Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 10:19:28 AM   
Missokyst


Posts: 6041
Joined: 9/9/2006
Status: offline 		 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Leatherist

<-----total riff raff!!!!!!!!!

(in reply to Leatherist)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 10:24:10 AM   
sylee


Posts: 9
Joined: 1/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SteelofUtah

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dnomyar

Steel congrads you actualy got me to read your whole post. You articulate very well. Me I try to condense what I have to say in as few words as possible.


Thank you

Sometimes being told you are long winded can be a compliment ....... right?

Thanks Raymond.

Steel



Absolutely!



(in reply to SteelofUtah)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 10:24:56 AM   
Archer


Posts: 3207
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline 		SSC and RACK were contrived to allow non participants to have a basic understanding of how SM differed from abuse.
When you try to move beyond that to make it a social stadard you end up running into trouble.

If you check the history (some ofwhich is in the link earlier provided an article by David Stein) you find there were some things they were trying to say and alot of things they never intended SSC to be used to do.



(in reply to RavenMuse)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 10:31:06 AM   
sylee


Posts: 9
Joined: 1/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Leatherist

quote:

ORIGINAL: missturbation

Just because you CAN,does not mean that you SHOULD.

And these are the sorts of tops who get this level of consent-because they CAN be trusted.



I don't know if this is really relevant or not, but this is something that my priest says. {Caveat - I doubt he is considering BDSM when he says it. }

All may, some should, no one must.



(in reply to Leatherist)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 10:36:58 AM   
LadyEllen


Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline 		Come to think about it - I used to do English civil war reenactments.

We shot muskets at each other, swung swords at each other, had cannons go off less than ten yards in front of us, stood there with horses charging at us and around us, had pikes jabbed at us

All of these are dangerous.  Most are life threatening. Most of it is potentially criminal.

But we all agreed to the level of risk, and all worked hard to minimise the level of risk, we all intended to have fun and not injure anyone.

Is it an analogy I can use, I wonder?

E

_____________________________

In a test against the leading brand, 9 out of 10 participants couldnt tell the difference. Dumbasses.

(in reply to sylee)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 10:42:56 AM   
faerytattoodgirl


Posts: 5824
Status: offline 		i require ssc for health reasons.  having a major heart condition can be lethal if something went wrong.

for instance if during knife play the cut gets to deep or is cut in a place where i bleed like hell...it can be serious health risk and life threatening for me.

breathe play is also a major issue.  i already have a murmer and breathing problems to begin with.  not recommended to try.

and yet i can handle a full 2-3 hours of continuous flogging while tied ona cross.
in fact that is one of my favorite things next to a long wax session.

if its not consensual...your not going to touch me.  all trust would be lost.  especially if its hazardous to my health.


_____________________________

I did not reply to your cmail.
I am flawed.
Imperfect.
MUST SPANK!!!
SPAAAAAAAANK!!!

(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 10:48:10 AM   
BlackPhx


Posts: 3432
Joined: 11/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

Come to think about it - I used to do English civil war reenactments.
But we all agreed to the level of risk, and all worked hard to minimise the level of risk, we all intended to have fun and not injure anyone.

Is it an analogy I can use, I wonder?

E


Actually why not use that as well as the SCA, scuba diving, climbing mountains and rock climbing, skateboarding, riding motorcycles (including trick riding) and circus acts such as knife throwers and magicians. There are things that we do every day that contain a LOT of risks. People hold jobs working with gas mains, climbing poles to work on electric wires, cable  and phone lines, they test weapons and face down criminals who are willing to kill or maim them to get away.  They make the same choices, the police and firefighters you know. They consent to enter into dangerous situations and very few of them are going to say they do it for sexual choices, but they will not say it is for the pay either. It is for the satisfaction they get in performing their jobs and they do try to minimize their risk while doing it, just as we do.

As safe as we can make it (just like them) as Sane as we both agree it to be (I think facing down a raging fire with a rubber coat, a helmet, and a hose to be insane but...), always consentual (they took the job just like we did, with their eyes wide open and accepting the risks voluntarily)

poenkitten


(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 11:14:12 AM   
Jasmyn


Posts: 1234
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: New Zealand
Status: offline
Safe: - meaning that the participants' physical and emotional wellbeing are of supreme importance, and proper safety precautions are followed at all times (including safe sex).

Sane: - meaning that the participants behave responsibly and activities are intended to result in mutual pleasure and fulfillment for both parties without harmful consequences of any kind. The abuse of another's body, emotions and/or mind for the sole gratification of one party at the expense of the other without regard for physical or emotional wellbeing is NOT sane.

Consensual: - meaning that all parties involved must be consenting adults who are capable of giving informed consent. Consent means both parties knowingly and voluntarily agreed to the activities engaged in and did not withdraw that consent. Honesty is a prerequisite to informed consent. Deception and manipulation render consent unknowing and involuntary
http://nzbdsm.tripod.com/two.html

---

"pain, bondage, dominance, or humiliation" - ergo B/D S/M  - I think a lot of the debate over SSC stems not from whether or not the term serves well enough for ehtical practicioners, but that a lot of people who came on board in the name of "BDSM", don't practice S/M. or bondage, or discipline.  A lot of dominant/submissive relationships now are not founded in S/M but rather 'lifestyle" and/or 'orientation' -  Master/Mistress - slave/sub, Daddy/daughter, Gorean, Female Supremacy, dom/sub, top/bottom, etc

S/M by nature is dark, and spiritual and ritualistic, haunting, exotic, oft times erotic, it has power and control, conflict and triumph, it's finding the edge and falling or calling, it is disciplined, it employs discipline, it has it's own energy, it can be dangerous, it can be edgy, it can be as tense and traumatic, it's cathartic, rebirthing, mutually beneficial to all it's forces ...

The article by slave david stein explains quite well where their thoughts where when the phrase was first adopted, which is pretty much how I have always taken it, by nature the activity of S/M is not always safe, is not always sane, and consent was sought and respected.

 

 

_____________________________

quote:

"To learn the art of submission a slave must first give up the desires that drew him to submission in the first place." Mistress Jasmyn Jan 2005.


Visit My Website


(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 11:33:04 AM   
Owner4SexSlave


Posts: 1311
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline 		You could compare it to how people enjoy various sports.  Such as Rock Climbing!  Some people use a lot of safety equipment and take a lot of precautions, and some People engage in Free Climbing without all the extra Safety Gear. 

< Message edited by Owner4SexSlave -- 5/15/2008 11:35:22 AM >

(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: if it isn't SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 11:36:39 AM   
sadomasokisti


Posts: 221
Joined: 10/20/2005
From: Iceland
Status: offline 		I use SSC when communicating with vanilla people. to differentiate between play and abuse.

In BDSM settings I still use SSC, but I don't use it to describe activities or categories.  For me it means I know what I'm doing. I'm not trying to any damage or to hurt anyone unintentionally. And with full consent of all participants.

For me consent is absolute yes or no.  It does not mean that I will like everything. 

With one person I don't use safe words at all although I have a way to communicate if I believe there is a physical danger eminent. It's the responsibility of every sub to communicate about his or her mental/physical health status if it can affect the play in any way, before the scene starts. I gave her full permission to what ever she wanted to do with the exception of permanent marking which would need a discussion beforehand.  
Of course I trust her 100%. 


< Message edited by sadomasokisti -- 5/15/2008 11:38:16 AM >

_____________________________


Pain is good. Extreme pain is extremely good

(in reply to BlackPhx)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 11:39:35 AM   
SimplyMichael


Posts: 7229
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline 		It is a common myth that you can't legally consent to bdsm and it legally the same as spousal battery but in most places in the US that is complete bullshit.  Anywhere like California where they prosecute pro-dommes for prostitution, case law clearly establishes bdsm as sex.

This isn't my "opinion" it is fact and is backed up by every presenter in the dreaded "scene"  many of whom are either attorneys or law enforcement...

(in reply to Owner4SexSlave)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 12:08:55 PM   
BlackPhx


Posts: 3432
Joined: 11/8/2006
Status: offline 		Maybe true in california, not true in Florida where actual sexual touching with an exchange of money must be engaged in for it to be charged under prostitution. We can whip all we want in a club, and in some clubs actually engage in sex..but if money changes hands..for the service, even if you call it tribute you can go to jail. In Ga it is illegal to own a vibrator. Different laws different places. You can find the laws for Florida that you CAN be charged under in the thread I posted a link to earlier. We are talking a state where men have been arrested for "solicitation of sexual acts in public" for sitting in a bathroom stall and tapping a foot, whistling or masturbating alone behind the closed door.  

Be careful when you wander through the the Bible Belt, the bluenoses like to make sure you are doing only what they think you should.

poenkitten

(in reply to SimplyMichael)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 12:09:41 PM   
BitaTruble


Posts: 9779
Joined: 1/12/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

What I have to do is explain why we're not crazy and dangerous - even though we do things that are crazy and dangerous in popular opinion.

E


Have you considered trying a different approach? Trying to explain that tying up and beating the snot out of your partner can actually be something fun isn't going to fly and trying to make it fly with the non-alternative masses is an iffy proposition at best. 

There are 6+ billion people on the planet. Most of them don't want to cut you into little pieces and stuff you in a barrel. Some do. Some of those who do are within alternative communities. Putting forth nanny laws in order to prevent barrel stuffing isn't going to work. The folks who want to stuff you in a barrel will find a way to do so whether there is a law against it or not and the good guys don't need a law against barrel stuffing because they aren't going to stuff you into a barrel anyway.

We are, in fact, as individual humans, mostly harmless. Most of us want to do stuff with, to and for people who want to share in that experience. I wouldn't try to come up with one line that is going to encompass the entirety of the BDSM population because we're just too diverse as a sub-culture. Some safeword, some don't, some embrace SSC, some don't, some this, some that yadda, yadda, yadda. What is true though is that there are a wide variety of ways in which individuals can engage in healthy, adult activities of a sexual, sensual or authority based nature and engaging in BDSM can be one of those ways. It's not always, but nothing is 'always' regardless of how you choose to live your life.

Convince me that all non-alternative relationships are safe, sane and consensual. That can't be done either so I wouldn't put an unrealistic expectation out there and suppose it can be done within alternative communities.

You know, the man said it - the best defense is a good offense. Good luck!

Celeste

_____________________________

"Oh, so it's just like
Rock, paper, scissors."

He laughed. "You are the wisest woman I know."


(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 12:10:50 PM   
ProlificNeeds


Posts: 1061
Joined: 5/19/2007
Status: offline 		I'm still perhaps failing to see how SSC or RACK makes BDSM, BDSM. if I tie someone up, they are tied up, whether they consented or not, whether they were aware of risk or not. I think, as said previously, people like to say 'it's not bdsm unless it's ssc' is them trying to cover their ass. BDSM is not some god wholesome term, it's just a term. It's CONTEXT is what matters and unfortunately no matter how many conditions or labels you try to add it will always be taken out of context by the ignorant or misinformed.

Example: I kill. - In what context? I kill bugs, or maybe I kill deer during hunting season, or maybe I kill people. Unless I'm explaining context and intent, it'll be open to any interpretation that comes along.

Example: I'm into Bondage, Domination, and sado-masochism.  Unless I explain that I'm into it with a view of SSC or RACK, why assume that I am? Maybe I like to get messed up by men who use woman and throw them away. Maybe I'm an abuser who enjoys using the blanket of BDSM to fill my own sick needs... oh wait, that's what we all do.

Sorry ladies and gents but we use BDSM, or WIITWD to hide all our ensembled needs under. So often we advocate 'different is okay, just not for everyone'. We try to be accepting of everyone's perversions or needs, yet in our heads we will try to justify things we want to continue doing. Very few people will say "Yes I'm doing something illegal, wrong and unhealthy, and I like it." Always people want to justify their vices, and that first step is by trying to convince themselves it's not really harmful, it's not really illegal, because of their intent.

Smoking is legal, but it's no good for you, yet lots of people do it and feel justified in doing it. That's only one example of the myriad of things we do to hurt ourselves. Problem is most people define what is OK by what the law says is OK. Society dictates what is good and acceptable behavior. BDSM is NOT accepted by society and by law, sorry but it's not. By the masses it's still 'wrong'. Put it in perspective, it's no more evil than smoking, binge drinking, or a hundred other destructive behaviors you can indulge legally. The only reason people keep tacking SSC or RACK on there is because they want the masses to find BDSM an acceptable form of harmful activity. Trying to find social acceptance means trying to justify your activities not only to yourself, but to everyone else.
Trying to justify your behaviors to everyone else is stupid because instead of a blanket for acceptance, you'll have a blanket for abuse. There's gonna be just as many 'bad' BDSMers as there are healthy ones.

Black is black, white is white, and BDSM is BDSM. Trying to convince yourself grey is pink and up is down is only deception to yourself.
Intent does matter, and if you are lucky intent will be taken into consideration if you ever tangle with the law. Don't count on it though, you should be AWARE of what BDSM is. In many cases, it's a crime, because no matter how much you talk it out, once you break a law, you break a law. If that bothers you, go into politics and spend your life working for reform towards stipulations and laws that will allow battery and assault to be legal as long as it is consentual. Just becareful, that slippery slope leads you right into the assisted suicide, and how to determine sanity.

It's a whole lot easier if you simply accept the fact you are walking a fine line with societies acceptable behaviors and laws, and keep it to yourself. Or you can try searching for a country where it is perfectly OK by law to engage in such behaviors. Amnesty International should have a long list.


BDSM is BDSM, sane or not, safe or not, if you are tied up, you are tied up, if you like to hurt, you like to hurt, if you like to damage people, well then you damage people. If you are smart, you can discuss your 'tastes' without ever admitting to DOING them, to those you cannot trust to keep it under their hat. I'd like to say that BDSM is perfectly fine and should become an open topic and acceptable, unfortunately I don't believe that. The things I particpate in are harmful and illegal. I am NOT a wholesome person, nor am I fully law abiding. Fortunately for me I'm smart enough not to leave evidence of my crime anywhere for others to pick up and flash around.

Smart criminals are good at hiding what they do. Those who don't hide their crimes, are often persecuted. Laws are not based on some superior moral code, so don't assume I'm declaring BDSMers to be immoral practitioners of horrible crimes. By societies standards however, we are. That's the reality we live in. I accept that I am a flawed individual, I am human, I like doing things that are not good for me, but that's okay by me. I just learn to co-exist in a society that does not think like me, by hiding my unacceptable behaviors and practices.

Your beliefs about BDSM do not change the raw truth about BDSM in the world. Your personal beliefs are not the only reality out there. SSC and RACK are great tools for justification of a criminal practice, but they do not define BDSM, they define a set of beliefs and practices inside BDSM.

The external reality of the matter is, no matter how you feel about it, is pretty plain. BDSM is BDSM, and can be used, for good or ill, for recreation or work, the term has been skewed into something else by those who like to espouse ideals. It's Bondage, Domination, Sadism, Masochism as far as I am aware, and holds no other context than to describe, impartially, a set of activities. It's not a religion, or a set of beliefs, just a lumped term.


(in reply to Jasmyn)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 12:16:59 PM   
CalifChick


Posts: 10717
Joined: 10/28/2007
From: California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SteelofUtah
the point that Cali made earlier is Null-n-Void when she said If it isn't consentual it's assult, It's Assult anyway or at very least it's battery.


You and others misunderstood me. I said nothing about having consent and what it is when you have consent, I only said what it is when you DON'T have consent. 

When you don't have consent, it is assault, battery, rape, kidnapping, whatever "crime" definition fits.

When you DO have consent, it may also be those things, and it may NOT be those things, depending on where you live. 

My point was that without it, it's definitely a crime. My response was geared towards going back to the original question and trying to highlight the differences for her consultation paper for the justice system, not trying to prove that it's a crime no matter what (which wouldn't help the "cause", if you will).

Cali


_____________________________

AKA "The Undisputed Goddess of Sarcasm", "Big Bad Cali" and "Yum Bum". Advisor to the Subbie Mafia, founding member of the W.A.C. and the Judgmental Bitches Brigade, member of the Clan of the Scarlet O'Hair-a's and Team Troll

(in reply to SteelofUtah)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 1:20:31 PM   
celticlord2112


Posts: 5732
Status: offline
quote:

"If it isnt SSC, its not BDSM"


Strictly speaking, if it isn't at least Consentual, it's illegal (broadly speaking).  Safe and Sane are highly subjective standards, so I'm not sure you could gain much traction defining BDSM in terms of safety or sanity.  But Consent is an absolute for legal reasons alone.


_____________________________



(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 1:45:57 PM   
Archer


Posts: 3207
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline 		Always love when folks try to cite laws in other states and get it wrong. Georgia has no such law making it illegal to own a vibrator. In fact I'm pretty sure there are no states where ownership is against the law still. There are law against the sale of them in  a few, but they kinda got struck down by an appellate US court not too long ago.



(in reply to celticlord2112)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 1:59:00 PM   
daddysliloneds


Posts: 1351
Joined: 6/28/2006
Status: offline 		we do things that lots of people think is insane, and most know isn't safe, but the one thing we always live by is the 'consent' part...

so for me and mine it's risk aware consentual kink(r.a.c.k.).

however, just a couple of days ago, when i posted in a thread about a non-consensual sadist that i had encountered, the submissive there said that is exactly what she was flying 9,000 miles to encounter...

all i could think to myself is:  why fly 9,000 miles when you can find that in just about any bad side of any town?  so based on her statement, i guess the term 'consent' may be an arguable term as well.
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

This is a question, not a statement!

"If it isnt SSC, its not BDSM"

Comments and observations welcomed - it does have a serious point to it in that I'm putting together a consultation paper for the justice system here in UK. All comments and observations used will be strictly non-attributable to screen name or actual name (where I know it!)

E


< Message edited by daddysliloneds -- 5/15/2008 2:07:08 PM >

(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 2:08:43 PM   
Evility


Posts: 915
Joined: 12/19/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen
Consent - this is a fixed aspect as I see it; there cannot be partial consent - it must be full consent for it to be consent at all, and it must be informed consent (ie the safety and sanity of the activity must be consented to, requiring full knowledge of the activity beforehand)?


My submissive prefers to issue blanket consent ala a blank check. She says that she prefers not knowing what new things I might devise to do to her. Having each activity laid out for line item consent ruins it for her. It is still consent but does not conform to the criteria that you described.



(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM - 5/15/2008 2:11:56 PM   
thetammyjo


Posts: 6322
Joined: 9/8/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

This is a question, not a statement!

"If it isnt SSC, its not BDSM"

Comments and observations welcomed - it does have a serious point to it in that I'm putting together a consultation paper for the justice system here in UK. All comments and observations used will be strictly non-attributable to screen name or actual name (where I know it!)

E


For me, if it is not consensual, then it is not BDSM -- it would be rape, kidnapping, assault and probably several other crimes.

Consent can be given once or repeatedly but for me if the dynamic isn't based and supported by mutual informed consent, I can't see it as BDSM.

Concepts such as "safe" and "sane" vary greatly and I'd point out that we rarely live in any truly safe situation -- after all, all life is really a death sentence just waiting to happen and being a little less sane by someone's standards may make the difference between surviving, thriving and well no longer existing.

_____________________________

Love, Peace, Hugs, Kisses, Whips & Chains,

TammyJo

Check out my website at http://www.thetammyjo.com Or www.tammyjoeckhart.com

And my LJ where I post fiction in progress if you "friend" me at http://thetammyjo.livejournal.com/

(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: if it isnt SSC, its not BDSM Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.078