Glenn Marcus : Convicted

So Glenn Marcus has been found guilty at his trial. Although he was acquitted on obscenity charges, the main focus of his defence was to assert his rights under the first amendment of the American constitution.

This is really important because you see Glenn used a tactic that many sadists have argued in court. This defence is that ‘informed consent’, which is the foundation of the argument for sadism, should be recognised as having some legitimacy. In other words ‘informed consent’ should be legally recognised as a defence against charges of abuse.

Many in the sadistic lifestyle believe implicitly that this is the case, but Glenn Marcus defence has been shown to be nothing more than a mountain of self serving dogma, which when exposed in court has fallen apart like wet tissue paper.

He joins a long list of sadists who have swallowed the big lie about ‘informed consent’ only to have their belief’s cruelly rejected in court.

Once again a sadist marches into court proudly proclaiming the defence of informed consent, sure that he will emerge victorious into a land of happy abuse and humiliation, only to find that the humiliation is all his.

Charles Henson (indeterminate sentence possibly life) Travis Frey (Ten years) right back to the Spanner trial in the mid nineties, all have entered court in the sure and certain hope that informed consent will protect them only to discover that it has no legal standing what so ever.

So will sadism learn the lesson, will it stop repeating the mantra? Even though it must now be obvious even to them that informed consent is no defence at all, I will bet that this verdict will be conveniently ignored, swept under the carpet, and sadism will go along its merry way championing a totally discredited concept. It reminds me of one of these doomsday cults that proclaim the world will end at a certain time, only too look totally bonkers when it doesn’t.

Sadists will continue to teach the big lie that is informed consent to any acolytes, they will continue to champion it in their closed society, they will continue to excuse abuse by using utterly discredited dogma. Until that is another Glenn Marcus comes along, marches into court fighting for his rights, only to discover that like all the rest he was wrong all along.

A final thing, His ex slave who brought the case did so because she felt that Marcus had brain washed her. Now there are no specific laws against cults in the U.S., so Marcus was charged under ‘forced labor’ laws. This tactic has been used successfully to pursue many cults in the past. Marcus was found guilty, and it must follow that the jury agreed with his ex slave that she was in a cultic environment when under the influence of BDSM.

While I’m not familiar with all the details of this case, particularly what Marcus did and whether that went over the line, I think this is a bad judgment for other kinky people.

For instance, there’s no reason to bring federal charges in this case. Marcus may have gone way beyond the bounds of consent, but I suspect he’s being made an example of by officials at the federal level. Note what the Guardian article says about the number of federal obcenity statute cases under the Bush II administration (52), compared to the Clinton administration (4).

Peter, Glenn Marcus was found not guilty under obscenity laws, but he was found guilty under ‘forced labor’ laws. I have not seen the pictures nor do I want too, but the case was brought because one of his ‘ex slaves’ complained that Marcus had abused, humiliated and brainwashed her.

He defended himself saying it was consensual and brought in other ‘slaves’ to confirm this. The Jury rejected the defence of consent, and I presume, decided that there was a high degree of psychological coercion directed against the women that Marcus abused. He used no other processes than are at work within the BDSM lifestyle on a day-to-day basis.

This is really important for those in the lifestyle where ‘informed consent’ is learned by rote. When it comes to courts Informed consent has no legal standing whatsoever, so when someone next abuse another using informed consent there is no guarantee that down the line they will not find themselves in court accused of abuse.

Can I just make one last point? The BDSM lifestyle seems to have hi jacked the word ‘kinky’ as shorthand for someone who enjoys abuse. This is not what people out side of the lifestyle understand it to be. I wonder how many people have described themselves as ‘kinky’ without realising that it is understood that they might want to be hurt. There is a whole world of sexy fun out there that has nothing whatsoever to do with abuse humiliation or bondage. Sadists should understand that people can enjoy sex in something other than the missionary position and not be into BDSM.

The quirk of sadomasochism has been around for centuries.The literature is full of it. Nothing the law can do will stop it Stopping this practice is like
attempting to stop homosexual- ity.So long as the people who indulge in it are agreeable. So what.But not in my own back yard please.

Has a woman Dominatrix ever been convicted of a serious felony because she alledgedly brainwashed and abused a male slave(s). If not there seems to be a double standard here! I am interested to know, the moderator should feel to foward e-mail to me regarding this. I wonder if a male slave or his family pushed for the prosecution a female Dominatrix.