So, for over a week now, I've been working on a post about whether or not there are forms of play, especially emotional or mental play, which are inherently abusive or universally unacceptable and questioning whether there are limitations to what can be consented to, even when all parties are adults who are fully mentally capable of giving their consent. I've questioned what sorts of activities are appropriate to do in a "blanket consent" or "generalized consent" relationship when one has given a general surrender of power instead of negotiating specific activities.
I don't know that I'm ever going to be able to finish this post. It's probably the most difficult thing I've tried to write.
This is partially because I'm scared that this will look like I'm trying to point fingers, or that I'm writing this with an agenda, which I'm honestly not doing. I'm not trying to say that I was abused, or that someone I know was abused, or that there was a specific situation I was involved in or witnessed recently where consent was not appropriately given. My thought process for this post started because I described a form of play as being "abusive" recently, and then started thinking about whether it's possible for any one thing to be inherently so instead of being different in any situation. I don't want to cause any outrage or hurt any feelings. I'm trying to write carefully and deliberately with this in mind.
This is also partially because of my writing style. When I'm ruminating on a theoretical topic, I tend to pull in examples using anecdotal evidence from my life or from other people's activities that have been shared with me. I feel like it's unfair for me to do that in this situation because then it puts these activities under the scrutiny of "was this abusive?" and no one wants that. That isn't fair to anyone, nor is it generally appropriate. When you remove all the specific descriptions from the text, you're only left with a series of questions to which I don't have any answers:
Are there things that can't be consented to?
Is consent valid when a person doesn't fully know or understand what they are consenting to?
Is consent valid if it's given when a person has already been brought into subspace?
Are there any activities that simply shouldn't be done?
Do we ever have the right to judge other people's activities?
If the same activity can be both positive and abusive depending on context, are there any aspects that influence this besides consent?
For now, I'm going to keep the rest of the post that I've worked on as a draft. Maybe I'll eventually come up with a way to finish it. In the meantime, I'd like to pose these questions to all of you. I'm curious to see if you have any answers. ♥
Hi! I’m Alex Reynolds. This blog deals with my adventures in consensual adult spanking, domestic discipline, Dominant/submissive dynamics, my life as a professional spanking model and my interactions with the kink, BDSM and fetish community.
Alex,
ReplyDeleteThis is a very difficult task. I really try not to be judgmental as well. I play hard and sometimes I have had people in the scene judge me. I am not pleased by these comments. But, I know the people mean well.
In my opinion, most edge play such as suspension bondage is abusive if the Dom is mentally impaired by alcohol or drugs.
Nerve damage caused by careless bondage techniques is abusive.
I am very interested in anything you write about this topic and I hope it engenders a good discussion.
Hugs,
joey
Thanks for your reply, joey! I agree with you that play become abusive if a person is impaired in a way that means that they can not safely perform it. I'd go further to add that I think some kinds of edge play are abusive if, even sober and cogent, a person is not capable of doing them properly. For example, I had someone with whom I was playing want me to switch and do some Topping. While I've topped for things like hand spankings or OTK paddlings, I simply don't know how to use more difficult implements and refused to try in that setting because I could have harmed someone. If I had decided to try something like complex bondage or breath play as an "experiment" without proper training or supervision I could have killed or injured someone. These are all important considerations.
DeleteThe other point you raised is very important, too: that no one likes to be judged. I've done some hard play myself and had it be a very positive experience, and I hate it when people comment that it wasn't done properly.
I wonder how many people will touch this one. It really is a tough call, and one has to tread very delicately. Plus, answering these questions would require an entire post in a comment.
ReplyDeleteI'll simply give one example, as food for thought. I once met a man who loved erotic asphyxiation. He told me that his ultimate, most cherished fantasy was to be smothered to death by a beautiful dominant woman. I just blinked at him. "But... but... you'd be dead!" I sputtered.
He smiled and answered, "Yes, but what a way to go."
Should anyone fulfill that for him, just because he wants it and consents to it?
Yeah, I realized that it was kind of a cop-out to ask others their opinions without actually stating mine. It's just been on my mind so much, but I don't know that I'm able to have careful enough footing. Ugh.
DeleteThe situation like you described is probably the most problematic one for me, because one side of me is vehemently opposed to people doing things which risk or guarantee death in a scene. At the same time, I learned a lot about the Right to Die movement when my brother was terminally ill, and if I can support someone's right to end their life because of suffering, it's not too far of a step to support someone's right to end their life because of desire. I can especially see this if those two situations were COMBINED (a person who fetishizes erotic asphyxiation and also has a terminal illness wanting his or her life ended in a scene).
It's all very confusing stuff, isn't it?
I'll give it a shot. Disclaimer: these are my answers and due to time and space constraints, I'm not going into too much detail:
DeleteAre there things that can't be consented to?
I would say that you can't consent to permanently and irrevocably giving up consent.
Is consent valid when a person doesn't fully know or understand what they are consenting to?
No. But if they are "adults who are fully mentally capable of giving their consent", they they are responsible for understanding. (This of course assumes that all the information is available to them)
Is consent valid if it's given when a person has already been brought into subspace?
That one is essentially a subset of the one above it. Does someone in subspace "fully know or understand"?
Are there any activities that simply shouldn't be done?
Never say "never" or "always"
Do we ever have the right to judge other people's activities?
If someone activities violate our own judgment, then I then we do judge them in our own minds, even if we don't say or do anything.
If the same activity can be both positive and abusive depending on context, are there any aspects that influence this besides consent?
Maybe, but I think consent is certainly the most important.
Hi, Alex. I've been to parties you attended but you wouldn't remember me. Thanks for the blog. I'm here because Blue Mark posted a link on a forum we both read.
ReplyDeleteFascinating list of questions. I can certainly see how writing about them, as an insider with lots of experience and lots of friends in the scene, would be difficult for you to do diplomatically. Also, it's hard to decide what to believe! These are questions that I would probably answer one way in the abstract, in theory, ideologically, but might answer very differently in real life, in the event, in action.
Are there things that can't be consented to?
My first thought here has to do with irrevocability. Play resulting in death is certainly one good example, but another is anything resulting in permanent disability -- in the extreme, a Boxing Helena scenario. With death (assuming no communication with the afterlife, if any) we can never know if the sub regretted it. If someone consented to quadruple amputation, we could know. So, is "permanent, uncorrectable change" a criterion? Well, that would also forbid cutting, branding, tattoos. Do we add "significantly affecting function"?
But since we all have only so much time to live, ALL decisions are irrevocable and cause permanent change, if only "there's five minutes of my life I can never have back." So my distinction may be meaningless.
But the deeper question (to a libertarian such as myself) is should we limit what decisions another person can make about her life? If an action violates no one's rights but the person choosing it, is it our business?
Is consent valid when a person doesn't fully know or understand what they are consenting to?
Tricky question. If they KNOW they don't know, sure. "I'm going to give you some number of swats between 5 and 15" is a trivial example. It's possible to consent to something the person you're giving consent to doesn't even know yet. "I'm going to choose one of these 3 implements by odd or even on a die." And certainly, in the initial consent of a TPE, neither party knows everything that may be involved. (I guess this question contains or includes "should there be any such thing as TPE?") But if the person THINKS they know what they're consenting to and are being deceived, then no.
Is consent valid if it's given when a person has already been brought into subspace?
I don't think so, any more than if they were drugged or talking in their sleep.
Are there any activities that simply shouldn't be done?
Is this different from question #1? If it shouldn't be done, it can't be consented to, and vice versa.
Do we ever have the right to judge other people's activities?
We can certainly judge whether we think they are behaving wisely, if they are making a good decision, if they are screwing up their lives. I make that judgment EVERY SINGLE TIME I see someone with a tattoo or other body modification. I'm the most judgmental SOB you ever met. I judge without knowing the facts, I judge based on personal preference or bias as if it was objective fact, nothing stops me. But so what? The issue is whether I should have any authority to STOP someone else. Nope.
(Entire post is too long; to be continued; in case I can't post the rest, to avoid this being anonymous, I am Michael (from Texas))
If the same activity can be both positive and abusive depending on context, are there any aspects that influence this besides consent?
DeleteHmm, is there ANY activity that isn't abusive if it's done without consent? That's the basis of every back-seat-of-the-car sibling quarrel that ever happened. "Moooom, he's POKING me." "Stop poking your sister." "Moooom, now he's TOUCHING me." "Stop touching your sister." "Moooom, now he's breathing on me."
But the end of your question is MUCH harder. As a top, what I see that meaning is this: Is there anything that I WANT to do, that I still should NOT do, even if a sub ASKED me to do it? Even if both of us consent to it, should it still not be done?
My PERSONAL answer to that is, I can think of thousands -- some of which I'd probably do anyway and regret. One category -- if it would violate someone else's rights, like public sex where we are likely to be seen by someone who might very well not want to look at that. In a sense, unprotected sex falls into this category, the someone else being the potential baby. Another general category is the entire class of "This will feel good now but it's dimes to dollars at least one of us will regret it later" and "This will feel good now, but after it's over it'll probably mean we never want to speak to each other again because it was just too much." This may not be what you are trying to get at. I'm answering "positive or negative" rather than "positive or abusive."
Speaking of which, this is abusively long. So I'll stop.
Michael (from Texas)
Mark and Michael, thanks SO MUCH for adding such detailed and eloquent thoughts. You give me a lot to think about!
ReplyDeleteMy comments keep disappearing. Third try. This is an interesting topic. I'll touch on one specific question from above.
ReplyDeleteIs consent valid if it's given when a person has already been brought into subspace?
I'd say no, it isn't. This is a point that is often harped on in my local BDSM community at party orientations and discussions about negotiation. Talk about it BEFORE the scene. If you didn't discuss it in advance then don't do it. It's not fair to spring something on someone who is in a different mindset than if you had asked beforehand or will feel pressured to go along with it. After the scene is over, discuss it. Let your partner know what was coming to mind and if it is agreed on it can be fit in NEXT time.