>>36152056>Only dangerous psychos enjoy nonconsensual violencei somewhat disagree with this on a mostly pedantic point, dangerous psychos get off to actually doing nonconsentual violence in real life without any assumption that the ones they are harming could opt in or out of said violence. anything in fiction is perfectly fine, and "consensual non-consent" is a thing, as hard as that might be to understand, so as long as the person agrees that their consent doesn't need to be verified, and agrees on a safe word, most forms of sexual violence are fine by me (severe, irreparable physical damage is where it starts getting grey, and there is a responsibility to be prepared for anything of a higher degree of risk, see what comma does, but other than that most of the other stuff isn't too bad imo.) but ya, if they don't like it, or if it starts getting serious in a real world scenario, you don't have the time to enjoy it while you are trying to make sure it doesn't go too far.
besides that point, i came from the other thread.
>>36125959 i guess i'll let it die if this one is active.
