I find the whole "no limits" thing a bit unrealistic.

[cati]

Briefly off topic.

SNAZZOZA

Coming from a Finnish background as I do, I couldn't resist replying to your thread. Your mentioning not wanting to go nude in a sauna made me smile. So often in public spas and such places in North America men and women will usually wrap themselves in a towel or wear a bathing suit, just as I would.
Whereas in Finland, the sauna replaces the bath and for convenience sake parents will take sauna with their "children". When the males reach adolescence they will join the other men and the girls the other females in the family.

For propriety's sake hosts will usually join their foreign guests wearing a towel.

In public saunas women will go together and the men similarly. It's never a mixed bag. On a recent visit to Finland I was invited to go with my aunt to a semi-public sauna and nude swim with the other women from the apartment complex. Although this is considerd the norm, I politely bowed out.
On the other hand I would easily take a sauna with other women "friends".

In North America the sauna is considered the same as a steam bath I guess. People are usually uncomfortable if someone comes in naked, although it does happen of course. I'm thinking it's more of a health issue in this situation.
Another tidbit...it is considered shameful for unwedded partners to take a sauna together.
Believe me you are not alone in not wanting to take sauna in your birthday suit.

 

[catalina_francisco]

I think the two sides in this never-ending controversy are not as far apart as it seems on the surface. The two sides don't mean the same thing when they say "no limits", or "my limits are my Master's limits". What this means to me is that they know the Master won't make them violate their limits, so they are safe in the "no limits" posture.

This issue is sort of like the lumberjack who said he used the same axe for fifty years. When questioned about that, he clarified what he meant. "I had to replace the handle nine times, and the head three times, but other than that it's the same axe."

To say you have limits is to somehow make you less submissive- to place restrictions on your Master's controls, and many subs just aren't comfortable with that idea.

My understanding from what Dominants have told me, including my Master, is that 'my limits are my Master's limits' is exactly as it sounds, not that it is essentially a matter of knowing the Master won't make them violate their own limits. It does mean IMHO as lilredwolph explained so well, that the submissive/slave has no limits in the relationship with their Dominant or anyone they are instructed to act accordingly with, but that a Dominant (as in many Dominant things) is entitled to set limits by which the pyl has to abide. That does not make them the pyl's limits as the pyl does not set them, but does make them the PYL's limits which makes sense to me. Often the limits of a PYL will also shift over time, but that still does not mean the pyl is misrepresenting themselves by saying they are in a 'no limits' relationship. Let's face it, the relationship and terms as such are between the consenting parties involved, and as much as some people who do not participate in such relationships like to push the 'yeah, but s/he isn't going to ask you to kill anyone so it isn't no limits' envelope, time and again, to try and invalidate the 'no limits' specifications of the relationship, it is not up to outside people to set the limits of another's relationship. As long as the limits are not set by the pyl, and there is a genuine desire and effort put into carrying out whatever order the Dom/me gives, IMHO it is a 'no limits' relationship.

It also does not mean blind obedience as some imagine, as some of the things ordered, can take a lot of work and time to achieve, but it does mean there is an ongoing means of training or adjustment to reach the desired goal unless the PYL decides otherwise. I also don't agree it is a matter of being less submissive to not be in such an arrangement, except perhaps in the head of some who feel that way. Everyone is entitled to form the reelationship which works for them without having to think if it suits ecveryone else.....nothing is a 'one size fits all' in this lifestyle I'm afraid, so to get bent out of shape because someone is doing something you aren't might mean the person needs to look at why they feel that way and do whatever they need to move beyond it and accept they have a right to chose what works for them, just as the other person who makes them feel less or more submissive does.

Perhaps an easy way to grasp the 'no limits' concept of the pyl is this : If you do not own a car, but are allowed to drive your mother's car, do you say if asked, you own a car? Not usually, though you might say you use your mother's car with her permission.

Catalina

 

[Joe Schmoe]

i dont agree giving these away to a person that you trust is far from a direct route to destruction.

There are never any guarantees in life. There are countless instances that harm or worse has befallen someone by another that was known and trusted.

 

[CutieMouse]

I keep re-reading this thread and the best way I can explain my thoughts on it (without diving into private issues) is that *our* limits are *our* limits; which is to say there aren't any for *us*.

Neither one of us wants less than everything, but that does not mean that there aren't things he'd rather not experience and vice versa. That would be where the joys of being [hopefully] compatable and sane come into play... neither of us care to involve the "big three no nos" (children/animals/death); there are things I suspect are more important to me than him, but he actively wants them for us because it gives us pleasure; there are things that he enjoys that make me nervous (mostly an inexperience issue on my part) but I actively want those things because it brings us pleasure. I am responsible for considering his feelings and taking care of his mind/heart/body as is he with my mind/heart/body. So we steadily move toward that goal of *everything*... of exposing and cherishing each other's souls with no barriers in place; no "limits".

I don't view the relationship as having limits (well, at the moment other than time and distance ). Someone could come along and say "See? If he asked you tomorrow to nail a horse you'd say no! You DO have limits! HA!", but for *us* that isn't an issue of a limit since neither of us are interested in such things.

I'm not sure I made one ounce of sense just now, but it works for us.

 

[catalina_francisco]

There are never any guarantees in life. There are countless instances that harm or worse has befallen someone by another that was known and trusted.

And it is said by psychologists if you cannot trust any others, it is because you do not quite trust yourself/your judgement.

Catalina

 

[sexymom]

I guess my problem is that I don't understand what some people mean by limits, because they are talking about their worlds, which differ considerably from mine. I really don't know which definition is more generally accepted. The thing which confuses me is that I have never, so far, found a "no limits" submissive who was not willing to discuss his/her limits when questioned as to what they would or would not do, or allow to be done to them. That's what I mean by limits.

Limits, to me, are things you would not do, or allow, even if ordered by your Master; but I understand that many terms are used in different ways by different people.

 

[Kajira Callista]

There are never any guarantees in life. There are countless instances that harm or worse has befallen someone by another that was known and trusted.

lol that is a risk some are willing to take at times.

 

[CutieMouse]

I guess my problem is that I don't understand what some people mean by limits, because they are talking about their worlds, which differ considerably from mine. I really don't know which definition is more generally accepted. The thing which confuses me is that I have never, so far, found a "no limits" submissive who was not willing to discuss his/her limits when questioned as to what they would or would not do, or allow to be done to them. That's what I mean by limits.

Limits, to me, are things you would not do, or allow, even if ordered by your Master; but I understand that many terms are used in different ways by different people.

That makes sense. At this point, knowing what I know of him, there isn't anything he could ask of me that I would refuse to do. At this point, knowing what he knows of me, I don't believe there is anything I could ask of him he would refuse to do. Anything either of us isn't willing to do/isn't interested in (luckily) the other has no desire to do either, so I don't view it as a "limit".

ETA that doens't mean it would/is/will be easy to meet each other's needs, just that to not do so isn't reality for us at this point...

 

[sexymom]

As I thought more and more about this issue, I realized that maybe I haven't been asking the right questions. When someone talks about their relationship with another person in the bdsm world, I am always interested in the nature of the submissive's commitment or obedience, and the amount of authority and responsibility the dominant assumes.

It would probably make more sense if, instead of asking about limits, I asked, "what would you refuse to do, even if your master commanded- i. e., would you commit murder, robbery, allow an innocent person to be punished, etc? The answer to such questions tells me something about the relationship, and the character of the submissive (and the dominant) that, to me, is important. That is what I meant when asking if there were limits- not realizing that "limits" has some other meaning in the bdsm world.

 

[CutieMouse]

I asked those questions of him about a year ago when we first started chatting. The response I got was that someone who truly Loved me, who had my best interest at heart, who was willing to take on the responsibility of a Lover would never ask someone they cherished so deeply to commit murder, or robbery, or to stand silent while the innocent were unjustly punished. I would never ask such things of someone I Loved (BDSM or not) so why would I expect a Lover (PYL/pyl or not) to do so? Safe, Sane Consentual/Risk Aware Kink. Love to us might mean doing things others are not comfortable with, but it does not mean we'd damage each other (ethicly, emotionally, mentally, physically) just for the sake of a power trip.

 

[DVS]

When it's qualified with "I trust my Dom to always do the right thing." The basis of any relationship is trust. I think you can say "I know my Dom's limit's, and I'm comfortable underneath his umbrella of judgment." In my opinion, with that line of reasoning, a purely nilla wife in a vanilla marriage could also claim no limits.

There was a time when I was with a sub for a long time. In the beginning, we talked about limits. She did have limits. But, after a while, she said she knew I understood what her limits were and so I could deside everything. She would just submit to my desires. But, those initial limits were still there, she just trusted me to adhere to them.

Now, if a sub comes to me and says she has no limits, I'm likely to smile a little devious smile. I think I could come up with a few things she would have limits to. I think the no limits sub, although it would truly be sexy if it were possible, is just someone tweaking the Doms. "Pick me...pick me....I have no limits!"

Nobody in their right mind would tell a stranger that they have no limits. I can maybe see a sub saying it to a Dom who she's been with for a long time, though. She knows the Dom and what she can expect from him, because of the long relationship they've had.

 

[Netzach]

M and I both have limits. Clear, discussed limits. M, my husband, gets to say "no" on things for whatever reason he wants and things are stopped and discussed, sometimes to be continued sometimes not.

I have a slave, also, to whom I'm not married and who will essentially do anything I tell him to.

What's interesting to me is that I don't feel any more cramped, less in charge, or less the dominant in the first relationship than the second.

I think there's a depth of understanding and connection and care between people. I've had it with bottoms with tons of limits and slaves with none. I don't really care what car I took to get there, I know I like the spot I arrive at.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Now, if a sub comes to me and says she has no limits, I'm likely to smile a little devious smile. I think I could come up with a few things she would have limits to. I think the no limits sub, although it would truly be sexy if it were possible, is just someone tweaking the Doms. "Pick me...pick me....I have no limits!"

Nobody in their right mind would tell a stranger that they have no limits. I can maybe see a sub saying it to a Dom who she's been with for a long time, though. She knows the Dom and what she can expect from him, because of the long relationship they've had.

LOL, we think a lot alike DVS. We have been in contact with quite a few subs who profess they have 'no limits' before even getting to know us. As it is up to me to handle most of the initial communication, I cannot resist the urge to come up with limits I suspect they will have, and if they still try and go down the 'I will submit to anything if you choose me' path, I usually begin by telling them they are not who we are looking for, then if they want to know why, elaborate on aspects of safety which we expect submissives we play with to have, the concern that if they are really that giving with total strangers they may not be that healthy to play with, not to mention we are not interested in blind submission from someone who will give it to anyone. It usually gets most of them thinking and re-evaluating things, but ther are always a few who wil continue to claim it, but what I have found is that most of those never bother meeting anyone in RL, so once again you are stuck with too many wankers.

Catalina

 

[cati]

I'm thinking that what Joe Schmoe is trying to say is that our survival instincts would automatically kick in, should a situation get out of hand. That there is no such thing as having "no limits".
I also trust my Dom to know how far he can push me and that he will stop when that threshold is reached..but how do we know until we've gone there?

 

[catalina_francisco]

As I thought more and more about this issue, I realized that maybe I haven't been asking the right questions. When someone talks about their relationship with another person in the bdsm world, I am always interested in the nature of the submissive's commitment or obedience, and the amount of authority and responsibility the dominant assumes.

It would probably make more sense if, instead of asking about limits, I asked, "what would you refuse to do, even if your master commanded- i. e., would you commit murder, robbery, allow an innocent person to be punished, etc? The answer to such questions tells me something about the relationship, and the character of the submissive (and the dominant) that, to me, is important. That is what I meant when asking if there were limits- not realizing that "limits" has some other meaning in the bdsm world.

I have to go with CutieMouse' response here, and as much as some then try to push it means there are submissive limits, it is a futile attempt to discount something not understood. Simply put, if there is not consent from people involved in any D/s act, it becomes abuse...so if a Dom/me asked for robbery, assault, rape, murder to be committed against another unsuspecting, non-consenting individual, it no longer is a matter of limits or submission in the D/s sense, or reality, as it is involving people who have not consented to be part of the scene. And of course, those who keep going over and over the 'no limits' specifics in an effort to prove it does not exist, if they are told by a submissive they will do any of the list (murder, robbery etc.) will then jump on that as unaccceptable and stupid, so consent aside, I don't often get the feeling most want to understand as much as disprove what they don't want to accept as lived reality for some....maybe I am just getting cynical again, but is what I seem to find repeatedly.

And yes, you will see many advertise they have no limits when seeking a partner, and IMHO, they are not worth bothering with as they are either fakes looking for an online ego boost, or are of the more prevalent variety who claim no limits and then reel off a long list of 'exceptions'......that is not 'no limits', just someone who thinks it is cool to pretend they aren't, or worse, feel that everyone has the same limits as they often state. Once again this does not prove it does not exist, just in general, given the trust and seriousness of such a commitment, it is not something which is given without lots of thought, a solid basis of a relationship beyond a personal ad and anonymous replies, and time to develop and build that trust and submission through shared experiences.

For us 'no limits' is just that, it means no matter what he asks of me, I have committed to fulfilling in whatever manner possible. It may take time and hard work from me and/or both of us, but unless he decides he no longer wants the order obeyed, it is understood it will become a reality wheter I personally like it or not. Problem I have is the more I dislike whatever is demanded of me, the more I like it and am drawn to it.

Catalina