RE: NO Safeword...??

RE: NO Safeword...?? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master

Message

FightingChains -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 8:19:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC But I just can't wrap my head around why I'd start a relationship with someone who feels the need to throw up 6 dozen walls in order to be "protected" from me. This has nothing to do with kink and everything to do with the question, "Why on God's green earth are you forming a teamwork relationship with your enemy?" For those who do consensual play? Completely agree. For those who do CNC play, or do role playing of nonconsent? You're stepping into dangerous territory, protect yourself against accidents While I completely agree that it's overstated in kink as a protection against all evil, there are circumstances where it is important.

JeffBC -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 8:30:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Blueswordsman Anyone who wont except a serious No! Stop! or a Safe word is a dangerous playmate. ... and once again the token vanilla guy becomes "dangerous". Truth is, I understand what you're saying and in the context of "play" it makes a lot of sense. The questions all become very different though when you're not talking about play. For me, at least, there's an entirely different model going on which drives different goals and different success measures and therefore different strategies. quote: ORIGINAL: CP But how would you counsel a new sub who is using the internet to find a dominant? How should trust be established in that situation? How is saying 'I don't honor limits or safewords' not a red flag in that situation? In truth, I think it probably is a red flag -- or at least a yellow flag -- because of the construction of the thought. Unlike what I just wrote above it IS working within the BDSM model and in that model things like limits and safewords exist for a reason. I think relying on them for safety is ludicrous but they do serve as a quick cheat sheet to some simple communication about likes and dislikes. While I have no interest in limits, safewords, and a million other BDSM concepts the way I'd be phrasing that would be totally differently and I'd be explaining the other viewpoint.

UllrsIshtar -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 8:42:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: windchymes You shouldn't be agreeing to "no limits" until you know what their limits really are. And why not? Apparently I do everything wrong all the time cause I rarely, if ever, feel the need to put limits out there before playing with somebody. "No limits" doesn't mean anything but "anything you're able to compel me to do", so why on Earth would I have to know what their limits are before agreeing to no limits? I don't have the faintest idea where Kana's, LadyPacts, ResidentSadist, or Jeff's limits are. And I would agree to play with anyone of them without any discussion at all about limits.

windchymes -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 9:22:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar quote: ORIGINAL: windchymes You shouldn't be agreeing to "no limits" until you know what their limits really are. And why not? Apparently I do everything wrong all the time cause I rarely, if ever, feel the need to put limits out there before playing with somebody. "No limits" doesn't mean anything but "anything you're able to compel me to do", so why on Earth would I have to know what their limits are before agreeing to no limits? I don't have the faintest idea where Kana's, LadyPacts, ResidentSadist, or Jeff's limits are. And I would agree to play with anyone of them without any discussion at all about limits. Perhaps you should reread my post, especially the first sentence, instead of pulling the one that you liked and changing the context.

UllrsIshtar -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 9:29:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: windchymes quote: ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar quote: ORIGINAL: windchymes You shouldn't be agreeing to "no limits" until you know what their limits really are. And why not? Apparently I do everything wrong all the time cause I rarely, if ever, feel the need to put limits out there before playing with somebody. "No limits" doesn't mean anything but "anything you're able to compel me to do", so why on Earth would I have to know what their limits are before agreeing to no limits? I don't have the faintest idea where Kana's, LadyPacts, ResidentSadist, or Jeff's limits are. And I would agree to play with anyone of them without any discussion at all about limits. Perhaps you should reread my post, especially the first sentence, instead of pulling the one that you liked and changing the context. Your first two sentences were: "There's a big difference between agreeing to a "no limits" session with someone you just met and don't have a clue what they're all about, and a long-term relationship with "no limits". The first implies a huge lack of brains and common sense." How exactly did I change the context? Are you implying I somehow know them because they've been posting here for a while? I don't know then any better than I knew my husband on our first date, after all I've never met any of them. I said I would agree to 'no limit' sessions with several people I just met and I'm not in a long-term relationship in. I used them as examples because I've never met any of them before I don't have a clue what they're all about in person any more than anybody I'd casually meet to play after talking to them on CM for a while. Just like I played with my husband with no limits on our first date. And my ex. And my ex before that. I have regularly played with no limits with people after just a couple exchanges online... according to you that should never be done. I'd like to know why not.

JeffBC -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 10:05:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar "No limits" doesn't mean anything but "anything you're able to compel me to do", so why on Earth would I have to know what their limits are before agreeing to no limits? Therein, however, is one of the major viewpoint differences. You are talking about something different than "D/s by agreement" or "BDSM D/s". As soon as you say "able to compel you to do" now you're talking more my language... D/s at the pragmatic and oft-times instinctual level. That is an ENTIRELY different discussion. This is where all those nice, tidy BDSM concepts like "limits, boundaries, roles, agreements, and consent" get tossed out the window as irrelevant. What's left is whether one personality can impress their will on another. The other thing that's left is that classic Dr. Phil line, "So how's that working out for you?" As I know from talking on these boards (and on this very thread), you need to be careful when mapping from one to the other because it's an entirely different problem with different goals and different rules.

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 11:07:20 AM)
I said I would agree to 'no limit' sessions with several people I just met and I'm not in a long-term relationship in. I used them as examples because I've never met any of them before I don't have a clue what they're all about in person any more than anybody I'd casually meet to play after talking to them on CM for a while. Just like I played with my husband with no limits on our first date. And my ex. And my ex before that. I have regularly played with no limits with people after just a couple exchanges online... according to you that should never be done. I'd like to know why not. Why not? Because it's incredibly dangerous, that's why not. First, there are a few people here in the forums who I'd trust to top me, if I played casually, which I don't. I feel that years of knowing them through their posts would be sufficient reasons for me to trust them, unless I picked up on something hinky when we were real time face to face. I put a lot of trust in my gut, so far it's never been wrong. I would not put the above in the same category as playing with people who you've had a few exchanges with on the internet. Though I have met and put my trust in people I've interacted with on the internet, the interactions have been for a long period of time and never within the context of a relationship. We were internet friends and met as friends. One or two I would have let top me if I was into casual play. Many I have topped with no negotiation of safewords or limits before play, but none of them were rank newbies who needed to know the basics of how to protect themselves. If they had been, we would have had several long discussions on the subject. I have talked to many newish subs and asked them point blank: You don't really know me, how do you know I am safe? Most don't have an answer, they are far too caught up n the fantasy. And this is what I am trying to get at. Experienced players can (probably) get by with trusting their gut, but how about the very new who are lost in porn or a 50 shades fantasy? What information about safecalls (yeah, I added that one end since I think it should be included in the discussion), safewords, and discussions about limits would you give them? Although I totally agree that none of the above is a get out of harm free card, what advice do you suggest? It's very easy to say, don't play with anyone you don't trust, if you are so new you can't trust your gut, what do you trust?

Musicmystery -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 11:16:02 AM)
~FR~ Beyond all the fur flying in defense of personal philosophies, this seems to come down still to trusting the person you're playing with. However long or short the association. In that context, a safeword is a choice, depending on the individuals and the type of play. There's no point in slinging around the accusations, judgments, warnings . . . it's still going to come down to the trust issue.

UllrsIshtar -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 11:17:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt Why not? Because it's incredibly dangerous, that's why not. Casual play is dangerous. Casually playing with 'no limits' doesn't add in the least bit to that danger. Casually playing without safe words doesn't add in the least bit to that danger. Either I'm playing with a psychopath who will not honor my desire to leave, or I'm not. If I'm not, then there is no difference in the danger level between a casual session with limits and safe words , and one without limits and safe words. quote: ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt What information about safecalls (yeah, I added that one end since I think it should be included in the discussion), safewords, and discussions about limits would you give them? Although I totally agree that none of the above is a get out of harm free card, what advice do you suggest? It's very easy to say, don't play with anyone you don't trust, if you are so new you can't trust your gut, what do you trust? I'd emphasis safe calls and explain that in order to work as a deterrent, the Top needs to be aware of the fact that you have people who will worry if you don't show up again. I'd suggest keeping the first couple sessions in public if at all possible/preferable by both parties. And then I'd suggest they make sure that whatever form of communication they agree on, they need to make sure they're both on the same page, which means you can't just say 'safe word's red' and call it a day if you plan on playing with safe words. I'd also advice newbies not to play with safe words in the beginning, but instead keeping open lines of communication where words mean what they say as a way to make sure the Top has all the possible information relevant while the newbie figures out exactly how they personally react to play. I think messing around with 'no means yes', and 'stop means keep going' because you agreed that the safe word is what really means 'stop' is advanced stuff newbies shouldn't mess with, especially not when first playing with a new partner.

JeffBC -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 11:47:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Beyond all the fur flying in defense of personal philosophies, this seems to come down still to trusting the person you're playing with. However long or short the association. In that context, a safeword is a choice, depending on the individuals and the type of play. There's no point in slinging around the accusations, judgments, warnings . . . it's still going to come down to the trust issue. Astutely put. But when you look at it this is a discussion about safety and the ways in which it can be had. The fact that there's different viewpoints on that is a good thing.

Musicmystery -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 11:56:22 AM)
And they all come down to trust.

FightingChains -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 1:10:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar quote: ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt Why not? Because it's incredibly dangerous, that's why not. Casual play is dangerous. Casually playing with 'no limits' doesn't add in the least bit to that danger. Casually playing without safe words doesn't add in the least bit to that danger. Either I'm playing with a psychopath who will not honor my desire to leave, or I'm not. If I'm not, then there is no difference in the danger level between a casual session with limits and safe words , and one without limits and safe words. quote: ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt What information about safecalls (yeah, I added that one end since I think it should be included in the discussion), safewords, and discussions about limits would you give them? Although I totally agree that none of the above is a get out of harm free card, what advice do you suggest? It's very easy to say, don't play with anyone you don't trust, if you are so new you can't trust yourgut, what do you trust? I'd emphasis safe calls and explain that in order to work as a deterrent, the Top needs to be aware of the fact that you have people who will worry if you don't show up again. I'd suggest keeping the first couple sessions in public if at all possible/preferable by both parties. And then I'd suggest they make sure that whatever form of communication they agree on, they need to make sure they're both on the same page, which means you can't just say 'safe word's red' and call it a day if you plan on playing with safe words. I'd also advice newbies not to play with safe words in the beginning, but instead keeping open lines of communication where words mean what they say as a way to make sure the Top has all the possible information relevant while the newbie figures out exactly how they personally react to play. I think messing around with 'no means yes', and 'stop means keep going' because you agreed that the safe word is what really means 'stop' is advanced stuff newbies shouldn't mess with, especially not when first playing with a new partner. Yeah, I agree entirely with you.

windchymes -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 1:19:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar quote: ORIGINAL: windchymes quote: ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar quote: ORIGINAL: windchymes You shouldn't be agreeing to "no limits" until you know what their limits really are. And why not? Apparently I do everything wrong all the time cause I rarely, if ever, feel the need to put limits out there before playing with somebody. "No limits" doesn't mean anything but "anything you're able to compel me to do", so why on Earth would I have to know what their limits are before agreeing to no limits? I don't have the faintest idea where Kana's, LadyPacts, ResidentSadist, or Jeff's limits are. And I would agree to play with anyone of them without any discussion at all about limits. Perhaps you should reread my post, especially the first sentence, instead of pulling the one that you liked and changing the context. Your first two sentences were: "There's a big difference between agreeing to a "no limits" session with someone you just met and don't have a clue what they're all about, and a long-term relationship with "no limits". The first implies a huge lack of brains and common sense." How exactly did I change the context? Are you implying I somehow know them because they've been posting here for a while? I don't know then any better than I knew my husband on our first date, after all I've never met any of them. I said I would agree to 'no limit' sessions with several people I just met and I'm not in a long-term relationship in. I used them as examples because I've never met any of them before I don't have a clue what they're all about in person any more than anybody I'd casually meet to play after talking to them on CM for a while. Just like I played with my husband with no limits on our first date. And my ex. And my ex before that. I have regularly played with no limits with people after just a couple exchanges online... according to you that should never be done. I'd like to know why not. Well yippee for you, you lived on the edge and it all came out all right. But if this is what you would advise new, uneducated people to do, well, that's on you. I choose to advise people to have common sense, especially those who are asking what the safest way to do things is. I stand by what I said and will continue to do so. Going by your example, I should just tell people not to wear seatbelts or motorcycle helmets because I've never gotten in any accidents, don't bother getting health screenings because MY tests have always come back negative, go ahead and smoke because MY dad didn't die of lung cancer. And besides, where did I say to never do it? I pointed out what the difference between the two scenarios were. You want to play on the edge, knock yourself out. But IMO, telling anyone to just throw caution to the wind and oh, just play with anyone who comes along is just plain irresponsible.

LadyPact -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 1:54:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar I don't have the faintest idea where Kana's, LadyPacts, ResidentSadist, or Jeff's limits are. And I would agree to play with anyone of them without any discussion at all about limits. I appreciate that. However, I'd have to say you have a big advantage there. While we may not have discussed limits or anything of that nature, you've got a pretty safe bet that all of us are sane. Jeff's not going to hurt you by a long shot. (Only non sadist on the list.) For those of us who are sadists, you've had a decent opportunity to read many of the things that we've said over the years and at minimum, you know we're not out to intentionally harm anyone. That's definitely better odds than a random profile that someone would come across and not know anything about a person's character, experience level, etc, etc. You've got your own experience level, judge of character, intelligence, and all of your qualities. Unfortunately, many of the discussions here get set to beginner base level. So often, answers and replies are geared toward people just starting out and when people are trying to give folks the basics, the more advanced discussion about navigating kink or authority dynamics don't start coming up until the later pages of any thread.

UllrsIshtar -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 2:20:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: windchymes Going by your example, I should just tell people not to wear seatbelts or motorcycle helmets because I've never gotten in any accidents, don't bother getting health screenings because MY tests have always come back negative, go ahead and smoke because MY dad didn't die of lung cancer. Explain to me HOW a limit or a safe word keeps you safer. What exactly do limits do that make is less likely that you'll get hurt? Specifically? How is playing with limits a 'seatbelt'? That's by whole points: it's not. You are not safer, not even a little, not even a teensy tiny little bit by playing with a limit than you are when playing without it. When that car crashes, a seatbelt will make that you are less likely to get hurt. It's why I'll advice a beginning driver to wear a seatbelt every time. Safewords and limits do not make it that you are less likely to get hurt. At the most they make it so that there is no difference in the change of you getting hurt. But at their worse... at their worse they give people a false sense of security, making them compare it to a seatbelt and therefore neglect to take other safety precautions (like a safety call) that do actually decrease the likelihood of you getting hurt. 'Limits and safe words' do not equal 'seatbelt and health screenings' because they're not preventative in any way. 'Limits and safe words' equal 'the choice of which color car to drive, or the choice of which doctor to go to', a choice that in and of itself does NOTHING to change your chances at survival, and is merely a stylistic preference. You're telling newbies: 'driving a red car makes you safer' and I'm saying it's bullshit, the color of the car don't matter... wear a damn seatbelt.

LadyConstanze -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 2:31:19 PM)
But meeting somebody who will tell you straight away that your limits and safewords don't mean shit to him, I'd think the guy is a fantasy warrior or just a bit on the other side of sane

JeffBC -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 2:45:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact Jeff's not going to hurt you by a long shot. (Only non sadist on the list.) pout This is probably how I lost my MasterCard (again). More seriously, let's be clear that you don't need to be a saidst to be dangerous. I could also be a mass murderer, rapist, or someone who likes to listen to Justin Beeber for hours on end. Once she lets me tie her up there's lots of ways that could go very wrong. But of what use is a discussion about safewords unless the scene in question clouds the meaning of the word "no"? Ishtar is saying (with Carol's and my vigorously agree) that there are other ways to make that trust determination. Just as you said, she DOES have a few years posting history with you and I -- along with some private exchanges along the way. She is using her "people sense" to size us up and make her risk determination. She's allowed time to work in her favor so that she has the data to make a real decision. I'd argue if you don't have the people sense to do that then you really shouldn't be letting anyone tie you up ever... at least in private. I guess to me it's seems axiomatic that real trust doesn't happen in any 2 sentence interaction. Relying on some sort of artificial insta-trust (eg: "I trust him because he nodded when I told him my safeword and limits.") seems risky to me. PS: I'm cool on the whole non-sadist thing but calling me sane was a really low blow :)

JeffBC -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 2:49:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze But meeting somebody who will tell you straight away that your limits and safewords don't mean shit to him, I'd think the guy is a fantasy warrior or just a bit on the other side of sane This is where this conversation's hypothetical nature produces different answers for different people. The phrase in question is both open to some interpretation and taken out of context. So you read one scenario involving some sociopathic idiot. I chose a more upbeat interpretation, basically, "Clumsy way to say that I'm looking for a TPE relationship which may or may not take a fair bit of 'getting to know you'". If we were all looking at a real profile with context and whatnot I'm guessing there'd be a lot more agreement.

MissImmortalPain -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 2:58:57 PM)
Stands beside Jeff and softly whispers....What everyone gets told before they cross the door to my home is "There are no safe words here and your limit will be reached only when you walk away from me" I guess I'm doing it wrong too but at least I'm in good company.

LadyConstanze -> RE: NO Safeword...?? (3/23/2014 3:00:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze But meeting somebody who will tell you straight away that your limits and safewords don't mean shit to him, I'd think the guy is a fantasy warrior or just a bit on the other side of sane This is where this conversation's hypothetical nature produces different answers for different people. The phrase in question is both open to some interpretation and taken out of context. So you read one scenario involving some sociopathic idiot. I chose a more upbeat interpretation, basically, "Clumsy way to say that I'm looking for a TPE relationship which may or may not take a fair bit of 'getting to know you'". If we were all looking at a real profile with context and whatnot I'm guessing there'd be a lot more agreement. I was actually looking at what the OP said, if a profile has: "Your limits and safewords won't be respected" I see red flags, if a couple has a relationship and they drift into TPE, different thing, but on a profile, telling a person they have never ever met that they will do whatever they like, sounds a bit "unhinged" to me, and somebody replying to it, errr, where is his or her psychiatric nurse?

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875