"No harm" limits

"No harm" limits (Full Version)

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

Message

IvyMorgan -> "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 2:36:48 PM)
I'm curious (as always). In a lot of discussions on limits I've seen, people on both sides of the whip say they have no limits, or only the limit "not to harm" the sub they are playing with (or not to be harmed, if they're a sub). This includes physical, emotional, and psychological harm. I was basically wondering what constitutes an action that would be "harmful" to those of you who define your limits in this way. Obviously this will differ depending on the individual, hence, the more the merrier in terms of replies. I ask because, recently, I was told I was a little left of the norm, limit wise, when I'd always thought of myself as fairly normal. Perhaps it's just my messed up view of me and the world, but, I have 4 limits that are hard, and everything else is negotiable. 1. No permanent damage; broken bones, tattoos, piercings 2. No people underage 3. No recruiting - I'm not going to go find You more subs 4. No drawing blood, including needles. The last one is for health reasons, the first three are basically moral, though no broken bones also boils down to common sense. A girl has to work/drive etc. I'm wondering if I've been reading more into "no harm" (as in, thinking more activities are potentially included) than was meant. Projecting, if you will, myself onto others. Perhaps a little imput from you guys would get me some clarity? Ivy.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 4:02:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IvyMorgan I'm curious (as always). In a lot of discussions on limits I've seen, people on both sides of the whip say they have no limits, or only the limit "not to harm" the sub they are playing with (or not to be harmed, if they're a sub). This includes physical, emotional, and psychological harm. I was basically wondering what constitutes an action that would be "harmful" to those of you who define your limits in this way. Obviously this will differ depending on the individual, hence, the more the merrier in terms of replies. I ask because, recently, I was told I was a little left of the norm, limit wise, when I'd always thought of myself as fairly normal. Perhaps it's just my messed up view of me and the world, but, I have 4 limits that are hard, and everything else is negotiable. 1. No permanent damage; broken bones, tattoos, piercings 2. No people underage 3. No recruiting - I'm not going to go find You more subs 4. No drawing blood, including needles. The last one is for health reasons, the first three are basically moral, though no broken bones also boils down to common sense. A girl has to work/drive etc. I'm wondering if I've been reading more into "no harm" (as in, thinking more activities are potentially included) than was meant. Projecting, if you will, myself onto others. Perhaps a little imput from you guys would get me some clarity? Ivy. Wow, if you're a little left of the middle, I must be someplace in the Far East... Using your own list as a reference, you wouldn't be a person I would consider as a companion submissive person for me. 1. No permanent damage; broken bones, tattoos, piercings Ok, so this one doesn't work for me. No broken bones, yeah, I can see that... I don't like to hear the 'crunch'... but tattoos and piercings and even brandings are on my 'Honey-do' list. 2. No people underage Yup, this one I am super-strict about... not because I don't think that someone who is younger may not already know hir mind -- but because the law says I can't listen to hir even if xhe does know what xhe wants, and I'm not willing to go to jail because somebody's mommy got upset. 3. No recruiting - I'm not going to go find You more subs I don't get much into the whole recruiting thing, but if one of my pets discovered that xhe liked being part of the family and wanted to bring a friend, I'd probably consider the new person under the usual terms. 4. No drawing blood, including needles. Ok, well, blood is a must... so is fire. This wouldn't work for me at all. The thing is, I set my limits by the boundaries of the submissive or bottom individuals that I'm with -- BUT I am careful to select people to play with and invite into the family who don't have hard limits where I want to play. If one of them has a hard limit of diapers and age play, you can bet sweet money I'll never cross (or even try to cross) that boundary -- I have no interest in it whatsoever... but it would make -zero- sense for me to take on a servant or play with a bottom who hated fire and blood when those are pet kinks of mine. Calla Firestorm

slaveforsure -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 4:34:46 PM)
Limits can be a tricky thing. My personal opinion is that submissives can have limits, slaves cannot. I cannot imagine submitting to someone who had such different morals and ideals that I needed to give them limits. I think every D/s M/s relationship starts off with some, but as you grow to trust and care about one another why would you need to even say “I have a limit of no broken bones or permanent damage” Isn’t this common sense? Why would a Master want to cause permanent damage to his slave; someone who has entrusted her everything in him? I am a slave and as a result I have no limits with my Master – I didn’t give them all up over night but as he gained my respect and my trust I realized they weren’t needed. Needles and piercings were things he was always interested in and started as hard limits for me – as time went on I became open to the idea of trying needles because I knew he enjoyed it – now I love them. He didn’t push them on me, but waited till I was ready on my own. Since I enjoy the needles in play I began thinking maybe piercing wouldn’t be so bad and as of a few days ago I now have two pierced nipples. This was meant to be an example but I have digressed far beyond my original point. Point being if you’re a submissive it’s ok to have limits as you have the right to say what you want or don’t want, but if you ever have to tell someone you are engaging in play with that you don’t want to be permanently physically or psychologically harmed why are you playing with this person?

missturbation -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 4:49:42 PM)
quote: In a lot of discussions on limits I've seen, people on both sides of the whip say they have no limits, With Sir i have no limits, with casual play parners i have plenty. quote: only the limit "not to harm" the sub they are playing with (or not to be harmed, if they're a sub). This includes physical, emotional, and psychological harm. This would depend on what you class as harm. For me we are talking permanent harm which would impair my life in the future. quote: 1. No permanent damage; broken bones, tattoos, piercings I don't personally class any of those as permanent damage. Broken bones in general heal, tattoos can be removed and piercings can be removed leaving minimal scarring. quote: 2. No people underage Totally in agreement. quote: 3. No recruiting - I'm not going to go find You more subs Not a limit for me, i have no objections to procuring. Means i get a say in who and can ensure i like them. quote: 4. No drawing blood, including needles. Again not a limit for me. Limits to me are very personal to the people involved in the relationship. As long as they are negotiated and agreed between all those concerned its all good.

spinninsweetness -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 5:13:33 PM)
Each and every person I encounter has different limits, reasons for them, or reasons for none at all. The underage one seems universal, no scat or permenant 'harm' almost as widespread. Mine personally are mostly emotional/psychological limits, such as name-calling and other humiliation type-stuff. For me, would cause more harm than say a broken leg. Though that I wouldnt like, would really bugger up my work! Mind you I havent yet met someone who I would be willing to have no limits, or who I trust enough to say 'use your own judgement' or whatever. I do find I'm more and more willing to push as I explore this.... for example, I had always assumed breath-play would be a hard limit, but whilst mucking around with a dom friend he just put his hand over my mouth a nose till I was gasping, eyes watering. Now something I would consider, in a less playful context.

stripmymanhood -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 5:24:26 PM)
ok...since a couple of other people have laid it out there...thought i might also... first...no permanent damage...well, i do agree to the no broken bones part...kind of silly to break a sub or slave that way...but i'm open to piercings, tattoos, and well...other potential modifications second...no people underage...this is the one thing i would consider a total dealbreaker...no matter what...will not play with those underage. third...no recruiting...while i might not like it...it's not the kind of thing that a slave can really object to. lastly...no drawing blood, including needles....i've only done blood play one time...and found i enjoyied it quite a bit...maybe it was because the Dommes were so into it...blood was squirting all over the place, and they got playful and kind of painted designs on me in my own blood...in another circumstance, i might not have enjoyed it so much...but given my experience with it...don't see how i could ever call it a limit quote: ORIGINAL: IvyMorgan I'm curious (as always). In a lot of discussions on limits I've seen, people on both sides of the whip say they have no limits, or only the limit "not to harm" the sub they are playing with (or not to be harmed, if they're a sub). This includes physical, emotional, and psychological harm. I was basically wondering what constitutes an action that would be "harmful" to those of you who define your limits in this way. Obviously this will differ depending on the individual, hence, the more the merrier in terms of replies. I ask because, recently, I was told I was a little left of the norm, limit wise, when I'd always thought of myself as fairly normal. Perhaps it's just my messed up view of me and the world, but, I have 4 limits that are hard, and everything else is negotiable. 1. No permanent damage; broken bones, tattoos, piercings 2. No people underage 3. No recruiting - I'm not going to go find You more subs 4. No drawing blood, including needles. The last one is for health reasons, the first three are basically moral, though no broken bones also boils down to common sense. A girl has to work/drive etc. I'm wondering if I've been reading more into "no harm" (as in, thinking more activities are potentially included) than was meant. Projecting, if you will, myself onto others. Perhaps a little imput from you guys would get me some clarity? Ivy.

L8bloomer -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 5:31:20 PM)
Just a quickie response here... For a variety of reasons, no blood play. I work with it all day. Having it be a must with a Dom would be a turn-off.

frazzle121 -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 5:38:06 PM)
To noone in particular. Harm is whatever you deem harmful. Some need pain, others dont. If a welt across the back is too much, it is too much. If a gentle stroking of the clit is too much, its too much. talk to your partner, find out what they like.

OsideGirl -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 5:45:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveforsure I cannot imagine submitting to someone who had such different morals and ideals that I needed to give them limits. Which still means that you have limits. Just because you don't have to enforce them, doesn't mean that they don't exist. It means that you found someone with a similar list of limits. We all have limits. We all have things that we absolutely won't do. There is no such thing as NO limits. There is only a compatibility which means that we can stop throwing them out there because we're understood.

StrongSpirit -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 6:45:08 PM)
I agree with Oside Girl. Just because you don't talk about your limits does not mean you don't have them. Similarly, there are whole bunch of people that say "I don't use a 'safeword'." But then you question them and it turns out they use a whole BUNCH of safe words: No, Stop, Quit, etc. When we say communication is the key to a good relationship, this is the kind of thing we mean. Just because you think you know someone well enough to know what they like and what their limits are does not mean you actually do. I have several vanilla friends that think they know me, but they might be surprised at what I do in the bedroom. These are people I've known for years.

Nyxmyst -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 6:51:32 PM)
I think that everyone has one safe word. I've noticed that screaming out "Shit! Foot cramp!" tends to stop whatever someone is doing. Nilla.. bdsm.. somewhere in between, just doesn't matter. :) -Nyx quote: ORIGINAL: StrongSpirit I agree with Oside Girl. Just because you don't talk about your limits does not mean you don't have them. Similarly, there are whole bunch of people that say "I don't use a 'safeword'." But then you question them and it turns out they use a whole BUNCH of safe words: No, Stop, Quit, etc. When we say communication is the key to a good relationship, this is the kind of thing we mean. Just because you think you know someone well enough to know what they like and what their limits are does not mean you actually do. I have several vanilla friends that think they know me, but they might be surprised at what I do in the bedroom. These are people I've known for years.

slaveforsure -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 8:00:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl quote: ORIGINAL: slaveforsure I cannot imagine submitting to someone who had such different morals and ideals that I needed to give them limits. Which still means that you have limits. Just because you don't have to enforce them, doesn't mean that they don't exist. It means that you found someone with a similar list of limits. We all have limits. We all have things that we absolutely won't do. There is no such thing as NO limits. There is only a compatibility which means that we can stop throwing them out there because we're understood. You’re entirely correct, I have found someone that has the same limits I do -- for the most part. There are some things he is interested in that I am not, I've just gotten to a point i trust him to set my limits. Things like the law and being permanently harmed should go without saying -- just my opinion.

DesFIP -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 8:11:39 PM)
Harm, roughly defined is anything that's going to prevent me from functioning right afterwards. If I"ve wrenched an arm and can't use it for a month, that's a major problem. That happened once, and being in my mid 50's it was a good two months before it was almost back to normal. As a result, if he wants me tied like that again, it's not in heels that I could fall off of. Daily life is severely impaired if a half gallon of milk is too much weight for my right arm. Emotional stuff, if I'm going to have a panic attack or cry for three days while upsetting my offspring, then it's too rough for me. Basically by the time I need to pick up the reins of daily life, I need to be able to do so fully. Now if he had a week to put me back together, that's fine. But if all we have is three hours, there's a lot less we can do.

DMFParadox -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 8:34:37 PM)
"Shit! Foot cramp!" wouldn't stop me, darlin'. I might laugh, though. (I'd also change your position, maybe, but... it might not be an improvement for you.) quote: ORIGINAL: Nyxmyst I think that everyone has one safe word. I've noticed that screaming out "Shit! Foot cramp!" tends to stop whatever someone is doing. Nilla.. bdsm.. somewhere in between, just doesn't matter. :) -Nyx quote: ORIGINAL: StrongSpirit I agree with Oside Girl. Just because you don't talk about your limits does not mean you don't have them. Similarly, there are whole bunch of people that say "I don't use a 'safeword'." But then you question them and it turns out they use a whole BUNCH of safe words: No, Stop, Quit, etc. When we say communication is the key to a good relationship, this is the kind of thing we mean. Just because you think you know someone well enough to know what they like and what their limits are does not mean you actually do. I have several vanilla friends that think they know me, but they might be surprised at what I do in the bedroom. These are people I've known for years.

Leatherist -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 9:17:59 PM)
I prefer not to ruin the lives of myself or others-the rest is entirely subjective to the individuals involved.

Lordandmaster -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 9:23:37 PM)
Not sure I understand your question, actually, but I can tell you that I don't see what No. 3 has to do with harm. Seems like it has more to do with your own dignity and self-respect. quote: ORIGINAL: IvyMorgan 1. No permanent damage; broken bones, tattoos, piercings 2. No people underage 3. No recruiting - I'm not going to go find You more subs 4. No drawing blood, including needles.

silkncarol -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/26/2008 10:23:29 PM)
Like most people i have hard limits too.....what person in their right mind doesn't have something? If i'm in a serious committed relationship where there is trust and respect...he knows my hard limits.....i trust him to take me where he wishes us to go. I do have soft limits that will shift and change depending on a partners experience and skill level.....

VioletAshes -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/27/2008 2:22:31 AM)
I think everyone has limits whether they admit to it or not. I definitely think limits are interchangeable though and can change as you get older or find someone you trust. Certainly I have fewer limits with my husband than I have ever had before. But my core morals and ethics which are directly related to my 'hard limits' have not changed.

leadership527 -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/27/2008 5:21:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IvyMorgan I was basically wondering what constitutes an action that would be "harmful" to those of you who define your limits in this way. Obviously this will differ depending on the individual, hence, the more the merrier in terms of replies. For me, I define it as such: "Large Harm": Any impact to my sub which would result in risk to herself, myself, or our relationship. This could be all sorts of things... excessive physical pain, poorly handled emotions, pushing her too far, too fast, or god knows what else. All I know is that at the point where, in her considered opinion, she would not be able to obey without, in some way, there being a price later on, then it is "large harm" and a reasonable and appropriate limit. I dont' need to her spell out all the ways in which this might happen. I just need her to be paying attention and reject any inappropriate commands. I don't consider "harm" in terms of physical damage. Bodies are amazingly good at healing. I'm more interested/worried about what goes on in the brain afterwards. And, given that we are not much into the SM dynamic, "harm" mostly comes in the form of emotional.

leadership527 -> RE: "No harm" limits (7/27/2008 5:35:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveforsure quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl quote: ORIGINAL: slaveforsure I cannot imagine submitting to someone who had such different morals and ideals that I needed to give them limits. Which still means that you have limits. Just because you don't have to enforce them, doesn't mean that they don't exist. It means that you found someone with a similar list of limits. We all have limits. We all have things that we absolutely won't do. There is no such thing as NO limits. There is only a compatibility which means that we can stop throwing them out there because we're understood. You’re entirely correct, I have found someone that has the same limits I do -- for the most part. There are some things he is interested in that I am not, I've just gotten to a point i trust him to set my limits. Things like the law and being permanently harmed should go without saying -- just my opinion. For me, at least, I've clarified this in my head as such. All sane humans have limits. A sub protects those limits herself. A slave entrusts them to the care of her Dom. My wife and I have never discussed limits in detail, only specific instructions for what to do if I go over one. Then again, we've been living together for 13 years, you'd hope that by now, I'd have a pretty good idea how she was going to react to most things. Still though, I can think of thousands of things I could do as her Master that would (and should) result in a limit being crossed. If she rejects such a command, I consider her a well trained slave and I consider myself proud that I did the training (and a bit annoyed at myself that I wasn't paying attention and gave the command to start with). It would never occur to me to think that this was "unslave-like" behavior. In my opinion, anyone who actually, literally meant that they had absolutely no limits whatsoever lacks imagination and possibly sanity. Humans can be very very bad to each other.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.125