RE: Hard Limits

RE: Hard Limits (Full Version)

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

Message

Celeste43 -> RE: Hard Limits (5/1/2007 3:22:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Satyr6406 If I ask a submissive to do something it's because I need it done or it is pleasing to me. In very few cases do I ask a submissive to do something (completely distasteful) just to prove a point. Now, if that submissive took time to get to know me, she would know that I am not going to ask her to do anything that offends my sense of right and wrong. The only way she can know what my sense of right and wrong is is by knowing me. Michael The problem with the rest of your post is that it contradicts this bit. For example, The Man and I are into bondage. He would find it very pleasing to put me into inverted suspension. And certainly inverted suspension cannot be said to be violating a moral code, cannot be thought of as wrong. However it is only too likely to give me vertigo which lasts for days. I suffer from vertigo occasionally and I am not willing to ever court it. He can't cure it nor can he give up his own work to handle my responsibilities which I will be unable to while lying in bed with the ceiling whirling. Therefore, although it crosses no moral code, is appealing to him, and in theory to me, I have hard limited it.

tsatske -> RE: Hard Limits (5/1/2007 3:23:43 AM)
I am answering this from the point of view of an unowned slave. I have been owned in TPE relationships in the past. When a Dom I am talking to or beginning to negotiate with asks me about limits, I tell them that I have many limits, in the beginning of a relationship, and they slowly disappear to be near no limit by the time I am owned. I would have no problem with calling a relationship no limits once I was owned, because the limits I maintain would no doubt be maintained by my Master, and I would be more than willing to give him ownership of these. But, when I am talking to someone new, I do identify 3 limits as 'hard limits', ones that I would not give up for ownership, even though, in truth, as I said, I would be willing to hand them over to anyone I trusted enough to own me. Those limits are: I need to feel real communication. If I am going to trust someone to make any decision for me that he choses, and obey all those decisions, then, for safety's sake alone, I need to know he is listening to me and knows what is going on with me. Then he can make his decision as he sees fit. I will not do anything I perceive as harmful to my own children -- who are now all in college and live away from home, and are good, self responsible young men who do not make this an issue. And no alcohol. I am an alcoholic, drinking alcohol, alcohol enemas, eating things cooked in alcohol, drinking 'dealcoholed' drinks, (both the cooking example and the dealcoholed drinks still contain alcohol, just less than they started with) are not an option for me. They will result in my losing my 26 years of sobriety and becoming a dishonest, rude, valueless person that no one could live with, so they will result in first my decollaring and ultimately my death. I have known alcoholic slaves who allowed their Master to decide to help them 'learn to drink' under Masters tutelage. The result was what I stated. An active drunk and a decollared slave. But, a Master I am willing to become owned by is going to understand these things, so eventually, once I am owned, I can let go of those limits. I have had lots of Doms argue with me about my right to hold these limits. See, that's a problem, because early in a relationship, I have a lot of limits. Even, I will not have sex with someone until I think we are in a 'life-mated' relationship. If you have problems with my 'hard limits' during the negotiation and getting to know one another stages, you really aren't going to like that until we do get to know one another, I am going to have lots of other things I won't do for you. But I simply take the attitude that they are not good candidates. Since I desire TPE, it seems obvious to me that any Master I could trust with that much power in my life is going to be willing to wait until we know each other well before he expects that kind of submission and obedience.

Satyr6406 -> RE: Hard Limits (5/1/2007 3:48:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Celeste43 The problem with the rest of your post is that it contradicts this bit. For example, The Man and I are into bondage. He would find it very pleasing to put me into inverted suspension. And certainly inverted suspension cannot be said to be violating a moral code, cannot be thought of as wrong. However it is only too likely to give me vertigo which lasts for days. I suffer from vertigo occasionally and I am not willing to ever court it. He can't cure it nor can he give up his own work to handle my responsibilities which I will be unable to while lying in bed with the ceiling whirling. Therefore, although it crosses no moral code, is appealing to him, and in theory to me, I have hard limited it. But, your Man has a sense of fair play that says that he doesn't want to harm you. As another post stated: "I feel like I need to re-iterate: There are plenty of BDSM activities that I would never ask of a submissive. It has nothing to do with her "limits". It has to do with my sense of right and wrong and of fair play and courtesy." I also said: "I'm not into anything scatological, either but, my submissive doesn't get to make that decision for me. It is MINE to make" The important part, there is the " ... my submissive doesn't get to make that decision FOR me. It is MINE to make." Too many submissives, in this lifestyle want to turn things upside-down. I would NEVER cause another human being harm. That's MY sense of right and wrong and, if she trusts me, she trusts in that judgement. I also made that point. I am not advocating abusing anyone. I am advocating taking time to get to know a dominant BEFORE you submit and then, really and truly submitting; exchanging power instead of "delegating" it. Peace and comfort, Michael

Asraii -> RE: Hard Limits (5/1/2007 4:29:52 AM)
When not in a relationship, I don't try to define limits at all for the simple fact that everyone is different. What I may do with one, I will not do with another, and vice versa. However, I do have several moral and ethical boundaries that I would never even contemplate crossing; but these are things that in my opinion should not even be brought up in a discussion of limits.

Padriag -> RE: Hard Limits (5/1/2007 5:20:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GaPhoto I'm curious as to everyones definition of hard limits. I am being mentored by several very experienced Dominants who have been around for quite a bit of time. Every single one of them have told me that hard limits are things that will damage a submissive emotionally, mentally, or physically beyond the Dominants ability to repair, thus requiring outside intervention, everything else is a soft limit which can be pushed when the time comes. It seems to me that alot of both Dominants and submissives use the term too frivolously. Zack I think you'll find that to understand the many different "definitions" of what constitutes hard limits it is very helpful to understand the context in which they are used and defined. Someone seeking a TPE relationship will likely have a different view than someone seeking a more limited dynamic as would someone merely interested in weekend fetish play. Hard limits between newly met individuals at a club or bondage party will be defined differently than between a couple in a committed, intimate, long term relationship. You'll also find that how and who defines them is often colored by how much they trust and whom they trust. So, while I might generally agree with the definition you gave, that would likely be because the context in which I apply it is likely similar to those mentoring you. Others who apply it in a different context will have different opinions.

Padriag -> RE: Hard Limits (5/1/2007 5:44:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RavenMuse Basicaly you are saying that you trust in your Masters duty of care.... which is what I outlined. If the trust in that duty of care is there and the Master has taken the time to get the information needed as to what will harm and what will prove difficult... and the girl has been open and honest in providing the relivant info.... no need for HER to have limits.... His duty of care will handle the whole issue far more efficiently and more objectivly and safely given it won't be thrown into possible dangerous territory by her driving need to please [:)] quote: ORIGINAL: RavenMuse Calandra. A perfect example of one of the big reasons I take on the responcibility for setting the limits rather than allow the girl too.... I am not under the pressure of the need to please. My need is to not harm, the pressure is in the right direction [:)] Two good examples (not surprisingly considering the source [;)]) of how this can work in some relationships, and work very well. In this case we have the dominant taking a very responsible role towards ownership, which is exactly what they should do IMNSHO, and exactly the kind of responsible ownership would-be slaves ought to look for. However, there will always be those submissives who will balk at giving that kind of control to the dominant and invariably when I have have observed it, it comes down to trust issues. Either they simply do not trust that dominant personally that much... or more generally they trust their own judgement more than they do that of another and are not willing to relenquish that much control. That difference in the degree to which they are willing to trust and give up control over themselves colors their perspective and how they define hard limits (as well as who should define them). quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie My situation is very much as Satyre(Michael) and RavenMuse have described, and I've appreciated their posts on this. However, Jevousadore's comment that a submissive's standards and sense of right and wrong are of little value to the dominant in such a case could not be further from the truth, at least in my relationship. He knows exactly where to bring me, where to push me, and where to pause me by knowing me intimately, which includes what my beliefs, morals, values, principles and standards are. And just because I have had to compromise a standard on occasion, does not mean he does not care about them. It simply means what he wanted for me and from me required such an action. I don't think anyone here, and I know my Master would be included, is advocating not taking responsibility for the development of the submissive and the relationship, OR advocating the submissive's sense of right and wrong as having little value. Your comments provide a good example of exactly my point regarding trust. Clearly you trust your owner's judgement, in part because you trust that he will be responsible in his treatment of you. You are also correct in that people like RavenMuse, Satyr, myself and others are not advocating that a dominant has no responsibility, etc... just the opposite in fact. We are saying exactly that they do, and that the power/control should rest with us precisely because it is our responsibility. However, not everyone is so trusting. The objection of some comes from a lack of trust. There can be many reasons for that and all of them are some variation on fear. It may be fear generated by past bad experiences which have created bad expectations. It may be fear that another's judgement is not as good as their own. It may be fear that in the process who they are will become lost or unimportant. There are many fears that affect our decision making. Sometimes those fears are justified, and the difficult part for the submissive is often learning to recognize when they are and when they are not appropriate. The more I see a submissve look for reasons not to trust, or pick through every little thing said, or questioning every little detail, as though they were looking under every stone expecting to find something wrong, the more I see serious trust issues with that submissive and the more I see them as being incompatible with me and what I seek. Someone who is more confident in themselves is more capable of trust, such a person does not see the world as a malevolent place, they do not expect to find something wrong at every turn.

KeirasSecret -> RE: Hard Limits (5/1/2007 5:52:08 AM)
quote: desire could honestly say that she has no limits and entered into our relationship without setting any. It would be true, but also misleading. Gives the impression that she was in rather a dangerous situation which couldn't be further from the truth. she might not have limits, but I do. This is how our relationship is also. It seems to me that having a list of things I won't do is like saying I don't trust you not to harm me. If i felt a need to enforce such a list, I would think that I had chosen the wrong Dom for me, and I was not actually submitting to him. Be well,

Stranger1 -> RE: Hard Limits (5/1/2007 6:57:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KeirasSecret quote: desire could honestly say that she has no limits and entered into our relationship without setting any. It would be true, but also misleading. Gives the impression that she was in rather a dangerous situation which couldn't be further from the truth. she might not have limits, but I do. This is how our relationship is also. It seems to me that having a list of things I won't do is like saying I don't trust you not to harm me. If i felt a need to enforce such a list, I would think that I had chosen the wrong Dom for me, and I was not actually submitting to him. Be well, Exactly-good matches don't need a laundry list to be secure.

Shanghaid -> RE: Hard Limits (5/4/2007 2:26:56 AM)
It's been said but I'll reiterate 'cuz you're asking for all our definitions. Hard limit - a 'no'. Open to later discussion but a 'no'. Soft limit - what hard limits tend to become over time and trust is developed. Not an 'no', more a I'd rather not right now... oops! My favorite sub told me once (unasked) that there was nothing I could ever think of that she wouldn't do with me (no limits). For the time we were together, I took that as a challenge to come up with something she wouldn't do reaching down deep into the depths of my depravity - and couldn't - god bless her! Best sex EVER. We're still in touch though I've moved away and she's (vanilla) married. SH'd

jessk -> RE: Hard Limits (5/4/2007 4:43:54 AM)
~ general reply to the OP ~ For myself, I don't tend to set any kind of limits before going into a relationship simply because what I may do with one person, I will not feel comfortable doing with another. I find someone I am compatible with, we discuss, and if we connect on all levels ( do's and don'ts ); he then sets the limits within the relationship. For the record, I do not count things that are morally, ethically, and legally wrong as a limit. These are things that I feel do not even need to be brought up and if a Dominant asks me about them, then I know we are not compatible.

CuriousLord -> RE: Hard Limits (5/4/2007 12:06:14 PM)
I can appriecate your views. Your approach to TPE seems responsible, well thought out, and realistic. In my definings, Master and slave are defined by TPE. Doms and subs (and those falling somewhere in between) are those who do not participate in TPE. Yeah, a lot of Dom's aren't for TPE.. I suppose they don't want that level of control for reasons similar to those that a sub may chose to give up control over herself. Having limits, then surrendering them as you become collared, is a good way of going about it. I'm just glad to see you've found a way to embrace a slave role in a manner that's responsible and realistic. Edit: Just to add, for the sake of explaining point of view to other readers.. A slave shouldn't have a hard limit against anything. Not against, say, stealing someone's car. She should only steal the car if ordered by her Master. In the actual sense (which law doesn't recognize), it's not her fault nor responsiblity. Her action is the responsibility of her Master. I utter deplore using this example. It's disgusting to consider. But it makes the point clearly. If a Master orders his slave to commit suicide, that slave does so- she has no hard limits. However, she didn't kill herself- he killed her. He is as much at fault for her death as if he shot her himself. A Master is solely responsible for the actions of his slave, provided his slave is acting within his guidelines and under his orders. Anything a slave does is both to the responsibility and credit of the Master. This is the difference between a Master and a Dom.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.785156E-02