quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

To keep the conversation interesting...

quote:

ORIGINAL: sweetieDA
Far too long winded for me and doesn't cover any of the peculiars that might be relevant to playing with me. Different things are okay with different people in different circumstances and sometimes what is okay changes midscene.

The first two circumstances, I agree. Let's delve into the third one.

quote:

Example - male Dom wants to cane me - I want it medium hard, not too fast, no wrap, no hitting legs, no hitting above ass crack. I'm okay with him touching my whole ass to see how hot / bruised it is but I'm not okay with any pleasure touching at all. I can't tick these things on that card.

This makes perfect sense to me, even when I stipulate the "no sexual contact" clause. From what I read, this isn't where the problem stems from. It's when people's fingers do the walking internally that seems to be a huge issue.

quote:

Example - watching a needle demo, someone offers to try it on me. At first I only want one in the skin on my back and then I want a little think about it. But after I get one in my back, I swoon into arousal and desire and beg her to stab me all over. I want needles in my tits, but I don't want her touching me sexually because I'm not into women. How do I tick 'can touch tits so long as only for (my perceived) non sexual play and not for (my perceived) sexual play'. This card doesn't begin to cover that.

No, it doesn't. However, allow me to give you the same scenario from the top side...

Let's say, we negotiate. In your non aroused, lucid, and non desiring state, we have agreed we're going to do that one needle on your back.

And then, you get "happy".

You are thrilled with the endorphins and in that moment, you really do want more piercings. You're swimming with your brain chemistry. We're having tons of fun!

But, you didn't give me consent in your non altered state. You only said "go further" when you were floaty and excited. Should I believe normal you or chemically influenced you?

This is a part of the problem. Once I listen to sub space you, I'm taking a risk. The whole thing could go great and everybody could be happy with the result. OR, tomorrow you could say that you feel taken advantage of because I "renegotiated mid scene" while you, in the moment, while your brain was buzzing" wanted more. Do you see how badly this could go for me if I didn't stick to the original negotiation?

quote:

Ultimately, I don't think anything can replace conversation and negotiation, as well as respecting the flow of a scene. I get that consent violations are an issue for some. For me, everything depends on how I feel when it's happening. If I had to give explicit consent for everything I was and was not okay with happening to me, we'd still be talking when the party ended.

I'm with you that negotiation and communication are the best way to go. What if you really didn't know how to do those things? The realm of public play encompasses the whole scale of people who might show up and pay the door fee. New people, experienced people... Folks in long term play relationships and those who are doing pick up play. How do we reduce miscommunications and outright consent violations? Maybe these cards will help. OK, for some folks, they won't, but what about the cases where they do?

quote:

I'd rather just play and if I like it, you can carry on and if I don't, I'll tell you to stop. I've no idea what I'm going to want before we even start play. I'm not going to consent in advance, when I've no idea if I'll feel like consenting once we've started.

Which is cool, right up until the time that your "carry on if you like it" takes a really bad turn. I'm in it just like you are.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sweetieDA



But, you didn't give me consent in your non altered state. You only said "go further" when you were floaty and excited. Should I believe normal you or chemically influenced you?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bhruic

quote:

ORIGINAL: sweetieDA



But, you didn't give me consent in your non altered state. You only said "go further" when you were floaty and excited. Should I believe normal you or chemically influenced you?

This is an interesting point about consent. It seems to me that consent is not really about what you want, its about what you allow, or ask for.

Some people may know very well what they want, but not have the courage to ask for it without a bit of chemical influence... such as a couple drinks, or some weed... or very heightened arousal.

This is where the responsibility of judgement - on both sides - comes in. Sex doesn't always happen stone cold sober... and getting horny is the whole point, so doesn't seem like a factor that justifies disregarding someone's offered consent.

I know for myself, if I want something enough to ask for it, then I really want it. How I may feel about it once I am no longer aroused is something only I can know... and so the burden of making the choice to ask for it is mine alone.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick
Apparently one is much safer from consent violations away from the scene as I have never had any such issues.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick
Look it's simple, play with people you know and trust and there is no need for any dumb "consent cards" as the ground rules are known and understood well before hand.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bhruic
This is an interesting point about consent. It seems to me that consent is not really about what you want, its about what you allow, or ask for.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bhruic
Some people may know very well what they want, but not have the courage to ask for it without a bit of chemical influence... such as a couple drinks, or some weed... or very heightened arousal.

This is where the responsibility of judgement - on both sides - comes in. Sex doesn't always happen stone cold sober... and getting horny is the whole point, so doesn't seem like a factor that justifies disregarding someone's offered consent.

quote:

If it were really that simple, then it wouldn't be happening. But it does. All over the place, all the time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

If it were really that simple, then it wouldn't be happening. But it does. All over the place, all the time.

And these silly cards will stop that how?

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

Then what's the point?

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome

Nothing that helps people talk about consent, and the complications of it, can be a bad thing.

Sexual consent cards seem like a perfectly sensible addition, in that they give you a structure for the conversation (and a record of it) if you didn't have one already.

Of course they don't do everything or catch every nuance, but that might be a 30 page contract and not exactly practical for all occasions.

Just wondering what some of the strident objections were about?

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome

Wayward, that just about sums up how I saw the thread.

Anything that contributes towards a better understanding between two individuals about consent can only be a good thing, and consent cards seem like as good a starting point as any to me.

I completely agree that there are as almost as many ideas about what constitutes consent as people. I am always slightly disturbed when people have the attitude that we (true BDSMers) know all about this stuff and if people knew what they were doing there would be no problems. This is patently nonsense. I am the first to hold my hands up and say that consenting to some of the stuff I like can be complicated and require quite complex explicit agreement and lots of trust.

Some of the concerns about mindlessly filling in tick-boxes notwithstanding, I can't see much wrong with something designed to encourage consideration of a difficult and thorny subject, full of risks and potential ambiguities.