madshysoul
Posts: 105
Joined: 2/25/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BitaTruble
quote:
ORIGINAL: madshysoul
It depends on exactly how you're asking, so I'll answer a couple ways.
I will call YKINOK in a live situation if I have informed, educated reason to believe that the act taking place in front of me poses a serious, life/limb threatening risk to the people involved and/or the audience. However, this determination is largely situational. I would say certain forms of fireplay are NOK in a crowded room or indoors at all. To me, it presents an unacceptable safety risk. Similarly, using a 9-foot bullwhip in a venue where alcohol is available, I would be unhappy with. (Under the logic that drunk people aren't usually smart enough to not walk into a backswing.) Though in these examples, I'm not calling out the kink -itself-, I'm objecting to the situation.
Excellent points. So, would you say that such parties and the activities mentioned should not be allowed at all regardless of whether or not everyone gave informed consented?
Yes. On the grounds that informed consent does not negate Murphy's Law. Just because I-the-sub have consented to the bullwhip, and You-the-Top know exactly what you're doing with the bullwhip, it does not negate the risk of a drunk stumbling into the backswing (or the cross itself) and someone winding up permanently blind/maimed. In this case it's not the scene going as planned that I make the determination on, but rather the consequence of the scene going wrong.
quote:
I've heard of people who enjoy deliberately scening while on mind-altering drugs. That, I say, YKINOK because A) the drugs are illegal and B) it removes the individual's ability to truely informedly consent to -any- act no matter how benign.
Is it okay if the consent was gained prior to indulging in the drug and the parties knew and accepted the risk of playing while under the influence of the drug before they were actually being influenced? Or does the unknown variable of drug interaction nullify any preformed consent?
I can make a fairly decent arguement in which the answer is Yes, it's ok with prior consent. However, I'm going to let a little of my prejudice out (just for a few seconds) and say No. I firmly do not believe that an individual on any mind-altering chemical/drug that has an impact on logical thought processes* has any business being in a scene. I say this because there is a greater-than-not chance that while on those drugs an individual is incapable of acting with they or their partners best interests in mind. The decision they might make un-altered is not the same decision they might make altered, and in my world-view that "might" is an unacceptable risk.
*Any drug (legal or illegal) which impacts rational thought/biofeedback loops. Heroin, pot, opiatic painkillers (I might stretch to muscle relaxers ...maybe) etc.
quote:
At a certain point, (from which I speak from personal experience), I question some forms of extended breath play scenes on the grounds that hypoxia can make an individual incapable of logical thought. That determination I make based on whether the entire scene has been discussed ahead of time or not. (IE, if your parner is hypoxic, YKINOK if you suddenly add some random new thing you've never discussed before.)
Iffy ground here, to me. I think it probably also falls outside the parameters of the disclaimer. For the sake of argument, say the entire scene was discussed ahead of time .. can the act itself nullify the preformed consent?
If the Top is in a sober state, and the entire scene has been discussed ahead of time, then I have no opinion. My objection is to putting an individual into a state of hypoxia, and then introducing some new act/device/kink which they have not consented to while not altered.
|
BDSM Activities: YKINOK - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread