Yesterday, a lady came into the Submissive Women's forum I frequent with an issue:
On previous occasions she and her partner had discussed anal play and she had expressed a disinterest in it, I believe her exact words to her partner were "I'm not interested in that."
For most folks, I would hope, that would be a pretty clear indication not to pursue anal play, but her partner decided that while she was spacing to fiddle with her bum... She is, to say the least, unhappy and feels that he might have broken her trust.
Many people advised the OP to make anal play a hard limit.
Today, another lady started a thread questioning why "I'm not interested" wasn't enough and why someone should have to make something a hard limit to have their reluctance to participate in an unwanted activity respected.
It started me thinking.
There's an idea floating around in the Kinkyverse that "no" doesn't always mean "no." We sometimes have safe words so that we can participate in play where we want to protest or say "no" without play stopping. Sometimes play won't stop until a safe word has been used. Safe words and the sometimes-ambiguity of "no" is such a big deal that there are a plethora of blogs written about it... A BDSM code word is required to stop play.
So we've got this idea that plain English isn't serious and we need to use a code word to express how serious a "no" actually is.
Thinking more, I wondered if the "no doesn't always mean no so have a safe word" school of thought might be affecting other plain-spoken communication. Communication your average submissive would expect to be heard and respected by a partner?
It's not impossible to imagine that someone who is hung up on safe words and play involving protest might view "Hard Limit" in the same light... "I'm not interested in that" could be seen as a faux protest to that person, leaving them with the feeling that it's OK to try that activity because they didn't hear the unambiguous "Hard Limit" code word to indicate that anal play was definitely off the table.
The code word makes what previously would have been seen as clear communication ambiguous.
It's really effing complicated.
But I suppose having heard about it, it's something that s-types and D-types should be aware of, and discuss before playing, because having your butthole diddled while spacing is a pretty tame activity when compared to some of the shit we can say "I'm not interested in that" about.
So...
S-types, just to be safe, it might be a good idea that you communicate to a new partner that when you express a disinterest in something you mean it. That disinterest is a hard limit until you say other wise, "I am not interested in that, it is a hard limit."
D-types, also to be safe, it might be a good idea if you ask a new partner how serious they are when they express a disinterest in something without calling it a hard limit. It might be protest play, but it might not... And if it's not? If you go ahead without consent, you both might end up feeling pretty awful about whatever happened. Nobody wants that.
Tuesday, January 6, 2015
Real & True BDSM Frustration
Yesterday, out of curiosity, I trolled FB (of all places) for groups geared towards submission. I found one, labeled as a "help group" or some such thing and decided, "What the hell, Squeaky. We've got nothing better to do (other than playing Farm Saga), let's join this here groupie thinger." So I joined, got approved, it was a closed group, and began reading.
Five minutes in and I just wanted to start banging my head against my keyboard until my skull ruptured and my brains spilled out. The only reason I refrained was because Cookie would be traumatized, and I didn't want to traumatize him. I like Cookie.
It's all very One True Way, Thou Shalt Not Sub Any Way But Thy One Twue Way, Amen-ish.
And I know it's meant to be helpful- I know that... But really, how helpful is it when you're offering newbies only one perspective and everybody in the group parrots your Holy Grail of BDSM?
There's a note about collars taken from someone else's blog, outlining the various "meanings" of collars (including one that I'd never heard of in my 18 years of doing WIITWD) and how EVERYBODY doing D/s believes and agrees with the author because it's Real & True...
No mention of the fact that not everybody uses collars, that some folks only view them as another toy in the box (even deeply committed We-Own-A-Home-Have-Kids-And-Dogs-Together-And-Are-Married people), not all people follow the "stages" of collaring...
There was a note about how to recognize a "Profound Submissive" (even if they didn't know they were a "profound submissive"...
And I read it and thought... OK, maybe that's someone who is extremely submissive in both personality and orientation, but it could just as easily be someone who had a profoundly submissive personality and had no interest in D/s, someone who had such horrible issues enforcing boundaries and standing up for themselves that perhaps therapy might help, or someone who had suffered through years of abuse and had no sense of self left... It just seemed rather shady to label that person and treat them like a submissive when that might not be who they are or how they want to be treated.
There were notes on "Rules for Submissives" (My favorite was "Be Humble" followed closely by "Respect and obey your top and expect punishment if you don't." Never mind that not all dynamics include punishment).
A Note on how to be a real Dom (Including rules for All Doms).
Something about etiquette to observe during a munch- A MUNCH! About the most Vanilla kinky gathering one can go to where there is no "etiquette" because it's in a public, vanilla space and Dog forbid we squick the 'Nillas!
*************************sigh*
So I doubt I'll last there very long. I won't quit- Someone has to pipe up and say "Hey, the only right way to do it is the way that works for you and your partner/s..." and I have the feeling that will go over like a fart in church.
Until then, it just reminds me why I write this bloggy thing. So there's another perspective available for the folks who feel that they have to shoe-horn themselves into someone else's idea of Real & True BDSM and end up being frustrated, unfulfilled, and possibly harmed because that R&T idea isn't a good fit for them.
Five minutes in and I just wanted to start banging my head against my keyboard until my skull ruptured and my brains spilled out. The only reason I refrained was because Cookie would be traumatized, and I didn't want to traumatize him. I like Cookie.
It's all very One True Way, Thou Shalt Not Sub Any Way But Thy One Twue Way, Amen-ish.
And I know it's meant to be helpful- I know that... But really, how helpful is it when you're offering newbies only one perspective and everybody in the group parrots your Holy Grail of BDSM?
There's a note about collars taken from someone else's blog, outlining the various "meanings" of collars (including one that I'd never heard of in my 18 years of doing WIITWD) and how EVERYBODY doing D/s believes and agrees with the author because it's Real & True...
No mention of the fact that not everybody uses collars, that some folks only view them as another toy in the box (even deeply committed We-Own-A-Home-Have-Kids-And-Dogs-Together-And-Are-Married people), not all people follow the "stages" of collaring...
There was a note about how to recognize a "Profound Submissive" (even if they didn't know they were a "profound submissive"...
And I read it and thought... OK, maybe that's someone who is extremely submissive in both personality and orientation, but it could just as easily be someone who had a profoundly submissive personality and had no interest in D/s, someone who had such horrible issues enforcing boundaries and standing up for themselves that perhaps therapy might help, or someone who had suffered through years of abuse and had no sense of self left... It just seemed rather shady to label that person and treat them like a submissive when that might not be who they are or how they want to be treated.
There were notes on "Rules for Submissives" (My favorite was "Be Humble" followed closely by "Respect and obey your top and expect punishment if you don't." Never mind that not all dynamics include punishment).
A Note on how to be a real Dom (Including rules for All Doms).
Something about etiquette to observe during a munch- A MUNCH! About the most Vanilla kinky gathering one can go to where there is no "etiquette" because it's in a public, vanilla space and Dog forbid we squick the 'Nillas!
*************************sigh*
So I doubt I'll last there very long. I won't quit- Someone has to pipe up and say "Hey, the only right way to do it is the way that works for you and your partner/s..." and I have the feeling that will go over like a fart in church.
Until then, it just reminds me why I write this bloggy thing. So there's another perspective available for the folks who feel that they have to shoe-horn themselves into someone else's idea of Real & True BDSM and end up being frustrated, unfulfilled, and possibly harmed because that R&T idea isn't a good fit for them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)