RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual

RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (Full Version)

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

Message

evesgrden -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 12:39:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Charles6682 It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know when limit's have clearly broken with intent on purpose. Unless someone is new and easily "lead' or easily "brainwashed". I wouldn't recommend someone with severe depression to partake in those kind of event's. I would want that person to feel comfortable and not scared half to death. I could say that I'm SSC and oh how I believe in RACK and throw in every other acronym, and then once I have you bound I'll ignore your limits. That's the problem with credos. They get spouted as if they have an implication for behavior, and these ones don't. This is about informed consent, nothing more. When people REALLY know each other, there's a "trusting what I don't yet know" element that becomes part of the relationship. That's when they drop the concept of limits. But informed consent is part of being a legal adult. Age of majority. You can vote, you can fuck you can play with knives, run with scissors, hang out with the wrong crowd, rob banks, and you're accountable for your actions. You personally might not want someone scared half to death, but there's a HUGE market for that. Sure there's the bedroom stuff, edge play, mind fucks, resistance play, there's also Stephen King novels, horror movies, rollercoasters, jumping out of airplanes, haunted houses, etc etc. Being scared half to death is big business with kink being the smallest piece. These cutesy sayings just don't seem anymore helpful to me than saying "Stay away from types like Jeffrey Dahlmer, Lorena Bobbit and Charles Manson". Oh ok.. that's good advice... now I'll be safe!. Someone claiming SSC etc is just trying to spread a blanket of false security or wrap themselves up in one. It's naive...and I like the article RS posted on it. Edited for typos

JeffBC -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 12:45:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Charles6682 You want an example? How about torture? I am not a pain freak, so seeking a sadist wouldn't make sense for me. Somebody using a whip can take it too far, even when "safeword's" are clearly heard loud and clear. THAT to me is abuse. Not consensual BDSM at that point. I've had that happen to me in the past, so I DO know what I'm talking about. No. you know about what happened to you. But when you try to generalize your experience into totally unrelated situations it all fails. Do you realize that you have just claimed that my marriage, Ishtar's marriage, and any other TPE couple's relationship are "abusive". Do you realize how foolish that is? Look... I'm not Mr. Dark & Dangerous. I'm not a sadist. But Carol and I have no "safe word" other than, perhaps, "I'm calling the cops". She's not a masochist but if I had some reason to tie her up and whip her (which, as it turns out, I do) I'm not going to ask her how she feels about it. I'm just going to do it because it's what I think is the right thing to do and she belongs to me. In point of fact, I'm going to tell her how she feels about it and expect obedience... failure to comply will carry it's own consequences as it always does. If she started babbling safewords I'd ask her succinctly whether she wanted to stop being mine permanently. If she said yes I'd stop because... you know... the other alternative would be "go to jail". There'd be none of this hysterical hand waving that happens in the BDSM community. There'd be a simple, quick, and brutally efficient call to the cops. I'd be in prison and she would be de-facto released. No fuss, no bother. If I chose not to stop then I'd be banking on the fact that for whatever reasons she didn't want to send me to prison... a risky gamble since Carol doesn't play these sorts of games. quote: If someone want's a "no limits 24/7" agreement, then that's great for them. But that's not going to work for me. It's one thing to give up control to someone I know and trust has my best interest's at heart. It's a whole other thing to submit myself to some nutjob, which I won't Good. Yes! Too bad you had that little rant up front.

TheLilSquaw -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 1:47:29 PM)
Charles, I play with people I don't know ALL the time. Both in private sessions as a proswitch and for my videos. I am adult, I don't need or want anyone to come to my rescue. The ONLY time I have anyone but me present during a pro sessions is if I am the bottom and that is just as much for the tops protection as mine. I don't think you can say "know someone first" is common sense. That may work for you but it wont for everyone and insulting to those that choose to play another way. To answer your question, "when does someone differ consensual bdsm from abuse?" That line is different for everyone. Again, what you may consider abusive I may consider tender and loving and vice versa. I have to say, that when I read your statement or question about torture. I shook my head. I get that you aren't "pain freak" but you clearly made a choice to get involved in a scene with someone who was using a whip on you. Which frankly I don't understand but then you go on to say that it was abuse because that person didn't stop the moment you used your safe word. To ME throwing the words torture and abuse around is about YOU trying to garner an emotional response form others. Some of the play, that I personally enjoy is face sitting. For ME it is a type of breath play. My bottoms, obviously can't say they need to breath so they tap me. However, just because you tap doesn't mean that very second I am doing to let you have a breath or let you take a long breath. Does that make me abusive?

TheLilSquaw -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 1:58:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: evesgrden You personally might not want someone scared half to death, but there's a HUGE market for that. Sure there's the bedroom stuff, edge play, mind fucks, resistance play, there's also Stephen King novels, horror movies, rollercoasters, jumping out of airplanes, haunted houses, etc etc. Being scared half to death is big business with kink being the smallest piece. I am one of the people who LOVE being scared to death. Although I do enjoy edge play I also enjoy that such outside of fetish play. Horror movies, horror novels, studying serial killers, roller coasters, haunted houses, bungee jumping, and motorcycles. Heck two of my dream vacations is going to Vlad's castle and the Jack the Ripper tour.

ResidentSadist -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 2:00:32 PM)
/flame on BDSM shouldn't be idiot proof. Common sense shouldn’t be a rare commodity. You don't need SSC, RACK or any mantra if you have a little common sense. Are we really so stupid as a collective that we have to chant slogans about being safe? Is there a short bus coming soon to take you all to the next party? The SSC flag wavers are annoying little twits that are literally ruining the BDSM community by selling it to tourists under the guise of safety so they can get fresh vanilla kink fuck meat for themselves. They should go hang with the swingers and step away from their fluffy painless socially acceptable floggers and politically correct social postures and leave BDSM for those that actually like the BD & SM parts of it. …I’m actually into bondage, discipline and S&M, so I‘m very biased. I own gear that actually hurts and I like to play dangerously with fear and pain. I liked the people that were in the lifestyle 20 or 30 years ago when it was a dark, scary and unsafe place that scared tourists away. At least you knew what stereotypes would compose the community back then. I am one of those that thinks "SSC has poisoned the well". That SSC crap is one of the major factors that left the gate open for all the horny housewives that read 50 Shades of Grey. If this was 30 years ago and some Shades of Grey horny housewife hit a BDSM club or event, she would run crying from building in fear and give up BDSM on the spot... thank god, another tourist has left the building. Yes I am lamenting about the good ol' days when BDSM had an edge and you had to earn your chops or work your way into the community. Hell, even the guy who coined that SSC phrase (David Stein, look it up) went around the country apologizing for it and said he never meant for the community to pick it up as a mantra or try and to exclude the edge players with. He feels horrible about every having coined that phrase. It was only meant for a localized group of newcomers in response to behavior by a particular group of predators’ in San Francisco. In one apology David Stein says: "The issue of my personal connection with the phrase is trivial compared with the issue of how the phrase has been abused and perverted in the years since it was coined. But i have to share some of the responsibility for that, since it wasn’t until a couple of years ago that i realized what a monster we had created. The only reason i ever tell anyone that i was the author is so i’ll have some authority when i explain what we meant by it back then — and what we didn’t mean by it. Above all, we weren’t trying to establish a fucking credo! The idea that ‘safe sane consensual’ is used to define something like articles of faith s/m newbies are expected to absorb turns my stomach, especially when the people doing the defining are the kind who do s/m at a very tame, low level of intensity and think that’s where the boundaries should be set for everyone. “The other big problem i have is with those who come at it from the opposite direction and claim that ‘safe sane consensual’ was always merely a PR gimmick, a way to present a friendly face of s/m to the public and the authorities even though we knew better. This is just false historically, and it is as much as accuses those of us who originally promoted the slogan of being liars. On the contrary: We did intend to draw a distinction and to leave some kinds of sadomasochistic behavior on one side of the line as indefensible while maintaining that whatever fell inside the line was defensible ethically and should be defended politically and legally. But what we intended to leave outside the line was things like sadistic serial killers and snuff scenes for money, coercive s/m of all sorts, not the edgier kinds of consensual play — unless there was a question whether consent was even possible, as with the underage or the mentally unbalanced. We never intended to draw the line to leave out heavy s/m, real pain rather than symbolic pain, blood play, knifeplay, humiliation play, 24/7 Master/slave relationships, and so on. But all these things and more have come under the gun in recent years from self-righteous censors and ‘dungeon monitors’ within our community waving the SSC banner! “In my own case, my hope was that the terms ‘safe, sane, and consensual’ would prove to be the starting point for a continuing community-wide discussion about the elements of an s/m ethics. Instead, what has happened is that the discussion has largely congealed around those three terms themselves, or about the SSC slogan. The only progress we’ve made has been with the term ‘consensual,’ where we have a far deeper and more nuanced understanding today than we had in 1983 — but more of that is owing to the women’s movement and the discourse about domestic abuse than to any discussions specifically within an s/m or D/s context. And too many people have simply tuned out, have stopped thinking or talking about these issues — either because they think ‘the SSC creed’ already answers all the questions, or because they think SSC has poisoned the well and must be rejected altogether before anything new can grow.” /flame off

tazzygirl -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 2:09:08 PM)
quote: BDSM shouldn't be idiot proof. Common sense shouldn’t be a rare commodity. You don't need SSC, RACK or any mantra if you have a little common sense. Are we really so stupid as a collective that we have to chant slogans about being safe? Is there a short bus coming soon to take you all to the next party? Come on, RS. Look around. How many have common sense that are new to the scene these days? If its the number that is reflected on the boards... they all need to be wrapped in bubble wrap.

ResidentSadist -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 2:23:10 PM)
^ Hey now, bubble wrap is a hard limit with me. I don't know tazzy, in the past 2 months or so I have been to Beyond Leather and the Florida Bash. That's about 800 leather lifestyle people. I used to host a local group so I got to knew a lot of people and most of them were still on the scene. I can report to you that in Florida, the real life scene hasn't gone to hell, needs bubble wrap or a short bus. Now online, that is another story. It isn't like it was in the 90s. Nowadays I feel like those tourist are surfing the net and making the BDSM community look like idiots while staying away from the real life community and hiding in the safety of there own homes. Not once did I hear "50 Shades of Grey" at those events . . . except Laura Antoniou (Marketplace author) who didn't mention it by name but called it the "unmentionable book".

TheLilSquaw -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 2:29:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Come on, RS. Look around. How many have common sense that are new to the scene these days? If its the number that is reflected on the boards... they all need to be wrapped in bubble wrap. Reminds me of that insurance commercial where the kids are outside trying to play and they are covered from head to toe in bubble wrap. heheh

SimplyMichael -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 2:35:15 PM)
My other gripe with "safety" is the almost unheard of real world problems in the scene. Grey area screwup but actual, call 911 accidents? Uh no...

tazzygirl -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 3:19:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist ^ Hey now, bubble wrap is a hard limit with me. I don't know tazzy, in the past 2 months or so I have been to Beyond Leather and the Florida Bash. That's about 800 leather lifestyle people. I used to host a local group so I got to knew a lot of people and most of them were still on the scene. I can report to you that in Florida, the real life scene hasn't gone to hell, needs bubble wrap or a short bus. Now online, that is another story. It isn't like it was in the 90s. Nowadays I feel like those tourist are surfing the net and making the BDSM community look like idiots while staying away from the real life community and hiding in the safety of there own homes. Not once did I hear "50 Shades of Grey" at those events . . . except Laura Antoniou (Marketplace author) who didn't mention it by name but called it the "unmentionable book". Could it be because they were leather events?

JeffBC -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 3:32:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael My other gripe with "safety" is the almost unheard of real world problems in the scene. Grey area screwup but actual, call 911 accidents? Uh no... This ties in with a larger theme of "safety" that I observe in pretty much all areas of BDSM. It's the "I can't go to a Starbuck's without snipers on the rooftops" mind set. BDSM people seem to struggle with stuff that normal vanilla people do day in and day out without a second thought. And the focus on safety seems to be out of all proportion to the actual risks. I've sort of come to the conclusion that there's a huge group of safety fetishists among you. But it isn't ACTUAL safety... it's this weird role-play of safety. Back to Michael's point, given the connection with "dirty sex" that BDSM has I gotta assume that incidents of "call 911" within the scene tend to generate press -- at least more so than some kid falling on his skateboard. Yet I just don't read the endless stream of articles that you'd think. Don't get me wrong. I'm not knocking LadyPact's efforts to teach safety on particular topics. I just think I see a lot more smoke than fire. Finally, THANK YOU RS for that freakin incredible link. I have to admit that had I coined SSC that's about how I'd feel. On the bright side though, such things do generate an awful lot of mirth and merriment in our household. I get to be all abusive and whatnot! YAY! Carol gets to roll her eyes a lot.

SimplyMichael -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 3:38:31 PM)
Except I have had snipers on the rooftop...i certainly felt much safer.

JeffBC -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 3:48:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael Except I have had snipers on the rooftop...i certainly felt much safer. here's the really funny thing. A few days ago I met this smokin hot 24 year old woman dressed in burlesque wear and asked her if she wanted to model for Carol. So tomorrow I'm going to pick her up and bring her home for a modelling session. She, apparently, is more excited than afraid. I'll bet you anything that there's no safe call in place. I keep looking across the street but I'm not seeing the snipers. And this isn't even a public place. She is coming to my home. Vanilla people seem to navigate the world an awful lot better than BDSM people -- at least if I were to go by what I read online. Happily, I've long since learned that BDSM online is not BDSM off line.

Charles6682 -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 3:50:24 PM)
I have been through MORE than my fairshare of pain, both in and out of the whatever you want to call this,kink. I wasn't trying to offend anyone personally but don't think I'm some powderpuff. It's too much of the pain that want's me to get away from that stuff. Yea,so maybe I am also alittle bit "vanilla" too. I don't hide that part about me. I do like to go and do thing's, beside's being locked in a cage all the time. I did say earlier that people who were in a actual BDSM type of relationship, and clearly all parties are fine with it, that's clearly not abuse nor illegal. As long as it's consensual, everything should be fine.

Focus50 -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 4:07:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kana quote: ORIGINAL: unepetitesouris SSC and RACK are both insanely important. They should both be used in every. Single. Aspect. Errrrrrr,I promised I'd be nicer to newbies (Are you watching,Focus)so I'll settle for simply saying,"Not." Why must folk try and insist on a one size fits all sort of limitations for BDSM. Lets try something radically different-You do your thing,I'll do mine,and we won't judge each other because we're both kinky freaks. "Mama always told me not to look into the eyes of the sun....but Mama,that's where the fun is." Watching with my sternest, most judgemental demeanour! [sm=flameout.gif] I s'pose I should say something about the actual topic.... I think a SS&C philosophy is important when the two involved are new to each other. There was a time I thought it was always important in every D/s relationship - until I noticed that once you've been together awhile, it wasn't even anything you referred to anymore. Same for safewords.... so now I think it's a good philosophy when first starting out together, even if you're both relatively experienced with others. I remember my mum telling me my food is for eating, not torturing.... Guess we all started out somewhere. [8D] Focus.

njlauren -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 4:35:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Charles6682 You want an example? How about torture? I am not a pain freak, so seeking a sadist wouldn't make sense for me. Somebody using a whip can take it too far, even when "safeword's" are clearly heard loud and clear. THAT to me is abuse. Not consensual BDSM at that point. I've had that happen to me in the past, so I DO know what I'm talking about. The cheap words of "Your my slave, so have to do whatever is told to me" is utter bowl shit. That's a abuser pretending to be a "Sadist" or a "Dom/me". This isn't just geared toward's Male "Doms" either. There are certainly some Female Dommes that abuse their "subs" too. I should know, I've met them. If someone want's a "no limits 24/7" agreement, then that's great for them. But that's not going to work for me. It's one thing to give up control to someone I know and trust has my best interest's at heart. It's a whole other thing to submit myself to some nutjob, which I won't quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael quote: ORIGINAL: Charles6682 Service Top? Sound's like a lame excuse for a Dom to ignore limit's and shame the sub into not doing what the "Dom" want's, even if it was something clearly beyond limit's. Guilt trip doesn't work on me. A sub asking for "safe play" isn't a service top. Sure, there probably are some "service tops" out there. I assume that's for the Dom to figure out. Just like I would need to make sure I don't just "submit" myself to just anyone. Sure,SSC,RACK or likewise, may be overrated and the words's are meaningless to someone who doesn't believe in "safe play" in the first place. It's overall advantage's outweighs what minor disadvantage's it may carry with it. My mind is already made up about this issue. Using "pseudo psychology" method's have no impact on me. How about a dose of fucking reality? I don't think you even know enough to know what is "safe", "sane" or even understand consent well, let alone have a standard that even approaches mine. Define a form of play and define when it is and is not "safe" or "sane"...go on, I dare ya! You are confusing two different things, the scenario you talk about is violating limits and/or a safeword, that is not RACK, that is not play, that at that point is abuse..which is not what people are saying. What they are saying is that setting rules like SSC or RACK as rigid rules, such as 'thou shalt not use electrical toys about the waist" or seeing a scene involving bloodplay or extreme whipping and saying 'you shouldn't be doing that'. RACK doesn't translate to "A dom/top/master" should be allowed to do anything, it translates to "a BD/SM scene requires that both people consent to what is going to happen, they have agreed on the risks, the limits, etc, and at that point, it is up to them what they do". The non consent relationship you talk about is something entirely different, that is where a sub or slave has basically told the dominant "you can do anything to me, I give up my right to a safeword or to put limits on anything"..they have consented to there being no limits, that is not RACK, it is a different beast. Let me give you two examples: 1)A domme has their sub tied up, and is using a bullwhip, the pain gets too intense, and the sub safewords...and the domme keeps going....that is abuse, they have gone beyond limits, and it is not edge play, it is violating consensuality. 2)A domme is playing with her sub, and is using a bullwhip, and has really opened the subs back, I mean has really given it to them...the sub hasn't safeworded, they are all bruised and bloody, but seem okay with it...some might say that is beyond SSC, etc, but it is fine, as long as the sub had a safeword and using a bullwhip was agreed upon..... Let me give you an idea of something more extreme. I read about a domme, here in NYC, whom quite frankly her playing style makes me ill to watch...but in any event, she did a scene with some sub guy who wanted to do a scene where the domme put him in some sort of metal cage and 'roasted' him over a fire (not to death, obviously), and they did it. Is this edge play? Yeah, very much so.....is it against SSC? Probably. Would it turn a lot of people off? Yep. Is it abuse? No, because it was consented to, presumably he (and she) knew the risks, and was willing to do it.....from what I read, the guy ended up with some pretty nasty 1st and second degree burns in places, like a bad sunburn ick.

SimplyMichael -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 4:44:29 PM)
So, no violet wand above the waist? So I flip you upside down or bend you over a couch, now most of you is "below the waist"...LOL

SimplyMichael -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 4:51:59 PM)
"edge play" isn't black and white. I knew a chick who loved needles and met a guy at a party and did over 500. Wasn't the least bit edgy for her. Another guys plays with her the next night, barely touches her but wades right through her emotional walls and reduces her to cathartic tears, super intense edgy scene. Years ago I was asked to help a guy do a rape scene with his partner. If I didn't have a ton of trust for the guy I wouldnt not have done it and it was super edgy for me. The "edge" is different for different people.

TheLilSquaw -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 5:04:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael "edge play" isn't black and white. The "edge" is different for different people. This 1000Xs this!

TheLilSquaw -> RE: Safe,Sane and Consensual (6/8/2013 5:09:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren Let me give you two examples: 1)A domme has their sub tied up, and is using a bullwhip, the pain gets too intense, and the sub safewords...and the domme keeps going....that is abuse, they have gone beyond limits, and it is not edge play, it is violating consensuality. For ME this example doesn't automatically mean abuse, violation of consent, or limits. How do YOU get to decide what is abuse, violation of consent or violation of limits for another couple?

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125