Law.
-L
Of course. But, if there are going to laws to protect people from themselves, it gets awkward to to define when they should come into play. Not that the whole legality discussion isn’t already off topic as far as I’m concerned.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by jmullaney *
**
What WAS the original topic? It was a matter of where such desires come from, no?
And my original argument was that we can’t determine where they come from, nor does it matter, since we have a right to engage in our kink (within Laura’s Laws, of course) no matter where the kink originated.
To that, I will add, that I actually consider this quite natural. Humans instinctually form hierarchies. We form governments, business situations, caste systems, etc. Attempts to try to do away with hierarchies only lead to DIFFERENT hierarchies being created.
It is my belief that this is a left over evolutionary instinct. Wolves do it. Apes do it. Humans do it. While we’re not allowed to play out our inherent tendencies in the outside world in most cases, some of us have an urge to play them out sexually, which is where they are most vital.
-L
Well, thank you, thank you, thank you. I breathe again.
I wouldn’t worry about whether you are qualified to tell people what to do. You obviously have a well thought out personal philosophy that governs where you draw your lines. The thing is, you aren’t in a position to. That is what the political process is all about. When enough people hold about the same opinions, and feel strongly enough about them, we have laws, and we all follow them. That is how society works.
And when enough of them feel as strongly as you do, dear SexyWriter, about personal freedom and live as let live, our society will undoubtedly be a good deal better than it is.
Please forgive me; I wasn’t trying to make you seem more outre than you are, and in fact I was not trying to place you in a position of having to “defend” your desires at all. Let us draw a kindly curtain over my own particular brand of kinky desires; I cannot say that we all have them, since I can see into no one’s heart but my own; I can only say that I have them, and that I (unlike you) am not comfortable with them. You have nothing to defend, nothing to feel ashamed of, and certainly nothing to justify to me, of all people in the universe. You are honest, gentle, forthright, and forthcoming, and certainly in no need of any justification from anyone on this board, or anywhere else that I know of. I was only interested in what you thought, not the status of your soul or how “good” you are, and I thank you for your honesty.
Fair enough.
Perhaps. Now that does sound like an interesting topic!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by SexyWriter *
**
That makes a lot of sense but we elaborate on those instinctly a lot wouldn’t you say? One thing for a dominant wolf to bite his mate on the back of the neck - not a bad analogy for hair pulling 
- but I’ve never seen an ape in a ball gag or fur lined leather cuffs.
The dilemma of limits and enforcing protection remains. Very few of us would have a problem with someone giving their mate a gentle spanking if they both enjoy it. Most would agree that the guy mutilating his ankles is deeply disturbed and may need protection from himself or anyone who assisted him in this. Where do we draw the line in between? Needle play sounds very extreme to someone outside the scene and I’ll be honest that I’m uncomfortable with it. I’m rather keen on pierced nipples but I’ll leave that to a professional and not make the act of piercing part of my play.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Padeye *
**
Well the apes already HAVE fur…
Seriously, I don’t think there’s a one to one correlation regarding what animals do, or even what neanderthal humans did, as a means of determining which creatures were submissive which were dominant.
**
I’m not comfortable with it either, frankly. And the man who did my piercing was a physician, so I considered him more than qualified. Of course, my OWN judgement is good. I know, because I said so. I certainly think there should be lines drawn regarding what kinds of people can jab others with unsanitized needles. This activity requires knowledge of the sanitizing and disposal of the appropriate equipment. I admit that this is ONLY a gray area for me because of my own pesonal experience. I tend to assume anyone who engages in this activity has the right to make their own judgement the way I do. But perhaps that’s shortsighted.
-L
I keep having strange dreams about sexywriter and ropes, i need to get out more, or take more cold showers.
Or you could try just sticking to the OP.
-L