General Question

flo's avatar

Is consent an excuse to beat someone up?

Asked by flo (11236points) February 17th, 2016

Let’s say your 15 yr. old is bruised black and blue. I love him he loves me, he asked me if he could beat me up, because he said that it makes him happy, and that if I consent it would prove to him that I love him. Also that once I try it I’ll see that I would like it too, So I consented. And I like it. So, please please don’t make trouble for him.

: is the case that brought on the question. The complainants are saying they were hit chocked etc. without any warning or being asking for consent. And Ghomeshi’s lawyer said they went back to him therefore it indicates consent.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

18 Answers

Darth_Algar's avatar

Well it’s up to you to press charges or not, so I guess the answer is yes.

Seek's avatar

Up to a point, and it depends on the jurisdiction.

The last time my mother beat me up, I called the police, but in my interview with the state attorney it was said that if I chose to press charges, I would have to testify, but if I didn’t, the state would pick up the domestic violence case with the photos and statements the officers took day-of.

The case was State vs. Seek’s Mom, not Seek vs. Seek’s Mom. She was still convicted.

So, if no one calls the cops, have whatever fight-club you want (I won’t talk about it) but if someone else calls, you may be without a choice.

NerdyKeith's avatar

No, its legally recognised as assault.

johnpowell's avatar

You can’t consent to illegal activity.

JLeslie's avatar


Also, jellies above touched on the fact that in America the state presses charges for assault. If you break the law the state can prosecute, it’s up to the state.

If cops are called and let’s say a husband hit his wife, the husband can gets arrested, even if the wife asks the cops not to. This happened to someone I know, his wife was beating up on him, swinging, she just lost control. She spent the night in jail even though her husband didn’t in the end want her arrested.

CWOTUS's avatar

In the specific example that you gave, a 15-year-old (at least in any US jurisdiction that I’m aware of) does not have the legal capacity to “consent” (in the legal sense) to the kind of behavior that you’re discussing. In general – there may be rare exceptions, I suppose – a 15-year-old is a minor, and therefore determined incapable of such consent on his or her own. So an adult parent or guardian could be held liable, in whatever way is applicable, for negligence (for not even knowing about the child receiving this kind of treatment from others), for depraved indifference (for knowing, yet doing nothing to stop it) or for assault (for participating in this kind of treatment). Other charges may apply; I’m not an attorney or a cop.

However, adults of free will and apparently sound mind can elect to engage in – and even to legally solicit and pay for, sometimes – behaviors that an outside observer would call clearly abusive, even to the point of causing bruising and blood loss. (This is aside from the self-abuse that some practice in the name of religion, one primary example of which will be on display in a little over a month when Good Friday rolls around in the Philippines. For one example out of many.)

I may have some kinks, but this isn’t one of them. I know about things, though.

Once the abuse (if that’s what we’re going to call it) proceeds beyond agreed-upon boundaries, or certainly past a point where the victim can consciously and at least apparently willingly agree that it should continue, then it may be prima facie assault.

Buttonstc's avatar

Apparently it is in a boxing ring.

johnpowell's avatar

Big difference with boxing is the referee. The fight should ideally be stopped before any major damage is done. I don’t really consider boxing any different from Football or Rugby.

But you can totally be charged if you are just a bunch of idiots with a boxing ring in your backyard and you kill someone.

Buttonstc's avatar

Good point. I was just being more facetious than anything else because it still amazes me that beating people to a bloody pulp is legally classified as a ” sport” ha ha.

Darth_Algar's avatar


Beating people to a bloody pulp is about the oldest sport there is. The ancient Greeks had Pankration, kind of an early form of MMA. The only rules were no biting, no eye gouging, and if you killed your opponent you forfeited the match.

ragingloli's avatar

A 15 year old can not consent.

JLeslie's avatar

^^True. If it’s minor there is no such thing as consent really, especially if the interaction is with someone over the age of majority.

SecondHandStoke's avatar

While the complex emotions that cause the desire is understandable consent is not legally accepted with regards to a minor.

The best you can do is let the minor understand that such feelings are normal but cannot be explored IRL until the age of consent.

flo's avatar

Thanks all.

@CWOTUS “However, adults of free will and apparently sound mind can elect to engage in – and even to legally solicit and pay for, sometimes – behaviors that an outside observer would call clearly abusive, even to the point of causing bruising and blood loss.” Okay let’s set aside the “pay for” part for now. The thing is it’s not always adults of free will agreeing with each other. there is usually no one else is there to witness it. One of them out of the blue, chocks the other until they pass out or die, or knocks him/her to the ground etc. And then the beaten up person acts irrationally, i.e continue with the quote unquote “relationship”.

Strauss's avatar

@flo …it makes him happy, and that if I consent it would prove to him that I love him…

I haven’t followed the link, but it sounds like he’s looking for an excuse to be abusive under the guise of consensual BDSM. Trying not to judge, but…

CWOTUS's avatar

@flo, abuse is abuse in the situation you describe (“choke” and “choking”, not “chock”), but if the victim is also the only witness, then it’s going to be damned difficult for a prosecutor to make a case against that abuser. Even worse when the victim not only refuses to testify against her abuser, but backs him in his defense. It doesn’t make it less of a crime, but it makes it a very difficult one to police and prosecute.

That’s one reason why police are more and more often given “no leeway” orders on these types of call; when called to the scene of an obvious domestic abuse situation they are required to make an arrest, to preclude the possibility of coercion of the witness by the abuser – and the high likelihood of additional abuse when they leave, otherwise. It also gives the prosecutor a chance to speak to the victim before she (or he) is reunited with the abusive partner or spouse, to see if the victim will finally accept help to break the cycle of abuse-and-make-up.

flo's avatar

Marie Heinen Ghomeshi’s lawyer, says they lied to the police, they said they never made contact with after him, therefore, so he must have not choked, (thanks for the correction) punched her in to the ground etc. without consent(which is suspicious thing since people can feel coerced enough to say yes to anything)

flo's avatar

….@everyone I missed the edit time above.

@Yetanotheruser ”...but it sounds like he’s looking for an excuse to be abusive under the guise of consensual BDSM.” Exactly. “And, re. “Trying not to judge, but…” Judging is what gets people to the right conclusion. By the way the link I posted is about Jian Ghomeshi,s case.
@CWOTUS “abuse is abuse…” Exactly. I agree with the rest of your post.

A person can lie about 99 things and tell the truth about 1 thing. Marie Heinen said in her closing argument, (paraphrased):You lied about not having made contact with him after that, therefore you could/(must?) be lying about having not consented

Answer this question




to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther