Snuff

[damyanti]

There are a few things that even in our open Community are only whispered about or we turn the blind eye to.

One of the major ones being...Snuff.

I don't get it. My reaction is always ...but considering there is an enormous amount of snuff stories and movies available on the net (and even in mainstream stores), maybe I am missing something...(its possible because I find most horror movies and grotesque things personally unpalatable).

I think I understand the basic premise...it is fantasizing, and in extreme cases realization, of (sexual) play resulting in the death of one or more participants (almost always submissive).

I consider myself opinionated, but rather tolerant person...my moral judgment compass being...each man has the right to live his life any way he wants, as long as he doesn't impede with that same right of others. How that translates to this lifestyle is- consent...for me sex games with those who are unable or unwilling to give consent (necrophilia, pedophilia, bestiality or zoophilia, r/l rape) have little to do with sex, let alone BDSM.

Of course there are things that are just not my thing, things that I still struggle to comprehend fully and things that are way out there for me (extreme body modification and things that cause permanent harm, such as removal of teeth, ribs, healthy limbs...). My stance on these is to try to learn as much as I can and the old adage "to each his own, ".

But snuff is a bit of a murky point. What do you think?

On one hand, you have an adult, presumably able to make informed decisions about his or her own life - giving consent. And the only person "harmed" is themselves. Are they not entitled to make that decision?

On the other hand, it seems completely crazy and devoid of common sense.

When others tell me that they are prepared for snuff, if their Dom/me orders them so, it makes me concerned for their safety. I worry that they are setting themselves up for abuse, that some sick individual is going take advantage of them and I try to get the "be careful (to whom you give your submission and or obedience)" inside their head...but am I crossing the line (of what is essentially none of my business)?

What are your views on this topic? How do you see snuff?

If this is a fetish of yours...what is it that you find erotic or sexually gratifying (because I honestly don't see it)? Is it a way to romanticize death?

Is snuff just another word for suicide?

[fetishdj]

Snuff.. what's not to understand about it? Its small pieces of tobacco and other herbs blended together that is sniffed up the nose...

Oh, hang on... you mean the *other* type of snuff...

Not heard much about this in the BDSM scene, and then only as stories rather than real life. Mostly only heard about it in horror videos. Of course one reason you may not have heard about it is the fact that it is horribly and totally illegal. IMO it also breaks all three elements of safe, sane and consensual (even if the person consents to being killed I am not sure should be possible to consent to your own death, it certainly isn't legally and morally it is a nasty area of personal freedom to explore).

Having said that, of course, I am in favour of euthanasia because I think someone with a terminal illness who wants to die due to extreme pain should be allowed to do so with dignity rather than being forced to stay alive. Legally, even this would get the killer a life sentence for pre-meditated murder (though most judges seem to defer it to manslaughter due to the mitigating circumstances) However, consensual killing for pleasure of an individual or videoed for the pleasure of others? Not a chance...

[thir]

Not heard much about this in the BDSM scene, and then only as stories rather than real life. Mostly only heard about it in horror videos.

An interesting and demanding topic..
I too have the impression that it is not a very big thing in real life more a sort of myth -?

Murder is one thing, as in non-consensual killing, but I do assume that it is the other thing we are talking about here?

Of course one reason you may not have heard about it is the fact that it is horribly and totally illegal. IMO it also breaks all three elements of safe, sane and consensual (even if the person consents to being killed I am not sure should be possible to consent to your own death, it certainly isn't legally and morally it is a nasty area of personal freedom to explore).

This I see is the core of the matter. I see the view here (with you and other people) that if you consent to your own death you are out of your mind and should not be allowed.

I have another view: Any person owns themselves. If you cannot own yourself, then there is not real freedom and that, to me, is the single most important thing in life.

The consequence of that is that you also can - for whatever reason - decide what to do with yourself, including dying as in suicide or agreeing to or asking someone to kill you.

Why anyone would want to is beyond me, but that is another matter. I see it only from the point of view of the person who decides on death him/herself.

[lucy]

This I see is the core of the matter. I see the view here (with you and other people) that if you consent to your own death you are out of your mind and should not be allowed.

I have another view: Any person owns themselves. If you cannot own yourself, then there is not real freedom and that, to me, is the single most important thing in life.

The consequence of that is that you also can - for whatever reason - decide what to do with yourself, including dying as in suicide or agreeing to or asking someone to kill you.

I second all that. However, suiciding or asking someone to kill you might very likely collide with other's peoples interests and freedom. Be it only because someone has to clean the mess and/or live with what you left. And that can be taken literally: When i was 11, a neighbour (20 years old and a mate of my brother) shot himself in the basement. It was messy; brains and blood everywhere. My brother found him, and to this day he has problems going to a basement. I never went to that basement anymore until we finally moved. Not because i was scared of what happened, but because i was afraid i might find another dead person.
I know it's probably the last thing a suicidal person thinks about, but it would only be fair to think of the persons who will find you.

The same with asking someone to kill you, even when you're about to die anyway. That can put immense pressure on the person who's asked to "do the job". I don't think a lot of persons could either comply or not comply with that wish without having a huge problem with it.

[thir]

I second all that. However, suiciding or asking someone to kill you might very likely collide with other's peoples interests and freedom. Be it only because someone has to clean the mess and/or live with what you left.

Point. It would be good to do it in a way as to not upset people who will find you. That may be difficult, though!

The same with asking someone to kill you, even when you're about to die anyway. That can put immense pressure on the person who's asked to "do the job". I don't think a lot of persons could either comply or not comply with that wish without having a huge problem with it.

These persons would likewise have their freedom to say 'no' to that.

[leah06]

This I see is the core of the matter. I see the view here (with you and other people) that if you consent to your own death you are out of your mind and should not be allowed.

I have another view: Any person owns themselves. If you cannot own yourself, then there is not real freedom and that, to me, is the single most important thing in life.

Thir, I always enjoy reading your posts because sometimes your intuitions are very different from mine and they are thought-provoking. I happen to agree with you that, in general, people own themselves and that they should be able to treat their property as they wish. However, I think that our intuitions place some bounds on that, as does our legal system. People who are insane are not able to, for example, enter contracts, dispose of their property, or make decisions regarding their care. Other people who are under a legal disability are treated similarly. Children, for example, generally can't engage in the activities I listed.

It seems to me that either you think it is a good idea to protect some people from themselves, or you don't. If you really don't believe that, then I would like you to justify prohibiting pedophilia. After all, lots of that special touching can feel really good, so why not let a child consent to it? But once you agree that SOME people are simply "disabled" - by age, or some kind of illness, or a psychological condition - from being able to make certain decisions for themselves, including the right to make decisions regarding their physical property, their bodies, then the questions is, who falls into that category?

I'm very comfortable saying, kids do. I don't need to interview each one to see where they fall on some decision-making spectrum; they just don't get to consent to sex. Or to lots of other things involving their bodies or their property. And insane people. Once you know that someone is insane, then they just can't make those decisions. So who's insane? Again, I'm confortable making the blanket judgment that physically-healthy people who want to "consent" to stuff are just nuts and can't consent to anything. You might disagree, and want to make a case-by-case determination; but unless you really believe that ANYONE, no matter what their condition, owns and can dispose of themselves in any way they like, I think you will need to agree that at least some people just aren't in a position to agreed to be snuffed.

[leo9]

Thir, I always enjoy reading your posts because sometimes your intuitions are very different from mine and they are thought-provoking. I happen to agree with you that, in general, people own themselves and that they should be able to treat their property as they wish. However, I think that our intuitions place some bounds on that, as does our legal system. People who are insane are not able to, for example, enter contracts, dispose of their property, or make decisions regarding their care. Other people who are under a legal disability are treated similarly. Children, for example, generally can't engage in the activities I listed.

It seems to me that either you think it is a good idea to protect some people from themselves, or you don't. If you really don't believe that, then I would like you to justify prohibiting pedophilia. After all, lots of that special touching can feel really good, so why not let a child consent to it? But once you agree that SOME people are simply "disabled" - by age, or some kind of illness, or a psychological condition - from being able to make certain decisions for themselves, including the right to make decisions regarding their physical property, their bodies, then the questions is, who falls into that category?

I'm very comfortable saying, kids do. I don't need to interview each one to see where they fall on some decision-making spectrum; they just don't get to consent to sex. Or to lots of other things involving their bodies or their property. And insane people. Once you know that someone is insane, then they just can't make those decisions. So who's insane? Again, I'm confortable making the blanket judgment that physically-healthy people who want to "consent" to stuff are just nuts and can't consent to anything. You might disagree, and want to make a case-by-case determination; but unless you really believe that ANYONE, no matter what their condition, owns and can dispose of themselves in any way they like, I think you will need to agree that at least some people just aren't in a position to agreed to be snuffed.

I really hope this wasn't meant to be as grossly insulting as it sounds. Your lengthy defence of the age of consent appears to imply that thir needs to be convinced that children should be protected - and it's probably just as well that she's away from the list for a few days, because she will be both horrified and spitting fire when she sees it. Did you really mean to imply that?

I'm used to guilt-by-association from the worst end of the Religious Right: if you support gay marriage you must be in favour of underage marriage, if you support abortion you must approve of infanticide. But this is the first time I was ever told that if I support the right to suicide I must approve of child abuse.

I ask again, did you really mean to say that? Because I hate to find I've torn into someone for something they didn't mean, so I want to be quite sure first.

[thir]

I really hope this wasn't meant to be as grossly insulting as it sounds. Your lengthy defence of the age of consent appears to imply that thir needs to be convinced that children should be protected - and it's probably just as well that she's away from the list for a few days, because she will be both horrified and spitting fire when she sees it. Did you really mean to imply that?

I am not spitting fire dear Lord, because I am fairly sure that that was not the implication.
I

I'm used to guilt-by-association from the worst end of the Religious Right: if you support gay marriage you must be in favour of underage marriage, if you support abortion you must approve of infanticide. But this is the first time I was ever told that if I support the right to suicide I must approve of child abuse.

It can be read like that, and I too abhor that way of arguing. I do not think it was meant that way, but I do agree with you that one should probably be aware of taking a discussion in totally different areas from what was under debate, or at least be very clear about it.

But again, I do not think that that mail was meant that way at all.

[thir]

It seems to me that either you think it is a good idea to protect some people from themselves, or you don't.
snip
But once you agree that SOME people are simply "disabled" - by age, or some kind of illness, or a psychological condition - from being able to make certain decisions for themselves, including the right to make decisions regarding their physical property, their bodies, then the questions is, who falls into that category?

Who indeed?

OK, we were discussing adults and the option of doing with your body what you want - or, a clarification, I was.

I have another question: who are qualified to determine if other people should be put under guardianship?

And insane people. Once you know that someone is insane, then they just can't make those decisions. So who's insane? Again, I'm confortable making the blanket judgment that physically-healthy people who want to "consent" to stuff are just nuts and can't consent to anything.

I guess the long and short of it is that I am not. Not at all. I tend to regard the powerposition of the whole set of mind doctors with scepsis, since morality, religion and other people's ideas have more to say than actual research, often enough. Consider how many of this profession are willing to call us crazy because of what we are and want.

You might disagree, and want to make a case-by-case determination; but unless you really believe that ANYONE, no matter what their condition, owns and can dispose of themselves in any way they like, I think you will need to agree that at least some people just aren't in a position to agreed to be snuffed.

THere will always be some, but the question is who is to determine who they are?
IMO taking people's choices away from them, which is what we are discussing here, put on its edge, is a darn serious thing. And to me it takes a good deal of justificantion, rather than arguing why people should be able to think and act for themselves.

[shayna{L_D}]

this is a very good thread damnyanti, i hope someone with answers comes along. Im with you on this.

[SauvagePouline]

I'm interested in seeing responses as well. I honestly thought it was purely fantasy, I didn't know it was one that people actually put into action. (i feel like i should qualify "people", but I can't think of a p/c way to do so, so i won't)

[leah06]

I've never thought about this, Damyanti, but I have thought a lot about the limits of consent. Here's one way to think about consensual snuff. People on here seem to be pretty unanimous against sexual activity with children. Why is that? As we've seen on a number of threads, children can be very sexual creatures, and they certainly are people with preferences. Why on earth shouldn't they be allowed to consent to mutually pleasing sexual activities with adults? I assume that for many people, as for me, one of the reasons is that we believe that children simply are not capable of giving or withholding meaningful consent in this realm. We might feel the same way about someone who's temporarily impaired - very drunk, say, or under the influence of some other drug - or someone who's mentally impaired.

So here's the thing - I don't need to make a case-by-case analysis of the sanity of someone who's willing to consent to snuff. I just don't. I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that anyone who "consents" to snuff is simply incapable of giving meaningful consent.

Is there the possibility of a grey area? Sure, just as hypothetically there might be a young child who would be capable of consenting to sex with an adult. (In fact, in Margaret Atwood's Oryx and Crake there is a character who comes very close to this.) Someone posted on these threads a few months ago (I'm not giving names because I learned my lesson about this) about wanting to end the life of his terminally ill wife in one final scene of torture. I will say that most responses to this were not totally on board for the idea. But then he explained that his wife was in tremendous pain during the last days of her life, and he wished that he could translate that pain into something that she could bear and enjoy. Technically snuff? Maybe, although a minor point worth mentioning is that he didn't actually do it. But to me, this begins to seem like it falls into the area of assisted suicide rather than consensual snuff. So there might be a grey area. But just as with pedophilia, the possibility of some outliers is not enough to make me change the general rule. I think "consensual snuff" is simply an oxymoron.

I really hope that people for whom this is a deeply cherished fetish will not be offended. I'm all for fantasies and people can have whatever fantasies they want. I'm not judging you, I'm not judging your sanity. To my mind, the fact that you're still here speaks for itself.

[MissConfused]

I thought - think - of myself as "normal" in relation to this website.
I have a snuff fantasy. One that ocassionally I masturbate to. It deeply excites me.

Would I ever do it? Of Course not!
But I have come to believe that anyone is able to express their fantasies here.
We know that they are fantasies and in the majority of cases will never come to fruition BUT this is the website to mentally live our fantasies.

I guess maybe I am "strange" but I do have my own snuff fantasy.
I thought everyone who is exploring their limits also had similar fantasies.
I believe each of us has a fantasy that they will never share with others no matter how open the conversation may be.

[Misschief]

I thought - think - of myself as "normal" in relation to this website.
I have a snuff fantasy. One that ocassionally I masturbate to. It deeply excites me.

Would I ever do it? Of Course not!

I applaud Your honesty.. I know what You mean about "masturbation material" though I am turned off by snuff..

Saw a hentai cartoon (which I love) once with a snuff premise.. I was unable to masturbate for a few days after that.. It just rubbed Me wrong.. Pissed Me off, actually..

There were these 2 girls who got lost on their way to vacation, got stranded on an island where they were individually gang raped and then discarded..

Made Me the opposite of aroused..

Curious about Your fantasy, tho..

[thir]

So here's the thing - I don't need to make a case-by-case analysis of the sanity of someone who's willing to consent to snuff. I just don't. I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that anyone who "consents" to snuff is simply incapable of giving meaningful consent.

I think "consensual snuff" is simply an oxymoron.
.

Why, exactly?

Many people would say that consenting to be a sub or a slave would clearly show that you are not in your right mind. But we here know that it is usually an informed decision from people who know what they are doing, and who consider themselves free enough to give themselves away if they so choose.

So where does this ability to decide you own fate stop? With you apparently at death, and I also feel that the idea of killing people is extremely abhorrent.
But to me that is beside the point. The point, to me, is that a person has a right to decide their own fate. That includes suicide - who can know for another person when life is too much, or sickness or pain is too much? We live inside our own sculls, and that, to me, means that only the person themselves can decide for themselves, but also that only the persons themselves have a right to.

To me, life is only worth living in freedom, and for other people to try to take control of my life in any way what so ever is wrong, and why to them it may be a matter of compassion, to me it is a matter of the ultimate disrespect for another person.

[leo9]

So here's the thing - I don't need to make a case-by-case analysis of the sanity of someone who's willing to consent to snuff. I just don't. I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that anyone who "consents" to snuff is simply incapable of giving meaningful consent.

The trouble is, this is exactly the argument we run up against in debates on suicide: any competent adult should be free to decide what they want to do with their life, but if they want to die, that proves they are incompetent to make decisions.

And as Thir pointed out, we've seen the same argument applied by people who are scared of BDSM: anyone who consents to being tied up and whipped is obviously not competent to give consent.

But I can see the difference. The fundamental problem about death, and the reason many people are against capital punishment, is that it doesn't allow of corrections or second thoughts. If you go into a heavy scene and realise it wasn't what you wanted, even if what goes wrong is that you're under a Top who won't respect your safeword, at worst the mistake can be fixed with some hospital time and trauma therapy. If you consent to be killed for the wrong reason nothing can put it right.

[fetishdj]

There is a chasm between fantasy and actually carrying it out. I don't see any problems with discussing it but I do see problems with doing it.

At a base level, death is sexy. A lot of people fantasise about it and this is why snuff exists. However, social mores are what hold us back from carrying out these fantasies.

There is also a vast difference between what we fantasise about death and the process for real...

[thir]

At a base level, death is sexy.

Why? I have never understood why some people feel like this. What is sexy about it?

[Arria]

The idea of snuff is a huge turn-on for me, but only where I myself am considered.

I think I would see it as an act of complete submission - that is what I like about the idea; there might be others who have different reasons.

It has nothing to do with any suicidal tendencies for other reasons (I don´t believe in suicide as I believe we have more than one life, and whatever we don´t master in this life will be dished out to us again in the next life, and I would really like to get done as much as possible in this life *lol*).
It´s not a wish to die.
It is a wish to give my life as a gift, to a person who loves and cherishes me, and whom I love and cherish in return.

Of course, a person who loves and cherishes me would not wish me to die, and would therefore not do such a thing.
Moreover, murder is still illegal around here, and I would not want the person who loves and cherishes me to first suffer my loss and then go to jail (I don´t believe one could get away with it, forensic methods are so advanced today...).
These facts prevent it to begin with.

Moreover, I have a son. And I think the well-being of a child should have a higher priority than fulfilling some kinky fantasy (if fulfilling said fantasy would influence the child´s life).
If one takes a huge responsibility upon oneself (which raising a child is), it should not be pushed upon other people just because one has some sort of fantasy that would make loved ones suffer, in my opinion at least...

So, I won´t act this one out... however, if I never had had a kid, I don´t know if I would have seeked out a partner who would fulfill this fantasy for me.

[Veralynne]

I'm gonna go with MissConfused on this and admit to occasionally fantasizing about snuff. Usually, because I enjoy breath play (and not so much extreme pain), it revolves around being choked or suffocated to death.

I'm not sure why it is so hard for you to understand (no offense) if you can understand why rape or other fantasies would be enjoyable. I mean... would you ever actually ACTUALLY want to get raped? By a disgusting deranged stranger? Okay, some would possibly say yes to this (and some would also possibly want to act out snuff)- but I think that many wouldn't.

The idea is similar to the rape fantasy- it's a loss of control, someone forcing themselves on you. With me it's also the feeling of passing out. The feeling of impending doom. Mentally counting down until the man cums and I black out permanently.

Now again, along with MissConfused, I would never act such a fantasy. Things that I can only do once don't have that much of an appeal to me :-P

[damyanti]

No offense taken Veralynne...that's why I opened the thread, . On this, I admit, I am the odd one out, LOL, but while I do know and get rape fantasies intellectually, I never had any. Its a long story, but they hold no appeal to me. Also breath play, not my thing, I cant stand people touching, let alone choking my neck.

Why I cant see it? Its rarely talked about openly (I did a search and couldn't find a thread dealing with it here, and nothing on Google either, unless you count what fetishdy mentioned about tobacco, LOL). Much like SauvagePouline I always thought its purely fantasy, and an extreme one for the rare few.

For me there is nothing romantic about death, (again, the same long story, lol). It is a fact of life, it serves a purpose.

I do understand what Arria means about ultimate submission and what people see in breath play/choking...why they find it enjoyable physically and why mentally (placing your life into the hands of another and toying with it...). I have no fantasy nor desire for it, but I can understand it (as much as anyone who isnt into something can understand it, lol).

As for snuff...its death. As you say its permanent.

I am of the firm belief that fantasies are a healthy outlet. And there is no reason why we should not fantasize about things we have no intention to realize. So I have nothing against that, and that's why I asked what people find appealing about it.

The reason why I posted this question and what got me thinking is that in the relatively short time, I have been contacted by two different subs who both said that (it is not so much as fantasy of theirs as) they are prepared to do it if their dom/me asks for it and that they would welcome it. IMO they had a poor grasp on SSC, and it got me concerned for their safety and upset...my Dom friend said that they were most probably just messing with my head and making things up...it is certainly possible, especially for one, but the other I think, really meant it...and that got me thinking...

Big thanks to everyone for their response. I hope people continue posting, as this has turned into a rather interesting (and educational) thread.

[leah06]

I didn't necessarily see Damyanti's post as questioning the fantasy as much as the occasional reality. I remember a news story about a guy in Europe who had cannibal fantasies, and found someone who shared them, and - well, finish the story yourself. His defense was consent, and as I recall it wasn't treated as first-degree murder, but I hope it wasn't because of the consent as much as, well, because they were both nuts. I haven't seen snuff threads here but there are some stories that get close to snuff. I just close them - not for me - but those are about unwilling victims. I can understand death as the ultimate loss of power and "giving" your death to someone as the ultimate surrender. As a fantasy.

[gagged_Louise]

Very interesting thread, all of you. I'm sometimes turned on by snuff motives but not as if it would be the fulfilment of being together or the only outcome of speaking your mind in an intolerable and unchanging situation. The first of those could be something like Sid Vicious and Nancy Spungen, the second could be a political martyr or perhaps even Christ - there are readings of the suffering and death of Christ where it's seen as a means of exposing something about evil rather than as a blood sacrifice.

What you seem to be sketching Arria is something like Sid and Nancy or a woman accepting to be the patsy for a crime or protest that her lover actually did commit. I never found Sid and Nancy very inspiring, rather dreary, but it could feel intriguing to some, I recognize that.

But if you suppose Sid were a real sadist and had actually tortured his girl-friend badly (which I don't think he did) and finally made her comply to die for him, then it gets harder to stomach, doesn't it? Sadistic snuff (not just killed, but tortured, perhaps raped and made to die in serious pain) feels like extreme degradation in my eyes, dehumanization. Sometimes the fantasy can feel thrilling to me, but mostly in a quick way I think. The ruthlessness and bluntness of it, the "we don't care for you" might feel a hot element, being led out manacled, whipped and hanged, but in reality it's the sort of thing I would never wish of course. I think this is one reason that including death in a role play has always felt tricky to me: when you're acting out a story or a scene with another, you're making them see things from the point of view of their character and if that person is cruelly put to death, it breaks the contract of fantasy in a way.

I'll be watching Michael Haneke's Funny Games in the next few days - borrowed the dvd yesterday. It's a movie I've been walking in curves around for years, I remember when it appeared ten years ago but it sounded too scary to go to the pictures and watch, especially after I'd heard the audio of an important scene on the radio, and an interview with Suzanne Lothar, who played the mother in the film. Funny Games is about a family going to their country cottage and who get sneaked upon by two nice-looking, polite young men who knock on the door and ask if they could have a few eggs. Soon they have taken the family - two adults, a son and a puppy - hostage, shoved their cell phones in the water, cut the phone wires, tied the people up and are taunting them that they will probably die. What's more, they turn at the audience and propose a wager, inviting us to see if the family will survive - by this move and others, Haneke reinforced that movie violence is something that has a huge market value because it's a kind of wish-fulfilment (or even a means of soothing the fear of this kind of gore happening to you when some psycho knocks on your door?) We are accomplices in the theater. But why do we wish for it, identify with being there - it's not just us kinksters who do that - when we can see what happens is just shocking and awful? I had to see that film at some time, and I'll be posting a review.

[damyanti]

But if you suppose Sid were a real sadist and had actually tortured his girl-friend badly (which I don't think he did) and finally made her comply to die for him, then it gets harder to stomach, doesn't it? Sadistic snuff (not just killed, but tortured, perhaps raped and made to die in serious pain) feels like extreme degradation in my eyes, dehumanization.

That is the first thing that comes to my mind when someone says snuff...others brought some other versions of snuff and I can sort of see where they are coming from and if a person is of sane mind, who are we and do we have the right to order or even tell them how to live or end their own life? But if it were someone really close to me, I would probably cringe and revert to questioning if those (as rachel06 said) who "consents" to snuff are simply incapable of giving meaningful consent.

Sometimes the fantasy can feel thrilling to me, but mostly in a quick way I think. The ruthlessness and bluntness of it, the "we don't care for you" might feel a hot element, being led out manacled, whipped and hanged, but in reality it's the sort of thing I would never wish of course. I think this is one reason that including death in a role play has always felt tricky to me: when you're acting out a story or a scene with another, you're making them see things from the point of view of their character and if that person is cruelly put to death, it breaks the contract of fantasy in a way.

...thank you for explaining it in such a great way, it clarifies a little what others see in it...but from a personal level I see nothing thrilling about it. Cruelty and dehumanization do nothing for me, but horrify and frighten me.

...to me BDSM is not crushing the will of someone else, it is capturing and turning another's power to your will and combining the two for the benefit of both. It's not a single moment of instantaneous gratification, but the drawn out interactions of pleasure over time.

Hence, snuff and Amber? Not my thing and I worry for those that consider it a worthy sacrifice just because their Master wants it. Frankly, it's harder to live for someone than it is to die for them, so unless death is in defense of another's life or an ideal that transcends your single life, then I think it's a little bit of a style without substance issue.

Great post Amber and this part mirrors my own view.

[DowntownAmber]

Death is an extremely romanticized concept, no doubt about it. It is often referred to as the "ultimate sacrifice" in reference to a soldier giving his life for his country or the act of a parent protecting their child. It is the one thing we can give and never take back. It is more than our love, more than our power, it is the entirety of who we are - everything we were, and everything we were ever going to be.

For those of us that have been to that place where we actually believed we were going to die, it is a place of revelation and insight. A powerful frame of mind, and significant whether you look at it from a religious standpoint of from a purely biological one.

The fantasy, as others have touched on, I suspect is rooted in the notion of an all encompassing control over another human being in a permanent and irrevocable way. Or perhaps it's simply holding the infinite in your hands for awhile. Anyone that has held a life as it has passed on, whether it was an animal or another human being, I do not think can help but pause and feel the power of life in its emotional and soulful form coupled with its intense physical frailty. It's a heady cocktail when that all comes together in the final few moments.

The experience stirs something, and in some people I guess what it stirs up is synonymous with sexual gratification. I like breath play myself (note to damyanti: I also HATE when people touch my neck or face so it is a significant sign of trust for me), but to me BDSM is not crushing the will of someone else, it is capturing and turning another's power to your will and combining the two for the benefit of both. It's not a single moment of instantaneous gratification, but the drawn out interactions of pleasure over time.

Hence, snuff and Amber? Not my thing and I worry for those that consider it a worthy sacrifice just because their Master wants it. Frankly, it's harder to live for someone than it is to die for them, so unless death is in defense of another's life or an ideal that transcends your single life, then I think it's a little bit of a style without substance issue.

My couple of cents, anyway. Okay, maybe three cents worth...

[AdrianaAurora]

Is this a fetish of mine? NO. Is it something I fantasize about and want? NO.

I absolutely agree that SSC is paramount, being tortured or abused to death holds no appeal.

BUT

Is it a way to romanticize death? Yes, that is one way to put it.

One thing to keep in mind, Hubby and I have been together for years. We have been through a lot, but we always stood united and I have learned to trust Him. It has taken us years to get to this point! Is it romantic idyl every single moment of every day, of course not, but it is real.

If He came home tomorrow and said He wanted to snuff me to be rid of me - yes, there would be snuff, but I wouldn't be the one lying in the casket. *weg*

My Husband is older than I and prone to extreme sports and extreme living, and if something were to...

The very idea of a life without Him seems like an unimaginable torment. If that were necessary, I would continue to function for the sake of our son, but I would stop living - and it has crossed my mind, that I would end up taking my own life.

(If our son was of age) and either Him or I were diagnosed with something or something similar happened - As far as ways to die go, having Him "wring my little neck" isn't such a bad one, .

[fetishdj]

It is legally impossible (in most countries that I know of... though I admit there may be some where it is possible) to consent to any act that will cause harm to you. The only exception is medical consent and that comes under very strict guidelines and rules and you need to be a qualified physician to apply this exemption and have the procedure you plan to do approved and risk assessed by your ethics committee.

Not sure what happened at the end of the German cannibal trial. If he did get away with not being charged with first degree (apart from the fact that we don't have a concept of first degree murder in European courts - we don't differentiate it as much as American courts do, its either murder or manslaughter) then it was probably due to some concept of diminished responsibility. Either there was an appeal of insanity by the defense or the prosecution realised that there was better chance of a conviction if the manslaughter charge was pressed over the murder charge. Either way, I doubt it was due to the concept of consent. If anyone knows more details I would be interested in finding out what happened.

As for the two subs... yes, that is concerning. My main concern is that they are too naive. They are offering more than they may fulfill in real life and that is never good for any BDSM relationship. Major safety concern, especially if they come across someone predatory pretending to be a Dom...

[lucy]

If anyone knows more details I would be interested in finding out what happened.

If you really want the gory details, here goes: The guy (Armin Meiwes) is called "Der Kannibale von Rotenburg" (the cannibal of Rotenburg). He cut off and ate the victims' genitals and filmed it too. The guy who got killed was not terminally ill but severely depressed.
He was convicted of "murder to satisfy his sexual desires" and got a life sentence. An appeal to the Bundesverfassungsgericht (the highest court in Germany) was turned down on October 24th this year.

Lifelong in Germany means: He may get out in 15 years if by then he is not considered to be dangerous anymore.

(FAZ, 24.10.2008 FAZ

So he was convicted of murder, even when the other gave his consent to being killed. Unfortunately i didn't find out with what arguments he appealed to Germany's constitutional court.

As for the rest: Very interesting thread; until someone told me of their fantasy a week ago i didn't even know that people had such fantasies. The only time i heard about snuff was in a movie with Nicolas Cage but that's a movie. At least i hope it doesn't happen in reality.

[morphinexopium]

I cannot even begin to comprehend, or even imagine the thought of 'snuff'.
I have heard of it on a few occassions, and the thought that even a sane minded individual could even want to end their own life actually makes me very, very scared for them, but then again alas this is my own opinion, I cannot judge, though it is hard at times.
I watched a documentary about assisted suicide, and this is an ongoing debate which is currently raging through parliment, even the Prime Minister has spoken about it. I know snuff is a differnt matter, but it is alongside suicide(asst), it is still death.
It's okay to have fantasies, after all i'm sure we all have them, but to actually carry death etc into reality, is the idea of a worst night mare, how scary.
No matter how/and when it might be carried out, but this is just my own opinion.

[redneck one]

I get turned on by the thought (and thought only) of some pretty extreme torture, but still I don't see the point in talking it farther. However, I had an online exchange with a lady who said her fantasy was to be impaled on a pole, and if she had a choice on how she would die, that would be the way. The first time in my life I have been "out-kinked."

I'm not sure I've ever heard of a real life case of snuff. It seems in most cases the rapist wants the victim dead (ie ex wife, murder for hire, or plain hatred), unable to identify him, for some other purpose that requires her to be dead (canibalism or other use of body parts), or it happens unintentially (going too far with a choking, beating, etc) It seems to me at least, that the idea of death for sexual satisifaction has some appeal to our brain like many other urban legands.