Monday, November 9, 2015

The Post That Caused So Much Controversy

I wrote the following post on Fetlife this past weekend, and it's caused quite a bit of controversy—more than I thought rational, frankly. 
I realize it's hard to get consensus on what should be reasonable grounds to get someone banned from kinky events. Many times, situations come down to the 'he said, she said' problem, and when one of the people involved in the 'drama' happens to be a friend, it's easy to let personal feelings get in the way. No one wants to believe their friend is capable of abuse; no one wants to believe their friend is capable of making up abuse. Proof and verifiable fact is often hard to come by.
But I would like to think we can ALL agree that these four types should not be allowed to kinky events. If we cannot agree on even THIS, we are, in my opinion, in trouble.

1. Anyone who has been convicted of rape, sexual assault, or attempted murder.

I shouldn't even have to explain this one. Seriously people.
(Except, apparently, I did and do have to explain this one, because people on Fetlife started asking me things like 'What if the attempted murder was in self-defense?' and 'What about actual murder, and not attempted murder?' So here's my answer: IF SOMEONE HAS BEEN CONVICTED OF MURDER, THEY SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN KINK EVENTS.  Jesus, the fact that I even have to type this out....also, I am not interested in 'what if' situations. 'What if the person deserved to be murdered?' Really?....Really?)

2. Anyone who engages in child pornography.

It all comes down to consent: children cannot consent. If you don't get why that is, you do not understand consent, and you're a danger to the rest of us.
(This is where I had on Fetlife people telling me how this is too vague because different countries have different ages of consent, and in some countries it's eighteen while in others it's fourteen. To which all I can think to say is, IF YOU ARE HAVING SEX WITH A FOURTEEN YEAR OLD GET THE FUCK AWAY FROM ME.)

3. Anyone who is on the National Sex Registry/a registered sex offender.

Don't tell me how easy it is to wind up as a registered sex offender. I don't want to hear your one-sided version of how it wasn't your fault, how you were duped, how the judge was out to get you.
If we allow known sex offenders into our play spaces, we basically throw any semblance of caring about the safety of our community out the window.
(This one caused a huge stir. Yes, I understand that people who are not a danger to society are ending up on the registry; yes, I think that's sad. But if we get so bogged down with every 'what if' situation, we keep no standards whatsover. To every rule there is an exception...and to every exception there is a rule.)

4. Anyone who is a self-admitted rapist, abuser, stalker, sociopath, or psychopath—whether they have been convicted of any crimes or not.

I am not talking about those who made a mistake or two on their journey, owned up to their mistakes, learned from them, and moved on. If we banned every Top who ever acted "unDomly" (read: like an asshole), we'd end up with play spaces with no Tops; if we banned every bottom who ever acted like a childish brat, we'd end up with play spaces with no bottoms. I am talking about people who have admitted to violating consent, perhaps publicly justified it, perhaps even braggedabout it, showed absolutely no remorse, and shamed their victims into silence in the process. I am talking about those who would probably face conviction of a crime if their victim(s) were willing to come forward.
I am talking about those who glorify their own abusive and criminal behavior.
(For some reason commentators on Fetlife read the heading, but not the paragraph. I am not talking about safe sociopaths here. I realize there are plenty of people with different mental illnesses in our communities who are good, upstanding, model citizens; I am not talking about them. Like I said, I am talking about those people who do evil and feel no regret, remorse, or shame about it.)


  1. Only one, on the sex registry issue. People who have been caught going to the bathroom in public end up on that list, because the law is stupid, so do you really mean EVERYBODY who's on the list?

    1. I am saying the blanket policy should be that people on the registry should not be allowed in play spaces. Can there be exceptions? Yes, perhaps. But making that exception should be a BIG DEAL, and not handled lightly. It should not be "you're my friend, I know you'd never rape a fourteen year old like they say you did, so I'll let you in." Because is exactly what is happening right now.

  2. Yes everyone on the list! Even if they were wrongly convicted, say they didn't do it, say their crime was minor, or whatever. Sucks to be them, I guess. Having a sex offender of any type attending puts the whole event at risk from a legal/police standpoint as I understand it. They are also not supposed to be on Fetlife, not that that stops very many.

    According to Human Rights Watch, eleven states may put you on a sex offender list for public urination. That means 39 do not. This is what I found.

  3. I realise you live in a country where this is the way things are done, but your need to prioritise revenge over rehabilitation bothers me. The fact the you acknowledge that you want to ban people falsely convicted, even after they've been exonerated and apologised to, is my definition of clichéd " all about revenge" behaviour.

    But it does make things easier. Instead of arguing about whether rehabilitation is possible or a good idea, or worth while, we can discuss how seriously f*** up it is to say "yes, you were framed, the cops who did it are in jail, the resulting settlement has made you rich*, but get out of my play space you murderer" (* because that's another screwed up measure of a person's worth, but that's what you use).

    I, obviously, go a lot further. Rather than permanently exiling or shunning someone who does something wrong, I think we need to allow people the possibility of rehabilitation. Or, as the religious put it, redemption. Otherwise we're saying to anyone who does commit one of the "really bad" offences "you have nothing more to lose". The difference between raping someone, and raping, torturing then murdering someone is... an extra life sentence. Ooh, that's a big difference, best avoid murdering the witness just in case.

    1. "You acknowledge that you want to ban people falsely convicted, even after they've been exonerated and apologised to." No. Read it again. If you're exonerated, your record is clear.
      Also, if you want to allow people who are murderers into your play spaces, because hey, we should give them a chance to be rehabilitated, then please, let them play with you in your house. That can be your play space to let these people prove they've been rehabilitated. Me, I don't want to risk my own fucking life.
      But based on your answer, I begin to think you're a troll.

    2. You said "IF SOMEONE HAS BEEN CONVICTED OF MURDER" then " I am not interested in 'what if' situations.", and you later talk disparagingly about other people trying to bring up false convictions before dismissing the idea. Can you quote the part where you allow for wrongful convictions?

      I'm not a troll, and since it clearly matters to you, I've never been convicted (or even charged) with a crime other than protest. But I've read the research, and I've see the effects of your ideas. They do actually result in people getting murdered.

      In your case you're setting up the same dynamic - people have every incentive to conceal their past crimes from you because that's the only way they can stay in the community they're part of. Because you refuse to distinguish between teenage sexting and rape, you don't have any way to distinguish the predators from the people who peed in the wrong place 30 years ago. You're not safer because you don't discuss it, you're ensuring that everyone lies.

    3. OMG dude. My desire to keep murderers out of play spaces will result in people getting murdered? Did you really just write that? Murder is the same as someone peeing in the wrong place 30 years ago?
      Do you realize how you sound?
      Let me put it to you plainly: THOSE WHO COMMIT MURDER SHOULD BE KEPT OUT OF PLAY SPACES. If you don't agree, you don't have to. But stop trying to use strawman arguments and false dilemmas to prove your whacky point.