I do not condone domestic violence, I despise anyone who picks on someone unable to defend themselves. I despise the mental abuse that accompanies the physical violence in these situations.
And yet, I have to say that I don't really think ANYONE has enough evidence based on the pictures to form an opinion.
Let me just say this: a Labour-supporting newspaper publishes a set of photos depicting someone who helped the Tories in an unflattering light. We don't know how many photos there are, the person who could have submitted only some of the photos or the paper could have chosen the photos to fit a certain narrative. The article is full of irrelevant bollocks, disparaging innuendo passing as comment and "onlookers said". The assaultee seems to have carried on living with the assaulter and seems perfectly happy. There have never even been rumours of marital
Based on the photos, the body language for an assault is entirely wrong. I've seen similar role-playing behaviour between consenting adults.
I'd have absolutely no trouble believing that Saatchi was a dom and that Nigella was a sub. And if you didn't know what goes on in the world of BDSM, you would quite likely freak out if you saw it being enacted in public. But the key difference between kink and domestic violence is the issue of consent. And if two consenting adults choose to do things that you or I find incomprehensible, does this mean that the police need to be involved?
So I'm not going to say that it's not assault, but I'm not immediately convinced that it is. I'm certainly not going to rush to judgment on the basis of those photos.
If it was a bit of hanky-panky, I'm bloody sure they both regret it; if it was assault, it's surely her decision to make something of it, or not.
I'm unsurprised that feminists have been jumping up and down about this, immediately calling it domestic violence, demanding police action and making snarky remarks about anybody with a contrary opinion.
However, I've been fucking horrified by "anarchists" calling for the police to get involved in the private affairs of a successful, powerful, adult woman. It's almost like they don't think she's capable of cutting his balls off with a deft twitch of a kitchen knife or, you know, going to the police herself.
The whole thing is profoundly depressing to me.
Update: I spoke to a professional domme about this. She says that the body language is not fully the language of someone who's enjoying it. But even she isn't sure that it's not a bit of roleplay. She thinks that Mr Saatchi may be a bit unpleasant. The jury is still out on what happened, but no matter what the truth is, it's none of our fucking business unless they choose to make it public.
Second update: Apparently Mr Saatchi is a cunt who has accepted a police caution for assault. So that's me told.
Third update: I believe a divorce is in the offing. So I was completely wrong.
No change there, then.
9 comments:
I am active in the world of BDSM. It does not look like the actions of a fully experienced Dom and Sub to me, however, since that fucking book was published, we are seeing a lot of clueless people "having a go" at BDSM.
It could be the case that Nigella read that fucking book and has persuaded her hubby to be her dom? Maybe, however, now that he has accepted a police caution, in law, he has admitted to assault. Yes, it could have been easier for him to admit to it and receive a caution, than challenge it and go to court for assault, but the situation is that we only know that side of it and unless Nigella comes out and admits it was all just BDSM or roleplay, then it remains a legally admitted assault.
That fucking book is the 50 shades book. Which is now responsible for numerous break-ups, assaults and lots of innocents being badly abused. Women who may like to try a spot of innocent consensual spanking, meeting up with very smart, manipulative doms who exploit their innocence to get them into a dungoen and massively abuse these women, and ignore safe-words. There should be some sort of warning in that book.
I have seen women, first timers, tied up, beaten, urinated on, cut, burned and left completely traumatised, because they wanted to play "hard core" due to that book.
Yes those sick doms are to blame too, but there will always be some really sick fucked up doms in the world of BDSM. This book has led women to these vile and sick "doms" without due warning.
I am a dom, but stick rigidly to fully consensual, and enlightened long term and on-going training. I gain the love and trust and devotion of my subs and would never do anything with any of them that they do not crave. I ensure that they go to counselling to deal with any emotional issues that they may have which motivates them to be harmed... Only after such intensive care and understanding, will I accept them as a sub.
Would I ever do what Saatchi did? Public humiliation is a theme which I have discussed with some subs. I have not done this yet, as I would pick a more amenable location for such play, than a restaurant. It would also be more abvious to onlookers, through dress and behavior, that the public play was consensual BDSM play.
So to summarise, It could be BDSM play, but I am not convinced that it was.
The tone of your article is entirely correct that we do not know enough of the situation, or the couple's relationship, to know for certain if it was a genuine physical assault, rather than amateurish BDSM roleplay.
Holy fucking christ!
I'm in two minds as to whether that post is a spoof, or whether you just gave someone the perfect opportunity to "come out" ;0)
As to the "story", I'll leave all the angst and taking of sides to others - personally I'm struggling to give even the fleetest of fucks.
The People isn't a Labour paper - it's official editorial line is apolitical, and I should know because I've written its editorials.
Yeah, it's presumptive to interpret the photos. I judge Saatchi by his artworks and he's a collector - Nigella being one of them.
WoaR I think you've hit the nail very firmly on it's head.
However, what shifty bit of action are our politicos trying to get passed us whilst we're all fixated on "poor" Nigella?
Or even using this as a reason to act for our own good!
Nigella? She's sooooo yesterday! Everyone's climbing aboard the Outrage Bus to gang up on Serena Williams for holding doubleplusungood views on rape!
I'm also involved in the BDSM scene and from the pictures it doesn't look consensual. It looks like someone being grabbed by the neck and looking shi-scared, not the faux scared of someone who trusts the neck-holder.
Saatchi's tightly clenched fist in the lower part of the photo is a pretty good indicator he lost his cool.
Its either a bloody convincing consensual scene, or domestic abuse.
Of course there are those that use BDSM as an excuse to abuse, and as Annonymous says their comment 50 shades of shite has been a gold mine for abusers who take advantage of a stream of willing women wanting to spice up their sad lives.
But IMHO Nigella looks every bit unconstentually abused in the photos.
I agree it could be a bit of whip & wellies but personally I think Saatchi is just a fucking coward who enjoys taking out his bad days on the easiest target. Those saying that Nigella should make it public if she is genuinely suffering abuse, should stop to remember that its not that easy or simple for an abused spouse - either female or male. Men will live with it rather than suffer the shame. Women tend to go into denial and blame themselves, thinking that if they hadn't done anything wrong he would not behave that way. Physical spousal abuse is also accompanied by psychological abuse. Its all about control. A bit like BDSM I suppose, though personally I don't participate and know very little about it.
Ahh, Foxy, you're well-known as a rock-ribbed Tory. It shines through in everything you say. :o)
Post a Comment