RE: Contracts

RE: Contracts (Full Version)

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

Message

TNDommeK -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 5:31:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wckdmnd Well if you weren't doing as you agreed to do in the contract. It should be thrown in your face This I disagree with. If a slave isn't doing as told, there are steps we take to ensure she does. If still no, then she is released.

wckdmnd -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 5:38:39 AM)
Wouldn't the steps you take be throwing the contract in her face? Because what you say there I totally agree that that's how it's done

chatterbox24 -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 5:58:28 AM)
Life changes to much and a contract is to limiting. Blah I don't want our life put in a box of silly sentences. I don't even know why I am answering anyway, I seriously don't think IM a sub at all anyway. One time deal. But if you like it why not!!!?

DarkSteven -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 6:00:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wckdmnd you want to argue "legalities" your Master takes a cane to your backside and causes deep bruising. That's illegal. In some states it's felonious assault and battery. you gave consent. Which means you both entered into an illegal act with full knowledge it was illegal. A lot that's done in BDSM is illegal on the books. Especially now that extreme use is becoming more popular. So your point about legality is what exactly? Her point is that it proves premeditation. Courts will come down harder on a defendant if premeditation can be proven. The language of a contract could be used to prejudice a jury further against a defendant. That will result in a greater chance of a conviction, and higher penalties after conviction. Edited to add: quote: ORIGINAL: wckdmnd Wouldn't the steps you take be throwing the contract in her face? Because what you say there I totally agree that that's how it's done Part of my issue is the term "throwing it in her face." That sounds like your main focus is winning an argument. Now read what TNDommeK wrote. "If a slave isn't doing as told, there are steps we take to ensure she does. If still no, then she is released. " No anger, No argument. Simply a quiet, confident summation of what is done. If your emphasis is on proving to your sub that you're right and she's wrong in an adversarial situation, you've got a way to go.

AthenaSurrenders -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 6:12:41 AM)
FR I can't speak for the US, but in the UK 'deep bruising' would most likely be a common assault - an assault in which no serious injury has occurred. Consent is actually a defence for common assault, so if he could demonstrate consent then he wouldn't be convicted. HOWEVER if I were to go to the police about this, I'd obviously be saying it was non-consensual. The contract in that case won't prove consent because I can say 'he made me sign it'. Worst case scenario, it shows intent on his part and could even hint at a false imprisonment case. By definition I can't consent to any assault causing serious injury - in which case the contract can't be of any use anyway, except of course, to establish a pattern of behaviour. I wouldn't have committed a crime by saying 'yes please break my arm' - the law just wouldn't accept my consent.

SimplyMichael -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 6:41:23 AM)
Contracts are a tool, and like all tools skill in both their use and an understanding of when and where to use them is important. Most people who cant use a tool dismiss their usefulness.

ARIES83 -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 6:53:30 AM)
I personally don't see much truth in that last line, but I'd be interested to get an idea of when/where and how would be a skillful way of using them.

TNDommeK -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 7:03:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wckdmnd Wouldn't the steps you take be throwing the contract in her face? Because what you say there I totally agree that that's how it's done I'm thinking its the "throw it in her face" I'm having the issue with. I can't see myself grabbing the contract and saying " see! You signed, do what I say" I just don't work that way. I believe in communication, teaching...if needed, punishment. Then if warranted...the door. She knows she signed, I don't need to remind her.

Kana -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 7:06:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael Most people who cant use a tool dismiss their usefulness. Not true. I have a law degree. I've owned my own businesses where contracts were required to protect (And this is so key-that's what contracts do-protect the interests of both parties). I evaluate contracts and terms for a living. I use these tools all the time, understand exactly what contracts are. And I see no use for them in my relationships. Used em before-found they limited me and the relationship. What had started out as a good idea turned into something that was stifling. Add in that they are unenforceable and they are essentially useless to me. Now, if I had a hundred laws and rules, that might be different. But I only have three and I think she can remember them, no need to write em down. Question-Would you require a contract before marriage? ETA-I'm not knocking anyone who does use em-just stating, as asked by the OP, my perspective from a personal POV ETA PT 2 (The Temple of Doom)-Hell fucking yes I throw the terms in her face when I used contracts. You bet your ass I did. And laughed and jeered at her as I did. Fuck-I'm a sadist, HTF else did you think I'd react? I cackle as I rub her nose in that shit

TNDommeK -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 7:12:12 AM)
But as the dominant, couldn't you and slave alter the contracts when needed? I look at it like this, if a king makes rules that his kingdom must follow, can't he change the rules at any time? He is the king, after all. Now of course this is on a much smaller comparison. But I find that whatever works best for you is what you go with. Lets say at the beginning of relationship, said slave signed a contract stating hard limits of anal (first thing that came to mind) and throughout your relationship, you've managed and she has been turned onto a little anal play and eventually she has tossed out the notion that anal is a limit, wouldn't it be ok to redo that part of the contract?

Kana -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 7:36:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TNDommeK But as the dominant, couldn't you and slave alter the contracts when needed? I look at it like this, if a king makes rules that his kingdom must follow, can't he change the rules at any time? He is the king, after all. Now of course this is on a much smaller comparison. But I find that whatever works best for you is what you go with. Lets say at the beginning of relationship, said slave signed a contract stating hard limits of anal (first thing that came to mind) and throughout your relationship, you've managed and she has been turned onto a little anal play and eventually she has tossed out the notion that anal is a limit, wouldn't it be ok to redo that part of the contract? Sure. And I do and have. I call these "State of the Union" moments-every few months we'll sit down (Well, I sit and she kneels naked) and hash out what's up and where we are going. But then you're writing a new contract, the new negotiation (Hehehe-its some negotiation-"From now on out, we're going to be doing this.") voids the old one. Legally, it's the same as offer/counteroffer. The counter voids the initial offer once made. And really I'm speaking only theoretically at this point-we work within a no limits structure-if I decide to nail her tongue to a coffeetable, it's my choice. We don't really discuss this sort of stuff anymore. But we have had to alter how and what we do due to health concerns, issues with getting older and other factors that have certainly impacted our play. And WTF signs a no anal contract? I mean shit, would you? I want a bitch to serve me, that gal, she giving up that ass. And the more she dislikes it, the more I'm gonna want it. I suspect you may understand....

AthenaSurrenders -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 7:45:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TNDommeK quote: ORIGINAL: wckdmnd Wouldn't the steps you take be throwing the contract in her face? Because what you say there I totally agree that that's how it's done I'm thinking its the "throw it in her face" I'm having the issue with. I can't see myself grabbing the contract and saying " see! You signed, do what I say" I just don't work that way. I believe in communication, teaching...if needed, punishment. Then if warranted...the door. She knows she signed, I don't need to remind her. I found that phrase alarming too. Throwing something in someone's face suggests lashing out or being spiteful. Even when something is going wrong in a relationship and it needs fixing, I think taking a confrontational and aggressive attitude about it is counterproductive. K doesn't strike me as the type of person who throws things in people's faces in general - that's a sort of whiny, spoilt attitude to have.

wckdmnd -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 8:21:58 AM)
I was just using her words. Perhaps I won't do such things in the future. Live n learn

SimplyMichael -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 8:49:30 AM)
Kana, You confirmed my point. There was a time you found them useful...

FeetKing -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 8:59:00 AM)
Nothing wrong with a well detailed contract between a sub/slave and their owner

SimplyMichael -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 9:03:22 AM)
Contracts are a tool, like all tools, knowing when and why to apply them determines your success with them. They do not create obedience, nor do they substitute for dominance New people can use them as tools to enhance communication and create clarity, around limits, responsibilities, defining outside relationships and a host of other issues. Like all ritual, they can be used to enhance a submissive mindset, to provide structure and safety, to have a tangible presence of the relationship. To make clear secondary roles, to outline the scope and limits of a part time relationship. Putting thoughts to paper requires one to clarify those thoughts, to say yes or no and can force people to reckon with unspoken needs and expectations. One doesn't need a ring or a priest to be married nor do either of those ensure a better outcome than a pinky swear, but many find them important. I see contracts in the same light.

MasterCaneman -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 9:15:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kana -Contracts aren't legally binding so they aren't worth the paper they're printed on, much less the time to write one. They're just so much wank fodder. The point of a contract is to protect the involved parties. Since a contract isn't enforceable, no protection is given-thus, they are beyond worthless. -The only contracts I've used are verbal. Why would I need otherwise. She gives me her word and that's that. Because, you know, if I didn't trust the slut, why would I want to be with the cunt. The agreements tend to be pretty basic too. She promises to serve, please and obey. I plan to be worthy. That's it. -In a million billion years, I wouldn't have expected a thread with this title to devolve into BBT 1. Total agreement, but if a couple wants to make it an outline of expectations rather than a binding agreement, I'd be okay with that. For some people, the act of making/signing a contract is a big part of their kink, irregardless of it's legality. 2. Ultimately it all boils down to that. 3. That one caught me by surprise too. Love the way threads can drift here. Just as long as there's no hotlinking to BBT Mary Sue slash fanfics arising out of this.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 9:34:53 AM)
FR~ We started out without having a contract. That was fine for a while until we ran across several sub/slaves that insisted on having a contract. When I asked why, they all said it was so they knew where the boundaries were, what their duties were, and what to expect from us. We were getting several a week like this (across several sites) - so we wrote one, a very simple one. It basically said: we own you mind, body and soul, ...lock, stock and barrel - the whole nine yards. We say jump, you jump first and ask how high for the next time. No questions, no arguments; you just do it. That was fine for a while. Then we were getting caught out with a lot of "what-if's". It didn't take long for it to start overflowing into two pages. I reduced the margins to minimum, I reduced the font to size 9; and it was still expanding! At this point, it was utterly useless. Who is going to read two or more pages of wall-to-wall small-print for something that isn't legally enforcible anyway? Like many contracts that I've come across over the last few years, it had gotten too specific and too complicated. I drew up another one that was a lot more generic, more concise, and could easily fit onto a single readable page. Since then, we've had very few "what if's" or other questions. One thing we always say to everyone that asks about it: it has no legal teeth whatsoever and cannot be enforced in any court of law; it is designed to be a fun document that saves many questions and is for mutual guidance only, a token of trust between us and nothing more. So far, for those that want a contract, it seems to have served its purpose. Personally, I don't think one is necessary. I say.... You do. What else is there to explain or remember?

Kana -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 9:40:51 AM)
What were Frosted Flakes Terms-something like we practice YDWTFITYTD (You do what the fuck I tell you to do). That's my contract. Right there. :-)

LeesaLove -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 10:41:37 AM)
It may be a good thing to go back to, but a contract does nothing other than that. I find it very laughable, especially when people try to use them for rape play.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875