Another "What the Hell is Wrong with People" moment

[dancerjodi]

First there is this http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/392495p-332825c.html (is this a reputable source)?

Here's said contract: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0217062contract1.html

I just don't know what to say to this. Humanity never ceases to amaze me.

Comments

Quick!

[mizdarkgirl.livejournal.com]

Browse this to counteract your links!
http://mfrost.typepad.com/cute_overload/bunnies/index.html

Re: Quick!

[mydeepbluesea.livejournal.com]

That website just made my day!

[dragonvpm.livejournal.com]

Heh, I had a long discussion about this whole thing a few days ago and even though I find a lot of the details in the contract pretty absurd/unreasonable (it reads more like a D/s fantasy story than an actual useful/useable contract), it's really hard to tell just what went on in this relationship (was the guy just flat out crazy, did he lose it slowly after they were married, or was ther some element of consensual D/s involved before he took it too far, etc...).

IMO the whole thing (especially now knowing they were married 9 years) feels a lot like a D/s relationship that went wrong more so than a psycho completely unleashing his fantasies on an unsuspecting wife. I also wonder about the authenticity of the contract since neither person signed it so there's no real way of knowing who produced it or why and assuming this thing goes to divorce/custody proceedings it would really screw the husband's chances of having anything to do with their kids for a long long time. There is a pretty good motive for someone other than the husband to create the "contract" and wave it around in front of the news during an ongoing trial and effectively try him in the court of public opinion.

[arianasilver.livejournal.com]

Actually....I was just thinking to myself how this seems less like a D/s relationship gone wrong...and more like she didn't feel like playing anymore.

I think they both signed the contract at one time, and for whatever reason she's really angry with him and decided to 'strike back.' Maybe she caught him cheating or whatever but....here's the part that sealed it for me:

In the news article it says:
"Ruth Frey told Council Bluffs police her husband was angry with her for taking their two daughters to church."

Page 3 of the "Contract," under the heading 'Dressing Up' it states:
"For special events...your clothes must meet my approval. General Rules are: ...All skirts no lower than 2 inches above below the knee (unless its for Church)"

So why would he 'kidnap & assult' her for taking the kids to Church, if its acknowledged in the contract that at least she attends Church? And if he had so much control over her, would he let her attend Church on her own?

I personally think it was consentual and something happened that made it not on her part anymore, and she decided to get back at him hard.

[arianasilver.livejournal.com]

sorry, that's 2 inches below the knee :)

[tisana.livejournal.com]

It is pretty funny, isn't it? I didn't know quite what to make of it, other than to think that with a few small changes, it made sense as a D/S relationship, but the tone was killing it for me...

[miss-manners.livejournal.com]

I am UberDom, you are subbiegirl, you will submit to me.

I am curious how they got kidnapping out of this. I do wonder if it is "real" both in terms of who produced it and how serious it was if he did.

[plaidsheep.livejournal.com]

I agree with another comment.. that it reads like a D/s relationship that just went horribly wrong.

Perhaps she had a change of heart and wasn't Playing anymore, and hubby didn't take too kindly to being told the scene was over.

Still creeps me out tho. Seems to go beyond just "living" the lifestyle.