Sexual Expression, Body Alteration, and the Defence of Consent

Abstract

The controversy surrounding R. v. Brown, Laskey, Lucas, Jaggard, and Carter' has a significance which extends beyond the world of sado-masochist, or dominant and submissive sexual relations. The courts' treatment of those who are differently pleasured should, therefore, be viewed in a wider context. For example, the decision can be compared with other limitations which are placed upon freedom of bodily control, bodily self-expression, and sexual gratification. This paper adopts a contextual approach. The starting point is the decision in Brown. Beyond this, it considers legal reactions to other forms of body alteration with the focus being placed upon the boundary between the tolerable, the problematic, and the criminal. Generally accepted forms of body alteration, like the various types of plastic surgery and body improvement surgery available, can be compared with other less legally acceptable procedures like sex change operations, and both with a number of 'nonmainstream body modification'2 techniques including piercing, tattooing, scarification, cutting, and female circumcision. It is in the distinctions which can be made between the legal, the questionable, and the illegal that most can be learned about legal attitudes in this area.