Stories bordering abuse

Own up Alan...it was actually you who started this thread under a pseudonym wasn't it?

Not guilty! The irony is, though, that this is now my joint most-commented story which might lead someone to think it was especially popular, rather than my most-criticised ever!

Some of us still insist it is one of your best, though!

Any plans for a sequel?

It is sometimes difficult to define what we mean by a NC story. For example if someone was offered a choice between having to pay a debt for which they didn't have the money and a spanking and they opted for the spanking it could be construed that there was an element of coercion involved. Is that NC?
A girl or boy subject to CP in a school environment is hardly consensual. And what about examples of judicial CP? Is the victim consenting to having his/her backside flogged with a birch/cane.
Personally I prefer stories with an NC element but I have no idea why that should be as I'm not an aggressive person by nature.

CP was voted out in New York in 1985 when I went to school. It was never used in Junior High or High School.

In schools one does have a choice. They can refuse to be paddled (or whatever) and end up being suspended for a number of days. I believe most of the time it's up to the students' parents on what choice they have regarding punishment. "If you're punished at school, you will be punished again at home." That tells me that the student's parent(s) is allowing the school to us corporal punishment. Does the student have a choice? Well, yes. Regardless if the boy/girl gets it at home after being suspended, they still make a choice.

If a person is given a choice to pay a debt or be punished with corporal punishment and, they choose to take the punishment, they're not coerced into anything. They were given a choice and they chose. So if their choice was corporal punishment, then it was consensual.

There are stories in the news where kids are paddled black and blue. I remember one woman who went to court and lost. She asked a police officer, "what if I did this to my child at home? What would happen?" The officer told her that her child would be taken from their home. Teachers and principals have what's known as Qualified Immunity. This means: They can't be sued, arrested, or the school for that matter. So, parents need to understand what they're consenting to.

Well, I got off the beaten track here and I'm sorry. It's just that there is a big difference in what happens in fiction and what happens in real life situations, and a story in the LSF shouldn't be taken seriously even if it does border or cross the line of abuse.

Well maybe it's just semantics, but I have to disagree with that.
One dictionary defines coerce as "to compel by force, intimidation, or authority, especially without regard for individual desire or volition..."
So the way I see it, coercion includes not just physical force, but almost any scenario where a person doesn't want to be punished. If someone submits only because they are intimidated by threats of a worse alternative, that is coercion, e.g.:
*School: Take a paddling or be suspended or expelled in addition to having misbehavior reported to parents.
*Judicial: Accept corporal punishment or be sentenced to imprisonment.
*Blackmail: Accept CP or have your activities exposed to a spouse or the public.
*Debt: Can't pay your rent? Let me have the fun of spanking you or you're out on the street.

That doesn't leave much as strictly consensual, which would include sex play (which could be for self-gratification or to please a partner) or to meet a psychological need to assuage guilt, etc.
But I could conceive of a number of situations that could be borderline between coerced and consensual, or may start out as coerced, but change to consensual. And I think these scenarios often make for some of the best story plots.

*School: Take a paddling or be suspended or expelled in addition to having misbehavior reported to parents.
*Judicial: Accept corporal punishment or be sentenced to imprisonment.

Those are choices which I've seen both first hand. Yes, spanking, too. (One kid in open court on bare bottom by his mother for stealing in the neighborhood.) The mother actually pleaded with the judge not to send him to reform school if she could punish him. The judge agreed. The other a 23 year old for abusing a dog (by his father in judges chambers with a belt on bare bottom.) I remember the judges words: You need to be humbled. He was given no choice. The judge got away with it.

*Blackmail: Accept CP or have your activities exposed to a spouse or the public.
*Debt: Can't pay your rent? Let me have the fun of spanking you or you're out on the street.

Both are blackmail.

Ryan, I have 35 years of law enforcement under my belt. What the dictionary shows as coercion is simply definitions. There is a difference between Webster and The Law. It's up to a judge to decide what is coercion and what isn't. That's all I'm saying. I agree with you. Many times these choices are not fair.

Paying a deb/rent/whatever or take a spanking is simply a story in the LSF as far as I'm concerned. Which in fact is against the law. When I was dealing with the courts the judges took coerced as "To Compel By Force." Gunpoint, Knife point, threat of physical harm, Threat of a family member physical harm, I'll sue you, I'll go to the press, I'll tell your husband/wife, etc... Depending on what some judges hear it can either be coercion or blackmail.

People are given choices. Plea bargains are one of them, which I hated. We're talking choices here. Coercion is not a choice it's intimidation. We may not like the choice, but it's still on the table.

I don't think we're really far off in concept. Some forms of coercion are allowed under the law (or at least have been in the past); others are not. Maybe can can call the legal ones an "incentive" to give consent that's not completely voluntary.

Everyday we as individuals make choices, some of those choices are made because of coercion in the sense that if we do not make certain situations (like paying the rent instead of booze) we end up on the street. Such things are up to each and every adult and that is as it should be.

Is paying rent voluntary? No, we pay because we want someplace to live. In a good world there would never be rent to pay, and we would all have a place to live. Same application applies to most things in life.

So no not every spanking in fiction or real life (and they do happen in real life) is with consent and never could be. There will always be spankings that are forced on others, the question becomes what does one do either to not put themselves in such a position that they would be spanked? Or does one make the choice to do something that may get them spanked and yet still decide to do it?

Just as some spankings are coercion so some decisions made by possible spankee's that force ones into making the spankings happen. IMHO it is not often the spanker who makes the decision to spank, it is the spankee who make the decision before the question ever came up that they would risk a spanking.

Many people assume it is always the one giving the spanking that are in control, and the spanker may be in the immediate moment the spanking is occurring. But I would argue at most times it the the one being spanked that makes the choice by their actions and therefore has the control. IMHO who ever has the real control is getting spanked there is no coercion involved.

CS