This is a very touchy topic, because if something does ever come up, the outcome depends on your first five minutes or so with the Authorities. The police at your front door.
Your playing one night and you get into a deep session , and things get a little loud. The next thing you know someone is knocking on your door. You open it and there stands the men in blue, holding a flashlight, and the questions start rolling.
What you say in the first 30 seconds depends on whether you the Dominant is going to jail or not. When speaking always make sure you have eye to eye contact. What is more important call your submissive to the door with you.
The submissive should only speak when spoken to, the submissive should only give direct short answers while not volunteering any information.
We are two consenting adults taking part in sexual play nothing more. We do enjoy rough sex but nothing more. The term BDSM should never come up, the word sex can.
Second you do not have to let them in your home, even if they should ask, you simply say no. Remember what you say in the first 30 seconds depends on a lot. This is something that should be practiced in your head over and over.
Let your submissive speak freely when asked a question, reassuring there is nothing going on except some wild sex. Again you do not have to let the police inside your home.
Now on the flip side of things this is not what these dumb ass fake Doms do not understand. You meet a new submissive and you play on the first meeting. Things get a little to rough, and he ends up hurting the submissive. The submissive picks up her things and goes straight to the police. You Mr. Dom are going to jail, straight to jail you will not pass go and you will not collect 200 dollars.
In our world there is no defense when it comes to the word consent. You will not be able to say well she let me tie her up, and let me beat her ass.
Listen to me, there is no Judge that will let you use Consent as a defense. Do your research. As a matter of fact I will even show you case law and proof. You will go to jail, maybe prison depending on how bad you beat someones ass. If you have a career you can kiss it good bye, if your one of the married ones you will lose everything you have worked so so hard for.
We are lucky to have an organization who stands with us, although they have been under fire recently about their funds as far as being a 501 3c , but they are still there and they are there for the community.
The group is called NCSF National Coalition for Sexual Freedom,for those of you who are new to the lifestyle, you should visit their site and read. They offer a lot of benefits, advice and here is the kicker. They have a long list of professionals that are on your side when it comes to the lifestyle.
These professionals being Doctors , Lawyers , and yes even Psychologist regular MD’s , as well as Counselors and Therapist’s. The group provides many many benefits.
Most of the time when a couple goes to court together the Male or Dom will not even be allowed to use the word consent, the Judge will simply not allow it. It will still be looked at as you got made and you beat your girls ass out of anger.
So you meet this Dom and your in a session, you have giving a safe word you are going to use, such as red. Things get a little rougher than you thought and you scream out RED, and he does not stop. After you are untied if your able to get up, and you decide to go to the police he will go to jail. This is your right. You may have agreed to a session but you did not agree to be hurt.
You should simply get dressed get in your car and go straight to the police. Because if you do not and you just go home, he will think he got away with what he has done. You will not be the only victim I promise you. By you not going to the police, opens the door for him to abuse again.
Here is a link you should look at, it is on the NCSF website and it explains more about the Law and BDSM
While the group is actively fighting for those who take the lifestyle serious and those who are real, they in now way condone any type of abuse, and they will not stand by you if that be the case.
Several years ago we had a Representative from NCSF come and speak at a local Munch, and there was way to much information to absorb in such a short period of time.
Listen to others and learn. Do not be a victim.
BDSM AND THE LAW
The relationship between BDSM and the law changes significantly from nation to nation. It is entirely dependent on the legal situation in individual countries whether the practice of BDSM has any criminal relevance or legal consequences. Criminalization of consensually implemented BDSM practices is usually not with explicit reference to BDSM, but results from the fact that such behavior as spanking or cuffing someone could be considered a breach of personal rights, which in principle constitutes a criminal offense. In Germany, Netherlands, Japan and Scandinavia, such behavior is legal in principle. In Austria the legal status is not clear, while in Switzerland some BDSM practices can be considered criminal. Spectacular incidents like the US-American scandal of People v. Jovanovic and the British Operation Spanner demonstrate the degree to which difficult grey areas can pose a problem for the individuals and authorities involved. It is very important to learn the legal status of the right of consent in the judicial statue of the country of resident for the practitioners of BDSM.
The practice of BDSM is not generally penalized in Germany if it is conducted with the mutual consent of the partners involved.
The following sections of the criminal code may be relevant in certain instances for BDSM practices:
To fulfill the charge of coercion, the use of violence or the threat of a “severe mistreatment” must involve an endangerment to life and limb. In cases where the continued application of the treatment could be ended through the use of a safeword, neither coercion nor sexual coercion may be charged. In the case of charges of sexual abuse of people incapable of resistance, similar principles apply. In this case, taking advantage of a person’s inability to resist in order to perform sexual acts on that person is considered punishable. The potential use of the safeword is considered to be sufficient possibility for resistance, since this would lead to the cessation of the act, and so a true inability to resist is not considered to be in effect. The charge of insult (slander) can only be prosecuted if the defamed person chooses to press charges, according to §194. False imprisonment can be charged if the victim—when applying an objective view—can be considered to be impaired in his or her rights of free movement.
According to §228 of the German criminal code, a person inflicting a bodily injury on another person with that person’s permission violates the law only in cases in which the deed can be considered to have violated good morals in spite of permission having been given. On 26 May 2004, the Criminal Panel No. 2 of the Bundesgerichtshof (German Federal Court) ruled that sado-masochistically motivated physical injuries are not per se indecent and thus subject to §228. Still, this ruling makes the question of indecency dependent on the degree to which the bodily injury might be likely to impair the health of the receiving party. According to the BGH, the line of indecency is definitively crossed when “under an objectively prescient consideration of all relevant circumstances the party granting consent could be brought into concrete danger of death by the act of bodily injury.” In its ruling, the court overturned a verdict by the Provincial Court of Kassel, according to which a man who had choked his partner and thereby involuntarily strangled her, had been sentenced to probation for negligent manslaughter. The court had rejected a conviction on charges of bodily injury leading to death on the grounds that the victim had, in its opinion, consented to the act. Following cases in which sado-masochistic practices had been repeatedly used as pressure tactics against former partners in custody cases, the Appeals Court of Hamm ruled in February 2006 that sexual inclinations toward sado-masochism are no indication of a lack of capabilities for successful childraising.
British law does not recognize the possibility of consenting to actual bodily harm. Such acts are illegal, even between consenting adults, and these laws are enforced (R v Brown being the leading case). This leads to the situation that, while Great Britain and especially London are world centers of the closely related fetish scene, there are only very private events for the BDSM scene which are in no way comparable to the German “Play party” scene.
Following Operation Spanner the European Court of Human Rights ruled in January 1999 in Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v. United Kingdom that no violation of Article 8 occurred because the amount of physical or psychological harm that the law allows between any two people, even consenting adults, is to be determined by the jurisdiction the individuals live in, as it is the State’s responsibility to balance the concerns of public health and well-being with the amount of control a State should be allowed to exercise over its citizens. In the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill 2007, the British Government cited the Spanner case as justification for criminalizing images of consensual acts, as part of its proposed criminalization of possession of “extreme pornography“.
In 2004 a judge in Canada ruled that videos seized by the police featuring BDSM activities were not obscene, and did not constitute violence, but a “normal and acceptable” sexual activity between two consenting adults.
In 2011, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in R. v. J.A. that a person must have an active mind during the specific sexual activity in order to legally consent. The Court ruled that it is a criminal offence to perform a sexual act on an unconscious person – whether or not that person consented in advance.
For Italian law, BDSM is right on the border between crime and legality, and everything lies in the interpretation of the Code by the judge. This concept is that anyone willingly causing “injury” to another person is to be punished. In this context, though, “injury” is legally defined as “anything causing a condition of illness”, and “illness” is ill-defined itself in two different legal ways. The first is “any anatomical or functional alteration of the organism” (thus technically including little scratches and bruises too); The second is “a significant worsening of a previous condition relevant to organic and relational processes, requiring any kind of therapy”. This makes it somewhat risky to play with someone, as later the “victim” might call for foul play using any sort of little mark as evidence against the partner. Also, any injury requiring over 20 days of medical care must be denounced by the professional medic who discovers it, leading to automatic indictment of the person who caused it. BDSM play between nonconsenting adults or minors or in public is of course punished according to “normal” laws.
§90 of the criminal code declares bodily injury (§§ 83, 84) or the endangerment of physical security (§89) to not be subject to penalty in cases in which the “victim” has consented and the injury or endangerment does not offend moral sensibilities. Case law from the Austrian Supreme Court has consistently shown that bodily injury is only offensive to moral sensibilities (and thus punishable) when a “serious injury” (meaning a damage to health or an employment disability lasting more than 24 days) or the “death” of the “victim” results. A light injury is considered generally permissible when the “victim” has consented to it. In cases of threats to bodily well-being, the standard depends on the probability that an injury will actually occur. If serious injury or even death would be a likely result of a threat being carried out, then even the threat itself is considered punishable.
The age of consent in Switzerland is 16 years, which also applies for BDSM play. Children (i.e. those under 16) are not subject to punishment for BDSM play as long as the age difference between them is less than three years. Certain practices, however, require granting consent to light injuries and thus are only allowed for those over 18. Since Articles 135 and 197 of the Swiss Criminal Code were tightened, on 1 April 2002, ownership of “objects or demonstrations […] which depict sexual acts with violent content” is punishable. This law amounts to a general criminalization of sado-masochists, since nearly every sado-masochist will have some kind of media which fulfill these criteria. Critics also object to the wording of the law, which puts sado-masochists in the same category as pedophiles and pederasts.
In September 2010, a Swedish court ruled that a 32-year-old man was acquitted of assault for engaging in consensual BDSM play with a 16-year-old woman (the age of consent in Sweden is 15). Norway’s legal system has likewise taken a similar position, that safe and consensual BDSM play should not be subject to criminal prosecution. This parallels the stance of the mental health professions in the Nordic countries, which have removed sadomasochism from their respective lists of psychiatric illnesses.
- Decision of the Bundesgerichtshof, 26 May 2004, 2 StR 505/03, which may be found at: BGHSt 49, 166 (bundesgerichtshof.de)
- Appeals Court of Hamm in its judgement of 1 February 2006, case number 10 UF 147/04, available online at the Portal of the North Rhine-Westfalian Ministry of Justice (German)
- “Spanner Trust submission to the Home Office Review Board on Sexual Offences”. The Spanner Trust. Archived from the original on 14 December 2007. Retrieved 27 January 2008.
- House of Commons: Criminal Justice And Immigration Bill
- Barker, Meg; Iantaffi, A.; Gupta, C. (2007). “Kinky clients, kinky counselling? The challenges and potentials of BDSM”. Open Research Online. Routledge. Retrieved 12 January 2011.
- Mike Blanchfield (27 May 2011). “Woman can’t consent to sex while unconscious, Supreme Court rules”. The Toronto Star. Retrieved 27 May 2011.
- Ayzad, BDSM – Guida per esploratori dell’erotismo estremo, Castelvecchi, 2004 ISBN 88-7615-025-0
- datenschlag.org(Oktober 2001) (German)
- Interessengemeinschaft BDSM Schweiz (German)
- Man freed in landmark S&M case
- SM og loven (Norwegian
A ton of information have fun.