There seems to be a lot of debate about whether or not to punish people who commit social “crimes” in the community right now. Personally, I’m of the mindset that if a legal court and thousands of highly educated minds can’t come up with a good solution for the problem of consent violation then a secret committee of kinky people in Seattle certainly have no hope of finding a solution. I have prided myself on my delusions of grandeur in the past but even I’m not so narcissistic that I hold the belief that I have a one size fits all solution to consent- I will be the first person to point out how absolutely bonkers I am and by the same coin, make no mistake that my statement is meant to insult and humiliate. From where I’m standing, which is on both sides of the issue, anyone who is acting hypocritically should be made aware of that and should be embarrassed about their conduct- I know I was when I made the same mistake last summer.
Let’s be clear here for a second though, everyone who has done any topping in the kink community is guilty of multiple felonies. If you’re going to put one person’s actions under a fine microscope and make connections to crimes that cannot be tried in a court of law you should expect that same treatment in return. So let’s knock out a couple definitions here in Washington state:
Assault in the first degree.
(1) A person is guilty of assault in the first degree if he or she, with intent to inflict great bodily harm:
(a) Assaults another with a firearm or any deadly weapon or by any force or means likely to produce great bodily harm or death; or
(b) Administers, exposes, or transmits to or causes to be taken by another, poison, the human immunodeficiency virus as defined in chapter 70.24 RCW, or any other destructive or noxious substance; or
(c) Assaults another and inflicts great bodily harm.
(2) Assault in the first degree is a class A felony.
Assault in the second degree.
(1) A person is guilty of assault in the second degree if he or she, under circumstances not amounting to assault in the first degree:
(a) Intentionally assaults another and thereby recklessly inflicts substantial bodily harm; or
(b) Intentionally and unlawfully causes substantial bodily harm to an unborn quick child by intentionally and unlawfully inflicting any injury upon the mother of such child; or
(c) Assaults another with a deadly weapon; or
(d) With intent to inflict bodily harm, administers to or causes to be taken by another, poison or any other destructive or noxious substance; or
(e) With intent to commit a felony, assaults another; or
(f) Knowingly inflicts bodily harm which by design causes such pain or agony as to be the equivalent of that produced by torture; or
(g) Assaults another by strangulation or suffocation.
(2)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, assault in the second degree is a class B felony.
(b) Assault in the second degree with a finding of sexual motivation under RCW 9.94A.835 or 13.40.135 is a class A felony.
In this title unless a different meaning plainly is required:
(1) “Acted” includes, where relevant, omitted to act;
(2) “Actor” includes, where relevant, a person failing to act;
(3) “Benefit” is any gain or advantage to the beneficiary, including any gain or advantage to a third person pursuant to the desire or consent of the beneficiary;
(4)(a) “Bodily injury,” “physical injury,” or “bodily harm” means physical pain or injury, illness, or an impairment of physical condition;
(b) “Substantial bodily harm” means bodily injury which involves a temporary but substantial disfigurement, or which causes a temporary but substantial loss or impairment of the function of any bodily part or organ, or which causes a fracture of any bodily part;
(c) “Great bodily harm” means bodily injury which creates a probability of death, or which causes significant serious permanent disfigurement, or which causes a significant permanent loss or impairment of the function of any bodily part or organ;
(5) “Building,” in addition to its ordinary meaning, includes any dwelling, fenced area, vehicle, railway car, cargo container, or any other structure used for lodging of persons or for carrying on business therein, or for the use, sale, or deposit of goods; each unit of a building consisting of two or more units separately secured or occupied is a separate building;
(6) “Deadly weapon” means any explosive or loaded or unloaded firearm, and shall include any other weapon, device, instrument, article, or substance, including a “vehicle” as defined in this section, which, under the circumstances in which it is used, attempted to be used, or threatened to be used, is readily capable of causing death or substantial bodily harm;
TLDR; If you engage in 95% of popular BDSM, you are guilty of a Class A Felony. For bonus points, consent isn’t a defense in Washington State.
If you are a bottom, requesting someone top you then you are asking them to commit a felony and you are asking them to trust that you won’t change your mind about having consented after the fact. If you do not see the inherent flaw in the idea of tarring and feathering predators, I have no idea what I can talk to you about because your world view must be microscopic.
According to the law, tops have far more to lose than a bottom. You can argue that mental damage or even physical damage is horrific- Make no mistake, it is- But that in no way validates accusing someone of a Class A Felony; I have been raped, assaulted and threatened with murder on more than one occasion but I recovered, the same is not true of prisoners. 81% of rape victims report short and long term mental/emotional impacts where the rate of recidivism in prisoners ranges from 73% to 81%. Let’s consider that for a second. 81% of rape victims have emotional impacts and 81% of people who go to prison go back and get raped in prison. No part of that statement is okay and using one statistic against the other as a way of invalidating the other is crass, non-feeling hilariously hypocritical and just self motivated; Neither rape victims nor rapists should be treated without empathy, lest we all devolve into chaos.
Wait, didn’t we all decide as a nation that it is better to let guilty people go free than punish the innocent?
Not All Rape Victims
As I’ve stated before, I am a rape victim and a victim of assault and I’m proud of it. I’m not proud because it happened but I’m proud because I overcame it, I learned from it, I grew and I became better for it. Was it fucked up and not okay? Absolutely. Do I want someone to protect me because I am a victim and I am fragile? Nope and fuck you for treating me like a delicate flower. In fact, I consider such efforts to be amazingly condescending and often misogynistic; “Oh, the poor little lady bottom has to be protected from the big bad male top and I am the one with a perfect record so I will save them all!”
This may sound like I am blaming victims but consider that I am saying this from the place of being a victim- You can only be defeated by things that you allow to destroy you; If you let someone else’s actions ruin your life instead of learning from it and becoming stronger, you wasted the learning opportunity. If you care at all about your wellbeing and safety, you need to be proactive about protecting yourself and adapting to your surroundings.
In my personal life and my professional life, I take responsibility for my own safety; I don’t rely on the opinions of others as a method of telling whether someone is an okay person or not. This means I research them, I ask questions, I am self aware and I think about how their reactions make me feel. I don’t use black lists or references and I almost never ask anyone for their opinion or experience with someone because it isn’t applicable to me. Even if those lists and references were perfect when it comes to reporting problems, they would be flawed because such things don’t actually have an impact on behavior. EG. People seek out folks who are dangerous because they are fun, then they ask their friends if someone is alright as a way to validate their choice. Personally, I have found “The Gift of Fear” to be a much more useful and accurate set of tools when it comes to spotting predators.
I know, I know. You are lazy and that is why you’re making a list. Let’s look at the best case possible and check out the statistics of the effectiveness of Sex Offender Registries:
4. Defendants were more likely to have charges reduced from sex to nonsex crimes over time,
with a 9% predicted probability of reduced charges from 1990-1994 (pre-SORN), a 15%
predicted probability of reduced charges from 1995-1999 (corresponding with initial
implementation of SORN) and a 19% predicted probability after 1999 (corresponding with
implementation of Internet notification).
5. Results also indicated that the probability of obtaining a charge reduced from truth-insentencing
(TIS) to non-TIS increased over time for sex crime defendants.
6. The probability of a guilty disposition changed at each year group, with a predicted
probability of 55% from 1990-1994, increasing to 65% from 1995-1999, and then declining
to 60% after 1999. This final decline was more pronounced when pleaded cases were
removed from analyses.
7. With respect to failure to register (FTR) as a sex offender, no significant differences were
found between the sexual recidivism rates of registered offenders with FTR charges and
those without FTR charges (11% vs. 9%, respectively). There was no significant difference
in the proportion of sexual recidivists and nonrecidivists with registration violations (12%
and 10%, respectively). Failure to register did not predict sexual recidivism, and survival
analyses revealed no significant difference in time to recidivism when comparing those who
failed to register (M = 2.9 years) with compliant registrants (M = 2.8 years).
TLDR; New rapists raped 3 fewer people a month in South Carolina but repeat rapists continued their fun. This means that even with a significant amount of resources, you can’t create a tool that would protect very many people and if you think someone is a serial predator then your efforts are completely useless.
All that means is that you are dis-empowering women by removing their ability to consent and you are doing a great impression of security theater.