Consent (Full Version)

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



Message

jujubeeMB -> Consent (9/19/2010 2:47:55 PM)

An argument going on in another thread has got me thinking about the issue of consent. The actual argument (and thread) doesn't matter here (seriously, do not bring that argument over here if it can be helped, please), but some of the issues seem to be as follows:

How do you know someone is truly consenting and not just consenting out of fear, whether that fear be fear of punishment, fear of being left by a partner, fear of losing custody of children, etc? Is it wrong if they're consenting out of fear? How do you obtain and trust consent when consensual (or non-consensual) conditioning is going on? And who is unfit to consent, and why?

I have very strong opinions about how important informed consent is, but I'm also someone who gets a lot of pleasure out of the concept of conditioning and consensual non-consent, so I find myself wondering at what point the line blurs into non-consent? Would love to hear anyone's thoughts on this.



hertz -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 2:56:42 PM)

I think this is an interesting question. I wonder too, how you might be able to prove you had consent if in the future you were accused of acting without it?



sexyred1 -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 2:57:48 PM)

Hi juju, I know which thread inspired this, as I just replied to it and I think your questions are very compelling.

I also find the concept of consensual non-consent hot, and I think there are issues regarding the interpretation of that.

I think that people can only truly answer from their own life experiences and perspectives.

I know for me, the line blurs (and was blurred) when a partner knew that I was into a
consensual forced dynamic sometimes. It became blurred when he became more interested in the forced part and started ignoring the consensual part.

When YOU feel the line has been crossed and you communicate that to a partner and they IGNORE that over and over again, then the line is clearly drawn and is no longer blurry.

Whether you choose to stay in a situation like that presents an entirely new set of reasons. Some people stay out of fear, out of hope that the person or situation will change, or I will go so far as to say something like the Stockholm Syndrome.

I also believe that when others find out about something (re: the criminal case being discussed on the other thread) that changes the focus from the internal dynamic of a couple/group to an external judgement, since it now appears that a crime has been committed, or not.

But as I said in the other thread, is what I will say now again: if an activity is being done to someone that will potentially damage them emotionally or physically to an extreme degree, then it becomes a matter of judgement; what you should do as opposed to what you can do.

And again, it is a dangerous thing to be linking healthy, consensual BDSM behaviors to criminal activity where consent may not have been given, or worse, consent may have been given under duress or lack of judgement.



StrongSpirit -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 3:29:37 PM)

First, you should always get some kind of consent before playing, at least the first time. Otherwise it is actually a crime. You don't start threatening someone before they agree to play. It's different if they have played with you before - then there is implied consent by the fact that they don't run away when they see you. As you have gotten consent BEFORE you begin to threaten, then you know your threats did not cause the consent. The issue becomes going beyond their limits, which is important, but not as important.

Second, most people I know deal with this issue via safe words. If you establish a safe word, then you can terrify the person as much as you want and if they don't use the safe word, it is real consent, not forced consent. This is particularly important if you are playing at non-consent fantasies, such as rape fantasies that some woman have.




DomImus -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 3:33:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrongSpirit

First, you should always get some kind of consent before playing, at least the first time. Otherwise it is actually a crime. You don't start threatening someone before they agree to play. It's different if they have played with you before - then there is implied consent by the fact that they don't run away when they see you. As you have gotten consent BEFORE you begin to threaten, then you know your threats did not cause the consent. The issue becomes going beyond their limits, which is important, but not as important.

Second, most people I know deal with this issue via safe words. If you establish a safe word, then you can terrify the person as much as you want and if they don't use the safe word, it is real consent, not forced consent. This is particularly important if you are playing at non-consent fantasies, such as rape fantasies that some woman have.


None of this would hold up in a court of law.



Aileen1968 -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 3:49:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jujubeeMB

How do you know someone is truly consenting and not just consenting out of fear, whether that fear be fear of punishment, fear of being left by a partner, fear of losing custody of children, etc? Is it wrong if they're consenting out of fear? How do you obtain and trust consent when consensual (or non-consensual) conditioning is going on? And who is unfit to consent, and why?

I have very strong opinions about how important informed consent is, but I'm also someone who gets a lot of pleasure out of the concept of conditioning and consensual non-consent, so I find myself wondering at what point the line blurs into non-consent? Would love to hear anyone's thoughts on this.


He can do anything he wants to me and he knows it. It's unspoken.
We have never had the kind of relationship where we've discussed likes, dislikes, limits and such.
It always seemed too formal and businesslike to do that. So much less like a relationship.
Anywho...a big reason, the only reason actually, why he can do anything he wants to me is because he's sane and makes great choices.
(BTW...sane doesn't always mean safe and boring). He makes decisions that work well in both of our minds because we match well.
If he chooses something unsafe, then I trust him to keep me as safe as possible. I also take responsibility for myself in knowing that I may be at risk.
I'm ok with that. In fact I'm more than ok with that. We are a team. We are both aware of the risks we take.

If he suddenly turned loony, then I'd most likely take a step back and reevaluate the relationship...



DarkSteven -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 3:57:54 PM)

I once asked a woman to play with her, and the play consisted simply of me running my fingertips over her face.  Before I began, I requested and was granted permission from both her and her protector.  Next time I attended the play group, I was told that she had complained to the DMs that it made her feel uncomfortable.  I replied that I had gotten permission from both her and her protector, and that she had never verbalized any objections.  The DM agreed upon hearing me.

I'll outline beforehand what I'm going to do.  And then give the bottom a safeword.  And I'll check up on her from time to time if it's the first play session for us.  As long as I do exactly what I say I will and she does not safeword, I say she's granted consent.

Play within the context of a relationship is another whole ball of wax...



mbes -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 4:11:02 PM)

I am a sub, but am not much familiar with fear as a motivating factor. If I agree to your actions, it is not out of fear. My other half knows this about me.
I do know that others act out of fear, but honestly, don't understand the motivation. If you agree, for any reason short of fear of imminent death, I have difficulty understanding your motivations. I know that this happens, but don't know the mindset behind it. For that reason, I will give more credence to the one who has obtained permission for action.
I do hate that this often puts the burden on those who are true victims, but this is how my mind works.



SirJeanLafitte -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 4:31:16 PM)

.






mstrjx -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 4:31:23 PM)

Maybe that's my problem. I've never entered a relationship where it started from fear. I'll have to think about that.

I've been giving a lot of possibilities free reign of my head lately. Con/noncon is one of them (and not just prior to this thread). But even there, it would be with both parties knowing (roughly, at least) what they were getting themselves into. Whether it's defined clearly, fuzzily, or (in the case of Aileen) not at all. But at least it would be agreed upon up front.

I'll let you know about a day in advance if I think you're going to read about me on the news. That way, you can start sorting out my alibis for me.

Jeff



xXsoumisXx -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 4:33:32 PM)

I agree with Aileen.. it is about trust, and we have that trust. We do not negotiate limits and such. He does what He wants. I do what He wants.
We know each other well enough at this point, that we don't really need to talk about new things before He tries them. He does really enjoy things that are difficult for me, so His challenge is to keep finding those new things..:)
I have consented to obey, and that is all i need to consent to, because i trust Him.



littlewonder -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 4:36:54 PM)

I consent because I want to be with Master, because I love him, because it's what I want and desire.

He knows I consent for those reasons because we talk, because we took the time to get to know each other and we talk....all the time...about everything.

I mean we're in a loving, caring relationship. I couldn't ever imagine being with him if I felt some kind of fear or threat from him and he's smart and like Aileen, he makes wonderful choices. It's one of the big reasons I love him so much. He's the most sane man I've ever met.



mbes -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 4:39:10 PM)

I just viewed a thread on a related subject on another message board, regarding rape (or possible rape scenarios) amongst the vanillas. I didn't comment because I have difficulty with the specifics when it comes to male/female interactions, and force.
To be specific: If I put myself in a position that inhibits my ability to approve or disapprove of an action, I consider my acquiesance to have been obtained at the point where I entered the scenario. If I drink (I know myself, drinking loosens my inhibitions), I take stock of my position before imbibing. At that point, I consent to what happens from there, or I don't. Once I've taken that drink, it's on me.
I do wish more women knew that dynamic prior to taking that drink. But it's not always on the men to know that they don't.
This is an example of the scenario I'm talking about.



mbes -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 4:40:50 PM)

Oh yeah, and any spelling errors (which I've noticed) are on me, as well!



leadership527 -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 4:49:34 PM)

OK, I generally don't think in terms of power and consent. I normally think in terms of influence. That being said I do experience some of these concerns myself.

quote:

How do you know someone is truly consenting and not just consenting out of fear, whether that fear be fear of punishment, fear of being left by a partner, fear of losing custody of children, etc?
I remove all such sources of fear. There's a reason I made it very clear to Carol that she was the most important person in the world to me, whether or not she submits.

quote:

Is it wrong if they're consenting out of fear?
I don't know if it's wrong or not. "Wrong" is a very situational thing. My feeling is that fear based authority is weak and unpredictable. In addition, for me personally, I'm not much into fear being a primary motivator -- or any motivation at all actually -- within my primary relationship.

quote:

How do you obtain and trust consent when consensual (or non-consensual) conditioning is going on?

See... this is EXACTLY why I don't think in terms of power & consent. I got into exactly this sort of hall of mirrors in my own head. So I stopped thinking in terms that clearly weren't working. I have influence because I do. I feel OK about that because I measure the results of my influence against my own ethical standards and I am pleased. I do not expect Carol to get me off the hook via her "consent".

quote:

And who is unfit to consent, and why?

I don't know whether this is the legal or dictionary definitions. But in my mind, it does not count as consent unless there is at least one other viable and appealing choice. For me personally, I offer Carol myself unconditionally. She can be whatever it is that she wants and I will still be grateful that she is in my life. The only reason that she is my slave rather than simply my "submissive wife" is that she herself is unable to be 95% perfect for me if there's a way to be 96%. I'm OK with offering her choices that amount to "wonderful" and "better than that".

quote:

but I'm also someone who gets a lot of pleasure out of the concept of conditioning and consensual non-consent,

For me personally, I avoid such obvious contradictions. It's like "Fight a war for peace". One doesn't fight wars for peace. They fight them to win. Such statements are, in my mind, fundamentally dishonest. In this case, it clouds the issue. Ultimately, someone either measures up to my own personal standards for consenting or they do not. All the interim steps between "no" and "yes" really don't matter in the end analysis.

Overall, I find the whole consent model "not useful" as I noted above. It leaves too many unanswered questions the moment you peel back even one layer on the onion. I suspect that works out great for a casual scene. I find it WAY less useful as a model for life. I've often noted that I cannot "make" Carol do anything. To use a deliberately extreme example (and not meant to be akin to limb chopping examples) Even if I hold a gun to her head, I cannot make her do something. I can only shape her choices... "Do X or I pull the trigger and you die." Ultimately, that's all any leader can really do for more than very limited situations. So long as I'm comfortable that the choices I am offering her are consistent with my own ethical standards and much more stringently, the standards I apply around the word "love", then all is well in my head.

edited to add: Carol says that consensual non-consent is when she consented to being my slave and when I told her to stop being my slave she didn't consent to that. :)



gungadin09 -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 4:53:58 PM)

This may be controversial, but i think when you begin playing with someone there should be a written "contract" delineating hard limits, soft limits, safewords, etc. This benefits both Dominant and submissive- to have it in black and white. You can always make a new contract when limits change, and perhaps for a long standing relationship it's not necessary. But there's such a danger of misunderstandings between new partners, that it's wise to take precautions. Having limits that are "bendable" or up to interpretation is a bad idea. At very least, there should be a frank discussion about limits before any play takes place.

What does "consensual nonconsent" mean? i believe hard limits are inviolable, and soft limits need to be expressly consented to. Saying "it's okay to break my limit, if You want to..." is dangerous, for both parties.

Who is fit to consent? Anyone who would pass the test to buy a handgun is fit to consent to BDSM.

pam



VaguelyCurious -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 4:55:38 PM)

nm.



mstrjx -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 5:15:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: gungadin09

What does "consensual nonconsent" mean?


There's a couple of ways to explain it. One has been mentioned often in this thread without saying so in so many words, and the other in your own post.

Basically, you consent to the relationship 'once', then there is never mention of consenting again.

If you think about it, it's what people like Aileen said. To paraphrase 'we don't think in terms of limits, because we know what we're about'.

But it's also what you said. Break everything down, make it so both people know where the lines are drawn, then 'go'. You stated it in terms of a contract or agreement, but in the case of con/non-con, you then throw out the paper and never reference it again.

Can hard limits soften? Maybe. Can soft limits disappear? Maybe, but they might harden after experimentation. But if you don't think in terms of limits and think about your relationship with your partner (that you chose), then a lot of things sort themselves out.

Does that make sense?

Jeff



Icarys -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 5:18:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: gungadin09

This may be controversial, but i think when you begin playing with someone there should be a written "contract" delineating hard limits, soft limits, safewords, etc. This benefits both Dominant and submissive- to have it in black and white. You can always make a new contract when limits change, and perhaps for a long standing relationship it's not necessary. But there's such a danger of misunderstandings between new partners, that it's wise to take precautions. Having limits that are "bendable" or up to interpretation is a bad idea. At very least, there should be a frank discussion about limits before any play takes place.

What does "consensual nonconsent" mean? i believe hard limits are inviolable, and soft limits need to be expressly consented to. Saying "it's okay to break my limit, if You want to..." is dangerous, for both parties.

Who is fit to consent? Anyone who would pass the test to buy a handgun is fit to consent to BDSM.

pam


Yours isn't controversial..It's the norm and mainstream.

In my book there's no need for contracts or safewords or asking permission if it's okay to do something to or for my female.

She consents one time...No negotiations.
In the beginning there's a feeling out of each other to see if we are compatible but I don't compromise...If there's something I want to do..she has to be willing to do that..

I on the other hand won't if I choose not to...I will say though I am open to a lot of things.


To the Op: Fear is built into us..It's part of every relationship to varying degrees. You can control it to some degree but that's about it.

The females I've been with feared letting me down way more than they ever did getting punishment..as a matter of fact I've had a couple that looked forward to it because they knew it marked the moment of forgiveness in our relationship.

That said..I hope no female is ever afraid of me in a truly scary way. I may bark but when it comes to a female..I've never raised my hand in anger.(I'm hoping Aynne will be my first)



Aynne88 -> RE: Consent (9/19/2010 5:20:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: gungadin09

This may be controversial, but i think when you begin playing with someone there should be a written "contract" delineating hard limits, soft limits, safewords, etc. This benefits both Dominant and submissive- to have it in black and white. You can always make a new contract when limits change, and perhaps for a long standing relationship it's not necessary. But there's such a danger of misunderstandings between new partners, that it's wise to take precautions. Having limits that are "bendable" or up to interpretation is a bad idea. At very least, there should be a frank discussion about limits before any play takes place.

What does "consensual nonconsent" mean? i believe hard limits are inviolable, and soft limits need to be expressly consented to. Saying "it's okay to break my limit, if You want to..." is dangerous, for both parties.

Who is fit to consent? Anyone who would pass the test to buy a handgun is fit to consent to BDSM.

pam


Just briefly and not in disagreement....

I only want a serious relationship and the sexual/BDSM activities that we do are never a "scene", or planned events and never public so it's hard for me to conceptualize "consenting" to my own sex life, which always has elements of BDSM involved, even is just emotional or power structure. Generally though it involves more tangible aspects.

I am his girl, his submissive, etc., so kind of like Aileen I don't do consent, he's my keeper if you will, he would laugh if I mentioned safewords or pre negotiated scenes. I find it really a turn off too, and well it borders on taking all the thrill of the unknown and element of the dark surprise out of it.

Also, just a disclaimer, there is no test to buy a handgun Pam, you walk in, plunk down your license, they run a 2 minute check to make sure you aren't a felon, and out the door you go gun in hand.

Not much of a test, that. I am okay with it. Probably explains why I don't do the whole consent thing either on a big level. Of course, the thread jujubee is talking about makes me sick and in that case the opinions of some of the posters is horrifying.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
3.100586E-02