Cracker by Damian Christie

Read Post

Cracker: Harder

60 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last

  • dominic s.,

    i dont think spanking between consenting adults is under threat. (i hope, anyway)all levity aside, i think that unfortunatly what we have here is peeps actually fighting to protect those who assault their kids, mostly the same people who would sneer at the whole 'thin end of the wedge' type angle.

    westside09 • Since Mar 2007 • 2 posts Report Reply

  • plum,

    I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but didn't all the children's organisations come out in support of the bill? Save the Children, Barnados, all of them. If that's so (and please don't quote me on that), that says a lot for me. After all, you've gotta think about the kids.

    Wellington • Since Feb 2007 • 15 posts Report Reply

  • Riddley Walker,

    plum that's right, all of them publicly support the amendment. and yes i think with consent BDSM will remain fine, the inapplicability to s59 being that children can't give legal consent. actually sorry, forgive the humour bypass - it's just this topic has been so thrashed to death elsewhere on PA.

    AKL • Since Feb 2007 • 890 posts Report Reply

  • Stephen Judd,

    "peeps actually fighting to protect those who assault their kids,"

    No, that's a really disrespectful caricature.

    I think the motivations behind the bill are admirable. I think the aim is admirable. I just think it's going to be bad law. And that has nothing to do with protecting people who assault their kids, and everything to do with opposing the idea that the best way to send a message is to pass a law.

    If you want to send a message, use a courier.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 3122 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Stevens,

    I think it'd be wise to hold onto those shares and even invest more. Spanking will become an even more fetishised secret scene, a symbol of resistance and deviance. I predict we'll have the world's spankiest kinkiest population in a decade or so.

    There is nothing so alluring as that which is forbidden.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 230 posts Report Reply

  • Hadyn Green,

    Spanking should still be legal but what they'll have to cut out is all that "you've been a bad boy/girl" talk.

    Because that would make it for "corrective purposes"

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 2090 posts Report Reply

  • Lyndon Hood,

    ... but I understand it would be just fine if if it was to prevent the spankee engaging in 'offensive behaviour'.

    "Stop that! Oh, stop! I said stop that!..."


    But to return to the humourlessness, this does bring us back to the point (I'm not saying it's a complete or unbeatable argument) that there are other defenses for assault and some threshold for prosecution exercised. The analogy isn't perfect, but parents don't get charged with kidnapping their children, and there's no special clause for that.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1115 posts Report Reply

  • Damian Christie,

    Err... serious discussion on the smacking bill off the end of my previous post please. Let's keep this all on topic thanks folks...

    And no Dominic, of course I wasn't suggesting spanking would be legally affected by s59... although there have been some interesting cases about the extent to which people are able to consent to assault in a BDSM context.

    In the end the House of Lords (I think, trying to remember back to LAWS 213) found the individual could consent to a range of activities, including having matches taped to the nipples then lit (all together now...owwwww), but I seem to recall it may have been because certain members of the B&D group in question were also senior tories or Lords or something... hardly surprising.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1164 posts Report Reply

  • Ben Austin,

    Ahh yes, I do remember the consent lectures vaguely as well (we called it laws 201) - although I thought NZ case law stated there were somethings you couldn't consent to, like nailing penises.

    I'd try and do some research to verify this thought, but I'm sort of worried about whether the search terms would get me in trouble with our IT policies.

    London • Since Nov 2006 • 1027 posts Report Reply

  • Damian Christie,

    Probably nothing my post wouldn't have already alerted them to ;)

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1164 posts Report Reply

  • Hamboy,

    I thought that s59 only refered to children, not adults dress up in short school uniforms pretending to be naughty children.

    Or can we use s59 to apply to adults as well?
    So next time an a**hole at the bar needs correction......

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 162 posts Report Reply

  • Juha Saarinen,

    Damian, you dirty blutter. I didn't need to know about that matches to nipples thing.

    Since Nov 2006 • 529 posts Report Reply

  • Lyndon Hood,

    I can't recalling hearing the verdict in that German case, but I assume that they found that, when it comes to eating someone, having their consent is no defence.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1115 posts Report Reply

  • Lyndon Hood,

    In the context, I should probably add that I used "eating soemone" in the sense of cannibalism.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1115 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    Having consent is no defence to providing a sophisting either.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2471 posts Report Reply

  • Ben Austin,

    I believe the lecturer made some comments to the effect of "this is the hot stuff, if thats what you are looking for"

    London • Since Nov 2006 • 1027 posts Report Reply

  • Riddley Walker,

    here's a list of organizations that support Sue Bradford's bill.

    UNICEF New Zealand, Save the Children, Barnardos NZ, Royal Plunket Society, Office of the Children's Commissioner, Families Commission, Jigsaw – Child Abuse Prevention (representing 14 member organisations), IHC, Amokura Family Violence Prevention (representing 7 iwi Chief Executives), Churches Agency on Social Issues (represents Presbyterian, Methodist, Quakers and Churches of Christ), NZ Council of Christian Social Services (represents 6 major church social agencies), National Council of Women New Zealand, NZ Federation of Business and Professional Women, National Network of Stopping Violence Services (33 members), Relationship Services NZ, Paediatric Society Of New Zealand, Action for Children and Youth Aotearoa, NZ Foster Care Federation
    Women's Refuge (49 member refuges), NZ Psychotherapists Society
    Parents Centre, NZ Psychological Society, NZ Child Care Association, NZ Playcentre Federation, NZ Federation of Graduate Women, CCS,
    Brainwave Trust, Child Development Foundation, Pacific Foundation (founder Lesley Max), National Council for Young Catholics, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, ParentingWorks, Youth Law Project, Wellington Community Law Centre, NZ Association of Counsellors.

    isn't it odd that despite the so called 'majority of nzers' that are outraged by this bill, the groups that actually have some understanding of the law, and who are actively involved in making a positive contribution to children and families' lives completely support it?

    AKL • Since Feb 2007 • 890 posts Report Reply

  • Heather Gaye,

    Good list, is there a similar one of organisations against the bill?

    Morningside • Since Nov 2006 • 533 posts Report Reply

  • Peter Darlington,

    Damian, you dirty blutter. I didn't need to know about that matches to nipples thing.

    Try reading 'Guts' by Chuck Palahniuk, Juha. The only sexi time book to ever make me feel light headed. And not in an entirely good way...

    Nelson • Since Nov 2006 • 949 posts Report Reply

  • the E,

    I for one will wait to hear what you find and post on the previous Cracker, Heather.

    I don't think consensual spanking as a titillation is jeopardised!

    English former public schoolboys I've met have had fetishes beyond corporal punishment-b&d-type (not, I repeat not, that I helped them out on this front) that could theoretically have been sparked through their odd school caning, for example.

    These are gentlemen who like to be piddled on.

    So what on earth can we find to explain this??

    wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 42 posts Report Reply

  • Judi Lapsley Miller,

    Generationally though, I suspect things will change. If you were never smacked as a child, never equated physical discipline with ‘being naughty’, wouldn’t the whole thing just be a bit foreign? In a world where being smacked was just a completely alien concept, wouldn’t it be more like “What the hell? Did you just strike me on my bottom with your open hand? What’s that all about?”

    Yeah, but I don't think that "time outs" on your own will ever be an acceptable substitute in BDSM circles...

    Judi

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 106 posts Report Reply

  • the E,

    'Guts' by Chuck Palahniuk

    Peter, do you mean "Choke"?

    wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 42 posts Report Reply

  • Damian Christie,

    Judi: Quite, but even on a more day-to-day level, do you think it will replace the casual bedroom slap on the arse? "Just go and sit over there for a second, I'm not going to talk to you..." "Ohhhh yeah, that's soooo hot..."

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1164 posts Report Reply

  • Che Tibby,

    here in wellington (back in the day) i used to speak with a pot-selling dominatrix who lived on the terrace.

    her: "there should be a BDSM dungeon in the basement of every major corporation in nzl"

    me: "bwahahahaha... [sigh...], why?"

    her: "so those dirty fckers don't have to come to my house any more".

    the back of an envelope • Since Nov 2006 • 2042 posts Report Reply

  • Peter Darlington,

    Peter, do you mean "Choke"?

    Sorry, it was from the collection, 'Haunted'.
    http://www.chuckpalahniuk.net/books/haunted/guts.php

    Nelson • Since Nov 2006 • 949 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.