The Rape Fantasy

[WildRose40DDD]

SAuggestion

If you are still uncertain, have her write out her ideal rape fantasy. It will let you see inside her head, what she is thinking and how she sees it happening. You can even use it as a type of script. It may help you feel more comfortable in the beginning.

 

[Marquis]

Very good advice. Worked for me and my bitch.

 

[Pure]

Wildrose said,

"If you are still uncertain, have her write out her ideal rape fantasy. It will let you see inside her head, what she is thinking and how she sees it happening. You can even use it as a type of script. It may help you feel more comfortable in the beginning."


Marquis said,
"Very good advice"

I reply:

If one want a scene, then talking as setting up the desired events is a must. Such a scene might be an enactment of a rape.
It might include the simulation of non consensual application of force.

But this is not a rape, though it might 'do' in a pinch, the way going to an army movie might satisfy one's dreams of being in combat.

It might be great fun, very satisfying etc., and I'm not saying it's other than a fine way to get off.

I made a little posting on this topic, Marquis, toward the end of 'top'. (perversion was the topic). In case you're interested.

J.

 

[Netzach]

OK, so I'm confused.

Do we have to beat everyone over the head till they admit that their "rape fantasy" is really a "ravishment fantasy"?

I guess we could, I guess we could really enforce language till only people in relationships pushing the edge of consensual non-consent can claim to be "raped" as part of their relationship (and obviously this STILL differs from getting suprised by someone you've never seen while opening your front door or going through the park)

As long as someone's agreed prior to at some point...ANY point, it's not rape. It's antithetical to the definition of the word, as I understand it. (Sex against one's will, note the absence of sex when I've given you prior global, discussed, consent to fuck me even when I may not feel like it, or sex with anyone you designate because you own me)

So as long as we are in fantasy land, why the hardcore semantics? If anyone is insisting it's not fantasy land, see the above. As far as language and meaning, we are bending the words, we are in the project of trying to define something that doesn't have a definition.

 

[X6QvQ9X]

The title of the thread says it all.

The discussion, and semantics, shall and will forever remain different for most everyone. This is the point of the pretense, however please note, in the real world saying no at any time is allowable. For do not the real world headlines scream with those whom have changed their mind, thus saying no at any time means non-consent.

To be forced to do anything sexual, at any time, for any reason is rape in my book. But, as a submissive, I have given my power of choice to another, to have and hold dominion over for me. This was not an act I took lightly, but too now not one I have to make.

The way of old gave property rights to any over those chosen by them to protect and preserve. In the real world then it was, as it is on Gor now, the way. Current earth society might not agree, but it does not change the fact of.

Writing and speaking about it whether in current, fantasy, or of past times is luscious and to me in many ways sacred, respecting all ways and means is essential to understanding too. We learn needs by study and experience

The reality also of is not changed by anothers view for me. To me rape is a power exchange, and the only difference I see is that at the time of occurance consent is not asked for.

For as in real life, no means no.

My man just does not listen.

 

[s'lara]

The responses following this should be good.

 

[MissTaken]

The reality also of is not changed by anothers view for me. To me rape is a power exchange, and the only difference I see is that at the time of occurance consent is not asked for.

For as in real life, no means no.

My man just does not listen.

Rape is a crime of power, not sex. That is a given.

Rape is a violent crime of power and as such, a rapist will stop at nothing until he or she gets what they are seeking. Brutality and victimization.

Whereby, I would think that your man would hear "no, I have the flu" if that were indeed the case or better yet, not approach sex until you are well.

The rapist will not.

Regardless of how completely you have given yourself to another, generally, there will be some consideration for your well being although that consideration will be found at varying degrees in each person's relationship.

Rape is hardly a considerate act.

So, there are differences between the BDSM power exchange and a criminal rape.

 

[Madame Manga]

Re: Re: The Rape Fantasy

Rape is a crime of power, not sex. That is a given.

That statement is often made, but that doesn't make it a given. This is an excerpt from a longer paper, "On the Sociology of Sexual Assault", by Mark Hansel. The whole text is at:
http://hansel.mnstate.edu/classes/CJ400/Monograph/

Rape as a sexual offense.

Identifying the social context of rape and sexual aggression helps us analyze the confused proposition that these are violent and not sexual acts. Since this is a strongly and widely held contemporary belief, it should be carefully examined, leaving open the possibility that it is untenable.

The report of Groth (1979) and Cohen et al (1971), that incarcerated rapists are motivated by anger and concern for dominance more often and more powerfully than they are motivated by sexual desire is the basic empirical support for this view. For the sake of the argument, I accept the report as valid. The report does not imply that all forms of sexual aggression are so motivated. More important, even if the motivation of most incarcerated rapists is not sexual, plainly the social meaning of sexual activity for them makes it important to them that their violent acts take a sexual form. Beating, stabbing or shooting a woman sometimes does not achieve satisfying psychic and social consequences. This implies that the sexual meaning of the assault is analytically important and should not be minimized, trivialized or compartmentalized. It also implies that ignoring the sexual meaning of sexual assault abandons the enterprise of explanation.

The proposition that rape is not sexual appears to have two intellectual difficulties and one political problem: First, it ignores any perceived qualitative difference between rape and other forms of violence. It seems unexceptionable that rape is widely considered to be qualitatively different than beating, maiming or killing. This is a central point, for example, in Brownmiller's discussion of the origins of rape (1975: 4-5) and in her discussion of rape in war (1975: 24). She argues that is the one offense for which women cannot retaliate ``in kind.'' She seems to be saying that rape evokes stronger emotional reactions than most personal harms and that these reactions are qualitatively different than the reaction to most other personal harms. I accept this. This would not occur were rape considered qualitatively the same as other assaults. Therefore, the position that rape is merely violence must be viewed as unfaithful to the way people think about rape. If rape did not have a sexual meaning, it would not be rape!

Second, and more important, any analysis that ignores the obvious sexual component of rape will not satisfactorily explain rape. Arguing that contempt for women or a desire to dominate women accounts for rape fails. Contempt does not explain why the aggression takes a sexual form. A satisfactory analysis must explain why rape is more contemptuous, more humiliating, or more oppressive than beating, stabbing or shooting. If the foregoing analysis is correct, then rape is contemptuous, humiliating and oppression because it is a sexual assault. It is not ``merely'' another kind of assault. It is qualitatively different - and understood to be so.

It might be argued that rape is just violence that happens to use the penis as a weapon (Brownmiller 1975: 1). Clearly, a penis is not a knife or a gun. In the absence of beating, stabbing or shooting, the physical trauma is less with a penis than with other weapons. This leaves me at a loss to explain the very deep psychic trauma of rape -- unless it is because the special nature of rape includes that it is a sexual violation.

Politically, the position raises problematic and perhaps even dangerous possibilities. Most men, including convicted rapists, view their sexual tactics as non violent (e.g., Scully 1990). Therefore, if rape is not sexual, few men need ever contemplate the possibility that their sexual tactics are deviant. If however, the sexual component is understood to be important, and if it is the unilateral nature of sexual tactics that makes them deviant, then such avoidance is much more difficult.


MM

 

[MissTaken]

I knew as soon as I made the above post, it was clumsy.

Anyway, it did lead to Madame M posting this article which I find very interesting.

After reading it and thinking on some recent conversations I have had in my real time life, I am of the mind that rape is in fact a crime of power that manifests itself through violence and sexual drive.

Okay, what am I referring to?
I was talking with someone who works in the prison system the other day. He told me about officers who got erections when beating on prisoners, out of necessity, of course! In fact, they may even run late into a situation that was well on its way to being resolved to get their piece of the "action" and then scurry away with a hard on.

That seemed odd, but then I quietly suggested that without that outlet, perhaps these men could be or are rapists.

Any thoughts on my half baked confetti thinking tonight?



Thank you Madame M, for the article.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Re: Re: Re: The Rape Fantasy

The proposition that rape is not sexual appears to have two intellectual difficulties and one political problem: First, it ignores any perceived qualitative difference between rape and other forms of violence. It seems unexceptionable that rape is widely considered to be qualitatively different than beating, maiming or killing. This is a central point, for example, in Brownmiller's discussion of the origins of rape (1975: 4-5) and in her discussion of rape in war (1975: 24). She argues that is the one offense for which women cannot retaliate ``in kind.'' She seems to be saying that rape evokes stronger emotional reactions than most personal harms and that these reactions are qualitatively different than the reaction to most other personal harms. I accept this. This would not occur were rape considered qualitatively the same as other assaults. Therefore, the position that rape is merely violence must be viewed as unfaithful to the way people think about rape. If rape did not have a sexual meaning, it would not be rape!

Second, and more important, any analysis that ignores the obvious sexual component of rape will not satisfactorily explain rape. Arguing that contempt for women or a desire to dominate women accounts for rape fails. Contempt does not explain why the aggression takes a sexual form. A satisfactory analysis must explain why rape is more contemptuous, more humiliating, or more oppressive than beating, stabbing or shooting. If the foregoing analysis is correct, then rape is contemptuous, humiliating and oppression because it is a sexual assault. It is not ``merely'' another kind of assault. It is qualitatively different - and understood to be so.

It might be argued that rape is just violence that happens to use the penis as a weapon (Brownmiller 1975: 1). Clearly, a penis is not a knife or a gun. In the absence of beating, stabbing or shooting, the physical trauma is less with a penis than with other weapons. This leaves me at a loss to explain the very deep psychic trauma of rape -- unless it is because the special nature of rape includes that it is a sexual violation.

MM

Firstly, IMHO I still believe 'rape' is an act of violence which is manifested in a sexual way as a means of exerting dominance and control over another in a non consensual way. The aspect of not thinking it equivalebt to other type assaults does not ring true with my experience with victims and survivors, and is part of why in my country it is predomiantly referred to legally as sexual assault, not rape. I also disagree that physical trauma associated with rape is less than that of assault using other weapons. Often there are permanent effects as in inability to bear children, STD's, and various types of scarring which lead to physical problems on a lifetime basis.

As to why it is a sexual form of assault, this too though outwardly sexual, is in fact just a means to an end of taking away another's power. Sexual means is the easiest, and usually most effective means, of doing this whether the victim be male or female, simply because of the intimacy of the act, and the social, and at times, religious and/or cultural implications. Making it sexual demonstrates the personal need and connection to the attack, not in a sexual sense, but in a physically personal way that using a manmade weapon such as a gun or knife does not quite do in quite the same insidious way. It is also demonstrated in assaults made by one gender toward a victim of a gender they normally would not be attracted to sexually, and most often not be able to have sexual intercourse with under normal conditions where power and control were not an issue. It is further demonstrated in the choice of victim being more often than not someone the attacker sees as vulnerable and weaker than themselves, thus an easier target, not a sexual target.

As to the factor of sexual desire being the motivator or outcome of the violence, this also is not so simple. Our own lifestyle shows people can be sexually excited by the use of violence in a power exchange, but it also shows us time and again that without real consent the agressor more often than not is not excited, interested, or able to continue. In the rapist's psyche, the issue of given consent has an opposite effect in making physical signs of excitement such as erection, non existant. A victim enjoying the act is not in fitting with their psychological intent which then results in other means of assault to alter this position of power, or loss of function precipitating the flight component.

Just my two cents worth based on both personal and professional experience. As with many things of the mind, I am sure in time to come there will be more research and discoveries defining sexual assault and it's motivator's in a more sophisticated manner, the theories and evidence changing and debated often.

Catalina

 

[X6QvQ9X]

Re: Re: Re: Re: The Rape Fantasy

Firstly, IMHO I still believe 'rape' is an act of violence which is manifested in a sexual way as a means of exerting dominance and control over another in a non consensual way.

Sexual means is the easiest, and usually most effective means, of doing this whether the victim be male or female, simply because of the intimacy of the act.

Making it sexual demonstrates the personal need and connection to the attack in a physically personal way that using a manmade weapon does not.

Our own lifestyle shows people can be sexually excited by the use of violence, but it also shows us that without real consent the agressor more often is not excited, interested, or able to continue. Catalina

I can follow your logic well Cat .. although my Masters motto is "suck a cold .. fuck a fever" ..

A tummy ache means enema time in my house .. and as I am so wisely reminded .. he has three useful holes to chose from ..

I do as i am told .. not as consent .. but because true without the begging of he is not excited, interested, or able to continue ..

I will say and do all to continue ..

 

[Pure]

Netzach said,

OK, so I'm confused.

Do we have to beat everyone over the head till they admit that their "rape fantasy" is really a "ravishment fantasy"?

I guess we could, I guess we could really enforce language till only people in relationships pushing the edge of consensual non-consent can claim to be "raped" as part of their relationship (and obviously this STILL differs from getting suprised by someone you've never seen while opening your front door or going through the park)

As long as someone's agreed prior to at some point...ANY point, it's not rape. It's antithetical to the definition of the word, as I understand it. (Sex against one's will, note the absence of sex when I've given you prior global, discussed, consent to fuck me even when I may not feel like it, or sex with anyone you designate because you own me)

So as long as we are in fantasy land, why the hardcore semantics? If anyone is insisting it's not fantasy land, see the above. As far as language and meaning, we are bending the words, we are in the project of trying to define something that doesn't have a definition.



X6Q seems to agree,

//The discussion, and semantics, shall and will forever remain different for most everyone. //

The point of looking at labels is to clarify what's going on. That's the point of the 'hardcore semantics'.

I don't, however, care if you want to say 'ravishment fantasy' implying, i guess, forceful 'taking'. The point remains.

We start with a fantasy of a rape/ ravishment. This is of being forcefully taken. Not of a simulation of being forcefullly taken.

(I simply hypothesize that the event in the fantasy is NOT the 'nonconsent' event of the typical 'Lit' story.)

For now I'll ignore your parenthetical remark about global consent.

So there are several possibilities that might 'satisfy' the fantasy.
'You' designates the victim.

1) You go to a bar and pick up an agressive guy you're planning on saying 'no' to. Variant a) He's attractive; variant b) he is NOT attractive.


At the other extreme, 2) You have the partner talk you through a _fantasy scene_. They say, "Close your eyes. Imagine you're walking up a dark path. Someone springs out at you and you can't see who it is; they smell of liquor and onions.... "

Somewhere in the middle is the 'enactment' or staging.

3) You say to the partner, "Hide behind the door one time I'm coming in. Then jump me and I'll fight (but not too hard; I wont hurt you). You'll overcome me (it won't be necessary to hurt me) and we'll have great sex." A variant would be to actually stage a scene from a play the two of you have written.

4) One could read (or have it read to you) a story of an actual rape.

5) One could read about a 'nonconsent' event, as in some Lit. stories, where there is an overcoming, then the women gets really turned on, and comes.


Apart from all the labels... (I don't care if you call them by numbers)

Which are going to be satisfying? In particular, 3). Hey if it gets you off, I don't care what the method is.

As to your 'global consent' scenario. One variation a) does indeed seem closer than others to 'real rape.'

6) You say, "You master can fuck me whenever you please, even when I don't feel like it." Then there are two possibilities: a)You are supposed to let on that you don't like it; b) You're supposed to pretend to like it. I gather some dom/mes, esp. male prefer the second. I.e., the non-sincere statement, "Why this is so great you (master) are fucking me now (when I said 'no' at first) ! I really get off on it."

------
The problem, 'what's the fantasy? what would satisfy?' comes up for fetishes: I read of a story where hubby says he wants to be pissed on. Wife is put off, but suggests. "why don't you lie in the tub, close your eyes, and I'll pour warm tea on you." He declines.

---
I'm leaving aside the question of the 'real' motive for rape.

J.

 

[Pure]

Miss T said,
//Okay, what am I referring to?
I was talking with someone who works in the prison system the other day. He told me about officers who got erections when beating on prisoners, out of necessity, of course! In fact, they may even run late into a situation that was well on its way to being resolved to get their piece of the "action" and then scurry away with a hard on.

That seemed odd, but then I quietly suggested that without that outlet, perhaps these men could be or are rapists.

Any thoughts on my half baked confetti thinking tonight?//

The guards in question are sadist, i.e, persons practicing 'sadism' (sexual).

The are very much UN-like the tops described by Marquis and others who are carrying out a planned 'ravishment' or 'overcoming' which is desired, and where the 'force' is requested/consented-to-in-advance. This 'top' is more akin to a sex worker with an assigned scene to play out. This top is NOT turned on by actual pain and degradation, but by the enactment/simulation of it.

Those are my opinions.

J.

 

[X6QvQ9X]

side of dom

I hope you all know the discussion of this all in itself is a wonderous tool, TY. I appreciate everyones words so much even when I might not agree with their post point. And not only does it give my budding writer twin side an expansion of story ideas, but it is also truly been a useful communication exercise for this little subbie.

Often Master asks me of my dreams and fears, this past week I have asked him many times to explain what excites him. The result has been that I have been a bit busier than usual, and sitting today is in itself a reminded of his reply. He was honest and practical, thinking it better he show me why.

He enjoys seeing me on edge, awaiting and wondering what way will lead me to his answer. He spent two days taunting, and with out a clue to me planning something I knew. Early this morning I was awakened to listen to his reply. Naked with my wrists still in their leather cuffs and padlocked together I ran to the shed to wait for him.

He brought me a cup of coffee and let me sip it before duct taping my mouth and placing my padlock on the hook in the rafters. He clipped shiney metal weights to my lower lips and nipples and paddled my rear end for ten minutes. He likes to see me dance he said, and the power he feels when he can humiliate and shame me is erotic to him.

He told me at length too what a turn-on it is for him to make me cry, to see this beautiful intelligent lady break when commanded to kneel and suck his friends. He told me it is the control he has over why I do things, and the way I do that makes him feel like the luckiest man alive.

Of course he then proceeding to force me to agree by bending me over his workbench and impaling a cold finger in my bottom before himself. His belief is that "rape" is the sexual taking of another for convenience, because you want it then, there.

It does not matter to him if it is by friend or foe, it is a sex act regardless of the type or timing. I belong to him though, so nothing he does is considered as rape. He is my protector, this was not really something I have been conscious of as so vitaly important to him.

He released my clips and cuffs lovingly and made me finish my cool coffee out there in the cold shed before wrapping a blanket around me and leaving for work. I came back in the house to find a note from him commanding that no housework be done today. He knows this is more torture than anything he could do to me sexually.

I hate a freakin' messy house.

 

[ethereal~minx]

Re: side of dom

I hope you all know the discussion of this all in itself is a wonderous tool, TY. I appreciate everyones words so much even when I might not agree with their post point. And not only does it give my budding writer twin side an expansion of story ideas, but it is also truly been a useful communication exercise for this little subbie.

Often Master asks me of my dreams and fears, this past week I have asked him many times to explain what excites him. The result has been that I have been a bit busier than usual, and sitting today is in itself a reminded of his reply. He was honest and practical, thinking it better he show me why.

He enjoys seeing me on edge, awaiting and wondering what way will lead me to his answer. He spent two days taunting, and with out a clue to me planning something I knew. Early this morning I was awakened to listen to his reply. Naked with my wrists still in their leather cuffs and padlocked together I ran to the shed to wait for him.

He brought me a cup of coffee and let me sip it before duct taping my mouth and placing my padlock on the hook in the rafters. He clipped shiney metal weights to my lower lips and nipples and paddled my rear end for ten minutes. He likes to see me dance he said, and the power he feels when he can humiliate and shame me is erotic to him.

He told me at length too what a turn-on it is for him to make me cry, to see this beautiful intelligent lady break when commanded to kneel and suck his friends. He told me it is the control he has over why I do things, and the way I do that makes him feel like the luckiest man alive.

Of course he then proceeding to force me to agree by bending me over his workbench and impaling a cold finger in my bottom before himself. His belief is that "rape" is the sexual taking of another for convenience, because you want it then, there.

It does not matter to him if it is by friend or foe, it is a sex act regardless of the type or timing. I belong to him though, so nothing he does is considered as rape. He is my protector, this was not really something I have been conscious of as so vitaly important to him.

He released my clips and cuffs lovingly and made me finish my cool coffee out there in the cold shed before wrapping a blanket around me and leaving for work. I came back in the house to find a note from him commanding that no housework be done today. He knows this is more torture than anything he could do to me sexually.

I hate a freakin' messy house.

*gulp* elwowoh *blinking eyes a few times & catchin breath too*
that's um some *still holdin breath* control & dominance there


pretty intense~ the way he chose to tell you, very persuasive---no, that's not the right word... god! I certainly would have gotten the message loud and clear and ...actually appreciated the force and motivation and passion and intensity and and and behind it~~~ wow!

 

[ethereal~minx]

I've always liked the idea of being forcefully taken against my will~~ but in the security of a relationship so I suppose it would be a 'consensual rape'... I imagine being a victim in planned circumstances


the attacker however does not wish it to be that way~~~ or rather, does not WANT it to be that way. "it is not rape if you know it's me" is actually what he says~~ which kinda scares me but at the same time, I know it wouldn't be anyone else
.... I'm wondering if his motivation or his reasoning is along the same lines as X6QvQ9X's Master


hmmm.

 

[dragonhearted]

Hi, s_lara,

I liked your posting, and there do seem to be a number of fantasies. I've picked three examples in stories, and I'd be interested to know what works, and what's fantasy:
Restaurant Nightmare, by blondfungirl
http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=109463

Highly interesting, this one; nicely written, definite elements of 'realism'; lots of 'guck'. This seems to represent a departure from the usual nonconsent in that the 'victims' associates are NOT having a good time, but she's doing OK. Almost as if--is this my imagination--gets off on the brutality, which would be an interesting twist. But she's spared.

-----

Which work for you, and how, by way of turn-on, if there is any?

TT

tail_teller is right...Restaurant Nightmare is incrediblty realistic. It's like a gang rape of sorts...

 

[Quint]

"Pit Stop" didn't do anything for me, mostly because although it was the first time I'd laid eyes on it, it felt like I had read it a thousand times before. I most often don't get turned on by the "she hated/feared/didn't want it, now she's coming" genre. TT's submission was much truer to my style. I do admit to some lusty thoughts with "Dr. Pretty," which I read many months ago and enjoyed on a literary level; much better attention to the niceties of writing than "Pit Stop," although admittedly in the same genre. Haven't gotten around to reading the rest.

The closest we've realistically come to fulfilling a rape fantasy was a time he got me borderline drunk. I wasn't wet; I wasn't focused enough to fight back. As far as I know, he just wants me to be honest when I hate it and when I love it. That time, I hated it and he loved that. No physical switcheroo and magical all-things-right-again orgasm. But that's as close as we come.

 

[MissTaken]

[B}The closest we've realistically come to fulfilling a rape fantasy was a time he got me borderline drunk. I wasn't wet; I wasn't focused enough to fight back. As far as I know, he just wants me to be honest when I hate it and when I love it. That time, I hated it and he loved that. No physical switcheroo and magical all-things-right-again orgasm. But that's as close as we come. [/B]

THAT is submission.

For those who question the whole consent issue as negating a true power exchange, Quint's example is a good descriptor of what it means to submit on HIS terms, not hers.



Thank you, Quint.

I was thinking this morning about how best to dispell the belief that the consentual nature of BDSM leaves the sub in control.

 

[Madame Manga]

You're welcome for the article, Miss T--I am not necessarily plumping for every one of Hansel's conclusions, but in general I found it a good, logical overview. I'm interested in forced-sex fantasy as a personal turn-on, but I'm also interested in the crime of rape; both stem from my need to overcome a former exaggerated fear of assault. Nothing like research.

MM

 

[Pure]

Originally posted by Quint


The closest we've realistically come to fulfilling a rape fantasy was a time he got me borderline drunk. I wasn't wet; I wasn't focused enough to fight back. As far as I know, he just wants me to be honest when I hate it and when I love it. That time, I hated it and he loved that. No physical switcheroo and magical all-things-right-again orgasm. But that's as close as we come.

Very intriguing, Quint. It has several features bringing it closest to rape, albeit of the 'taking advantage' variety.

It did not--so far as I can tell-- unfold on pre-agreed terms, ie., after he'd read your specs in "my rape fantasy."

The lack of your orgasm, and the lack of his caring about it, definitely bring it out of the 'nonconsent' fantasy mode, as in Dr. Pretty.

The specifics make it lie outside the SSC norm, or in a gray area; disagreeing with Miss T, I do NOT think it sounds like the more typical bdsm 'rape' scenes, alluded to by the thread starter(dedalus); recommended by Wildrose, and Marquis, etc, and detailed by lilnymph.

I wonder if, for this kind of event, it's the pre-event anticipation, and the after-event memory that cause the 'juice', not the actual event. I.e., in remembering it or visualizing it after the fact, would that help you come?

Best,
J.

 

[catalina_francisco]

THAT is submission.

For those who question the whole consent issue as negating a true power exchange, Quint's example is a good descriptor of what it means to submit on HIS terms, not hers.

Though I don't question Quint's desire to submit, I do not see this incident as submission as she outlined how she was too drunk to fight back. To submit, you have to make a choice to give the other what it is they want, then give it or succumb to it, not be forced to through your inability to stop the proceedings. Though Q had no problem with the incident afterwards, at the time she was unable to make that choice or exercise control. Many a rapist has used it as defence though when their victim has been incapacitated in some way to claim they felt she was agreeing simply because she was unable to fight off the attack.

Catalina

 

[Pure]

Catalina said,

//Though I don't question Quint's desire to submit, I do not see this incident as submission as she outlined how she was too drunk to fight back. To submit, you have to make a choice to give the other what it is they want, then give it or succumb to it, not be forced to through your inability to stop the proceedings.//

The scenario was presented as being somewhat close to a rape; in that sense it would satisfy a 'fantasy of a rape,' which Quint appears to have.

Don't you see, that the 'no condition to refuse' is exactly what makes it thus; i.e., if I get woman into 'no condition to refuse', and go ahead, I've probably raped her (unless I'm following her instructions!).

Had there been some pre-specifications of the sort some have recommended, then when it starts to happen, Quint would have said "Ah, this is it. So I choose not to fight it, and things will presumably continue as planned" or

"I'll fight it, expecting to lose, but that's just fine by me."

In either case there isn't a rape, so the event--a staged or 'mock' rape--is going to be LESS satisfying to Quint than what happened. (Of course if a couple like a staged or 'mock' rape, the woman would get off that way, and NOT in the way it happened to Quint.)

I hope this makes sense. I'm trying.

J.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Have no problem with your words Pure, but was more concerned with it being seen as submission, especially as it has been such an area of contention legally for so many years. I submit to things I do not want to, but it is not because physically I am unable to do otherwise, it is because it is my role as slave to which I submitted in the first place......there are no limits anymore. In that also comes into play the fact Master does not allow the inclusion of drugs or drink in any type scene, apart from our own beliefs, as he wants to feel the power he has to feed from my submission which is clearly given unhindered by any other factor. Is also why he is pleased I do not go into subspace....he likes me fully concious at all times of what I am submitting to and the meaning and motivation behind it, and to know I am submitting, not incapable of doing otherwise.

Catalina

 

[evesdream]

Originally posted by Pure
We start with a fantasy of a rape/ ravishment. This is of being forcefully taken. Not of a simulation of being forcefullly taken...

It seems as though (could be mis-reading) this debate is coming around to the point that it is actually possible to want rape, (or in more accurate- less legal terms), the experience of rape, from the victim standpoint, which i think is true. Trying to say that all rape fantasies are really consensual ravishment fantasies might be like saying--if you don't want the cord to snap and go plunging into the abyss, you don't really want to go bungee jumping.

I do know that there are people in the pervoverse -a miniscule minority obviously- who seek the experience of rape, not ravishment. With the loss of footing, disruption of identity, the sad stories to bury and carry, endure. All of those things that it wouldn't be possible to experience in the pre-nupped scenario. Although, maybe, such a person wouldn't want to be cut, or to catch a disease, or pregnancy, these are all risks that are concommitant in fulfilling the stranger in the woods variation of this kind of fantasy. I read what Quint described as coming as close to without danger of the cord snapping, (although possibly fraying)- and agree with what Catalina said, t'isn't submission, even though some of the impulse and outcome bears similarity to some submissive experiences.