Hard Limits (Full Version)

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



Message

GaPhoto -> Hard Limits (4/30/2007 1:08:15 AM)

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



GrizzlyBear -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 1:31:26 AM)

I tend to agree that many subs confuse soft limits with hard limits.  On sites that have checklists or questionnaires I see some really silly things listed as hard limits.

But you do have to remember, that what they consider to be their hard limits have got to be respected until they change their mind, or you persuade them to change it.  This cannot be forced.  "Hard limits" require some form of explicit consent before they can be pushed.  Otherwise you risk a serious misunderstanding that may involve the police.  You do not want to go there.



MyMasterStephen -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 1:45:27 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.

Zack




A hard limit is just that: a point beyond which the submissive will not go.  A soft limit is a limit that the sub wishes to maintain "for now", but beyond which she may be willing to be taken later, when she is more confident and greater trust has been established.

But since when was it the Dominant who set the limits?  The limits are the sub's, and so it must be the sub who sets them.



Tenebrious -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 2:21:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MyMasterStephen
A hard limit is just that: a point beyond which the submissive will not go.  A soft limit is a limit that the sub wishes to maintain "for now", but beyond which she may be willing to be taken later, when she is more confident and greater trust has been established.

But since when was it the Dominant who set the limits?  The limits are the sub's, and so it must be the sub who sets them.


I agree with this, with two exceptions:

1. (more of a clarification than a disagreement)  As far as I am concerned, a hard limit is not set in stone.  While it should always receive absolute respect, the person setting it may change their mind about it at any time.  A hard limit is simply a way of saying "I don't want to do that at all" not "I will never want to do that at all."  I also believe, however, that hard limits should not in any way be "pushed" or "negotiated" in an effort to manipulate or change them.

2. A dominant has just as much ability to set a hard limit as a submissive.  Granted, the dominant is usually more in control of what happens during a scene than a submissive is, but they also have every right to say "I don't want to do that at all" even if the submissive would like to engage in such play.  For some it may be their own submission, while others may draw the line at scat or injections, or even something generally regarded as a more tame activity.


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.

Zack


Not causing irreparable damage to another isn't a question of "limits" as much as "responsibility" and therefore, such being a hard limit should be inherent to any form of BDSM play, in my opinion...



RavenMuse -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 5:57:45 AM)

One advantage with the Dynamic I offered and desire was seeking was that 'limits' where handled in rather a smoother way than the merry dance I see going on with some other people.


I agree that from what I have seen, some do appear to use limits in a way I disagree with. They negotiate, horse trade "I might accept X if you will do Y" and the like, which to Me removes what limits are supposed to be.

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. I have a duty of care and not only did I get all the relivant information from her, but also I keep an eye on watching for signs to other things that would cause problems and/or harm.

I know the things that would harm her, those are treated by Me in the way hard limits should be handled. They are things I will not make her face, because I don't HARM what is Mine. I know the things she has a great deal of difficulty with but can be brought through carefully without harm, those I handle like soft limits should be handled. They are handled with extra care, extra patience, gently, or forcefully as appropriate to get her through without harm. I will happily hurt My girl and both of us will get something possitive from Me doing so, but I never HARM her.

*I* set them, they are MY limits, MY responcibility. No negotiation, no 'horse trading'. she gave Me the information and trusts in My duty of care. Whilst she truely has no limits herself, the reasons they are important in WIITWD are covered by MY approach and way of doing things.



RavenMuse -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 5:59:51 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MyMasterStephen
But since when was it the Dominant who set the limits?  The limits are the sub's, and so it must be the sub who sets them.


Maybe true for YOUR dynamic, not for everyones.... not for Mine! [:)]

In fact I would say you are taking a big risk in letting them hold that responcibility. Case in point, when desire and I where discussing things and she realised and understood My approach she was hesitent anout one particular play aspect. Didn't want to state it as harmful and if she had been setting limits it would have been placed in soft limits. Because she was already deep in her need to please Me. she was thinking I would regard her as a poorer slave if there where too many 'hard limits' and was reluctant to have too many.

We discussed her experiences and feelings.... Lucky I have a medical/psyche background and picked up the edges of panic in her voice, her tone, the fear even talking about it held..... Its a phobia... it WOULD be harmfull.... The conversation was cut DEAD and I told her it WAS harmful and I would NOT be using that with her. End of story. My choise, My responcibility, MY duty of care.



Satyr6406 -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 6:25:28 AM)

Okay. I've been biting my lip (and I'm NOT a masochist) trying to decide if I should post, on here. I know I'm opening up a can of worms but, here we go.
 
Bottoms have "hard limits". Submissives, if they have taken time to get to know a dominant, before falling to their knees to serve have found a dominant with whom limits are redundant because they know the dominant well enough to know that the dominant would never ask them to do anything that is beyond their abilities.
 
Of course we all have "boundaries" but, if submissives would take the time to TRULY get to know a dominant, they would submit to one whose expectations would not out-distance the submissives "limitations".
 
There are two kinds of "failure". One is a failure of ability. This is something that just can't be helped. No matter how much my little one wishes to please me, she cannot flap her arms and initiate flight.
 
The second is a failure of desire. That is an issue. This is where the conflict with "hard limits" and not getting to know a dominant before agreeing to serve comes in.
 
If I ask a submissive to do something it's because I need it done or it is pleqasing (GRRRRRRR "pleasing", even) 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.
 
I've said it, before. I'll say it again: the three acceptable answers in my house do NOT include: "That's one of my hard limits." because, to be quite frank, being denied by a submissive is my hard limit and she can explain all her hard limits to the cab driver who's taking her out of my house.
 
 
 
 
 
Peace and comfort,
 
 
 
 
 
Michael



Stranger1 -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 6:38:40 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



They do. Hard limits are not things like  "I don't like broccoli."

They are more things like.."I'd really prefer you not do something to me that will have me wake up screaming at five am for the rest of my life."

Don't forget that tops have the right to hard limits as well.

My personal top limit is "continual drama."



Jevousadore -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 7:33:46 AM)

Hello, Michael....

I am curious about some of your statements in your post.  To me, the difference between a submissive and a slave, Dom and Master, is total power exchange, but that is my definition.  As a submissive who does have some slave tendencies, I still set my hard limits. 

I agree that a submissive should "know" her Dom and what he needs.  What I find interesting is that you never state that a Dom has the same responsibility.  If a submissive sets a limitation and the Dom has an issue with it, before entering into a "relationship" of any type, the Dom should be up front that at some point he may demand the act.  It seems to me that neglecting to do so would be not only deceitful, but extremely hurtful, especially if the heart is involved.

One of my hard limits "scat" play.  No ifs, ands, or buts.  If I were involved with someone and they came home one day and decided I had to do this to "prove" I was truly "submissive" to them, I would be the one dialing for the cab. 

I do not see this is a "failure" of desire.  I do not desire to go out and kick puppies. Is that a failure on my part, or the person who enjoys doing so? Desire is relative to each person. If anything, to me, the failure would be on the part of the Dom for not communicating a need in the first place and for destroying the bond of trust and integrity within the relationship.

You write:

"If I ask a submissive to do something it's because I need it done or it is pleqasing to me. In very few cases do I ask a submissive to do something (completely distasteful) just to prove a point."
 
It is one thing to push a submissive on her soft limits, and to keep the doors of communication open on her hard ones.  But what benefit to the relationship would occure in making a submissive act out a hard limit "just prove a point"?  Yes, the Dom may get a few minutes of pleasure if she breaks down and agrees, but the loss of trust may be irretrievably broken, and later feelings of resentment and betrayal may fester.

"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. "
 
What about a submissive's point of right and wrong?  If a submissive is going to have a value system, the ability to be loyal as well as mentally and emotionally healthy, she, too, will have a sense of right and wrong. Again, a Dom should also take the time to know these values and respect them just as he expects the same.  If they are values he cannot or does not want to accept, he should not accept the submissive. 

I guess my point is......if being denied something is your hard limit, for which you demand compliance, but yet you accepted a submissive with hard limits and then reached a point where you no longer respected them, wouldn't the failure actually be on your part?  If you understand the limits yet later use her emotions against her to force the issue, if you threaten to end the relationship in which you are disregarding a previous understanding, is that not borderline abuse?  What happens to the integrity and trust?

Respectfully,

jevousadore



Satyr6406 -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 8:31:57 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jevousadore

Hello, Michael....

I am curious about some of your statements in your post.  To me, the difference between a submissive and a slave, Dom and Master, is total power exchange, but that is my definition.  As a submissive who does have some slave tendencies, I still set my hard limits. 



Then, we differ because I don't use labels. A lady wants to serve or not. If she wishes to serve; it's TPE or hit the highway.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jevousadore

I agree that a submissive should "know" her Dom and what he needs.  What I find interesting is that you never state that a Dom has the same responsibility.  If a submissive sets a limitation and the Dom has an issue with it, before entering into a "relationship" of any type, the Dom should be up front that at some point he may demand the act.  It seems to me that neglecting to do so would be not only deceitful, but extremely hurtful, especially if the heart is involved.

One of my hard limits "scat" play.  No ifs, ands, or buts.  If I were involved with someone and they came home one day and decided I had to do this to "prove" I was truly "submissive" to them, I would be the one dialing for the cab.



I'm not into anything scatological, either but, my submissive doesn't get to make that decision for me. It is MINE to make

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jevousadore

I do not see this is a "failure" of desire.  I do not desire to go out and kick puppies. Is that a failure on my part, or the person who enjoys doing so? Desire is relative to each person. If anything, to me, the failure would be on the part of the Dom for not communicating a need in the first place and for destroying the bond of trust and integrity within the relationship.



Yes, the dominant has failed the submissive! Of course! He has come up short! If the dominant is scared to death of puppies and is being inundated by puppies and asks the submissive to kick them away ... (But, that's the whole "good reason" thing. You're trying to ridicule my beliefs by coming up with egregious scenarios) (as a side-note. I suggest you read sonnets 57 and 58 by Billy Shakespeare. That man knew service)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jevousadore

You write:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Satyr6406

"If I ask a submissive to do something it's because I need it done or it is pleqasing to me. In very few cases do I ask a submissive to do something (completely distasteful) just to prove a point."
 


It is one thing to push a submissive on her soft limits, and to keep the doors of communication open on her hard ones.  But what benefit to the relationship would occure in making a submissive act out a hard limit "just prove a point"?  Yes, the Dom may get a few minutes of pleasure if she breaks down and agrees, but the loss of trust may be irretrievably broken, and later feelings of resentment and betrayal may fester.



No, again, it is up to the submissive to learn what kind of person the dominant is before just falling to their knees. If the dominants expectations do not surpass the submissive's "limitations", where is the conflict (except that you feel the need to make it seem like the onus is on the dominant)?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Satyr6406

"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. "
 


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jevousadore

What about a submissive's point of right and wrong?  If a submissive is going to have a value system, the ability to be loyal as well as mentally and emotionally healthy, she, too, will have a sense of right and wrong. Again, a Dom should also take the time to know these values and respect them just as he expects the same.  If they are values he cannot or does not want to accept, he should not accept the submissive. 



If she doesn't respect my position on what's right and wrong she shouldn't be serving me. As far as learning her values? She is held to my standards. If she doesn't measure up, she is not worthy of serving me. 

I guess my point is......if being denied something is your hard limit, for which you demand compliance, but yet you accepted a submissive with hard limits and then reached a point where you no longer respected them, wouldn't the failure actually be on your part?  If you understand the limits yet later use her emotions against her to force the issue, if you threaten to end the relationship in which you are disregarding a previous understanding, is that not borderline abuse?  What happens to the integrity and trust?

Respectfully,

jevousadore


I wouldn't accept the service of someone who claimed to have "hard limits" a submissive doesn't dictate terms to me. She is in my life to make it easier. If she doesn't want to serve me, no one's chaining her to a radiator. Her portion is obedience; not judging my behavior.
 
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. If I ask her to kick those puppies away because they're biting my ankles and scaring me and she refuses, she's telling me that those little sons of a bitch are more important than I am to her. Pack your bags. here's yer sign. You're dismissed.
 
 
 
 
 
Peace and comfort,
 
 
 
 
 
Michael



MasterNdorei -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 8:56:40 AM)

As a slave in this Master's house, i am not allowed limits of any kind, but with the intent of giving you another's opinion...

A hard limit is something you have no interest in doing, and do not want to negotiate about it.

A soft limit is something you might do in order to please, though it holds no benefit for you. It might also be something you are curious about but need more information before saying you are comfortable with that kind of play. Basically it is something you have some resistance towards, but are not closed completely to the idea.

As it has already  been mentioned, i think it is important to re evaluate limits kept on an actuak list, on a regular basis. People change, fantasies evolve. What was once taboo may be quite fun now.

Be Well~*
Master's dorei



MstrssPassion -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 9:05:30 AM)

if it is being used frivolously then the concept just isn't being understood in the manner as it was intended

A "hard limit" is a definite no.... period

GrizzlyBear writes: what they consider to be their hard limits have got to be respected until they change their mind, or you persuade them to change it.  This cannot be forced.  "Hard limits" require some form of explicit consent before they can be pushed.

This I would have to say is a frivolous use of the term because it doesn't respect the no as a no but more like, "you say no now but I'm gonna keep at you until I persuade you to change your mind". This is not respecting a person right to establish a hard limits & it isn't going to do anything toward establishing trust if the person who says no is constantly going to be challenged or questioned until the no turns into a yes.

no offense GrizzlyBear...

When I initiate a conversation where limits are established I tell the person I am speaking with the be damned sure of what they are classifying as a HARD LIMIT because these will NEVER be visited. I don't care what amount of begging they attempt... no means no & I will at least teach them with this method to be very careful what you ask for & what you refuse.

If it is something that they may have a small measure of curiosity about but they just aren't at a place where they wish to explore it... then it is considered a limit & it will be respected as something that won't be engaged in unless they are fully aware it will happen ahead of time. I'll never spring things on anyone so long as they have not given me their full consent to do so. Once they are comfortable with whatever it is that they had any reservation with then they have to tell me that it is no longer a limit & it gets move over to the ok things to do list.

I don't do anything frivolously... my consistency & methodology is quite literal in many regards.



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 9:11:49 AM)

Personally I do not use the term "hard limit."

Something is a limit for me or it isn't.  If something is a limit for me, it doesn't matter who tells me to do it, it won't happen.  An example for this would be allowing someone to harm my nephews- simply not going to happen, no matter who orders it.

If something is not a limit for me, it doesn't matter who tells me or not, it's something I would do.  An example would be killing someone as a way to prevent them from harming my nephews- I would definitely do that, whether ordered to do it or not.

People turn limits into prizes, rewards, bargaining chips, gimme's and all sorts of chips to play with.  For me it's a simple statement of what I will allow myself to do and what I will not.  This list is what I need in order to stay true to myself.




Tenebrious -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 9:20:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MstrssPassion

I tell the person I am speaking with the be damned sure of what they are classifying as a HARD LIMIT because these will NEVER be visited.


I personally think that's a little more strict than things need to be.  I won't push a hard limit, but if it's something that I'm interested in and it seems to me that they have put enough thought into changing their mind about it, I'm not going to refuse to ever consider it.



Nogimmicks -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 9:52:23 AM)

Funny thing, but I am in agreement with michael, though our logic train is completely different.

To my mind, there is no such thing as a person who does not have any "hard limits". We all have them. I do not care if someone is "submissive" or "slave" or whatever, they have hard limits. There are some things we simply will not do, ever, end of sentence and thought. In most cases, though, the limits that a person believes they have in the beginning of a relationship are very different than they are later on. I have never liked "whipping" people, I take no pleasure from knife-play or mummification or scat or any number of things that other people enjoy. The idea of putting a woman in diapers would about make me puke. However, if I have a submissive (and let us be honest here, there is no such thing in this forum as a real slave) and there is something I do not particularly care for but I know it will excite her, I will try it and learn to like it, if only with her. The opposite is also true, what she thought was a hard limit when we started later becomes common practice that she looks forward to, because she has learned that it is special with me, because she trusts me completely or simply because she enjoys the sense of pleasing me more than she dislikes the act she is engaging in.

The above sounds like a direct contradiction of everything Michael said, but it isn't. Given the above caveat, that everyone has limits (just try to take the most complacent slave on this board and tell her you want to skin her alive for your amusement and you will find she has a hard limit), Michael is right. Any submissive who wants to define her relationship, to say "Okay Mr. Dominant, you can spank me when I think it is okay and I don't ever do any housework and I am not willing to wear clothing you set out for me and I will decide when we will 'play' at this dominance thing" isn't a submissive at all, she is just a girl with an active imagination and a kinky bent. Likewise, any man who will engage with such a woman is not a dominant man at all, just a horny guy who likes to play at kinky sex, when he is allowed to. Both people are equally deluded and neither will ever truly satisfy the part of their brain that ordains their need to be one side or another of a power exchange relationship.

When I see a woman posting on this site with a long list of "hard limits", I actually applaud the fact that she may be the real McCoy. When one is communicating with a bunch of people they do not know, they should well give a list of things that do not appeal to them. It is no different than the list of qualities she has that she is looking for in any man she might find attractive: "He must be in decent physical shape, he must be gainfully employed, he should be reasonably intelligent and have some modicum of a sense of humor, he should have a certain air about him that I respect..... etc. etc. Of course, the man she actually falls in love with may be completely different than her list of qualities, but at least she has a good starting point. Likewise, her "hard limits" are a great starting point. The man she ultimately submits to may take that list of limits and laugh at them (as I normally do), preferring to explore her needs and wants and desires and fears himself. She may have thought that housework was a "hard limit", but she may well find that the rest of the relationship, and the way he makes her feel overall, makes cleaning to his expectations a priviledge. If not, well, I agree, she can discuss it with the cab driver on the way home.

Frankly, for me, "hard limits" are a great look into a woman's mind. They can illuminate her bad past experiences, misunderstandings or even show how well she really knows herself. However, they do not define my sexually or the nature of any relationship that follows. As I get to know her, I will learn the most effective means of rewarding her or punishing her. I will get to know what turns her on and what turns her off by the way she repsponds and by what she does. I will lead and she will follow, but I will lead with my greatest concern being her long term health and happiness. In other words, I will define her hard limits, because I will care more about her than even she does.

Now, I think it is important to add something here. I am not, nor do I believe in being, deceptive about any of this. I would never tell someone that I will absolutely live by their limits and then not honor that. Instead, I say the truth, "well, we will discuss those limits when we know each other better". If she has something listed as a "hard limit" that is absolutely going to be a showstopper, I tell her upfront. In my case, I like to use poyamory or polygamy. If one reads my profile, I make it clear that such is my right. The fact is that it isn't something I feel all that passionate about one way or another. I just feel as though it should be me who defines the relationship, so I reserve the right. It is something that truly makes a woman reflect on just how submissive she really is and just how dominant she wants her mate to be.




MagiksSlave -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 11:16:11 AM)

Hard limits are a NO NEVER they dont have to be things that will nessiserly harm the sub they are things that the sub has stated they will never ever do.. not every limit a sub has is a soft limit subs have a right to say I will never do this this or that and to find someone that will respect that. Soft limits are things they dont want to do but for the right person at the right time they might be able to push them... they then may be fine with it or they may even find something that they thought was a soft limit is indeed a hard limit.

So I guess you can say I definetly dont agree with what you or your mentors are saying as far as limits are conserned.

Magik's slave



RavenMuse -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 11:24:38 AM)

Thats fine sweetie.... you simply wouldn't be compatable and we'd both simply move on to someone who was.

*I* set the limits based on those two criteria. What harms and what she really struggles to do. The girl does NOT get to cherry pick, limits are NOT something she can use to control the situation, not with ME!



junecleaver -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 11:32:17 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



It's not like there is an official BDSM dictionary so people are working off of different definitions sometimes.  There is a tendency to just throw around words without really conveying the meaning we wanted.  Limit can be one of those words.  The way I have used that word has evolved over time.  At one point, I thought I could use it to describe something I just didn't want to do.  With more information, more introspection, I eventually stopped using the word within my own relationships because it just wasn't that effective.

By that definition, I have no limits.  I am healthy mentally, emotionally, and physically.  I have no triggers or past traumas to affect my current play.  Maybe down the road we'll uncover one, but the common experiences and phobias that most people make limits around aren't things I experience(d).


I didn't go into my relationships with 'limits.'  But I did have a lot of conversations about what I did enjoy, what I didn't enjoy, what made me cry, what made me giggle.  I was honest about that stuff and I trust his judgment.  He knew going into this that I wasn't a masochist and that if he caused me pain I would endure it but I wasn't capable of 'enjoying' it like a masochist would.  He also knew that I was interested in humiliation.

He thinks of needle play as a 'limit' because he is absolutely terrified of needles and to see someone pierced with one makes him nauseous.  I think of that as a plausible reason to list something as a limit.  So maybe if we had a scene involved with camel crickets, I would have to say, 'Whoa camel crickets are a hard limit!'  Because I am actually terrified and grossed out by camel crickets.

Just for clarification imo, something unethical like play involving children or murder or impractical things like amputation or death, should not be called 'limits' since they are just part of being a pragamtic, ethical, mature adult which are the only people I would play with anyway.



MagiksSlave -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 11:43:25 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RavenMuse

Thats fine sweetie.... you simply wouldn't be compatable and we'd both simply move on to someone who was.

*I* set the limits based on those two criteria. What harms and what she really struggles to do. The girl does NOT get to cherry pick, limits are NOT something she can use to control the situation, not with ME!



hey dont get me wrong i have no limits when it comes to Master, he set all the limits we follow and that is how we both wish it to be, I just dont think if a sub has limits that they should be conisdered soft just because someone doesnt feel a sub is intitled to have hard limits or doesnt think they should exist.. thats all I was saying.

edited to add: The only thing Master lets me controll with any type of limiting is electrical play.. dont get me wrong we still use the electric paddle but he wont forse it onme if I really really dont want it because he knows how terrafied I am of it... like really really scared so he lets me have a little more controll over that.

Magik's slave



leakylee -> RE: Hard Limits (4/30/2007 11:44:09 AM)

i use the term limits simply because that is the accepted venue, but like a few others, once owned, mine are gone. i accept the preference of the one that i have freely chosen to serve. it was a choice i made. so i had better know what i am in for. the best that i can hope for is to request not to do something, and i had better have a damn good reason why it would be harmful to me. but even this is entirely up to the degression of my owner.

lee



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.1787109