My brother's bible class was teaching him about "addiction"

[Aractus]

I'm a part of the Kink audience, I'm familiar with the kind of content they produce to the point where I can pretty much point out the sub-site this woman is talking about just from her descriptions; the mentions of masked men and extras makes me think of Publicdisgrace, which a short search of the site in question reveals that, indeed, she did a movie for that site that seems to match. And then several after, which I'll get into later.

And I should point out to you that much of their content is not legal in Australia. In Australia pornography (x-rated material) cannot depict violence of any kind (which at present is very poorly explained on the current website, but I assure you is accurate).

The more I think about it, actually, the more I disagree with Aurora, the model who wrote this article, and it's not just because she did more shoots with the company. For one, what, exactly, was she expecting to happen?

A consenting scene?

She didn't use her safeword, she didn't verbalize her desire to stop in a way that was agreed upon in advance, and once it became clear that she did want out she was untied and given, from what I've read, perfectly adequate aftercare.

That explanation is offensive to my sensibilities as a man. No means no. So what if she didn't use her agreed-upon safeword? If she forgot it she shouldn't be forced to perform acts against her will - we have a word for what that is: rape. And hiding behind such a flimsy defence most likely would not hold up in court if it had been pursued as a criminal matter.

This is a particularly frightening issue for me; as a dom, one of my greatest fears is unknowingly going beyond my sub's comfort zone and doing him or her actual harm. The need for a safeword, for all parties to be clear on what it means (and that it's not a failure or a disappointment to use it) is essential, and I know Kink goes through this with the models beforehand, because they do it on camera at the beginning of every movie. Their safewords aren't hard (it's the classic "yellow/red light" system) nor was the woman ever gagged in this particular shoot, which isn't to say she didn't have something in her mouth, just that she could remove it easily and anyway, Kink does secondary safeword signals for those cases; there's simply no reason she couldn't have used it, and no indication that the scene would have continued regardless if she had.

Again, you do not have a clear understanding of the technical legalities. Safe word or not a person cannot consent to actual harm - and if you say bruising was involved, that's actual harm my friend. No matter what the context actual harm cannot be consented to. If you choke or gag someone until they pass out or vomit that's also actual harm. And yes that makes a lot of sub-dom activity technically illegal which is all the more reason why it shouldn't be filmed and sold as "legitimate" pornography.

---

I have no gripe with you Esq., but just to give you an example - let's say you're in a sub-dom relationship and your girlfriend decides she's pissed off about something and goes to the police, covered in bruises and said "he did this to me". You get arrested and appear in front of a magistrate - do you think the magistrate cares if you had a consenting sub-dom relationship? No. Courts don't care how or why it happened, and they're not going to let you waste their time by explaining it. All they care about is did you inflict harm - yes - then you get sentenced. It's that simple. And that's why you legally cannot sell pornography that depicts (whether real or simulated) violence here (or in most countries). In the USA you can sell simulated-rape, and it's probably the only country in the world where that is legal.