charly9345

Is BDSM a Sexual Act?

8 posts in this topic

I'm not a lawyer! Am struggling to understand what is meant by a sexual act in the recent prostitution legislation. As far as I can work out from this:

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sexual_offences_act/#Sexual_key_points

"Any activity is sexual if a reasonable person would consider that:

(a) whatever its circumstances or any person's purpose in relation to it, it is because of its nature sexual(e.g. sexual intercourse, masturbation); or

(:) because of its nature it may be sexual and because of its circumstances or the purpose of any person in relation to it (or both) it is sexual".

Sexual - key points

In deciding whether an activity is sexual, one has to first look at the nature of the activity. If the activity is by its nature sexual (e.g. sexual intercourse, masturbation) then it is sexual.

Where the nature of the activity may or may not be sexual, then one looks at the circumstances or purpose (or both) of the defendant in deciding whether it is sexual (e.g. R v Price, The Times 20 August 2003 - where stroking a woman's leg over trousers and below the knee was capable of amounting to an indecent assault).

So, if I pay a woman (or man) to spank me, or pay her/him to be spanked and nothing else goes on is that a sexual act?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know the answer and am just speculating, but if the spanking leads to sexual titillation then I would say it would be considered a sexual act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not a lawyer! Am struggling to understand what is meant by a sexual act in the recent prostitution legislation. As far as I can work out from this:

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sexual_offences_act/#Sexual_key_points

"Any activity is sexual if a reasonable person would consider that:

(a) whatever its circumstances or any person's purpose in relation to it, it is because of its nature sexual(e.g. sexual intercourse, masturbation); or

(:) because of its nature it may be sexual and because of its circumstances or the purpose of any person in relation to it (or both) it is sexual".

Sexual - key points

In deciding whether an activity is sexual, one has to first look at the nature of the activity. If the activity is by its nature sexual (e.g. sexual intercourse, masturbation) then it is sexual.

Where the nature of the activity may or may not be sexual, then one looks at the circumstances or purpose (or both) of the defendant in deciding whether it is sexual (e.g. R v Price, The Times 20 August 2003 - where stroking a woman's leg over trousers and below the knee was capable of amounting to an indecent assault).

So, if I pay a woman (or man) to spank me, or pay her/him to be spanked and nothing else goes on is that a sexual act?

what it basically means is that if someone is getting off on it then it's a sexual act. Whilst it does nothing for me, people who engage in BDSM do it for the sexual thrill. It's not rocket science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, if I pay a woman (or man) to spank me, or pay her/him to be spanked and nothing else goes on is that a sexual act?

Yes it is. See section 78 SOA 2003 - which you have quoted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many in US would not consider a blow job to be a sexual act

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, if I pay a woman (or man) to spank me, or pay her/him to be spanked and nothing else goes on is that a sexual act?

I think you just have to ask yourself one simple question, Am I paying just for the act of spanking itself, or am I also paying for the sexual gratification of the act of spanking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, yes, young man! This is a most interesting question! I think you'd be well advised to ring my office on Monday and make an appointment to see me!

Having been advised, when I retired, to leave both the photocopier, and the books right where they were, I'm very slightly out of date, but I think you'll find that some nu-labour statute or other provides that "sexual" is defined by the view of the man on the Clapham ombibus.

A while ago I followed an eclectic (good word that! better if you can both spell it and know what it means.) series of links to a web-site where I found attractive young women who were eager to be bound and thrashed, but were quite clear that their customer could have no sexual contact with them. I was a little surprised - to me there could be no reason for binding and gagging a nubile young woman, other than to facilitate eventual penetration, but, hey, I'm not alone on this earth.

Did that protect whatever the customer was doing from being described by some dutiful CPS hack as "sexual"? IMHO, "No!". If your local cabal of HH clones / Councillors eager to be re-elected / Police / CPS decide that "an example must be made", or that they need pre-election publicity, or that head office has commented adversely, etc., then a prosecution will follow, and it will be urged on the jury than when a man binds and thrashes a nubile young woman, for money, there is no other explanation than sexual gratification! Central European pschycho-whatevers will be flown in at whatever cost to say that everything is sexual. For the wretched pervert to claim that he never gets a hard-on when he inflicts pain will be completely ignored.

Sorry mate!

(Would it help if my bill of costs was made out to your firm? You would be able to pass the VAT through the accounts.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Many in US would not consider a blow job to be a sexual act

Bill Clinton made that decree didn't he ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now