Kink is so subjetive: One example

[badubydo]

34 minutes ago, gwmxyz said:

ok Im going to voice an unpopular opinion.  I think the two situations may be closer than some think.

I know I am very - I mean very - turned on when guys just go ahead ignoring whether I consent or not.  Technically, it probably is a crime.  

The diifference between that and rape isn't lack of consent - it's whether there would have been consent if it had been sought.  In my case, yes, obviously.  In a rape,  obviously not. There may also be a different motive - rape done to hurt the victim; while in my case as it turns me on, it was most likely done for that reason too.   So I agree it is completely different.

It is just outwardly it does look very similar. Neither seeking consent, nor it's being a crime is the difference.

Gloryholes I agree are completely different.  Consent is obvious there - not easy to imagine how they could make it more obvious.

Also, without doing any sort of research on it, I can't help feel that more guys than women are into being fucked anon. If there is any equivalent of Hampstead Heath frequented by women, I'm not aware of it.  Though in fairness I haven't been looking either.

If you tell a guy no, and he still forces himself on you that is RAPE. If a bottom insists on a condom, and the top purposely breaks/removes it that is RAPE. If a top insists on a condom and the bottom purposely breaks it - that is RAPE. 
 

Comparing non - consensual sex to the idea of you being ok with being forced is NOT Ok. 
 

It is vile to compare a young woman being raped and say it is nearly the same thing as some guy forcing himself on you when you don’t consent or ignore you because it “turns you on” 

 

No consent is rape. And by letting these guys do it to makes it ok for them to think it’s ok if they do it to others. 
 

being “turned on” is NOT is a sign of consent. 
 

 

[analluv27]

Ok some of these scenarios sound like cases of the little head is doing all the thinking. Any situation where one person is not COHERENT   is not in a position to give consent. And that falls under rape.

Now I know plenty of guys will mumble and say they shouldn't be there, get in that state unless that's what they want. And that argument is weak. If that's what gets your rocks off then role play. There's plenty of people who like it rough and even with that people have limits. 

It boils down to decorum and  respect. 

[gwmxyz]

Quote

It boils down to decorum and  respect. 

I agree.  It is certainly how I always treat people.   There's only one problem.  I get very turned on by people who do not respect me.  

Let me give an example.  Apologies, it's one I've mentioned before but it illustrates the point well.
Once upon a time I only did safe - by which I mean almost paranoid safe - sex. Thickest condoms, continually checking they were on etc etc.
Then this guy says

"can I put it in bare, no fucking just put it in"

I thought ok - no harm in that. I knew he would start to try and fuck - and when he did I would insist he put the condom on.  Only I was wrong.  
Amazingly - I still don't know how - he did exactly what he said. His cock was completely still with no attempt to fuck at all.   Only after - literally - about 5 minutes completely still I feel him cum  in me.
Ï've cum"  is what he said.
Now from any consent perspective, it's probably just about consensual but it's still pretty shitty behaviour.  It's the complete opposite of decorum and respect. And I reacted accordingly - told my bf - who was downstairs with the guys bf - we were leaving, And generally acted as if I was pissed off.
But I wasn't.  It was a complete act.  I was massively turned on. For the whole taxi ride back I couldn't think of anything except his cum inside me. And of course a little later I got in touch and suggested another meet.
(an aside, but divine retribution may have come into play then - because that time I had an epileptic fit which scared the hell out of him).

In a way I wish it was otherwise.  And that I got turned on by people who were super-respectful and checked I was ok at every point.  But sexual desire doesn't work like that. 

I'm not sure I agree with the broad definitions of rape either.  Sex is a series of interconnected actions.  Quite how guys know I consented may be a mystery, but it quickly becomes apparent that I do.

Unlike rape where the opposite is clear immediately.   So like I say, they are completely different. But it seems a  little more nuanced to me.  

Let's not get into the coherence debate.  As I see it, if I can consent in advance to surgery when I'm unconscious, I can consent to sex.  Any court that says otherwise, is not applying the meaning of consent. It's a judge ignoring my decision and substituting his instead (or hers - but almost certainly his) -something they have been doing for centuries. (from Oscar Wilde to R v Brown in UK).  

To be fair it's just not their thing. Like the one who thought the appeal of bareback was about saving money - not spending on condoms.  Or at least if they do have greater understanding. they're sure as hell not going to admit it...

[BootmanLA]

21 hours ago, gwmxyz said:

Let's not get into the coherence debate.  As I see it, if I can consent in advance to surgery when I'm unconscious, I can consent to sex.  Any court that says otherwise, is not applying the meaning of consent. It's a judge ignoring my decision and substituting his instead (or hers - but almost certainly his) -something they have been doing for centuries. (from Oscar Wilde to R v Brown in UK).  

Here's the thing. You consent to surgery under anesthesia, AFTER the procedure and all of what they're going to do has been explained to you, AND almost always, there are provisions in the consent form for what to do if something goes awry.. There's often (though not always) a designated someone else (relative, spouse, partner, child, whatever) waiting in attendance in case a health care decision has to be made and there's time for someone to make it on your behalf.

So yes, it's possible to consent to sex under those circumstances - that you know you'll be unconscious when it happens. But for there to be any parallel, there needs to be explicit disclosure of everything that's going to be done to you while you're out. Otherwise, those particular acts are non-consensual.

And before someone suggests that you can give a sweeping "anything goes" consent... really? You mean it's okay if the guy decides to remove your nuts and cock with a box cutter while you're out, that's "consented to"?