quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika

Domi & subtee, the reason why people try to define concept such as these is in the hopes of creating a framework for people to experiment and reduce the changes that one doesn't end up in the dumpster or in jail.

- LA

quote:

For those who aren't familiar with Consensual/Non-Consensual (C/NC) play is, here is a definition based on my understanding of it.

Before entering in this dynamic, the bottom (or submissive, slave, etc) consents to relinquishing their right to consent to the top (or dominant, mistress/master, etc) who is therefore is in a position to have total control over what happens next.

Now on a personal note, I think that engaging in this type of dynamic requires having a very clear picture of the bottom's limits, soft & hard, fears and desires. It also requires being really in-tune with one another.

This dynamic appeals to me a great deal and I'd say that to date, without formally calling it C/NC (I only discovered the term recently), it's very much how I've been conducting my relationships over the years. But I'm wanting to reflect on this practice (is it a practice? a mindset? a dynamic?) further.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aileen1968

You're really making this so much more complicated than it really is.
Who's on first?

Do people actually sit around contemplating the details of their relationship dynamics.
I don't waste brain power on that. I just enjoy the time we're together.
By that, I mean....I don't sit there discussing whether or not we have a consensual/non consensual dynamic.
We don't discuss rules. I don't remember ever doing this kind of negotiation in vanilla relationships.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aynne88

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aileen1968

You're really making this so much more complicated than it really is.
Who's on first?

Do people actually sit around contemplating the details of their relationship dynamics.
I don't waste brain power on that. I just enjoy the time we're together.
By that, I mean....I don't sit there discussing whether or not we have a consensual/non consensual dynamic.
We don't discuss rules. I don't remember ever doing this kind of negotiation in vanilla relationships.

No fucking shit. I mean sorry for the vulgarity (not really) but jaysus people, breathe...it's not that big of a deal. We do what we do....and no Aileen with my prick ex-husband I never negotiated his asshole behavior at all. Why all the sturm and angst? I don't get it, I really don't. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aileen1968
Do people actually sit around contemplating the details of their relationship dynamics.

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika

Domi & subtee, the reason why people try to define concept such as these is in the hopes of creating a framework for people to experiment and reduce the changes that one doesn't end up in the dumpster or in jail.

- LA

But that's just stupid....You might as well be on Gor.

All of your consentual/nonconsentual crud goes right out the window when someone makes a thud a the bottom of the dumpster or dials 911.

Why would you even want to promote such a concept? Do you not read some of the posts out here?

IdiotDom will believe that because some dumbfuckingsub has given him the authority to run a muck that he is now above the law and free to do as he desires. Then after removing a uterus or a teat or two, IdiotDom can't understand why he is now being pursued by Johnny law.

It actually is a win/win for the community in that dumbfuckingsub can no longer breed and IdiotDom is going to spend the remainder of his days incarcerated.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icarys

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aynne88

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aileen1968

You're really making this so much more complicated than it really is.
Who's on first?

Do people actually sit around contemplating the details of their relationship dynamics.
I don't waste brain power on that. I just enjoy the time we're together.
By that, I mean....I don't sit there discussing whether or not we have a consensual/non consensual dynamic.
We don't discuss rules. I don't remember ever doing this kind of negotiation in vanilla relationships.

No fucking shit. I mean sorry for the vulgarity (not really) but jaysus people, breathe...it's not that big of a deal. We do what we do....and no Aileen with my prick ex-husband I never negotiated his asshole behavior at all. Why all the sturm and angst? I don't get it, I really don't. 

Finish that glass already![:D]

quote:

Damn I am working on it, don't rush a good beverage. . I love you. That's so fucked up...

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbcurious


Then you're probably one of those people that thinks if drugs were legal, everyone would use drugs.

Just because a person can do something doesn't mean they will. The idea of inflicting that type of damage would disgust many in the position to do so if they could.

I may not know much about BDSM but I do know people and would never put myself in the hands of someone who didn't find the thought of your example to be repulsive.

As I stated earlier... Once I trust and know someone well enough to enter into a relationship it will be without conditions or restraints or safe words. I wouldn't be with someone who didn't have the ability to take care of me as well as I take care of myself and I have a pretty strong sense of self preservation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy



I have never removed a uterus. That would be wrong and kind of icky.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbcurious

Domi, I'm well aware that the example is OTT but the premise isn't. If someone is going to put me in a place that's bad for me either physicly or mentaly simply because they can, then that isn't someone I'm going to be in a relationship with.

Once a commitment is made there's no negotiating or boundaries or safewords because we're on the same page as to what we want from the relationship as well as sharing common values and the desire to make it work.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbcurious

Oh crap... We agree on somthing.


I may have to re evaluate my position. [:D]

quote:

ORIGINAL: aldompdx

LA,

I appreciate your point, and applaud your responsiveness in your thread. What I have described is quite consistenmt with what I hear you express. And apart from the terminology, we seem to "be on the same page."

> She wants to feel that you really have total control over her
Exactly. The fantasy of just the feeling, rather than the reality of real and broad control, which is never really "total."

Consider the control which is exercised over an employee. At an ultimate level there is consent to remain bound to the employment agreement, while at another level an employee does not have the discretion to freely choose many things. Oftentimes, it is government law and regulation which constricts that freedom for the social safety or good.

Sheeple usually have more real choices and range of responsibility than they believe, accept, or recognize. The fantasy of control most typically arises from a subconscious sense of helplessness or meekness.
See, the MILGRAM EXPERIMENT.

> She offers herself to you.
And that is the freedom of choice -- consent -- which I address. That consent goes to the essence of surrender -- the offering, rather than the taking. Such offering is from personal power that is maintained by ongoing self will, which is not relinquished, given away, or exchanged. It is that distinction between taking and receiving which a great many dominant people seem to confuse. Taking from somebody is not by their submission or surrender. Receiving their precious offering is.

I have spent the time to elaborate upon this issue because too many people out there are predisposed to take, rather than humbly and respectfully receive. And, they create doublespeak to justify their taking.

Also, don't forget about those submissive people who conditionally surrender in a manipulative bargain (exchange) of giving to actually get (taking).

-- A.L.

quote:

Also, don't forget about those submissive people who conditionally surrender in a manipulative bargain (exchange) of giving to actually get (taking).

-- A.L.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub

quote:

Also, don't forget about those submissive people who conditionally surrender in a manipulative bargain (exchange) of giving to actually get (taking).

-- A.L.

isnt that what all relationships are about?   we enter them because we get what "we" need?  if those needs are not met for long enough,(days or weeks or years depending on the person), we withdraw our consent to be in that relationship.  this goes for vanilla and both sides of the slash of d/s, in my humble mind.

submission is as much a selfish thing as domination....it is done because, GASP, it makes the person doing it feel good.

this shit aint difficult, even an idiot like me can figure it out in 20 words or less.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subtee

Do you really believe you and others in discussion will create a BDSM consensual/nonconsensual framework? Are we impinging on your diligent work? You've been here long enough to know better. It's rightly the choice of those who are engaging.

So sorry, I clearly explained to you why my sensibilities tend to frivolity...thought you would understand after your rather loud silence on my thoughtful, personal contributions to your requested questions.

Is this the point at which we should be discussing your legs? In serious discussion?