Between BDSM and the DSM: The Relationship of BDSM and Psychology

I have posted a copy of  Between BDSM and the DSM: The Relationship of BDSM and Psychology, By: Doron Mosenzon (Instructed by: Dr. Otniel Dror) Seminar Paper for the Course “Gender and Science” 2013-14. 

You can read the full paper at: https://goo.gl/HK3r1F

Dominant Views in Psychology and Psychiatry

What is Sexual Deviance?

Early Sexology and the Creation of the Deviant

"Sex and sexuality were always an inflammatory subject, and every religion, ideology, and discipline has an interest in the way people relate and operate with their sexuality. More specifically, trying to decide what sexual acts and dispositions are “normal”, “healthy”, “natural”, and “moral” is an important part of any philosophy or area of study that deals with human sexuality.

Consent NEEDS communication.

There's a lot of discourse about consent going on lately. And that's a good thing. We've ignored consent violations too long, both as a BDSM community and in American culture as a whole. As much as it's frustrating and painful to talk about such things, talking about consent and what it means is good and healthy for us. It's like lancing a wound, it hurts and a lot of pus comes out at first, but it's what's required to start the healing process.

BDSM Consent in Non-BDSM Sex

By Kayla Beare - Original Post HERE

In a post-#MeToo world, the need for a clear-cut and comprehensive definition of sexual consent has become a topic of conversation for many. The BDSM community is often said to be ahead of the curve in having this conversation, and there is much that can be learnt from this community.

 BDSM, an acronym referring to bondage/discipline, dominance/submission and sadism/masochism, is a term that encompasses a broad range of intimate activities that often, but not always, includes some component of sexual play. BDSM has been around for centuries, as early as Mesopotamian times, but has only recently become part of public discourse in Western societies thanks to kinky books and films such as the 50 Shades of Grey series.

 Unfortunately, the 50 Shades of Grey series, although hugely popular, is not an accurate depiction of healthy BDSM. The books, and films, underplay the consent negotiation process generally present in BDSM play. Consent in BDSM, much like consent in sex more generally, is often considered morally transformative. This means that it defines the morality of a sexual act: without consent, it is abuse but with consent, it is a shared, actively chosen experience.  Consent is so vital to BDSM play that is one of the tenets of the BDSM code: “risk-aware consensual kink “ Arguably, we should all be having sex in which we are aware of the risks and are fully consenting, regardless of whether or not we are engaging in elements of kink or BDSM. Let’s explore the key facets of the BDSM model of consent and its use in non-BDSM sex.

 

Panel addresses BDSM myths

BY CATHERINE DINH

CONTRIBUTING REPORTER

Three panellists convened on Wednesday to dispel what they deemed myths surrounding a controversial sexual practice known as bondage and domination, sadism and masochism (BDSM).

Roughly 40 people filled a room in Linsly-Chittenden Hall to hear clinical sexologist Charley Ferrer and two representatives of the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom, Judy Guerin and Richard Cunningham, discuss issues relating to BDSM, including safe practices and attributes of what they called the BDSM community. The panellists said people often consider BDSM to be illegal, violent and impersonal, but argued that these are misconceptions and that BDSM can be part of a healthy relationship.

Ferrer, who has written several books on sex, explained that’d is about people exploring their bodies and personal preferences — not just about sex. She said many people in the BDSM community do not interact sexually, adding that dominance and submission can be seen as normal components of relationships.

“It is not domestic violence,” Ferrer said. “In [BDSM] you are sharing yourself with someone else and they care about you.”

Guerin, a former executive director of the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom — a group that advocates for adult privacy rights— said BDSM is about “comfort with your own body.” Cunningham, the group’s legal consultant said BDSM is not a hidden practice and that the community is open to everyone.

The panellists stressed the importance of practicing BDSM safely and maximizing communication between participants. BDSM practitioners use “safe words,” Cunningham explained, using the word “red” for “stop” and “yellow” for “slow down.”

Cunningham said the BDSM community values consensually, and Ferrer added that BDSM is “a lot about respect.”

Exploring BDSM can help people become more open to alternative types of sexuality and sex practices, the panellists said.

“If you have any reluctance to embrace diversity, spend some time with a member of BDSM,” Cunningham said.

The panellists said the BDSM community is small and that people within it gain reputations for their individual practices. Ferrer said BDSM members often refer to people outside the group as “vanilla,” adding that those who have not tried BDSM have not explored the full possibilities of sexual experience. Ferrer and Guerin advised those interested in trying BDSM total to people in the community.

“If you don’t like it, you can stop,” Ferrer said. “It’s like if you don’t like something on TV, you can change the channel.”

Cunningham cautioned that people practicing BDSM must be able to distinguish fantasy from reality and Guerin said to “keep it light-hearted.”

The discussion also briefly addressed how homosexuality has sometimes been stigmatized as a mental illness, drawing parallels with BDSM’s evolving public image. Ferrer defended BDSM by saying that people are “all kinky in some way.”

As the discussion wrapped up, the panellists answered questions from audience members.

In response to a question on the legal status of BDSM, Cunningham explained that BDSM is not criminal so long as no one is injured. If people are hurt, it is then considered assault, he said, adding that people need to understand boundaries.

The panel was co-sponsored by the LGBTQ Co-op at Yale.

BDSM and the Right to Autonomy

Hot for Kink, Bothered by the Law: BDSM and the Right to Autonomy - Canadian Bar Association

"The things that seem beautiful, inspiring, and life-arming to me seem ugly, hateful and ludicrous to most other people. This may be the most painful part of being a sadomasochist: this experience of radical difference, separation at the root of perception. Our culture insists on sexual uniformity and does not acknowledge any neutral differences — only crimes, sins, diseases, and mistakes.”

Written almost thirty years ago, Pat Calia’s diagnosis of society’s sexual chauvinism still applies in Canada to the more hardcore forms of BDSM (Bondage-Discipline-Sado-Masochism, referred to broadly as “kink”), in practice and in pornography. While there are no laws that explicitly target BDSM activities or representation, Canadian courts have concluded that sex deemed too risky or rough can be criminalized under assault-related provisions, and sexual representation that is deemed “violent”, “degrading” or “dehumanizing” can be criminalized under obscenity provisions. In both cases, consent to the activities does not immunize the practice or the porn from criminalization. The ostensible explanation for this interference with our sexual autonomy is harm reduction. And yet our culture tolerates a wide variety of risky and injurious non-sexual activities, from mixed martial arts to elective cosmetic surgery, while circulating a wide variety of brutal imagery and violent stories, from extreme horror films to depictions of genuine torture and killing.

What might account for this hypocrisy?

Full article below: 

Morally problematic, socially divisive, and legally suspect: devotees of BDSM

Morally problematic, socially divisive, and legally suspect: devotees of BDSM

[Bondage-Discipline, Domination-Submission, or Sadism-Masochism] are often treated as the problem children of sexual ethics. This essay is my apology, or defense, for BDSM, which I shall argue can satisfy criteria for mutually respectful erotic interaction but also provokes legitimate ethical concerns within a diverse, complex world. I do not presume to offer a comprehensive discussion of BDSM, to address every ethical issue related to its practice, or to speak for the experience or position of every BDSM identity. Several aspects of my intellectual, social, and personal background–including my transcendental idealism, my feminism, and my BDSM orientation–inform and motivate my account.

As a transcendental idealist, whose philosophy is influenced by J. G. Fichte, I claim that mutually respectful erotic interactions provide a natural milieu–wherein human beings cultivate their ability for reciprocal influence by expressing desires guided by both feeling and reason–that facilitates social, and ult imately moral, consciousness. As a socially and politically conscious woman, whose ethics is colored by the second and third waves of feminism, I think that social and political justice entails advocating women’s efforts to determine, improve, and value their gendered existence, including their diverse,

1             In this essay, I presume the truth of various particulars about BDSM, which my individual experience, other subjective reports, and empirical study support, but I am open to discussion and dispute of these particulars insofar as BDSM has been mostly excluded from theoretical, empirical, and literary discourse. The attached bibliography (which was distributed to participants in the “Good Sex, Bad Sex” conference ) includes some literature that has influenced (but not determined) my account and that offers a starting place for readers interested in BDSM.

2             In this essay, I presuppose the legitimacy of my intellectual, ethical, and personal positions, but I am open to discussion and dispute of these positions insofar as I am always in the process of developing and refining my views. The attached bibliography includes some literature that underpins my perspectives on sexual ethics as a philosopher, woman, and individual.  unique sexual experiences. As an individual, whose erotic identity is inseparable from BDSM, I believe that BDSM activity is integral to my personal and human welfare. Section One: Misconceptions and Conceptions of BDSM

I would like to offer a rudimentary conception–and counter some basic misconceptions–of BDSM. BDSM encompasses a multipl icity of erotic inclinations, interests, and behaviors, which may include: corporal or behavioral restraints (e.g. bondage and discipline); bodily or emotional control (e.g. domination and submission); physical or mental pain (e.g. sadism and masochism). Erotic partners may engage in topping [relatively giving, active] roles or in bottoming [relatively receiving, passive] roles within particular erotic interactions. These interactions may be fantastical, theatrical, visual, or aural, or they may be concrete, actual, tactile, or corporeal, but in either case, they elicit a gamut of diverse feelings that vary widely in intensity.

BDSM interactions do not typically entail males harming females, adults molesting youngsters, or culturally central, socially powerful individuals exploiting culturally marginal, socially powerless individuals. Participants are generally consenting adults of similar cultural and social background. Tops and bottoms may be hetero-males, hetero-females, gays, lesbians, bisexuals, or transsexuals. Tops are not usually socially domineering, psychologically sadistic personalities and bottoms are not usually socially submissive, psychologically masochistic personalities. Outside of specific erotic contexts, few BDSM participants enjoy inflicting or enduring restraint, control, or pain. Relative to the range of actual sexual practice, participants rarely experience extraordinary sexually-related emotional distress, psycho-social dysfunction, or ethical conflict.

Section Two: Reciprocal Consent, Concern, and Desire

Reciprocal consent, concern, and desire are criteria for mutually respectful sexual interaction, which BDSM can meet. Mutual respect requires that sexual partners give explicit, or at least implicit, expression of their voluntary participation in a particular interaction. Additionally, it demands that each exhibits concern for the other’s human and personal interests within that interaction. Finally, it compels that both show erotic desire for the other within that interaction.

Help defend #BDSM, #LGBTQ, sex work, privacy and free speech.

Help the first UK solicitor to crowd-fund his pro bono work to defend BDSM, LGBTQ, sex work, privacy and free speech.

If you are reading this and you are in the UK, you may one day need a lawyer to defend you and yours against the government’s anti-sexual freedom laws.

Even if you are not in the UK, you may enjoy reading or viewing material produced there, so this affects you too.

“I am the only lawyer in the UK who specialises in obscenity law and sexual freedoms”

Myles Jackman is the lawyer who specialises in this work and he devotes a lot of his time to working pro bono – i.e. for free. Help Myles do this important work by pledging a small monthly sum.

Help defend BDSM, LGBTQ and free speech * Hush-Hush

Myths and Misconceptions About #Kink

Benny Vimes — February 1, 2013

Our culture is full of myths, misconceptions, and confusion about kink, BDSM, and fetishes. We’re going to address 10 of them here; 5 in this article and another coming soon. For each of the misconceptions there will be two answers: one from Benny and one from Cheyenne. That way you can get two different perspectives, but it is also worth saying that like any other identity we can’t speak for everyone who identifies as kinky. The kink world is incredibly diverse!

Also, this post may contain too much sexual content for some readers. If that bothers you, don’t read it.

1) Kink is inherently incompatible with feminism/reifies patriarchy.

Benny – One of the most important tenets of feminism is that people have the right to decide for themselves what the structures of their relationships look like, and what kind of sex they want to have, or not have. Patriarchy tells us there are limited roles people can take in relationships, and that the kinds of sex we can have and the situations in which we have it are limited. A feminist

perspective can open up those options, saying that women, and indeed people of all genders, have the right to make those decisions without consulting a patriarchal society. We have the right to make sexual decisions for ourselves, and we even have the right to define pleasure for ourselves.

When we see a man beating a woman in a BDSM scene, it can look a lot like abuse. It makes sense to question the act of hitting a woman when we live in a society full of non-consensual violence. Without knowing the context of the scene, no wonder people assume it is not okay! However, if that woman ASKED for that scene, specifically requested it, negotiated with the man hitting her, and set limits around what that scene would include, the situation is quite different from the kind of violence that feminism fights against.

The Amnesty Sex Work Argument, Broken Down

VICE: by Frankie Mullin / @frankiemullin

"You might have noticed a shit-storm around sex work in your newsfeed this week: Amnesty was accused of being onside with pimps, there were lots of open letters and there were even more opinions. Lena Dunham got involved.

The beef is based on Amnesty's proposal that sex work should be fully decriminalised, as the charity believes this will make things safer for sex workers. Some people disagree; most conspicuously some of Hollywood's leading ladies including Lena Dunham, Anne Hathaway, Carey Mulligan and Kate Winslet. According to those in opposition, Amnesty has climbed into bed with a bunch of pimps. Others think that decriminalisation is the way forward for sex workers. Managed to miss the whole thing? Here's a breakdown of what happened.

First up, what did Amnesty actually propose?

On the 7th of July, Amnesty issued a draft policy proposal, suggesting that the criminalisation of sex work harms those most in need of protection, i.e. sex workers themselves. The proposal follows a two-year consultation and is backed up by numerous studies from organisations like the Human Rights Council, United Nation Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime, the Commission on Human Rights and UNAIDS. On a global scale, Amnesty argues that decriminalisation offers sex workers better legal protections and makes them less vulnerable to exploitation from third parties.

Then came the letters...

Regulator Atvod's ban on fetish films criticised by free-speech campaigners

Activists from Backlash, which promotes freedom of sexual expression, said Atvod was illegally subverting free speech and accused it of being out of touch with the online world.

Photograph: Richard Fremont/Getty

Courtesy Of The Guardian's Damien Gayle - @damiengayle

Authority for Television on Demand says clips on fetish sites would be banned if on DVD but one dominatrix dismisses regulator as ‘UK’s Pornfinder General’

  

Free-speech campaigners have condemned the first rulings against film-makers under new rules banning the depiction of harmful sexual fetishes.

The Authority for Television on Demand (Atvod) ruled that sites run by two dominatrix film-makers offered video-on-demand clips that would be banned on if they were for sale on DVD.

One site, Glasgow Mistress Megara Furie, was found to have breached rules with a film showing repeated kicks to a man’s genitals that appeared to draw blood. The second, Mistress R’eal, fell foul of regulations with several videos, including one of a man being whipped until welts appeared on his back.

But activists from the group Backlash, which promotes freedom of sexual expression, said the rules applied by Atvod amounted to illegal subversion of free speech and accused the regulator of being out of touch with the online world.

The rulings are the first to be brought under rule 14 of the Atvod rulebook, which bans a video-on-demand service from showing material that would be refused classification by the BBFC (British Board of Film Classification).

Atvod’s ruling on Glasgow Mistress Megara Furie’s film Ballbusting said: “The sustained kicking appears to cause pain and on several occasions reference is made to the man’s genitals beginning to bleed. The end of the video features a close up which gives clear sight of Glasgow Mistress Megara Furie’s bloodied feet.”

The ruling added: “With clear sight of forceful kicks to the genitals which appear to break the skin, this goes beyond the allowance made by the BBFC [British Board of Film Classification] for ‘moderate, non-abusive consensual activity’.”

Mistress R’eal fell foul of the same rule with A Bullwhipping In The Woods parts 1 and 2, two videos that show a man being whipped for not eating faeces off the shoe of the dominatrix.

Atvod said the gag and restraints used in a third video meant a man’s “means of indicating a withdrawal of consent is not apparent”, again in breach of BBFC rules

Both sites were also found to have breached a second rule intended to keep hardcore pornography out of the reach of children.

Peter Johnson, chief executive of Atvod, said all the videos ruled against had been shown to the BBFC, whose analysts agreed they would not pass them for sale, even in licensed sex shops. He said Glasgow Mistress Megara Furie had acted quickly to shut down the service and remove the offending video, but Mistress R’eal was facing enforcement action. Sanctions include a fine of up to £250,000 or a ban from providing video-on-demand services, Johnson said.

Ruth Evans, Atvod’s chair, said: “Under the new rules, material which is banned from sale on a DVD in the UK is also banned from UK video-on-demand services.

“This is particularly likely to affect pornographic videos which feature violence or in which consent is not clear. If you can’t walk into a licensed sex shop and buy it, nor can you view it at home on a UK video-on-demand service regulated by Atvod.”

Rule 14 came into force in December amid protests by sex workers, pornographers and free-speech campaigners. Those opposed to it drew wide publicity with a protest outside parliament that included “face-sitting”, a sexual activity banned under the rule.

Campaigners with Backlash told the Guardian they believed the new regulation, brought in using a statutory instrument (a law enacted through delegated powers), went beyond the scope of the EU directive it was based on and as a result would fail a judicial review.

Itziar Urrutia, who runs the Urban Chick Supremacy Cell, a dominatrix fetish website, said: “The patriarchy knows full well that the CPS [Crown Prosecution Service] don’t prosecute these minority-interest websites under the Obscene Publications Act because a jury wouldn’t convict. So they resort to illegal ‘rules’. This will end in a grown-up court.

“Atvod have erected themselves as the UK’s Pornfinder General. A modern witch-hunt against a peril that sacrifices children to a fantasy evil created by the state. The sole purpose of this new puritanism is mass control and surveillance, under the pretence of ‘protection’.”

Urrutia successfully fought Atvod last year over rules that demand explicit material must be kept out of the reach of people under 18. She added: “I have some bad news for our government: like it or not, paywalls don’t stop minors from accessing porn because they don’t need to pay for it. They are far more techie-savvy than these luddite civil servants.

“What children need is sex education to help them understand the role of porn in society,” she said.

Hot Girls Wanted, Porn Isn't 'Ruining' Women. Exploitative Labor Is.

Hot Girls Wanted, the newish documentary produced by actress Rashida Jones, is making headlines and earning some rave reviews—as well as getting panned by people in the adult industry and advocates for sex workers—for its depiction of one tiny sliver of the wide world of porn, a fly-by-night talent agency called Hussie Models, which operates out of a scuzzy little house in Florida. The movie centers around a handful of young women at the Hussie house at a particular time, but purports to be a window into “professional amateur” pornography as a whole, strongly hinting that it’s an industry that ruins many guileless young women who only wanted to be famous.

The idea that young women are being lured into the Big City only to have their virtue wrecked is a very old story, going back to the 19th century social purity movement and the Christian reformers who set up weekly soapboxes outside houses of prostitution. In Hot Girls Wanted, the general notion that porn irreparably or at least very seriously taints women is paired, a little shakily, with shots of writhing pop stars like Miley Cyrus. Its goal is somehow clear and vague simultaneously: Hot Girls Wanted is aiming to convey something about our sexually-saturated, erotically schizophrenic culture—but that something never resolves to anything much at all.

If amateur porn was, in fact, lying in wait within the recesses of the Internet to snatch very young women away from loving homes to plunge them deep into highly visible sexual slavery en masse, Hot Girls Wanted would highlight a trend of sexual corruption that no civil society should put up with. But the film’s obsession with sex kneecaps a much more important discussion on young women and labor: a discussion that in one way is specific to a small and unregulated corner of the porn industry in Florida, but speaks more generally to the way cultural shame contributes directly to exploitation.

READ MORE BELOW

In Hot Girls Wanted, Porn Isn't 'Ruining' Women. Exploitative Labor Is.

Sex workers rights: The feminist criticism of the industry has sparked an aggressive debate

Thank you to: Pandora Blake and Niki Adams - www.politics.co.uk

Last week the New Statesman organised a debate on "buying and selling sex" at Conway Hall, in collaboration with London Thinks. Here, Niki Adams of the English Collective of Prostitutes and Pandora Blake of the Sex Worker's Open University, who were both on the panel, address some of the accusations which emerged during the discussion.

Contrary to what chair Samira Ahmed seemed to feel, this debate was not about sex workers with different experiences trying to find common ground. It was not about propping up a flawed binary between 'happy hooker' and 'helpless victim' (categories that are both used to silence sex workers who speak up). And it wasn't a stimulating academic conversation exploring ideological difference. Sex work is a survival strategy used by real people. We are further marginalised and made vulnerable to violence when any aspect of sex work is criminalised.

OH DEAR! Anti-Porn Feminists are at it again

"BDSM is abuse and rape culture, The Sixth Siren joined Fetlife to prove it"

Oh dear...did they prove it?

I find the views of some of these ill informed feminist ‘types’ quite insulting. The other day, surfing the web, I came across an article about the BDSM as abuse and BDSM inciting a rape culture written by the “Anti-porn feminists”. The whole thing made my blood boil – literally. ( I will post link and article later) The article cites its EVIDENCE as FETLIFE – how one feminist infiltrated Fetlife and noted all the goings on.

This whole joining Fetlife and writing about it would be fine IF she had written about the whole picture – But alas, no. She chose to write ONLY topics & conversations out of context.

Below are a few points I’d like to make regarding her article:

What do you think of this statement: BDSM is Violence Against Women - Share your views

Here is a quote taken from the Liberation Collective:

"The existence of male submissives in BDSM practice does nothing to excuse, nullify, or disprove the fact that BDSM is violence against women. We know that liberated sexuality does not follow the patriarchal model of dominance and submission, and that BDSM is the normalization of domestic violence."

What do you think???

Giving the #Tories a majority = ANTI PORN , ANTI HUMAN RIGHTS, ANTI EXTREMISM, ANTI TOLERANCE, PRO SNOOPERS CHARTER, PRO ATVOD CENSORSHIP.

Want to know more about these issues and more??

*  The Daily Mail's favourite 'go to' politician for censorial sound bites appointed as the government's chief censor

*  A Conservative government has been in power for less than a week, and already our fundamental human rights are under threat

*  Anti-terror: the perversion of tolerance

*  Government's anti-extremism plans will have chilling effect on free speech

*  Theresa May's plans are a threat to British values

*  Hacking away safeguards from mass surveillance...: British Government sneakily enacts legislation to exempt the security services from laws against hacking

*  Should You Be Worried About The Snoopers' Charter?...

*  First victims of new Tory internet censorship rules... ATVOD internet censors act against BDSM material on two VoD websites

*  Mistress R'eal appeals against ATVOD censorship

*  Fun game makes light of the UK's repressive porn laws

READ BELOW

UK Government Watch

David Cameron really, really has not the faintest what he is talking about when it comes to the internet.

David Cameron really, really has not the faintest what he is talking about when it comes to the internet.

Earlier this week, I asked a simple question of his latest pronouncements on online porn, child abuse, internet filtering and related stuff: is he an internet ignoramus – or a master manipulator?

Today, I think the answer is clear: like far too many of our legislators, his grasp of matters internet is fleeting at best, leading him over and over to an excess of soundbite over substance.

Let’s start with two simple propositions, both of which his press office readily agreed to:

1) David Cameron is in favour of companies such as Google adopting filters to filter out online porn, and will bring in regulation to ensure this happens if they fail to act voluntarily.

And 2) he is definitely not in favour of regulators intervening to block or ban page 3.

A DVD you would wish your wife or servants to view? Drake Blaize, Michael Peacock trial and the law

Now that the obscenity trial against Michael Peacock is over, what have we learned? (Apart from the fact that there are still people who get their porn from DVDs rather than the internet?)

Rather wonderfully, the jury came back with a verdict of Not Guilty, unanimously, on all counts after about a tea-break’s worth of deliberation.

It’s that perhaps we are finally beginning to become comfortable with the idea of consent, the notion that one does not have to practice a particular sexual kink or orientation to not condemn it, and that people who approach an escort who goes by the handle “Sleazy Michael” and rent or buy DVDs from him are possibly, just possibly, not being blindsided by the nature of their content.

Which is probably a great relief to my publisher, given that I’ve written about more than a few of these so-called “obscene” acts (in chick-lit bestsellers no less). The law used to bring the charges against Michael, the Obscene Publications Act 1959, was the very same invoked in the Lady Chatterley’s Lover trial.

Making a Fist of It: The Law and Obscenity: We have not heard the last of R v Peacock

On Friday 6 January 2012, a historic case came to a conclusion in Courtroom 7 of Southwark Crown Court. Michael Peacock was unanimously acquitted, after a four-day trial that saw the outdated obscenity law of England and Wales in the dock.

Peacock had been charged under the Obscene Publications Act 1959 for allegedly distributing ‘obscene’ ‘gay’ DVDs, which featured fisting, urolagnia (‘watersports’) and BDSM.

Peacock had advertised the DVDs through Craigslist, his own website (which also promoted his services as a male escort), and in a magazine. The Human Exploitation and Organised Crime Command (SCD9) or London’s Metropolitan Police — which encompasses the former Obscene Publications Squad — saw the advert and began an investigation.

They contacted Peacock, arranging to call around at his Brixton flat and purchase the five most popular fisting DVDs, which they did; then, after examining the DVDs, returned to the flat to arrest Peacock. Peacock also sold DVDs on his website, sleazymichael.com, and in the London-based gay magazine, Boyz. ‘Gay, straight, bi and trans’ DVDs were available (the word ‘porn’ was not used in the adverts) for prices starting at £8.50. No lesbian, underage, ‘K9’, bareback, brown or blood DVDs were available, but a total of 2,247 DVDs were catalogued and Peacock estimated he made a modest £70 a week from their sale.

Defining Subordination & feminist perspectives. Porn & BDSM

"Clare Phillipson suggests trenchantly, in defending the prohibition: ‘We do not need research to prove that the creation and distribution of material which depicts women being tortured for sexual pleasure … is anything other than harmful"

But this moderately plausible assertion is not enough to condemn extreme pornography without further evidence.

Defining Subordination

WEB: www.sinfulandwicked.co.uk MOB: 07426 490 214 TWITTER: @sinfulandwicked

Am I allowed to laugh? (BDSM) – a Christian Perspective

There are occasions when the Atheist in me has to roar with laughter...... I think I may do some research from the Bible to find Christian encouragement to participate in BDSM. Since all books are open to interpretation.... I will interpret and offer a conclusion that is a positive influence to some nuts. And I am sure Master Drezda will most likely assist. 

So, lets read what they have to say:

Bondage,  Domination, and Sadomasochism  (BDSM) – a Christian Perspective
 I hope that as you read through this page, you will arrive at the same conclusion as I have concerning bondage, sadomasochism and their associated subcultures.   God created us and gave us the wonderful gift of sex to be enjoyed in the intimate bond of  marriage.  God intended sex to be a loving, giving experience, as opposed to a selfish, lustful, or domineering experience.   This page has been written primarily to Christians, but I encourage everyone to consider the points made.
 Definitions:

• Bondage: "sadomasochistic sexual practices involving the physical restraint of one partner " (Merriam-Webster Dictionary)

• Domination: "supremacy or pre-eminence over another; exercise of mastery or preponderant influence" (Webster's Dictionary)

• Masochism: "A sexual perversion characterized by pleasure in being subjected to pain or humiliation esp. by a love object; pleasure in being abused or dominated" (Webster's Dictionary)

• Sadism: "A sexual perversion in which gratification is obtained by the infliction of physical or mental pain on others; delight in cruelty" (Webster's Dictionary)

 Additionally, Encyclopaedia  Britannica says this:  "The sadist, however, often seeks a victim who is not a masochist, as some of the sexual excitement derives from the victim's unwillingness. The level and extent of sadistic violence may vary considerably, from infliction of mild pain in otherwise harmless love play to extreme brutality, sometimes leading to serious injury or death. The satisfaction of the sadist may result not from inflicting actual physical pain but rather from the mental suffering of the victim. Sexual urges may limit the level of violence, but in some cases the aggressive impulse becomes predominant and the sadist progresses to more extreme expressions of his violent tendencies. Sadism may be a factor in some violent crimes, particularly rape and murder."

• Sadomasochism: "The derivation of pleasure from the infliction of physical or mental pain either on others or on oneself" (Webster's Dictionary)

• Submission: "An act of submitting to the authority or control of another" (Webster's Dictionary)

 There are many ways in which people mix the above acts with sexuality.  The term "BDSM" is a broad reaching term that vaguely covers all of the above activities, and there are many subcultures associated with BDSM. Rather than attempt to analyze each group in this discussion, I will present some principle-driven questions that can be asked of the particular activity with the goal of determining whether the activity is pleasing to God or not.

Questions that can be asked concerning a BDSM activity:
1. Does the act degrade and dishonour God's temple?  Our bodies are made in God's image and are intended to be vessels of worship (Romans 12:1-2; 1 Corinthians 6:12-20).  When we mistreat someone's body, or allow our bodies to be mistreated, we degrade them and dishonour God.  This is basically mocking the dignity of God's image.   This dovetails with Satan's objectives of marring, abusing or destroying our bodies such that they cease to glorify God. 
 2. Does the act pervert sexual pleasure by mixing it with pain?  Pleasure and pain are opposites, but BDSM attempts to bring them together for sexual gratification.  Pain is a by product of sin (Genesis 3:16-17; Genesis 6:6) and was not intended to be part of creation.  It will be eventually removed from creation by Jesus at the end of the age (Revelation 21:4). God designed us to enjoy many different pleasures, including sex, food, work, art, music and  sports.  Our fallen nature tends to combine sinful acts with our outlets of pleasure.  God does not take pleasure in evil - nor should we as his followers.  David wrote, "You are not a God who takes pleasure in evil; with you the wicked cannot dwell." (Psalm 5:4 NIV)  Consider what Solomon wrote: "A fool finds pleasure in evil conduct, but a man of understanding delights in wisdom" (Proverbs 10:23 NIV) 3.  Does the act stifle the work of the Holy Spirit in your life?   When you consider the definitions of the words involved with BDSM and its associated acts, it's apparent that they are not based on love.  Rather, they are based on malice, hate, cruelty, lust, selfishness, control, and domination.  These attitudes are part of our sinful nature (Mark 7:21-23) and are directly opposed to the attitudes or "fruits" of the Holy Spirit.  The fruits of the Holy Spirit are "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control" (Galatians 5:22-23 NIV).
 There are many scriptures that warn us not to have the attitudes featured in BDSM.  For example, Paul wrote in Ephesians 4:31-32 NASB, "Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice.  Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you."  (note: the definition of malice:  "desire to see another suffer" (Webster's Dictionary).  For more examples see the scriptures at the bottom of this page. God commands us to walk in obedience to the Holy Spirit and not to gratify our fleshly cravings (Romans 13:12-13).  Paul wrote: "Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires" (Galatians 5:24 NIV).  When we ignore God's commands and  pursue our sinful cravings, we stifle or "quench" the activity of the Holy Spirit in our lives (Ephesians 4:30). 4.  Does the act corrupt God’s perfect plan for love and sex in marriage?   Let's first look at the below scripture to best understand God’s intent for marriage relations:²²Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.
²³For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Saviour.
²⁴Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. ²⁵Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her
²⁶to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word,
²⁷and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.
²⁸In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
 ²⁹After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church-- Ephesians 5:22-29 NIV

Key ideas from the above scripture:

1. Wives are to submit to their husbands as they do to God.  Our submission to God does not involve punishment, wrath or abuse, because Jesus Christ bore all the punishment due to us on the cross (1 Peter 2:24; Romans 5:1).  We have peace with God and submit to him in reverence and appreciation for the great sacrifice he made for us.  A wife's submission carries no hint of sexual slavery, abuse, suffering or pain.

1. The husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church.  Jesus did not treat the church harshly, nor did he inflict pain for pleasure or seek to dominate them. Jesus loved the church so much that he sacrificed his own body to pay for our sins.  His sacrifice was once and for all, eliminating any need for further pain and suffering on account of our sin (Hebrews 9:26; Hebrews 10:10).  Following Christ's example, a husband has no business treating his wife harshly, inflicting pain for pleasure, dominating her, etc..  Also, the reverse is true as well - he has no business allowing his wife to do those acts to him.  It simply would not be within the character of Christ.

1. A wife should not mistreat her husband because this would be a perversion of the submission and respect that should characterize the wife's role.    Paul likened the husband’s role to that of Christ and the wife’s role to that of the church.  In Ephesians 5:22-24 he wrote, “22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.”  The question we can ask ourselves is, “Did God intend the church to abuse Jesus through pain and domination?” No!  The church's attitude toward Jesus is to be one of reverence, respect and love.  Likewise, wives should treat their husbands with reverence, respect and love. 

1.  We are to nurture our body and our spouse’s body.  We worship God in many ways, but especially in how we treat our body (Romans 12:1-2; 1 Corinthians 6:12-20), which is made in God's image and is a temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 3:16).  It would be dishonouring to God for the wife to abuse her husband's body, and a husband is specifically commanded to cherish and nurture his wife’s body, as he would his own body (Ephesians 5:29-30).   Nurturing, caring and feeding do not carry any connotation of bondage, pain or abuse.

1. Does the act bring you under the rule of a defeated enemy?   Satan hates the fact that through our faith in Jesus Christ, we become co-heirs of God's kingdom (Romans 8:17).  As adopted sons of God, we inherit authority and dominion over sin, Satan and his forces (see authority).  Consequently, Satan seeks creative ways like BDSM to bring us back under his rule (through sin) and strip us of our "divine inheritance" rights.  

 God commands us clearly to not allow sin (or anything other than God) to be our master (Genesis 4:7).  Also, Paul wrote:  12Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. 13Do not offer the parts of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body to him as instruments of righteousness.14For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace. " 16Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey--whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness?" Romans 6:12-14,16 NIV We must remember that Jesus surrendered his own body to be punished once and for all for our sin.  His sacrifice purchased our freedom from the law of sin and death (Romans 8:1-2).  To willingly place ourselves back into some form of bondage would be to make a mockery of the freedom Christ purchased for us.  Paul wrote: Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage.  Galatians 5:1 NKJV
 If we allow ourselves to come under Satan's rule, we will be subjected to his "tools of domination," which he uses to keep people in slavery.  Being subject to these tools is no fantasy!  Here are some examples: 

• Torture: Matthew 18:32-35

• Sickness: Luke 13:11, Acts 10:38

• Affliction: Job 2:7,

• Murder & death: John 8:44, John 10:10, Hebrews 2:14

• Bondage/Slavery: Hebrews 2:14-15, Romans 6:19, 2 Timothy 2:26

 6.  Is the act based on violence or graphic fantasies (e.g. sex, death, rape, torture, mutilation, etc.)?  In an exclusive interview in the 1990's , the late serial killer Ted Bundy shared with Dr. James Dobson how pornography progressively helped him accelerate down the road to sadistic killing.  Interestingly enough, BDSM was involved. 7. Is the act a 'perversion' of normal heterosexual  relations?  People turn to perversions when they are not satisfied with the “normal” pathway of stimulation.  In essence they are saying to God “your plan for my sexuality is not good enough…I want more gratification.”  By doing this we open ourselves up to some very serious consequences. The apostle Paul captures some of those consequences in his letter to the church in Rome: "²⁴Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.
²⁵They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.
 ²⁶Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.

²⁷In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

₂₈Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.
 ²⁹They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,

³⁰slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;

³¹they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. "  Romans 1:24-31 NIV
 Here are the key aspects of the peoples’ behavior:

• They degraded their bodies with one another

• They worship created things instead of God (sexual fantasy is a form of worshipping the body)

• They explored additional areas of perversion (homosexuality)

• The consequences of such actions included:

• They were given over to shameful lust and a depraved mind

• They received a "due penalty" for their perversion

• They were filled with every kind of wickedness, including malice and murder

• They became heartless and ruthless

 Pursuing BDSM-related activities may produce similar results, because they often involve degrading the body, worshipping something other than God (sex, body, pain, control, punishment, power, etc.), and exploration of other forms of perversion.  Once we open ourselves up to the associated consequences, it becomes very difficult to regain a clear and right mind.  However, recovery is possible with God's help. If the answer to any of the above questions was "Yes", then I would encourage you to refrain from practicing the activity. Consider these additional verses:
Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth" 1 Corinthians 5:8 NKJV"But now you yourselves are to put off all these: anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy language out of your mouth." Colossians 3:8 NKJV"³For we ourselves were also once foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful and hating one another. ⁴But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, 5not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit"  Titus 3:3-5 NKJV "Therefore, rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind."  1 Peter 2:1 NIV "Do not drag me away with the wicked, with those who do evil, who speak cordially with their neighbors but harbor malice in their hearts." Psalm 28:3 NIV
"²¹For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery,

²²greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly.
²³All these evils come from inside and make a man 'unclean.' "  Mark 7:21-23 NIV
 "But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people." Ephesians 5:3 NIV "Therefore, as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience." Colossians 3:12 NIV "Do everything in love." 1 Corinthians 16:14 NIV

WEB: www.sinfulandwicked.co.uk MOB: 07426 490 214 TWITTER: @sinfulandwicked