GO HERE to buy blank cards with Ms Slide’s kinky artwork (or non-kinky if you prefer) printed on them.
Purple Latex, 2014″ by Ms Slide.
Many people outside BDSM look at us and see the outfits and accessories; they think of whips, chains, constraints, pain, role-play and a thousand other peripheral parts to our orientation. What they often miss is consent. Consent is central to BDSM. Sex without consent is rape. BDSM without consent is abuse. Consent is key.
Consent isn’t just a grudging “yes” or the absence of a “no”, but an ongoing, enthusiastic dialogue about what’s wanted and what isn’t. This shouldn’t only apply in the context of BDSM and sexuality, but in employment, parenting, friendship and every other situation with a power dynamic. Recognising another human’s autonomy is the first step to Not Being A Total Dick.
Being in the BDSM world has taught me more about consent and respect than any sex education programme, magazine or conventional discussion on the subject. Below is part of an article at PSMag that talks about “The Foggy Edge of Consent” (and by “foggy edge”, its author, Jillian Keenan, doesn’t mean it in a Robin Thicke sort-of-a way – quite the opposite):
“…We hide from the details of our desires, or bury them in psychoanalysis and shame. To truly end our cultures of rape and abuse, both within the BDSM and mainstream sex communities, we can’t reduce sexual consent to a catchphrase. We have to talk about sexuality, and all of its tricky details, without evasion, self-preservation, or censorship.
We think we’re having a national conversation about sexual consent. But as long as we continue to pretend that consent is binary—a light switch that goes on or off—those conversations won’t go far. Consent is a fluid target that can be given, rescinded, re-evaluated, or even seduced. We all know that, but we’re terrified to talk about it. Safe kinky sex is exactly the same as safe vanilla sex: we won’t have it if we never learn how. We should be talking—really talking—about that foggy edge of sexual consent…”
Read the full article here.
The Gimp Man of Essex first hit the news in September, when various news sources ran articles about the mysterious, masked figure who wanders the streets of Colchester. For every photo of him uploaded to his Facebook page, he donates £1 to MIND.
There have been many misconceptions about BDSM and mental health in the past, long since debunked, yet many people still believe that fetishists, sadomasochists and any other consenting (and consent-promoting) adults not conforming to socio-sexual norms must be ill. The Gimp Man of Essex doesn’t go out in costume during weekends or school holidays. He doesn’t approach people who seem uncomfortable or who don’t show an interest in speaking to him. A small number have accused him of being a “nutter”, “pervert” or “paedophile” nonetheless. The majority are supportive though.
He told the BBC: “Most people are very welcoming when I tell them what it’s all about.”
Pleased to speak to the public and answer their questions, the anonymous latex superhero challenges stigmas around kink and raises a significant amount of money for charity in the process. Click here to read an exclusive new interview with him at Honour and here to donate to MIND.
Andrew Holland, a man from Wrexham, was charged under Section 63 of the 2008 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act. He was accused of possessing a short video showing a woman having sex with a tiger. A friend had sent it as a joke. He had watched six seconds of it. Predictably, the case toppled over as soon as the court heard the tiger – actually a man in fancy dress – inform the camera: “That beats doing Frosties ads for a living!”
Despite the farcical nature of the case against him, Holland had his reputation, job, family life and health destroyed as a result. This is just one of many examples of the harm caused by this legislation.
Things, however, are about to change. Here’s a snippet of Mistress Magpie Corvid’s article in the New Statesman:
“In a letter to the head of the Crown Prosecution Service, Holland’s solicitors have claimed that even five years after its enactment, the law is so unclear and poorly understood – including by police, prosecutors and solicitors – that it too easily traps the innocent. Assisted by a specialist legal team and advised by the sexual freedom campaigning group Backlash, the former defendant has called on CPS head Allison Saunders to review the implementation of Section 63; if no such review is forthcoming, the law will be challenged via judicial review… In the challenge, Holland’s legal team, advised by Backlash, emphasise the Act’s violations of human rights. With the concept of “extreme” pornography poorly defined, and without reliable guidance from CPS to prosecutors, individuals find it difficult to determine what is and isn’t legal. Perhaps, this is why a law which experts predicted would get less than 30 cases a year has had over 5,000 convictions since its inception. It’s impossible to know how many people have pleaded guilty to possession of images that were not actually unlawful.”
Read the full New Statesman article here.
Learn more about Backlash here.
Read a blog on the case by Obscenity Lawyer here.
Read an article for Politics.co.uk by Jane Fae here.
Read the Independent article here.