Safe, Sane & Consensual: Words to Live By

[catalina_francisco]

I don't think SSC is the only right way to do things, because I'm not crazy about having my morality defined in acronyms. I don't think it's ok to villify people who want to take the risks, I do think it's ok to reiterate that there may be some serious risks and this is what they are.

As for consent, it's the thing that differentiates me from Pinochet, in my mind, at times. I like to keep that wall up. Consent can be one time and blanket, or it can be ongoing and revoked at any time, that's a stylistic detail if you ask me. There are millions of people in the world that don't get the benefit of consent at any point.

I don't mind SSC when it's not intoned and invoked with fanaticism.

Have to agree with you. I think SSC for me is not about telling others how they should do things, but ensuring there is a clear understanding about the difference between consent and abuse, and that consent is not meaning you unthinkingly say, 'Yes Master/Mistress, I am yours to do with what you will' without having an informed view from which to give that consent.

I am afraid I am coming to a point where once I would have had empathy for those who fought this idea of informed consent and play and then came wimpering back after things went where they didn't think/know they could, to feeling 'whatever, you reap what you sow'. Sounds a bit cold but when people fight so fiercely and blindly to not be informed and justify it as their right, I tend to think, fine, you're right...that is their consent, they can take the responsibility and consequences of not thinking first and learn by it, but don't be surprised if I don't feel like dishing up the tea and sympathy. I have no problem if someone makes an informed decision and for some reason it does not work out...at least they have tried to protect themselves in a responsible manner which acknowledges the risks.

Catalina

 

[catalina_francisco]

Another aspect on the consent issue. Make sure your play is not done in a way that might offend others. Wether that be doing it in a public place or leaving the drapes open. Remember everything you do reflects on the BDSM community as a whole. If we offend non playes, it only gives them ammo to use against us.

Nice to see others also think of the bigger picture and other people who are not being given the opportunity to consent. It is not that difficult to have your fun, without making it harder for the rest of the community to be taken seriously when asking the right to play in the way which floats their boat be respected.

Catalina

 

[ownedsubgal]

i never understood the concept of allowing others' perceptions to affect the way you live your life. not doing a certain thing because it could make your particular community (in this case, the BDSM or D/s lifestyle) look bad to those who are not a part of it. that to me sounds a rather dreary and forced existence. i believe in common courtesy to others, in carrying onself in a manner befitting one's place, in being an overall good person. it seems to me if, while using one's submissive or slave, one is thinking...gosh, i had better close the drapes, someone might see me beating you...if before doing anything, one considers how others might think of that act...that one is not truly living at all. that doesn't mean bringing the chains and whip to the kids' teeball practice is okay, i just don't believe lifestylers should care so much what the rest of the world thinks of us. if you carry yourself to be worthy of respect within the lifestyle, then to me it follows that you are carrying yourself to be worthy of respect without. no adjustments necessary.

 

[catalina_francisco]

OSG, it is a matter of fact that most of us in the lifestyle have to live in the vanilla world. I have a job and need an income, the way I am perceived will impact on my income, although I am fortunate enough to live in a country where BDSM is not illegal it is a matter of fact that if known my career could be influenced. There are submissives that have children, in many countries they would lose custody if it would be known that they are into BDSM. If you want visitation rights to your own children, being male or female, and it is known that you are into BDSM, and more so you live that lifestyle in front of the children, again you could lose all visitation rights. For the most of us the way the rest of the world look at BDSM will influence us financially, emotionally, and yes physically.

If given the choice of living without my children, of not having a job, or drawing my curtains to maybe protect children of others, my choice is quite easy.

Next to that if we advocate that we do not enforce consent then we have a problem, the problem simply is that if we can take partners without their consent what is stopping me from taking the first good looking woman I encounter on the street. What gives me or anyone the right to decide the pecking order in this world, without consent it is the right of the strongest, and the strongest is not always the biggest, but most of the time it will mean the richest or the one with the biggest gun. Like Netzach said before, consent differentiates me from Pinochet or Hitler or Genghis Khan. Without consent I would be an abuser, however I do believe in blanket consent if given freely.

Consent is also not only about me and my partner/s, if I decide to have sex in public, to do some exhibitionist acts my partner and I might have consented to it, but what about the 4 year old kid who passes by, what about the religious fanatic who is insulted by it, or the simpleton who is completely shocked. We have the right of consent but our rights weigh as heavily as vanilla rights. We simply do not have to right to enforce our lifestyle onto others.

This does not mean that you have to follow the SSC blindly, that it is to be our bible, but it should be your guidelines, maybe not following the letter of the word but more the spirit and the ideas behind it, and consideration for others both in and out of the lifestyle.

Francisco.

 

[Netzach]

There's a big difference between not subjecting people to your sexual kinks and not playing in a way that "offends anyone."

I patently refuse to live as anyone's poster child in the name of SSC.

Nor do I think it's my job to reassure the fearful "no no no it's not like that..." when sometimes...it is. It wasn't by conforming in a panic to the expectations of straight people that GLBT people won rights, though that strategy was an important starting point (Mattachines come to mind)....it was by deciding to be exactly who we were and wearing dresses while pelting the police with bricks for 3 days. While I'm not a fan of violence I think we're going to have to do more opposition and less advertising if we want to have rights.

My walls are thin. There's lots of loud everything going on. I'm sure I contribute to this in interesting ways at times, but I'm not going to live my life gagged because someone might know I have sex at some point.

That said, I don't take my show on the road, usually. I expect respect and obedience in public but I don't make it ostentatious for someone to deliver these things.

But I definitely do believe in consent as a way to enter a relationship or a contract. I definitely believe in *informed* consent as a way to handle ourselves as individuals interacting with others. I definitely believe in responsibility for ourselves as individuals, and like osg I think that common sense good conduct is it's own best advertising.

 

[Kain]

Consent is also not only about me and my partner/s, if I decide to have sex in public, to do some exhibitionist acts my partner and I might have consented to it, but what about the 4 year old kid who passes by, what about the religious fanatic who is insulted by it, or the simpleton who is completely shocked. We have the right of consent but our rights weigh as heavily as vanilla rights. We simply do not have to right to enforce our lifestyle onto others.

Exactly my point, but worded more eloquently than I ever could.