I hate stories like this. It lends itself to a long discussion about the age-differences, power imbalances, emotional and mental coercion. I speak loudly and proudly about consent, and its strictest application, and will be the last person to “victim blame” in a situation in which the nature of consent was vague or unestablished.
However, this article and lawsuit seem to be dripping with sex-negative hysteria. People partake in trusting, consensual “violent” sex all the time, and yes, many people like it. Details of this lawsuit stick out to me, but the most significant is the lack of reference to consent. It does not state that Ms. Jencsik gave or refused consent, but instead highlights that she was “not in her right mind” during their four-month relationship (which could serve to invalidate any potential history of consent, written in emails, chats, text messages — all of these will probably come to light during the case.)
Sometimes these situations are vague, and vague is very dangerous. Always negotiate ahead of time, always have a safe word (and unless you have one, the default is “stop”.) If none of that had been established, I could see how the experience could have been very traumatic and potentially abusive.
However, If Ms. Jencsik had granted consent, this could set the stage for a very dangerous precedent and further demonizing sexuality (and members of the BDSM community.) This is a scary dialogue, because In our culture, the sex-negative side always wins.
Consent requires trust, and that includes trust in the nature of consent itself.