BlueLight Wrote:It's easy to rape someone without anything sexual involved.
"A person (the accused) commits the offence of rape when he has sexual intercourse with another person ("the complainant") without the consent of the complainant, where he knows that the complainant does not consent to the intercourse or he is reckless as to whether the claimant consents." Chapter 11:28, sexual offences Act.
Not relevant to the current discussion is the fact that "consent" is also vitiated in some circumstances, laid out in the next subsection of the Act.
You can't have sexual intercourse "without anything sexual" being involved.
You can't commit rape without having sexual intercourse.
If there is any law that specifies otherwise, the law is fucking asinine. The law in my country, however, does not specify otherwise.
BlueLight Wrote:Torture would basically be bondage or maybe hard core bondage.
Collins
World English Dictionary
torture (ˈtɔːtʃə) [Click for IPA pronunciation guide]
— vb
1. to cause extreme physical pain to, esp in order to extract information, break resistance, etc: to torture prisoners
2. to give mental anguish to
3. to twist into a grotesque form
— n
4. physical or mental anguish
5. the practice of torturing a person
6. a cause of mental agony or worry
Extreme physical pain, or anguish
Guro stuff.
A little bondage, or even a bit of hardcore bondage, isn't quite going to cut it. Even if mere bondage is what the person is referring to, the term they are using to refer to it is wrong.
I'll admit that one of the more metaphorical senses, the "mental agony" thing, could be caused even by tying someone up lightly, but I doubt that "the causation of mental agony or worry" is any "fetish" that anyone in the thread is referring to.
Could I interest you in being correct when you are trying to correct somebody, sir?
