Sane?

Sane? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

CitizenCane -> Sane? (6/6/2007 9:44:02 AM)
For all you adherents of SSC out there, I'd like to know a few things: 1) How do you define 'sane'? 2) How do you determine if your partner is sane? 3) Does it matter to you if they are not 'sane' by your particular standard but their insanity does not make them a danger to themselves or others? 4) Does it matter to you if they are not 'sane' by your particular standard but their insanity makes them fit their role in the relationship better? For instance, someone desiring a service sub might find one with mild OCD very attractive.

pleasingpj -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 9:47:15 AM)
As one being fairly new, i would be interested in hearing the replies to this question.

mistoferin -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 9:52:30 AM)
I don't adhere to or practice SSC because there really is no way to define sane or determine sanity in a way that is meaningful and acceptable to all. The same goes for "safe" and "consensual". I know that you are trying to determine how people who do adhere to it make these determinations though so my response is really just to get people to ponder the validity of the SSC mantra as I know my opinion on it doesn't really answer your question.

SirDominic -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 9:52:43 AM)
Philosophers and psychologists have been trying to define "sane" for centuries. lol. No-one has managed to actually pin that definition down to my knowledge. Namaste, Sir Dominic

SirDominic -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 9:55:45 AM)
Even the dictionary cannot define the word in any meaningful way: 1. free from mental derangement; having a sound, healthy mind: a sane person. 2. having or showing reason, sound judgment, or good sense: sane advice. 3. sound; healthy. How does one define healthy mind? sound judgement? good sense? They are just as nebulous as the word sane itself.

earthycouple -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 10:12:15 AM)
Safe Sane Consentual was what I thought I adhered to then I learned cutting and lighting people on fire is fun! Thank goodness for Risk Aware Consentual Kink. I agree that "sane" can't be defined. People think what I do is insane and I believe the post about animals and consent is pretty insane. I don't think the OP is insane, at least not yet. I would venture to guess few would think me personally insane. I have no basis for determining the saneness of others. Only if I believe their actions to be sane or not. An insane action does not make for an insane person (ask juries). Yes it matters. I will not engage with those who I feel don't fit into my realm of acceptability. Just like I don't go to the movies with people who don't fit into my realm of good movie genres. I don't ask someone whose taste I don't like to decorate my living room. Doesn't mean I don't like them, just means we don't agree on those things. As to your fourth question...doesn't my "insanity" of cutting up people make me perfectly sane to the one who wants to be cut? How can I want it, appreciate it and still feel it is an insanity? Robert may be insane to many because he likes lays perfectly still of his own will and volition while I slice his skin with an Xacto blade. To me he is perfectly sane and my little ahem slice of heaven on earth.

SimplyMichael -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 10:21:22 AM)
RACK was developed because chatrooms picked up SSC and it was no longer cool. Safe is a relative term. There is a 100% chance you will die if you live, you risk dying driving to a playparty. Both adherents "risk" and define "safe" in more or less the same ways, there are safety nazis in both camps. Sane can mean many things, certainly having ADD has nothing to do with sanity. I wouldn't want a partner who I knew wasn't self aware but that has nothing to do with sanity. Consensual again is a pretty broad term and there are idiots on both sides who under or over value it in my opinion. There are people who would let me do things that I don't they are ready to give consent to and there are people who I wouldn't get consent from to do the things I want to do to them and they would be happy I didn't ask.

imthatacheyouhav -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 10:28:29 AM)
Hmmmm....Master says...assume the position i'm gonna flog you....i say, yes Master.....consensual?...yes...sane? probably not...safe?...yeah , the flogging is pretty safe (with Masters flogger anyway LOL)

MasterFireMaam -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 10:38:02 AM)
Arg. This is why I'm RACK. Master Fire

slaverosebeauty -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 10:39:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 1) How do you define 'sane'? 'Insanity' is "doing the same thing over and over and over again expecting different results {most basic definaition i have ever heard and it works for me}." So I start from there and work my way away from that. Safety and sanity go together. I define sane as 'how a rational, mentally {emotionally, pyschologicaly, etc} person reacts in a given situation or senario, etc." quote: 2) How do you determine if your partner is sane? I talk to them. While communicating with someone you learn about them, their habits, who they are, presuing that they are beign as honest as you are. Then, when we meet, I go by my gut insticts and how that person reaction and interacts to the world around them. Are they looking over their shoulder? Are they relaxed? Do they seem tense? Nervious? Relaxed? etc. quote: 3) Does it matter to you if they are not 'sane' by your particular standard but their insanity does not make them a danger to themselves or others? If they are not sane, then why would I put myself at risk? When I meet with someone for the first time of the 100th time, I ALWAYS remind myself, that I have a small child at home who is expecting to see his mommy. This doesn't mean that I don't trust my partner, I have to otherwise they would not be a partner, it just means that my wits are present and that I am puttign faith into someone else. Trust is a BIG word to me, one I don't take lightly. quote: 4) Does it matter to you if they are not 'sane' by your particular standard but their insanity makes them fit their role in the relationship better? For instance, someone desiring a service sub might find one with mild OCD very attractive. If they are insane I would not be in a realtionship with them, so the question is irrelivant. OCD is one of those diseases where it can be benefitial, someone with OCD is not insane. I think its interesting how many around here think that you have to be NEW to believe in SSC. SSC is "common sence" in its most basic of terms and by definition. If you don't have common sence in a relationship dynamic like what lifestyers engage in, then its recklas {self or partner(s)} endangerment. Yes, someone can CHOOSE to put themselve in that situation, yet, that makes it 'consensual' {wow, thats the 'C' in SSC.} I have known about M/s and bdsm since I was 12, and read about on a regluar basis since I was 16 and have particpated in soem manner since I was 18; I'm not new. If believeing in something like SSC and common sence makes ME a newcommer, than DAMN; then the world has gone down hill faster than I thought.

slaverosebeauty -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 10:40:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterFireMaam Arg. This is why I'm RACK. Refresh my memory, what RACK again? I'm still kinda buzzed from the self-tanner fumes.

Archer -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 10:44:31 AM)
Yikes I find myself pretty much in Simply Michael's camp (This causes me to question my own sanity!!!!!!!) LOL. SSC RACK different words used to discuss the same central ideas. I was gong to go into a history missive about what slave dabid Stein had to say about what SSC ment, since he is credited with being the original source. Instead I'll just say Safe- Safe is a relative term it means that you have looked at the risks and taken every practical measure to mitigate the risks. Sane- Eliminating folks who's mental health makes them incompetent to make decissions for themselves. also meaning that I do not view SM as a mental illness. (the way the APA diagnosis guide used to back when SSC first came out) Consentual- I use informed consent as my own standard meaning that the person has enough relavent information about what I intend to happen and the possible unintended things and that they can decide if they wish to continue. For those that say what we do isnt "safe" I point them in the direction of the OSHA laws that say every employer is required to provide a safe working environment and ask them "How in the world do Refinery Workers, Commercial Fishermen, and Dock Workers, fit into your ideas of a safe worklace? Then like Michael mentioned point them to the Highways and ask them if their car is "Safe" If they are Safe Drivers, etc.

HypnoticDan -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 11:01:07 AM)
I don't try to prove if someone is sane. I approach it like a Turing Test and instead ask: "Are they more or less sane than me?"

Celeste43 -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 11:01:24 AM)
Mild OCD does not qualify as insane. It's a mood disorder, a problem with brain chemistry. It's treatable with medication if necessary in the same way that Type II Diabetis is treatable with medication if necessary. In terms of people with mental or emotional difficulties, my rule is whether or not they are functional. Can they keep a job, raise their family, stay in school. You know, function in the real world. Beyond that I need to know that if someone has an illness, physical or emotional or mental, that they are getting the best possible treatment and following doctor's orders. This applies to hypertension as well as depression. You have a problem you go to the doctor and you do what you're told. If you have trouble integrating the treatment into your life, then you see someone who helps you do that. If you aren't capable or willing to take care of yourself, then I sure don't want to be involved. And being fourth generation mood disorder, I practice what I preach.

mistoferin -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 11:03:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaverosebeauty I think its interesting how many around here think that you have to be NEW to believe in SSC. SSC is "common sence" in its most basic of terms and by definition. If you don't have common sence in a relationship dynamic like what lifestyers engage in, then its recklas {self or partner(s)} endangerment. Yes, someone can CHOOSE to put themselve in that situation, yet, that makes it 'consensual' {wow, thats the 'C' in SSC.} I have known about M/s and bdsm since I was 12, and read about on a regluar basis since I was 16 and have particpated in soem manner since I was 18; I'm not new. If believeing in something like SSC and common sence makes ME a newcommer, than DAMN; then the world has gone down hill faster than I thought. You seemed to take offense that I said that in MY experience, most of the people I have encountered in MY local communities who adhere to the SSC creedo are those who are newer. I did not say that one MUST be new to believe in it or practice it. I am not sure why that ruffled your feathers so, it wasn't intended as a personal slam. You say in your post that SSC is common sense. I strongly disagree. There is nothing "common" about it and all of the terms included in it are relative to the involved individuals idea of "sense". As I said to you on the other post. What is safe? What is sane? What is Consensual? Your answers to those questions will be your own and will not fit my definitions or many others. Therefore....nothing "common" about it.

vield -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 11:04:54 AM)
Anyone can think up clever acronyms to describe what they personally think about, what "the scene" means to them, and anyone can juggle definitions to prove themself right and someone else wrong, as much as they may enjoy doing this. One VERY good reason why SSC is a wonderful slogan for the BD/SM scene is that it is so very easy to defend against people who think our scene is damned or should be forced out of existance, By claiming the our three rules are that all BD/SM should be Safe, Sane, and Consensual, we have left many attacking groups in an untenable position. When someone like the concerned christian women of Illinois go to the media and attack our right to hold major scene events, the local vanilla media has a field day making them look like total idiots. In many cases the media is not "for" us. But it is very hard for them to resist taking shots at the antis, when SSC is our scene motto. "Well Mr. XYZ, please tell the folks what you so vehemently oppose about people insisting upon acting safely?" "So Ms. ABC, why do you object to people insisting upon only enjoying sane actions?" "But Rev. PQR, please tell me what you feel is so horrible about consensuality?" There are dozens of variations of these scenarios, and in most cases scene supporters have no need to debate anything, the antis screw themselves up so badly with the vanilla media that they lose any credibility. They become the clowns of the local 10 o'clock news. Thus I support using SSC as "Guiding Principles" for scene organizations and events. I also support using it personally, because while your definitions of SS may vary widely, I feel consensuality (meaning adults freely and knowingly consenting to all they do) is the dividing line between BD/SM and sexual abuse. I try to always recommend that everyone seeking partners for play or for more than play take the time to thoroughly discuss their own definitions of what they like, what they hate, what their hard limits are and what every term used in their BD/SM vocabulary personally means to each person involved. English like most languages has many possible meanings for many words, and it is very simple for two people looking at the same list of terms to each visualize very different actions than the other. Just reflect for a moment about how many thousands of meanings a little word such as "love" can have to people who are honestly trying to understand each other.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 11:16:04 AM)
quote: 1) How do you define 'sane'? Anything that I survive. quote: 2) How do you determine if your partner is sane? By exclusion, if a person agreed to be my "slave" by definition they are insane. beth will readily admits to this truth. quote: 3) Does it matter to you if they are not 'sane' by your particular standard but their insanity does not make them a danger to themselves or others? No. My preference for chains, clips, and leather cuffs versus rope reduces the potential for escape. quote: 4) Does it matter to you if they are not 'sane' by your particular standard but their insanity makes them fit their role in the relationship better? Not only doesn't it matter - it is a requirement. SSC, and RACK are great buzzword references. Mike spoke to their usefulness and practicality. Similar to using 'limits' and 'safe-words' they work until the one time they don't. My SSC act is on another person's Un-safe, Insane act. RACK is no better a term. Does awareness of the risk of 'breath play' or blood/fluid exchange make participating in the act any less risky? All these terms make for good parlor talk or club rest area discussion. Injuries, or accidents I've witnessed or been a part of during play have occurred to the most experienced, as well as first time participants. If anything it is the most experienced who "know everything" that run into the most trouble. Their 'experience' and 'reputation' get in the way of being aware of some minor remedial problem providing the potential of it becoming a big one. Mutual compatibility and the desire to experience complimentary sensation and emotions is a better banner to wave. But MCDECSE doesn't role off the tongue as easily as RACK or SSC.

darkinshadows -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 11:30:53 AM)
On another tangent someone mentioned - SSC isn't just for new people - but it doesn't help when new people use it because they use it without understanding it - that is the problem with mantras - it just starts looking ridiculous when people state them and then don't live by them. (Bit like the 10 commandments[;)]) Peace

MasterFireMaam -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 11:51:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaverosebeauty quote: ORIGINAL: MasterFireMaam Arg. This is why I'm RACK. Refresh my memory, what RACK again? I'm still kinda buzzed from the self-tanner fumes. RACK = Risk Aware Consensual Kink Master Fire

AquaticSub -> RE: Sane? (6/6/2007 12:07:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CitizenCane For all you adherents of SSC out there, I'd like to know a few things: 1) How do you define 'sane'? In relation to BDSM play - using dangerous toys only when you have enough skill. For example, if Valyraen randomly came home with needles tonight and wanted to try them I would have to say no because he doesn't have any training in needleplay. Also, just realizing your level of skill and not exceeding it to dangerous amounts. Valyraen practiced with my flogger for awhile before we started upping the insensity of our play with it. quote: 2) How do you determine if your partner is sane? Me? Be around them, watch their behavior, figure out if you trust them or not. See if they've have really bad break-ups that are out of the ordinary, ie. exs complaining about abuse. quote: 3) Does it matter to you if they are not 'sane' by your particular standard but their insanity does not make them a danger to themselves or others? If they aren't a danger to themselves or others, then I don't care. However, I may not choose to submit to them. quote: 4) Does it matter to you if they are not 'sane' by your particular standard but their insanity makes them fit their role in the relationship better? For instance, someone desiring a service sub might find one with mild OCD very attractive. I wouldn't consider mild OCD to be not "sane". It would be a disorder yes, but I consider mild OCD as more like depression, something that needs to be monitered. If I were a dominant who owned a submissive who was mildly OCD I would still insist that she be treated on a regular basis until her therapist suggested treatment only on an "as needed" basis. Edited to say: Now that I think about it, I may be starting to fall into the RACK line of thinking. I dunno. [:)]

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125