I consented when I used to self-harm. I wanted to hurt myself. Why was that frowned upon while getting someone else to do it for me is applauded as being so progressive? Why does throwing sex into the mix suddenly mean we're unable to criticize or discuss the possible unintended effects?

"Consent" is a mirage in relationships founded upon a dynamic of domination and submission. I'd also like to point out, that just because a person consents to engage in a behavior, does not magically make that behavior ok or exempt from being harmful. Consider the woman who spends years in a domestic violence relationship. One can use the bdsm "consent makes it ok" logic to argue that the abused woman's relationship wasn't that bad, or perhaps that she liked it even. After all, she consented to stay in that relationship.

Consent is more than just yes or no. This is why we have laws and rules regarding workplace relationships among bosses and employees. Because really, we all understand that "consent" is not enough.

There's this doublethink at the heart of sex pozzery. On the one hand, sex is so vital that humans practically have a right to it--disabled men should be provided prostitutes and prostitution itself should be completely legalized. On the other hand, sex is no big deal. As long as you get consent and cOmMuNiCaTe, strangling and punching your partner is ok. Polyamory is ok. It can't possibly have an adverse effect on your life if you persuade your partner to nominally agree to it.

It's as if sexual behavior occurred in a hermetically sealed box; and any trauma or violence inflicted in the bedroom magically ceases to exist once you step outside of it. Unless, conveniently, you're a man (or woman, but let's face it, it's mostly men) who feels sexually dissatisfied. Then, the harm inflicted by a lack of sex is so overwhelming as to be psychologically and physically ruinous.

There's no other area of life where not getting what you want, when you want it, from who you want is viewed as an injustice.

Ugh so true. I always see the argument that if you’re feeling traumatized by a bdsm relationship then “You’re not doing it right and obviously aren’t participating in aftercare” but why do they never stop to think… maybe we shouldn’t be having the kind of sex that requires aftercare in the first place?

Its funny how "woke" people shut down when porn/sex is involved. I've seen handmaidens do novel length dissertations on why kids media like The Princess And The Frog & Moana are actually horribly racist. But they won't dare tackle the racist tropes in pornography, kink, BDSM, etc because "kink shaming is bad".

Same with the handmaidens who clutch their pearls every December over "Baby Its Cold Outside" (and claim it contributes to rape culture). And then, in the same breath, call us SWERFs for talking about the ACTUAL RAPES that happen in porn and prostitution

I didn’t know what trauma bonding was until years after I experienced domestic violence and after I found out what it was I suddenly had the explanation as to why my abuser would try to hug me and comfort me and after he did something awful to me, like anally rape me.

I remember pushing him off, bending my knees and kicking him in the chest with both feet with such force he flew off the bed. Then he accused me of abusing him.

He had this dead look in his eyes too….glazed over, like in a trance.

Yikes, I didn't even know "aftercare" was a thing. How can you defend a kind of sex that needs recovery management? That just seems obviously Not Healthy...

When did this become normal. I am watching the Netflix show Grand Army. I am only on episode 2 or 3. There is a rape and is now showing the aftermath at least showing the girl is traumatized unlike Euphoria which show them loving rough sex. As for GA - I am curious where they will take this storyline.