Risk and BDSM

[YourCaptor]

Ok, gotcha. Good fucking question.

First thing I would say, is, if it's just about me getting my kicks, we shouldn't be doing it. I don't care what kind of True Dom propaganda people peddle, you are in it together. The reason the experience is called a power exchange is that the sub has to have power going into it. So if a sub agrees to play at something risky with me, and we both go into it well informed, and I don't just , you know, fuck up and accidentally suspend them by their neck or something, they own half the responsibility.

But your rape play example brings up another aspect, and that is that a lot of people have trip wires in their head that they don't even know about until they get snagged. A sub might think they want rape play, but then during the scene, it triggers buried memories of something and then they freak out. And Jesus, I would rather make a mistake that we can fix with bandages than one that's gonna take ten years of counseling.

And I don't think there is jackshit you can do to avoid that kind of risk.

If you are talking about consent, I think it can be present even if the bottom is not interested in the activity. All they have to want is to do it for you. Them getting a kick out of it is not required for consent.

Also in practice I don’t think responsibility is 50/50. At least in private play it isn't.

 

[YourCaptor]

Ultimately you(general you) have to decide if you can live with the worst case scenario.
In your example and a lot of others, for the dominant person that includes being seen as the bad guy by practically everyone.

Bad guy to the point of incarceration. So really the worst case is your life ruined. Problem is, living without taking that risk may also ruin your life.

Blurgh, you should probably have contingency plans-- which I have probably never seriously thought about, to be frank. What you do when someone maybe your own self, doesn't come out of it easily, are we cognisant of the fact that risks can include lots of time dealing with hurt-- are we prepared for that?

I haaate thinking about serious stuff when I get my horn on!

Contingency plans are good idea.Hmm...

 

[KoPilot]

Idk. I think that comes mighty close to that "better to have loved and lost" thing, which I think is horseshit. If someone tells me that the status quo is just as unbearable as absolute disaster, that just tells me they've never actually experienced disaster.

"Yeah sure, we lost everything in the fire... but it sure was an adrenaline rush!"

 

[IrisAlthea]

Bad guy to the point of incarceration. So really the worst case is your life ruined. Problem is, living without taking that risk may also ruin your life.



Contingency plans are good idea.Hmm...

Yup, there's a worst case scenario for not doing things too.

 

[Pachet]

Some of the people I've known who've played the roughest and done the riskiest things, were first responders. I guarantee you they have seen the worst case scenario. And still the reward was worth the risk, to them.

Problem is, living without taking that risk may also ruin your life

^this.

People have their reasons. As long as the consequences are thought out and prepared for, I still believe it's up to the individual what they do with their own life, even if what they do leads to death. Same as if your heart's passion was extreme skiing. You could fall and smash up on the rocks and end up a bloody mess, and people will say "he died doing what he loved". But die during a bdsm scene, which may well be something that you love and that fulfills you, and it's "oh so tragic. oh well, weeding out the gene pool".

 

[YourCaptor]

Idk. I think that comes mighty close to that "better to have loved and lost" thing, which I think is horseshit. If someone tells me that the status quo is just as unbearable as absolute disaster, that just tells me they've never actually experienced disaster.

"Yeah sure, we lost everything in the fire... but it sure was an adrenaline rush!"

I disagree. What if you grew up in the fire?

Also

I actual know a friend of a friend who lost all her belongings in a fire. She said it was actually liberating. She is an interior decorator, and having to start over provided her with a blank slate. Her place looks fucking incredible.

Some of the people I've known who've played the roughest and done the riskiest things, were first responders. I guarantee you they have seen the worst case scenario. And still the reward was worth the risk, to them.



^this.

People have their reasons. As long as the consequences are thought out and prepared for, I still believe it's up to the individual what they do with their own life, even if what they do leads to death. Same as if your heart's passion was extreme skiing. You could fall and smash up on the rocks and end up a bloody mess, and people will say "he died doing what he loved". But die during a bdsm scene, which may well be something that you love and that fulfills you, and it's "oh so tragic. oh well, weeding out the gene pool".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0zryVWVqYM

 

[KoPilot]

I disagree. What if you grew up in the fire?

If you talk to someone who lives in a country torn up by revolution, war, whatever, you're not going to find anyone there who enjoys what's happened unless they're making money from it. Or unless they're nihilistic sociopaths that like breaking things.

Everyone's got self-destructive tendencies; it's our fascination with being mortal. I go riding my bike in the street without a helmet most times. I've worked with fiberglass resin and all kinds of highly toxic aerosols and solvents without a mask and sometimes without adequate ventilation, even. You bet your ass that makes me a fucking idiot, I'm not going to try and justify it. I don't need to, there's no point anyway.

But the one thing I'm not going to do is pretend to know what real disaster is like. That's a consequence that I cannot ever fully weigh or comprehend. I've never been there. I've never stepped on a landmine, had my family shot in front of me, been in a place crash, whatever, and only when I've experienced it can I say that I know if disaster is preferable to the status quo.

I actual know a friend of a friend who lost all her belongings in a fire. She said it was actually liberating. She is an interior decorator, and having to start over provided her with a blank slate. Her place looks fucking incredible.

If she liked the fire and not just the freedom, she'd be burning her possessions every time she got sick of looking at something. She liked the aftermath, not the event itself. Completely different. She also probably made a shitton of money from the insurance claim. If your inverted suspension goes awry, you're probably not going to get a nice chunk of change from a settlement.

 

[YourCaptor]

If you talk to someone who lives in a country torn up by revolution, war, whatever, you're not going to find anyone there who enjoys what's happened unless they're making money from it. Or unless they're nihilistic sociopaths that like breaking things.

Everyone's got self-destructive tendencies; it's our fascination with being mortal. I go riding my bike in the street without a helmet most times. I've worked with fiberglass resin and all kinds of highly toxic aerosols and solvents without a mask and sometimes without adequate ventilation, even. You bet your ass that makes me a fucking idiot, I'm not going to try and justify it. I don't need to, there's no point anyway.

But the one thing I'm not going to do is pretend to know what real disaster is like. That's a consequence that I cannot ever fully weigh or comprehend. I've never been there. I've never stepped on a landmine, had my family shot in front of me, been in a place crash, whatever, and only when I've experienced it can I say that I know if disaster is preferable to the status quo.



If she liked the fire and not just the freedom, she'd be burning her possessions every time she got sick of looking at something. She liked the aftermath, not the event itself. Completely different. She also probably made a shitton of money from the insurance claim. If your inverted suspension goes awry, you're probably not going to get a nice chunk of change from a settlement.

I think this is starting to turn off into a wrong direction. This is about chasing risk, not tragic events.

Its not the disaster that is craved, it is the risk of disaster.

So in the fire example, someone would not be trying to burn things, but maybe they would leave candles unattended.

 

[KoPilot]

I think this is starting to turn off into a wrong direction. This is about chasing risk, not tragic events.

Its not the disaster that is craved, it is the risk of disaster.

So in the fire example, someone would not be trying to burn things, but maybe they would leave candles unattended.

You can't talk about risk without talking about the tragedy that might result, though. That's the whole point of this thread.

 

[MzChrista]

If you are talking about consent, I think it can be present even if the bottom is not interested in the activity. All they have to want is to do it for you. Them getting a kick out of it is not required for consent.

Also in practice I don’t think responsibility is 50/50. At least in private play it isn't.

if you are talking about what gets done during a scene, then yeah, the top holds the biggest part of responsibility. Knowing how to do whatever you are doing in a safe way and then DOING it that way, and all that.

but what i am saying is that if the bottom agrees to do a scene, they are taking half the responsibility by agreeing to it. If they are taking less than half, then I dont think they are really consenting are they?

 

[MzChrista]

Yup, there's a worst case scenario for not doing things too.

In the long run, most people regret things they didnt do more than they regret things they did.

 

[YourCaptor]

You can't talk about risk without talking about the tragedy that might result, though. That's the whole point of this thread.

True, I just want to make sure to counter the loosing everything in the fire was an adrenalin rush issue.

 

[YourCaptor]

if you are talking about what gets done during a scene, then yeah, the top holds the biggest part of responsibility. Knowing how to do whatever you are doing in a safe way and then DOING it that way, and all that.

but what i am saying is that if the bottom agrees to do a scene, they are taking half the responsibility by agreeing to it. If they are taking less than half, then I dont think they are really consenting are they?

I totally need to use this on play partners. Nice logic. I like it.