Showing Off The Goods

[shy_anon]

Title: Showing Off The Goods
Wordcount: ~3400
Rating: R
Summary: Ianto's proud of his new pet, but Jack's going to have to learn to play the game a little. Follows Bind in the Au Club story series.
Warnings: D/s, mild electrical play, general themes of bondage.
Notes: xtricks got me rolling on this again by being all thinky at me in comments. Thanks!

Comments

[shy_anon]

Yes, sorry, I was a little incoherent there :) What I meant was, I didn't think elevating it from the burning cigarette would really do the story any good from a standpoint of "I don't want Ianto torturing Jack for information" -- I think there would come a point where Jack would stop talking out of sheer bullheadedness, as it's certainly not the first time he's been tortured. For Jack, tying it up with sex is a way to break a barrier that he's conscious of but can't do anything about. He's used to torture and to lying to his lovers but he's not used to his lovers explicitly pushing him to the truth at his request.

Jack did thoroughly research the club before buying in as a member, and he definitely has been monitoring Ianto and fingering the retcon in his pocket nervously. That'll come out a bit more as we move on. But the rule of discretion in the lifestyle is pretty firm, at least in my limited experience, and he knows it would ruin Ianto to break it over something so meaningless (to Ianto) as Torchwood. If the owner of a bondage club can't be trusted, that club goes out of business fast.

And with that last paragraph you are putting your finger square on the point of the next story. :)

[xtricks]

Yeah, I didn't mean that there was any real risk of gossip from the club, rather that the level of paranoia Jack lives with is probably much higher than anything that happens at teh club.

Something to think about is the Spanner case, a case in England wich set the precedent that consent in BDSM did not negate assault and a group of men were prosecuted for consesual BDSM. The law is very … uh, vague (to say the least) but essentially, forms of injurious BDSM are prosecutable whether or not the participants consent. What forms and how injurious is one of the things that's not made clear, plus the fact that the law was and is applied mostly to homosexual men (similar cases with male/female couples, including one that resulted in the death of a participant, havn't been prosecuted the same way). But it would change the tenor of a club like Bind - since the law is so vague, what acts are legal and what aren't would make people more nervous. Most folks who write BDSM fiction in England/Wales etc, ignore this law and base it more on a US model where - most of the time - BDSM is legal so long as there is consent.

http://www.spannertrust.org/documents/spannerhistory.asp

The bottom paragraph outlines what at least one of the presiding judges felt was 'acceptable' injury and it's pretty minor (rope marks, for example, might be considered prosecutable harm).