|
undergroundsea -> RE: punishment vs. abuse (1/15/2010 7:30:03 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: boisefemdomcpl
my definition is that abuse occurs if medical attention is required. Her definition is that abuse occurs if She continues after i have said my safeword.
Let us assume that a dominant is playing with fear or doing a mindfuck during the course of knifeplay, and that she inadvertently cuts the sub which then requires a visit to the hospital. I would not consider this situation abuse. I would consider it either simply an accident or neglect (if it resulted from carelessness but not from bad intent). Thus, a trip to the hospital does not by default constitute abuse.
Deliberately ignoring lack of consent--whether communicated via a safeword, via limits, or otherwise--more clearly exists as an example of abuse. Still, there is more to the matter.
I can imagine scenarios where consent is not withdrawn but abuse still occurs. Let's imagine a scene where a sub is restrained, blindfolded and is given a safeword. There has been no discussion about what types of implements might be used. Next the dominant begins to hit him with barbed wire quickly, getting in a few hits before he uses his safeword. I would consider this example to represent abuse. If a dominant does something that technically does not violate a limit (as if trying to find a loophole: he didn't specifically say she couldn't hit him with barbed wire) or safeword (stopping upon hearing the safeword but quickly getting in hits before safeword is uttered), I would still consider it abuse if it is done in an underhanded manner because it is thought to be objectionable and harmful to the sub. While the example I use could easily require a visit to the hospital, this concept can also apply to activities that do not require a visit to the hospital (bruises visible on the face, thus adversely affecting one's profession).
Here is another example of a scenario where consent is not violated but I would consider it abuse. Suppose a sub while in deep headspace or while inebriated asks to be castrated, and the dominant proceeds to castrate him. I would consider this example abuse. By this example, abuse for me also draws upon responsibility and the severity of consequence of the activity. The matter is not so much of whether he is inebriated but one of severity of consequence and whether the submissive is capable of exercising good judgment, and of refraining if such competence about judgment is thought to be questionable (whether due to altered state of mind or whether due to idiocy ;-) ).
Lastly, I can imagine scenarios where consent is violated but I would not consider it abuse. Suppose a dominant is about to pour a glass of water over the head of a sub and he asks her not to (because he doesn't want his hair to get messed up), I would not consider it abuse if she does so anyway and there is not a harmful consequence (for instance, he is not concerned about his hair because he is about to go to a job interview). Thus, for me the question also depends on whether the consequence is indeed harmful. Because what is harmful or not can be subjective, especially due to the subjective nature of the emotional response caused, this type of scenario is most fuzzy. Depending on the scenario (suppose it is to take a photograph of a sub with his camera while restrained even though they had discussed before that such should not be done), even if I do not consider it abuse because of severity of consequence, I might look upon such a scenario unfavorably because it is a violation of trust.
Thus, I think what defines abuse is intent (whether underneath the veil of SM the act comes from a good, respectful place or a bad place of disregard) alongside severity of consequence and whether the dominant acted responsibly. Furthermore, my perception of whether I would consider it abuse or not would be influenced by how the dominant responds after the event.
Cheers,
Sea
|
|
|
|
