What would you do if BDSM would be illegal?

[VelvetSin]

Cute article, but already so outdated. I'd guess based on the reference to Clinton's affair w/ Lewinsky that it was written around '98. It's amazing what has changed since then.

The 2003 case of Lawrence v. Texas changed everything, and of course the circumstances were actually a little analogous to your "Cops" show -- police were called to a residence with a report of a domestic disturbance (neighbor w/ a vendetta called in a false report), police found two men engaging in homosexual conduct, and even though the report was false they had to arrest them under the laws of the state. The Supreme Court overruled the state law as an unconstitutional invasion of privacy.

So all those laws that may still technically on the books that you point to CANNOT be upheld. It takes an act of the state legislature to remove the bad law from the books, or a court challenge by someone who has been arrested by the law.

Now, what two people do in private is none of the government's business, so long as it is done among consenting adults. So says the Supreme Court of the United States. Hallelujah!!!

The article was definitely outdated with the Clinton reference, but it was mainly linked for the collection. It was the first one that popped up in a quick search that listed more than one or two laughable laws, but I was lazy and didn't find a more current article. (Sorry! ) Many of those laws are still on the books and people still could be arrested under them. The convictions would be overturned but that would still inconveniently interrupt the scene and require an uncomfortable call to work explaining why you'd need to use a few personal days while the public defender worked it out.

For the sake of the original thread's intent, see US v. Glenn Marcus decided May 24, 2010. While his accuser claimed her participation was against her will, other witnesses supported Marcus' statements that it was consentual in an agreed S&M relationship. It is not exactly the same thing as what is being argued but it does open the door for similar cases with or without consent in the future. It still all goes back to whether people choose risk v. reward, and if someone outside the bedroom calls 911, whether the police decide to care. Some officers might and that would prove whether Lawrence v. Texas or US v. Glenn Marcus would hold up for a BDSM case.

 

[statsultan]

The article was definitely outdated with the Clinton reference, but it was mainly linked for the collection. It was the first one that popped up in a quick search that listed more than one or two laughable laws, but I was lazy and didn't find a more current article. (Sorry! ) Many of those laws are still on the books and people still could be arrested under them. The convictions would be overturned but that would still inconveniently interrupt the scene and require an uncomfortable call to work explaining why you'd need to use a few personal days while the public defender worked it out.

For the sake of the original thread's intent, see US v. Glenn Marcus decided May 24, 2010. While his accuser claimed her participation was against her will, other witnesses supported Marcus' statements that it was consentual in an agreed S&M relationship. It is not exactly the same thing as what is being argued but it does open the door for similar cases with or without consent in the future. It still all goes back to whether people choose risk v. reward, and if someone outside the bedroom calls 911, whether the police decide to care. Some officers might and that would prove whether Lawrence v. Texas or US v. Glenn Marcus would hold up for a BDSM case.

The Glenn Marcus case is all about the nature of consent. It won't overrule Lawrence. But, yes, you're correct in that the BDSM community should pay special attention to it.

 

[where]

You can replace "underage sex" with "same sex kissing" or "spraying of walls" or whatever. How can this come down to definitions then? Exactly which part of my texts made you believe that the definition of "BDSM" or "underage sex" would matter at all in this thread?

You don't have to. Assault doesn't list all possible attacks. There is no law for murder with poison, one for murder with a gun, one for murder with...
So your assumption this would be required for an anti-bdsm law is unfortunately completely wrong.

You should read some more laws.

because assault has a victim, bdsm, doesn't, therefore if you are to outlaw a victimless crime it needs to be very clearly defined.

So, when Mr TRB fucked me so hard last night, I went off the bed and smashed my face on the floor so my nose bled. he didn't stop because all he cared about was his own orgasm, so he kept on fucking until he had finished. is that BDSM?

Earlier when I sucked his cock, we both got enthusiastic and I gagged to the point of almost throwing up. is that bdsm?

for a moment, he pinned my hands down as he fucked me and called me his little cum slut, is that bdsm?

you need to read more laws.