Ew.

[BlueIris]

This is officially one of the most demented things I've ever read about.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0217062contract1.html

CREEPY.

[atommom]

1. If my husband handed me that document, I'd be out the door in a

heartbeat. Sick, sick, sick. There's just so much objectionable material here that I don't know what to quote, but this will have to do...

You are also noncompliant if you start something and cannot or will not finish, even if you state that you are in pain or something hurts. If you are noncompliant you lost three times the GBDs <Good Behavior Days> that would have been given. If you don't have enough GBDs to cover the loss, then you will be tied to the bed and I will do whatever I wish to you. This will continue every night until you are ready to be compliance <sic>, at which time you will need to apologize and explain how you are ready to be my sex slave again.

Like being tied to the bed isn't sex-slavey enough!

:puke:

[Hello_Kitty]

2. How did a loser like him get a second date, much less married?

His attitude is so wretched there's no way he could disguise it, even in the early stages of a relationship. His poor, poor, wife. To her credit she didn't sign the contract but living with him must have been hell on earth. There's a mention in that horrid document about attire for church. Jerk probably thinks that religious scripture dictates that he is the master of his wife and she was probably raised to believe that

Have I mentioned how much I hate patriarchal, organized religion? :grr:

[BlueIris]

3. The thing that still disturbs me the most about that thing...

is the number of references in it to "the kids." I am too disgusted with this unfortunate situation to go looking to see whether or not the couple actually had any. Shudder.

[NMMNG]

4. Vile. Utterly vile.

It doesn't say, but the article suggests the "contract" was presented to the wife after they were married. I would have gotten an annulment or divorce poste haste, with the "contract" as evidence. Women are not effing property.

[Cerridwen]

5. I couldn't get past the first page

I think if someone had handed me something like this, they'd be in grave danger of losing their "family jewels!"

How the hell do we create people like this?!

[NMMNG]

6. Right wing ideals and Fundamentalist religion.

Makes them think women are property.


:puke:

[benburch]

7. More discussion here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=471071&mesg_id=471071

[bloom]

11. One feminist's perspective

that sounds about right to me (this IS the feminist group - after all):

"BDSM reminds me, among other things, of Dungeons & Dragons, and the dog show circuit, and those dudes in the park with swords and chain mail, and indie rock musicians, and guys who wear Star Trek uniforms to work, and people who deconstruct “American Idol” episodes in internet forums, and toddler beauty pageants. Except that BDSM probably involves a bit more stylized rape than most of those.

Am I mocking your “lifestyle”? I sure am! Although this should come as no surprise to even the casual reader, since I have made it no secret that the founding principle of I Blame The Patriarchy is opposition to all dominance models in the social order.

Whether or not it is true of your particular sexyclub, there can be no doubt that a lifestyle of ritualized dominance and submission carries with it a high risk of true abuse; few people exist in the world who are capable of finessing such a thing into the art form its proponents believe it to be. I know this because few people exist in the world who are capable of finessing anything into art, and there is little evidence to suggest that a scene based on so inane a pursuit as orgasm should be any different."

http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/01/26/in-which-the-author-pronounces-on-a-popular-hobby/

another nip:

"Well. As a loud-ass bitch who is about as dominant as it’s possible to be, I can also tell you that the “scene” was not the bastion of anti-patriarchal transgression that it paints itself as...

BDSM is truly anti-patriarchal like Madonna and Britney Spears swapping spit at the Grammys was truly lesbian. To wit:

If you’re only allowed to be in charge when the man hands you money to say it’s okay, YOU ARE NOT IN CHARGE. If being in charge requires that you wear punitive clothing, YOU ARE NOT IN CHARGE."

http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/01/28/in-which-the-author-bottoms-out/


Also Violet Socks weighs in on the Frey topic with... :

"Wasn’t it Germaine Greer who said women have no idea how much men hate them?

Twenty bucks says some of the BDSM crowd is going to show up to explain that this is just normal “topping” behavior and is entirely compatible with a loving, respectful relationship."

http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/17/mate-expectations/


(hmmm how did she know?)

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bloom]

15. Well you know - spouse abusers

could all get together and form a club and call it XYZ and ridicule people who don't go along with the premise of their club - say they aren't open-minded - and all that. And as long as they didn't cross any legal lines - nobody could do anything (except say what they think about it).

And that would seem pretty similar to what you have been doing.

The article/story that started all of this sounds like clear-cut spouse abuse to me. And it sounds like you are mostly identifying with it. So I don't know what kind of reception you expect to get around here.


I think the sort of thing described in the contract could not be more at odds with feminism. Other feminists might disagree with that - and that's their prerogative - but I think the twisty lady exhibits courage by calling it how she sees it.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bloom]

18. You remind me of people who call themselves

patriots in order to justify killing and torturing people.

Like a war-monger who wants to convince a pacifist that she/he is wrong.

I have a lot of other things to read. Thanks anyway.


Maybe I could find some books on feminism for you. You could learn about equality instead of domination.



From a post in GD:

War is manliness gone awry. It's all about penetration, ejaculation, and domination. "Get in there (without warning or permission), discharge your weapons on anybody opposing you (and maybe even on those who don't), and take control. "

War is rape and murder. Rape is always about gender, in some secret or not-so-secret way. While men can rape men, men rape women in far greater numbers. (Women don't rape men.) Rape is a crime of opportunity. It is an act of hatred and aggression. Towards women.

So, war, which is about rape and murder, is an act of hatred and aggression towards women. It's Mother Murder.

Mother murder is not only about mothers. It is about wives and daughters and sisters. Wife-beating has become epidemic, particularly among soldiers returning from war.

http://www.counterpunch.org/vanbergen02202006.html

[benburch]

19. I think you are unlikely to find a book on feminism I have not read.

I am very deeply a feminist and a humanist. What I have no use for is the sort of trivial feminism that looks at surface appearances only, and which seeks "one true way", because that is the path to the pogrom.

When are you going to read those books? I'll read any you suggest (assuming I have not read them).

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[atommom]

20. I don't think you're going to win anyone over by calling us bigots.

Just FYI.

[benburch]

21. Only you can decide if you are a bigot.

A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from their own.

If that fits you, you are a bigot.

If not, nothing I or anybody else says can make you one.

[Hello_Kitty]

24. And some other bigots

Try to coopt the very movements of which you speak and warp their entire purpose to suit their self-serving and exploitive agendas. And then try to sell it to you as "freedom" and get all whiny and bitter when you refuse to pretend it's anything but the same old shit wrapped in prettier paper.

[ismnotwasm]

22. Please don't make the mistake that there aren't those of us

Who understand only too clearly.
I have a right to my experiences and the conclusions I've drawn.

Western SMBD has become a perversion of the Eastern concept of ananda--ecstasy through pleasure and pain.
We won't agree on this, I have my experiences and you have yours.

Coming here to a feminist board with the mind set that there are not those who very familiar with alternate sexual lifestyles is condescending from one who calls himself a feminist and a humanist. I know you weren't replying to me, but trust me, here-- no one is going to put all their intimate experiences on the net.

I like you, Mr. benburch, but we can all be guilty of erroneous conclusions, can we not?

[benburch]

23. I wasn't talking to you though.

Don't make the mistake of thinking I am making a general pronouncement when in fact I am talking to one or two people? :)

[Warpy]

8. Somebody in GD pointed out this is a typical BDSM contract

and if that doormat of a woman is into that, it's her problem. We can only hope she gets help.

[NashVegas]

9. If That Is a Typical Contract

Then I feel pretty secure in saying that people who are into and defend this scene need serious psychiatric help.

That contract is all about what she (and I really don't care whether or not the sub is a he or a she) is going to do for him, not one word about what he's going to do to spiff up her day.

On the bright side, at least there was no mention of punishment for non-compliance, other than the removal of some freedoms.

[bloom]

10. "doormat of a woman"

The husband writes up an insane contract - ties her up - sounds like against her will or she wouldn't have taken the matter to the police - and you are calling HER names.

Nothing I read suggested that she was "into that" for one thing.

And for another - I don't know why any and all of the blame should not be laid at his feet.

If he ever gets out of jail - "In Iowa, kidnapping is a class A felony and carries a life sentence without the possibility of parole" it would be too soon - for this and for the child pornography that it sounds like he made that was found on his computer.


That is not to say that after living with this crazy guy that she would not need some kind of help. I hope she gets it from people who don't blame her. That wouldn't be very helpful.

[Warpy]

13. I suggest you revisit the meaning of the word "if"

Thanks.

[bloom]

17. ...

At the very least you assumed she was a doormat. At least that is how I read it. I never saw any reason to make such an assumption.

"Somebody in GD pointed out this is a typical BDSM contract and if that doormat of a woman is into that, it's her problem. We can only hope she gets help."

[ismnotwasm]

12. Crazy mon.

Poor woman. 10 to 1 she met him in church. No slam against churches here! (I hate that stuff) but church (any church) is such a perfect place for people with untreated, or untreatable personality disorders to hang out. Note the skirt rule, what was it now longer than 2 inches above the knee unless at church.
Woman probably didn't have that highly developed inner radar saying "get the fuck away" Perhaps a bit sheltered, a little, or a lot naive. Good for her to keep the contract and hit his ass with it. I hope he spends an appropriate amount of prison time. And sweet God, like someone else was saying, I hope they didn't have children!

[bliss_eternal]

25. What a control freak...

"You will be naked within 20 minutes of the children going to bed..." "...you will sleep naked."

:rofl:

I didn't read it all, but the parts I read just made me lmao. The idea that someone would demand such things. :crazy: That guy's a psycho!

Oh and on his demands for her grooming(eeeuuuwww)--this proves it. Men that like women to be fully shaved with nothing as far as pubic hair is concerned are definitely leaning toward pedophiliac tendencies. As evidence by the grooming he demands in his contrat and the fact that he has a child molestation charge pending.

Sicko!

[Hello_Kitty]

26. According to some DUers, it's an 'alternative lifestyle'

And we mustn't judge, lest we be called bigots and accused of bringing feminism down. So glad we have these visitors who drop by to 'educate' us. :eyes:

[bliss_eternal]

27. WTF?!

Holy crap--did someone actually say THAT?! What a load...

I'm guessing this is in the conversation above that I hadn't read yet. (sigh) I guess I'll have to do that now...:eyes:

[bliss_eternal]

28. Ok, read it all now--sorry still psycho to me.

:rofl: Seriously, Dude has ISSUES!

[Samurai_Writer]

29. Those who consider this an alternative lifestyle are idiots

I'm very well-versed in the BDSM lifestyle -- have many friends in it and have experimented with it myself. What this guy did is NOT BDSM -- it's kidnapping and rape. The 'contract' is not a BDSM contract, because it clearly pointed out that he would do things to her even if she was in pain or got injured because of it. Considering this guy also had 60 photos or videos of child porn on his computer, we can safely assume that he is a deeply disturbed and psychotic.

Oh yes, and if a man INSISTS you be shaved at all times, it is highly likely he has pediophilia tendencies. Not the "it would be nice if you shaved for a change" type of thing. But if a man HAS to have a woman shaved ALL the time, that is a big clue right there.

[benburch]

30. Actually "Some DUers"...

were making the point not to judge all BDSMers by this creep. What he did was not Consensual. When you are not talking mutual Consent, you are not talking BDSM.

But "Some Other DUers" think all BDSM is rape based on nearly zero knowledge, and won't bother to learn a thing about it.

[bloom]

31. Seems to me that it was YOU who brought BDSM into this

discussion.

Otherwise - we would have merely been discussing Travis Frey and how disgusting and anti-feminist he is.

[benburch]

32. Nope. Go read the GD topic again.

The discussion was how icky it would be for anybody to AGREE to such a contract.

Of course, the woman in this case was never ASKED her opinion.

But the contract, by itself, if a part of the mutual consensual fantasy life of two lovers would be perfectly appropriate and quite typical of such "slave contracts" in a BDSM setting.

Mind you, I have never had any use for a "slave contract", and think 24/7 roleplay of any sort, be it BDSM, Republicanism, or even Klingon is tedious, but I know some people who do just that and love it and wouldn't have it any other way. And I was asking people not to judge them by this terrible example.

But Prejudice is a powerful thing, it seems.

[bloom]

33. What I would like to hear

is how you think that such a contract reflects feminism. Because I think it is the opposite of feminism and I don't know why you are posting here.

And saying that women are "free" to choose such patriarchal constructs doesn't cut it for me.

[benburch]

34. Would you rather they were NOT free to choose them? nt

[bloom]

35. I want you to explain

how such a patriarchal "set of rules" has anything to do with feminism.

[benburch]

36. When a woman no longer has the freedom...

...to choose how to express her sexuality, Feminism is DEAD.

A woman has to have the right to choose to consent to sex, or not consent to sex, for any reason whatsoever that appeals to her, even payment, or the State controls her sexuality. And that is the subtext here; The Christian Right and certain "feminists" want such things made crimes.

When you have a woman for whom a set of "rules" such as a slave contract touches that little place inside of herself that makes her feel erotically empowered, who are you to tell her she is wrong or that she shouldn't do it or that no man or woman ought to be allowed to share that with her?

And believe me when I tell you that I know of many intelligent, empowered, self-actualized, feminist women who are in exactly the situation that this sort of thing is their biggest turn-on in life.

Do you want to deny them this?

Do you want to paint them anti-feminist tools of patriarchy?

Or wouldn't it be more feminist to say that when a woman is acting of her own free will, whatever that may be, and empowered to do so, feminism is alive and well?

[bloom]

37. Saying that women are free to choose

what kind of sex to have

and saying that this "set of rules" has anything to do with feminism are two different things.

While feminism might make it easier for women to choose to partake in something that is someone's patriarchal fantasy - that doesn't mean that feminists in general would encourage it.

I agree with the OP, "This is officially one of the most demented things I've ever read about."

I'm sure you have read more demented things than that. And I really don't want to know about them.

[benburch]

38. So, your point of view is that such women are Demented?

That just sounds like the Most Feminist Statement I have ever heard.

NOT.

Actually, it sounds like a statement from somebody who loathes women and freedoms.

[bloom]

39. You need to take more time with your reading.

A women didn't write that "set of rules". That is what the OP said was demented.

That is what is being discussed here. That "set of rules" by Travis Frey.

[benburch]

40. No, we were discussing the meta-issue, clearly.

I was making the point, I re-iterate, that this guy was a creep and a criminal, but that you should not judge the concept of a "slave contract" or the willing, happy people who find joy in such a thing by his miserable example. He has nothing whatsoever to do with a Consensual BDSM lifestyle. It was the CONCEPT of a free will BDSM lifestyle that was being attacked or I would have had nothing to say in the first place.

Now, YOU seem to have said that any woman who would choose such a set of rules of her own free will is;

Demented.

Anti-feminist.

A Patriarchal Tool. (Despite the fact that the Top in such a relationship is often another woman.)

Or do I misread you and we really have no disagreement on this matter whatsoever?

[bloom]

41. I think we have plenty of disagreement

such as that "slave contracts" are in agreement with general feminist goals and principles.

I don't think so.

Or that having such a "set of rules" empowers women or promotes equality.

I don't think so.

I think violence against women is violence against women and if someone dresses it up and puts a label on it and insults people for not saying that it's a positive thing - that that's pretty stupid.


Just because I think people have a right to choose certain sexual practices - does not mean I have to think that those practices are a positive thing. Nor do I think violent sexual practices are positive things to encourage. And like in this case - presumably the wife was being pressured into accepting a lifestyle she did not want. You assume that these things are consensual - I think having such practices encouraged by people such as yourself increases the likelihood that other women will find themselves in a similar situation.

And I wasn't the one calling the woman a doormat. I think she is a victim (although I admit we don't know the whole entire story - we mostly know what a crappy "set of rules" the guy wrote).

YOU - I don't see as a victim.

[benburch]

42. So you are saying...

Indeed that any woman who wants this is Demented unworthy of being called a Feminist? Even when two women are the ones making the agreement?

I know a number of lesbian couples who would laugh and laugh and laugh at you for that one!

So, in exactly what way is a FANTASY contract entered into by a woman of her own free will, indeed, usually sought out by her, un-feminist?

In what way is a set of FANTASY rules for a sexual game freely played by a woman and sought out by her un-feminist?

I don't assume that these things are consensual, I know it for fact. I have seen women LOOKING for such situations (and usually not finding them.) Sure there are women who are seduced into them, but nobody can seduce you into something you don't basically want. Unless you think that any woman who accepts such a thing is indeed a "doormat", whether you were the one who first used the word or not?

Analyze for me; In what way is a woman who of her own free will seeks out the "bottom" role in a Sadomasochistic relationship a victim? She knows what she wants. She seeks it out. She negotiates the terms of it. She has the right to end it immediately with a word or action. She can choose never to come back for more. When she is done, she is happy, even elated, and fully in control of the situation. In what way is this victimization?

You might as well make the argument that the "top" is victimized because the very same set of rules apply, except, the "top" is the one least likely to find sexual release in this situation. Yep. You heard that right. Tops rarely have orgasms in this sort of scene. Bottoms usually do. This is because the scene is the creature of the bottom be that person be male or female, the bottom controls every aspect of a sadomasochistic game. And that is as it should be.

[Hello_Kitty]

46. I've got no interest in BDSM as a subculture or lifestyle

Therefore, I'm not going to waste any time "learning" about it when life is short and there are many, many other subjects that are more worthy of my attention. And people have a right to do what they want with their bodies, yes they do.

However, I do reserve the right to talk trash about ANYTHING that has encroached into mainstream culture to the extent that it affects the attitudes and assumptions of people with whom I MUST interact professionally and often those I choose to interact with personally. Porn has done this to large extent, and things like BDSM to a lesser degree but one disturbing end result is that more than person I've met believes that "healthy" sex should entail some humiliation and pain and that women especially enjoy it. I don't know what that is and maybe I don't possess the erudition to analyze it properly in this post, but it sure the hell ain't feminism to me.

[benburch]

47. Of course that is your right.

Everybody has a right to have an uninformed opinion and to react emotionally to an issue, no matter how much pain that causes others.

[Hello_Kitty]

48. Oh boo hoo

I don't know a lot about fundie Christianity either but I react emotionally when they try to shove their dogma down my throat. And well shuckie wuckies.....why, that probably causes pain to the fundies. I don't give a shit and I'm not about to start studying the Bible intently to better "understand" them. Again, I don't talk trash about you until your shit starts affecting ME.

[benburch]

51. Oh, it's not MY feelings that are hurt.

Just those of your sisters.

[geniph]

43. I don't think the "contract" is necessarily germane to the issue

What he's being tried for has nothing to do with that contract; it's been introduced as supporting evidence. However, I see it as rather a red herring, as we don't have enough information about the circumstances under which it was agreed to (presuming that it was agreed to).

Let me start with this. The crime of which he's accused - kidnapping and rape - is vile, deserving of the maximum legal penalty, and has nothing to do with consensual BDSM.

Then let me state this. I know a number of people who've been party to similar contracts. I've been party to one myself. In all the cases I know about, the contracts were consensual. What makes me uncomfortable about this one is that it's lacking a clause that I'd expect any adult to include in a truly consensual D&S contract. It's lacking a method by which either party can negotiate a change in the contract, or a termination of it, or any kind of safeword mechanism to stop activity which is causing non-consensual distress.

I see people out there playing at power exchange who don't really understand the real world. Real people can't agree to live a 7x24x365 power exchange relationship for the rest of their life with no timeouts. Real people have physical problems, emotional issues, and sometimes just want to be left BE. Anyone who disparages a clause to negotiate timeouts, terminations, or changes in the agreement is, in my mind, better off playing these games online, not with real people.

I read things from people - and it's mostly guys - who claim you're not a true Dom (or Domme) if your bottom can negotiate out of the agreement, or safeword out of a scene, etc. And I would never play with those people in a million years. It's all too easy to cross the line from BDSM play - which a lot of very well-adjusted and not at all perverted people enjoy - into abuse, which I think we can all agree is wrong and criminal.

I don't have enough information on the circumstances under which this contract was signed to condemn it. Some of the clauses in it make me uncomfortable - the inability to safeword out of a scene that's causing too much physical distress, for example - but that's not my trip, and maybe it was hers. I do know people who don't like to safeword, because they like having their boundaries pushed. I personally don't consider that SSC play (safe, sane, and consensual). But I think it's probably best if the case is tried on its actual criminal evidence and not the sensationalist tabloid aspects which are not germane to the case. Being a Dom doesn't automatically make you a rapist and an abuser, any more than being a bottom automatically makes you a doormat. (I can attest to that from personal experience, as I liked playing as a bottom, and I am absolutely, 100%, not even remotely submissive or deferential in any other aspect of my life - which might be why I liked doing it as sex play.)

I should also point out that I know of at least two cases in which contracts like this, originally consensual, were later introduced as "evidence" in custody cases to try to show one party as an unfit parent. Divorces get ugly, and all kinds of shit gets dredged up. I am NOT claiming that's true in this case. But I AM saying this contract is evidence only that he was into at least fantasizing about BDSM play. That's IT. There is, as far as I'm aware, no evidence that the contract was ever enforced. THE CONTRACT ITSELF IS NOT EVIDENCE OF THE CRIME FOR WHICH HE WAS ARRESTED. He needs to be tried on that evidence, not in the media and the court of public disapproval.

[benburch]

44. I agree they usually have severance clauses...

...but even where they do not, that is understood to be the case. Sometimes people want the "forever" stuff in the contract because they don't want to think about it ending, but we all understand that they can and do.

In this case, though, there was no negotiation. On their wedding night he chained her to the bed by force, raped her, and imposed this on her without prior consent, negotiation, or desire on her part. And that is indeed the crime here.

[benburch]

45. And one more thing...

Great post! Very well stated!

[lukasahero]

49. Just FYI - it was never signed

"A copy of the proposed contract, which Frey's wife never signed and later provided to cops,"

[benburch]

50. Right...

He meant to impose it upon her. It was never negotiated. It was never a matter of consent.

[lukasahero]

54. I think some of the problem in this thread

is that the two situations are being conflated here. This situation was NOT a consentual BDSM contract and I think that because those contracts and relationships were brought up in this particular thread, it has confused and clouded the issue. (And I'm not taking sides as to who/how it was brought up in the first place so don't go there. :) )

My problem with it, and I mean no judgement on the men and women who participate in private, consentual BDSM relationships any further than I am going to suggest here, is that the actions of one individual can and are used by others to support the inaccurate perceptions of an entire group. The first question that is asked when it is discovered that a woman is in an abusive relationship is always "Why does she stay?" (Or "why doesn't she just leave?") The implied answer is "Because she likes it."

Just as the violence of individual Muslims affects the way many, many people view all Muslims, women do have a responsibility to consider how their individual actions affect the way many, many people view all women. I don't know what the answer is. Obviously women should be able to live in a relationship that works for them. But we should at least consider and discuss the impact our personal choices has on others. Is there a way to discuss this that delineates the two situations?

Also, there has been a good deal of name-calling from all sides in this thread. There has been an emotional, visceral response to this situation. However, the idea or suggestion that an emotional response (traditionally a "feminine" characteristic) is an inherently bad response, is denigrating to the feminine (which one can argue is rather un-feminist).

Emotional responses contribute in great part to empathetic policy and are not inherently bad. They are only viewed as bad because logic and reason have become unproportionately idolized in the world we now live in. Democrats are framed as "soft", "illogical", "emotional", the "mommy party". This is somehow considered bad. When we participate in supporting the idea that those things are bad, we do no service to women or even the Democratic party, not to mention our chances of changing the world.

[bloom]

58. I'm not interested in judging

what other people decide to do either - but - I do think for one thing that it's a good idea to consider viewpoints such as...

BDSM is not necessarily a positive thing

BDSM may simply be a manifestation of the patriarchy in it's extreme (sort of the like Catholic Church - only different)

and when it's comes to what has been brought up in this thread - I think it's a problem when women instinctively react that something is not in their best interests ( or the interests of women in general - like spouse abuse or rape - things that are basically no-brainers) - and then you have a man come in and try to convince us (through intimidation or whatever it takes) - that such things are OK if he says they are (because ritualized spouse abuse and rape) belong to the practices of some group or other.

While I am willing to accept that many people may accept a certain kinkiness into their lives - I don't like to see the lines blurred - where women are asked (demanded) to accept that spousal abuse is ok when.... or rape is ok when.... and like you said - it can affect women in general when some women accept it - because those women - whether they like it not - will be held up as examples of spouse abuse and rape being ok - because some women accept it as a ritualized fetish thing.

From my perspective - it has become a fringe idea that might grow - that women DON'T have to go along and say these things are OK. Whether it's in their own bedroom or on a message board like this.

[eridani]

52. If this is a BSDM contract--

--then where in fucking hell are the SAFE WORDS? Huh? Answer me that. People I know who do BSDM always have safe words. Some even have two, one for when the physical aspect gets to be too much, and another for when the emotional part is going too far. The absence of safe words marks this "contract" as abusive bullshit.

[Hello_Kitty]

53. I think neither of them were versed in BDSM protocol

She probably didn't know that there were supposed to be safe words and outlets and he either didn't know of them or was disinclined to give them to her. I agree, abusive bullshit from an insecure loser.

[geniph]

57. That's why I said this kind of guy should play online

and leave real people alone. I stay FAR FAR AWAY from this kind of top. They should stick to online Gor play.

[bloom]

55. Some pertinent posts from the blog world:

From a woman who has suffered from spouse abuse:

"What Travis Frey has done is exactly what most abusers do, only he put it in a contract."

"The point is that women in abusive situations know all too well the pain that Ruth Frey has been put in. THIS is what abuse is, although normally the men themselves don't even have such a firm grasp on it. But women all over the world will tell you stories to make your blood curdle. Stories of being tied and left, of being raped and humiliated, stories of getting in 'trouble' for not wearing heels, for not making him 'look good' for gaining 10 lbs...

Travis Frey's are everywhere; it’s just that most of us don't get to show the paperwork to prove it. We only have our words to be taken on and those, according to the justice system and many men out there, are nothing."

http://www.bitingbeaver.blogspot.com/


Another similar post:

http://redstatefeminist.blogspot.com/2006/02/batterers-contract.html

---------


RE: “When Rape Is A Gift”

"Play acting sexualized violence is not freedom in a world where one out of every four women is raped in her lifetime. It’s fetishizing your own oppression. And if that’s what a woman needs to get off, well I understand how that can happen when you don’t have many healthy alternatives. But let’s not wrap that up in shiny paper & a bow and call it sexual freedom."

#12 http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/23/when-rape-is-a-gift/


There are many other interesting posts as well....