Can you consent to rape?

[Doctor Pervert]

The simple answer is no, you can't because rape is defined as being non consensual.

So, how about CNC then, how does that work? CNC for those wondering is Consensual Non Consensual, what the fuck, how DOES that work?
Well the reality is that CNC is real just a role playing activity, in other words what is happening is in effect acting out a fantasy in a controlled way.

Whoa back up, what's going on here? Rape is something people actually WANT to happen? How, why, so many questions.
Lets begin with consent, but this is a whole huge topic in itself so I'll just let you jump out and read about that here before you keep going.

Now how about this whole CNC business again, what's going on there?
First lets address the elephant in the room, yes, in fact rape FANTASY is very common for women, really. But that does not mean they want to be raped, fantasy is fantasy and should not be seen as something people actually want to experience. This happens across all areas of human experience, from war games where you play at killing hundreds of people to fantasy tales where your sword can behead elves or dwarfs or other people. So it's no surprise that sexual fantasies are common too and for many some of those fantasies can be very extreme, inappropriate and bizarre.
But having a fantasy does not mean you actually want to experience that activity in real life, it's kind of the job of fantasy to keep that dangerously nasty stuff safely sequestered in your head.

In the kink/bdsm community quite a few fantasy activities make an appearance in the form of role playing. In just the same way as fantasy cosplayers act out scenes from their favorite stories kinky people act out scenes from some of their own fantasies. And this is the key, it is acting, under controlled circumstances, it's not the real thing.
So why do it then, why pretend to do something and not just do it? Well aside from often being illegal and immoral it can be really dangerous, you could get seriously hurt or even die.

So then, how does CNC play work? In a nutshell it's when one party plays the part of the victim and another plays the attacker and this is where this starts to get tricky because you have to be really careful how you set things up. A mistake here could see someone calling the police on you and then spending the night at the police station trying to explain your way out of being charged. Right now you're thinking how, why, the "victim" consented, right? Trouble is in many jurisdictions you can't consent to a whole range of activities legally, and police have no choice but to charge the "attacker" despite any arrangement you may have had.

In reality this makes setting up a convincing CNC scenario almost impossible. Kidnapping scenes are especially dangerous for all concerned as they present a huge presence and exposure where a concerned member of the public could report what they see as a real event.
Playing out rape scenes in your own home or just some hard rough fucking is more manageable but you still want to keep the noise down. You might be having a great time yelling and screaming but unless your neighbors are privy to your games they can also end your night of fun real quick.

I could keep on with more but I wanted to open this up for discussion. Specifically I've seen a couple of posts in the last few days that clearly confused or at least blurred the fantasy reality boundaries and I want to make sure everyone is clear on this. If it's fantasy make sure everyone knows that, lets keep things safe, sane and consensual. This is never negotiable.

 

[subdream]

Rape is one of my pet fantasies. I nurture it, but I would never try to act out on it. But those fantasies of being drugged and abducted are so nice and boost self play a lot. And once I envision myself captivated and used for all sorts of sexual pleasure...

What I learned CNC is just planning most of the scene beforehand. From my perspective, CNC is great for the submissive while the dominant part is almost entirely a tool of self play. But my perspective might be one sided since I tend to be more on the submissive side.

 

[Meorin]

Hey Dr Optokon,

99% of the time I see your posts and I agree. This is one of the very few times where I don’t.
For simplicity, I will only consider relationships between submissive females and dominant males for my post.
I can not agree with your premise: “The simple answer is no, you can't because rape is defined as being non consensual.”

There can be blank, unlimited consent for sex and sexual acts as well as torture. Specifically with the understanding that this consent especially when the sub does not want it to happen and does not consent in the moment. Agreements like this happen a lot in real life TPE relationships. I have even seen similar agreements in online play, usually enforced with the threat of abandonment for misbehavior or blackmail play.

Strongly tied into this is the last thing you said. Something where I have to say, you are categorically wrong: “lets keep things safe, sane and consensual. This is never negotiable.” It always has been negotiable. Not just in BDSM but also in vanilla relationships. It always is and always needs to be a negotiation because what is safe and sane is extremely subjective.

For example: Is anal sex safe? With or without a condom? How about ass to mouth? What about STIs or other health risks? How can you say it is safe when it gives you a higher risk of colon cancer?
Is oral sex safe? With or without a condom? How about swallowing? What about STIs or other health risks? How can you say it is safe when it gives you a higher risk of throat cancer?
How little or how much bruising is safe and sane? How little or how much cut skin is safe and sane? How about a broken little toe compared to a broken arm?

And with all that we are still way within the discussion about SSC (safe, sane and consensual). But especially in BDSM there is more than just SSC. There also is RACK (Risk Aware Consensual Kink). Within RACK safety and how sane things are, are merely a side argument at best.

With all that, let’s get back to the topic of rape. What does Wikipedia say about the definition?
“Rape is a type of sexual assault involving sexual intercourse or other forms of sexual penetration carried out against a person without their consent. The act may be carried out by physical force, coercion, abuse of authority, or against a person who is incapable of giving valid consent”

Imagine a slave gave blank consent to anal sex, specifically inviting dom to go for it whenever and however he wants, even without any lube or stretching. A month later, dom acts on that consent while she is asleep. When that happens, sub gets a bad tummy cramp and begs him to stop, clearly in immense physical pain and distress and clearly stating “No, stop, I don’t consent! Stop this! This hurts too much!” but he doesn’t, siting the prior, blank consent.

From his perspective that interaction was great. Rapey but from his point of view not rape cus he had consent.
From her perspective that interaction was rape. She gave consent but withdrew it during the act.

Who is in the wrong here? The dom for not stopping when the sub withdrew her consent? The sub for giving that kind of consent in the first place?
Does it change things if the possible withdrawal of consent was talked about beforehand and sub said she didn’t want to be able to withdraw the consent?
How do things change for you when the sub a couple of days later says this was the best sexual experience ever and wants it to happen like this again?
Is the dom less at fault if there was a safe-word in place but sub forgot to use it when feeling genuinely being raped?
Now imagine this is not about rape but torture. Or physical damage. How about being choking? What if sub refuses to have a safe-word in the first place?

CNC about simple rape, or kidnappings in most cases are temporary roleplay.

Legally you can not give unlimited consent. But I see this unlimited consent be given or demanded in BDSM relationships all the time by and with people who consider themselves to be a slave instead of a sub.

In the praxis I have seen, CNC rarely happens within roleplay but rather with the understanding that dom can do what he wants, when he wants, how he wants. Especially not considering the subs emotions/wants/needs/consent in the moment. Especially with stuff sub/slave did not consider when said consent was given. All assuming that sub/slave was aware that things she is not aware of might and will happen before she consented.

In the praxis I have seen, CNC happens with subs/slaves who want to actually suffer. Who want to be pushed and used far beyond what they sexually enjoy. Who want to be taken away the option to back out later.
In the praxis I have seen, CNC happens in every day life, “normal” sessions and only rarely within roleplay. CNC in praxis is a mindset and less so a specific thing that is being done.

This is all highly complicated and for many of the questions I had for the reader I do not have a clear answer either. I hope this perspective is not taken as too aggressive but rather as another point of view about the same topic.


Sorry for all the scrolling

Jan

 

[Doctor Pervert]

This is why I wanted to start this discussion, I bet there are a lot of guys who feel much the same as you and likely quite a few subs who'd also agree.
In a way what you described and argued out very well is precisely why I think you are wrong, here's why.

SSC is not negotiable, your points about safety simply point out what I've discussed in other posts about acceptable risk and this is all part of the SSC doctrine. It doesn't mean you have to be 100% safe, that's impossible, what it means is you have to act with safety in mind, and that's why it's tied to the "sanity" clause. And then this is where we get to the consensual bit.

This is nicely illustrated by your anal rape example,

Who is in the wrong here? The dom for not stopping when the sub withdrew her consent? The sub for giving that kind of consent in the first place?
Does it change things if the possible withdrawal of consent was talked about beforehand and sub said she didn’t want to be able to withdraw the consent?
How do things change for you when the sub a couple of days later says this was the best sexual experience ever and wants it to happen like this again?

Now you conclude with the positive result, which is entirely possible, but ignored the negative result. The sub goes to the police and reports the incident, you are charged with rape and your life is forever ruined.
Can this actually happen? Of course it can and it does, all too often. The polices hands are tied, as you also pointed out, legally consent can be withdrawn at any time and as such you are now a criminal.

You quoted Wikipedia's definition which is good enough and presents the legal standpoint, rape is sexual activity without consent. Therefore if no consent exists, it's rape, if there is consent and it is not withdrawn at any point then it's not rape. You can't divorce consent as a legal construct by saying we treat it differently within kink. Consent works the same, and yes it's a fucking minefield, trip up and boom, you're dead.
My point stands, you cannot consent to rape.

What you can consent to is mock or roleplay rape like activity, it might contain all the same physical elements but crucially mentally it is worlds apart. And this is why it's so hard to emulate, the mental reaction is entirely different.

People are complex and often fickle, minds can change, emotional states can be fragile at times and people break down. Panic attacks are unpredictable and capable of serious mental scaring if not handled correctly. There are way too many factors to ever consider a situation where you ignore someones wishes simply because of prior agreement.

TPE and other long term "slave" agreements are fantasy constructs within the BDSM/kink worlds, they have absolutely no basis in law. It doesn't matter what someone has said or signed, if they change their mind at any point and withdraw consent you cannot cross that line. If you do you will breaking the law.

Here's a simple example of my own, from experience here running this site. There are people who get very, very excited by posting photos of themselves online nude or in even more extreme hardcore situations. They love the thrill it brings, the loss of control. For some they post themselves but others lack the courage and so enlist the help of others to post the photos for them.
Fast forward a few days/weeks/months and even years and I get a message from one of these exposers,
"Help, my girlfriend/boss/parent/friends found one of my photos now I want them all gone!"
Too late dude, that ship has sailed, I reply.
"No seriously if you don't delete everything I posted and find everyone who got hold of them my life ruined!"
Ok, everything you posted here is deleted but I don't know who else has them.
"You don't get it, you have to fix this, I fucked up and I changed my mind."

How often does this happen, way too often. To the point we have received actual legal threats to close down the site which is why we took the step of banning exposure on the site. The legal ramifications of ignoring the possibility that people would change their mind, effectively removing their consent placed not only us in a legal jam but some of our members as well.

Bottom line, you do you. If you feel the risk is worth it, if you feel morally you have consent and are acting in good faith then you can make your own decision.
But make no mistake consent can be withdrawn at any time and if you choose to ignore that it could be a devastating mistake that ruins your life.

 

[subdream]

I'd like to add that in certain juristictions, one can't legally give consent to certain things. That means you might do something illegal even with consent. Check with your local law before doing something that might ruin your life.