Offering her Collar?

There was a question on a group over on FetLife about when a submissive should “offer her collar.”

It isn’t my collar to offer. It is Master’s collar that he slipped around my neck and locked in place to symbolize his ownership of me. If he were to end our relationship, the collar would stay with him as it is his.

We got to know each other and had many discussions on what we wanted from a relationship before Master collared me. The collaring took me by complete surprise, but made me happy he wanted to claim me as his.

In a previous M/s relationship, I wasn’t ever collared although I was in a committed M/s relationship. He didn’t view the symbol necessary to our relationship.

When I was single and had play partners, it still wasn’t my collar to offer. It was a symbol of the dynamic no matter if it was a few hours of play and submitting or a weekend or a week. Many didn’t play with collars. A few asked me if I had a collar, but more like a toy to use for leashing or using attachment points.

Master has many different collars for me. One is the one he collared me with and the others they are more for play or dressing up. Such one matches the cuffs that I wear during play. I have a pink patent leather one that is cute to wear when doing daddy/little girl or school girl. A metal collar that I have wore when dressing up at big events.

I think usually it seems to be a mutual agreed upon decision what the collar means and when one is collared. For me a collar is a symbol of the relationship be it D/s, Top/bottom, Daddy/little girl, M/s or whatever the foundation of dynamic represents.

30 Days of Kink – Day 26

02kink2Day 26: What’s your opinion on online BDSM play?

Well this has hit one of my pet peeves. I have been there and done that and it does nothing for me. I embraced it at one time as I thought it was all I could have, but then I knew I needed more and got offline.

My pet peeve comes in when someone will write me and they say they are owned and talk of their life of service and how it feels. Or they talk about the scene they had last night. They talk about how brutal it, how the lashes hurt, and then I find out that it was all online and nothing done in real life.  When I say that he slaps my face and then spits on me, it is because he is actually doing it to me. There is an actual red cheek and spit dripping down my face. When I am getting him his coffee, cleaning his house, and doing many other acts of service, I am doing them here in person.

It is okay if you want and desire BDSM online, just don’t tell me you are being brutally beaten when you aren’t. Say “we role-played online that he beat me.” I would respect that a lot more than making it seem like it is all done in person when it isn’t.

See the rest of the 30 Days of Kink questions here.

Understanding punishments

Another day, another head scratching moment.

On FL, I came across a post by which an s-type admitting to having done something against her d-type’s wishes.  The punishment administered was to masturbate in public at multiple locations.

*sighs*

I know we all approach the lifestyle differently and there’s no one way to do the things we do …. but really?

How is masturbating a punishment?

I completely get that this might be how some folks see punishments as being, but I just don’t agree with it for my relationships.  What’s the lesson to be learned in the final analysis?

* Do something against the d-type wishes (break a rule, command, whatever)
* Be told to masturbate as punishment

Lesson learned … is …. break more rules and commands so that masturbational activity can continue?

It’s okay if your dynamic swarms around fun-ishments … and if in the colloquial analysis you want to call them punishments – then I suppose that’s up to you.  Personally, I don’t like it when my s-types do something against my wishes.  It’s more important to me to find out why things didn’t happen and to fix those things – rather than giving them some masturbation exercise that really doesn’t teach them anything.

I’m not sure how the fun-ishers deal with things they want changed … if they are dangling masturbation and other acts as “punishments.”  It makes things complicated and inconsistent.  Does the rationale rest in trying to keep the dynamic from going too deep?  How does fun-ishments reinforce the things those d-types want their s-types to do?

I’m logically trying to figure out how those dynamic sustain themselves over the long haul.

Consensual issues (part 3): Separating facts from projections

Bob is a bad man.
Bob did very cruel and inhuman things.
Bob is dangerous.
Bob pushes lines and does mean things.

We don’t like Bob.

Bob has been banished from our land.

Except…

Did we really glean anything about Bob?  Do we know what Bob did?  No.  But someone out there made an accusation … and all things we knew about Bob are immediately slanted to whatever the accusation is.  “Bob is bad.”

There’s a climate in local communities at the moment that are approaching abuse and consensual non-consent (CNC) issues with a very zealous blinding attack cycle.  I appreciate and support the awareness lessons that are currently being advocated.  However I’m a bit concerned that some folks are projecting more of their own issues towards this crusade and not keeping a balanced check of their emotions and past.

Being blinded by such projections do not allow us to objectively look at the problem and make sound, rational and sane decisions about Bob.  Yet there are those that instinctively have figured out Bob without gathering any other facts beyond that which was said up above.  “Oh I knew he was a bad person.  I heard … I heard … then I heard ….”

I’m not very intrigued at the what and how Bob did things … I’m more interested in the why things happened the way they did.

I am very much opposed of the overzealous nature by which Bob gets skewered for whatever Bob apparently did.  Communities instinctively have knee-jerk reactions as they seek to ban, flog, and stone Bob to death for whatever atrocities he is believed to have done.  I know you may be reading this going: “yeah, he’s going to blame the victim,” when simply I’m imploring people to reflect on the totality of what happened instead of making erroneous rashes to judgment.

If Bob did bad bad things, then Bob deserves to be punished for those things.

It’s plain and simple.

But if Bob engaged into a situation with Sally – then in the interest of fairness, we need to examine the totality of what happened and why it happened.  That’s not a lobbied support to accept Bob as an innocent as much as it’s important to examine Sally’s role in what happened.  That’s because when folks partake in a consensual environment, in a consensual kink dynamic, there’s a mutual engagement between people. Someone becomes the dominant, someone becomes the submissive.  A scene, play weekend or dynamic then evolves from that.  Hence the reason that there’s a shared responsibility between Bob and Sally that most advocates seem to casually omit when banging their war drums loudly.

By examining what Sally did on her part also enables us to learn how to better teach s-types to avoid the peril Sally faced.  If at the very least, offering a fair warning, educating her more extensively in the negotiation phase or better yet – how to teach her to better listen to her instincts.  We stand to gain a lot of information as to why things happened as they did.

Yes, we can put all the onus and burden on Bob since he’s the d-type.  I can understand that perspective.  But the majority of the situations out there come from an agreement being reached between two like minded people to engage in … something.  If Bob kidnapped Sally.  If he broke into her house.  If he did anything where Sally could not negotiate and be in agreement with, then that’s wrong.  Bob deserves the criticism.  Bob deserves the punishment.  Bob deserves the scrutiny.

If Sally agrees and consents, then that little play on words is how we try to explain to vanillas that makes it okay when Bob spanks, whips, binds, bites and otherwise has his way with her.  Consent is at the heart of our dynamics and interactions no matter how intense or vicious the scene might become.

The integral part of consent is that it’s reached by both parties to engaged in … this or that or the other.  If Sally agreed to engage with Bob to do … things … then we need to take that into consideration.  It’s not an automatic thing, more information is needed.

Onward.

“But Sally had that one scene with him where he beat her with a dog toy and touched her inappropriately.”

Do we know what was negotiated?
Have they played together before?
Do we know what Sally and Bob talked about prior to the scene?
Do we know how much Sally knew about Bob?
Do we know how much Bob knew about Sally?
Did Sally check out Bob’s other play partners to see what kind of play he engages in?
Do we know how much she tried to know what Bob’s style was like?
Do we know if Sally knew that Bob was a dark sadist?  Is he?
Do we know if Bob knew that Sally is quite a masochist?  Is she?
Do we know what kind of masochist Sally is?
Do we know what kind of play Sally enjoys?
Do we know how much Bob conveyed to Sally?
Has Sally ever safe worded to anyone before?
Has Bob ever had anyone safe word during a scene?
Has Sally conveyed what she’s like when she goes into floaty space?
Has Sally conveyed what she’s like what she drops out of floaty space?
Does Bob really understand Sally’s floaty space and does he know what to do when the space happens?
Did they ever discuss their previous experiences so as to get a basis of what happened before?
Do we know if Bob thoroughly outlined what he planned on doing to her?
Do we know if Bob was completely honest and forthright with Sally?
Do we know if Sally was completely honest and forthright with Bob?
Did Bob outlines places he was NOT going to go with Sally?
Do we know if Sally outlined places she did NOT want to go with Bob?
Did Sally ever tell him “do what you want to do” at any point they were together?
Did Sally say anything that Bob could have possibly misconstrued as a green light into the wrong place?
Did Sally convey what triggers she has? Did she say where they come from?
Did Bob know that the play he wanted to do with Sally were going to trip triggers?
Did Bob ask Sally if she wanted to be touched sexually as the scene was going on?
Does Sally remember Bob asking her? Does Bob remember her answer?
Did Sally ever convey to him that sexual touching was a hard limit?
Did Bob ever convey to her that sexual touching was something he was going to do?
If Bob nor Sally didn’t discuss sexual touching – why didn’t they?
During their scene, did Sally safe word?
Did they discuss what safe words were going to be employed?
If Sally safe worded, did Bob know?  What did Bob do?
If he didn’t stop – why didn’t he?
If he knew it was a limit and didn’t stop, why didn’t he?
If she didn’t safe word, why didn’t she?
If she couldn’t safe word because she was frozen and unresponsive, then why didn’t Bob or Sally end the scene before she entered that state?
Did Bob know that Sally has a tendency of freezing up and becoming unresponsive?
What exactly do we know and why aren’t we then brutally honest with what we don’t know?

(The above list of questions are only good if everyone is blatantly honest and forthcoming with the information they’re providing. Folks that deceive their way to the “truth” – are an entirely different matter and it’s pointless attempting to get information out of them.)

I’m not blaming Sally, nor am I blaming Bob either.

“Why aren’t you blaming Bob?”

Because we lack context. We lack information. We lack perspective that can objectively review things.  We don’t know what transpired between Bob and Sally beforehand, during and after.  We don’t know what steps Sally took to protect herself nor do we know how much Bob communicated exactly what he was going to do.

“But Sally fully negotiated out what was to happen.”

I doubt it very seriously she followed the line of questioning up above.

We don’t know how clearly things were conveyed or not. We don’t know if it was a misinterpretation or a deliberate plot to cross any line that Sally puts up.  We don’t know if Bob just took advantage of the situation or if he believed he had the right to do things because of what he interpreted from Sally.  We don’t know a lot of information – and we haven’t even begun to look at the scene yet.

We don’t know if she safe worded.  We don’t know if Sally was triggered nor do we know if Bob knew about the triggers in advance.  We don’t know if she went into subspace or subdrop or what her capacity was like during the scene.  We don’t know what was conveyed during the scene or what transpired after the scene.  We don’t know what the agreed upon expectation for the scene was going to be.  Was she going to get floaty?  Was that the agreed plan and idea?  Did they walk through every step of floaty and aftercare?  We can all go blame Bob for what he’s being accused of, but as you can see much investigation still needs to be done.  Instead of instinctively picking up our pitchforks, torches and shovels we need some patience to understand what happened.

This isn’t to say that Bob did bad things, he very well could’ve and did.  It’s also equally important to look at what Sally did too.

“Aha!  Here he’s finally blaming the victim.”  No.  I’m not.

At the core of our scenes and dynamics, they are generally fostered in two (or more) folks seeking something from one another.  There’s consent, a shared responsibility, a shared level of “hey, things are going to be done to you.”  “Ok, I want things done to me.”   There’s also a shared responsibility to make sure that there’s an understanding of what’s to be expected.  If it’s going to be a no-sex scene, then changing it mid-stream is a PRETTY BIG F***** DEAL.  D-types that brush that off as something minimal truly doesn’t understand what kind of game changer something like that can be.  Conversely, if an s-type teasingly says she wants to be fucked while she’s already spacing out in their own little universe – then d-types might take that to be an invitation or a game changing deal that they are interpreting. Whether or not the s-type wanted the game changing event to happen, D-types should always stay within the agreed upon terms UNLESS the dynamic has evolved in a way that ALLOWS for those terms to change.

Even when there’s shared responsibility, it doesn’t mean d-type is automatically innocent.  If Sally did everything she could to find out about Bob’s history, she negotiated things to the T, she ensured that there was definite boundaries involved – then she’s done her part.  It’s up to Bob to ensure that he lives up to all the things that was agreed to.

If there’s dangling threads and if Sally didn’t go through all of the things she should’ve when playing with Bob – then that doesn’t excuse what Bob did either.  But it doesn’t mean that Sally’s responsibility in her part shouldn’t go unnoticed either. Not unlike any potentially harmful situations, if we don’t educate ourselves and practice some diligence in our processes we run the risk of a lot of things that could go very badly.  That’s why we have to fill out waivers about implied responsibilities when we sky dive, or take a rock climbing course, or even going to the gym.

We ultimately accept the responsibility of what happens to us.

That’s no different here – except we do enter into an agreement, arrangement, or an understanding of what can, will, potentially could happen in a scene or dynamic.

Yes, Bob needs to do what he can to uphold what is expected of him.
Yes, Sally needs to do what she can to uphold what is expected of her.

It’s entirely possible that Sally herself violated the established consent with Bob.

GULPS – WHAT THE FUCK?

If an s-type was physically, mentally and emotionally able to articulate a line or limit and they do not … then the s-type has violated consent in that situation.  It’s not “mental” to hold s-types responsible for being able to be as communicative as they can be.

To clarify: an s-type who can’t articulate a line or limit because they are experiencing mental trauma in the form of a trigger or landmine is not included in that statement.  One cannot expect an s-type to effectively communicate when their emotional and mental state are chaotically attacking everything internally.

However.

Responsible s-types will articulate their triggers and landmines well in advance so that they can be best avoided.  D-types are not mind readers. Some of us can’t read a book much less read someone’s body language.  The best way to avoid a potentially traumatic scene is to communicate everything out in the open so that things can be steered around or avoided.  s-types that don’t seek to inform d-types of the lines, limits and triggers have failed in providing a consensual situation from forming because they have held back critical information from the onset.

“Wait, so can an s-type change their mind in the middle of a scene if they need the D-type to change things up?  Or do they just have to suffer through it because ‘that’s what was agreed upon?'”

Yes.  Situations change all the time – even within the confines of a scene.  Parties should negotiate and more importantly, have the ability to rationally process and negotiate so as to avoid the “in the heat of the moment” mistakes that can happen.  If a s-type promises sex and later says they don’t want to, then the D-type has to respect that change.  Let downs happen bub – sorry.

The important thing is to find the best way to communicate all sides before, during and after the situation.  It’s not just a matter of “red, yellow, green, purple alligator, or brussel sprouts” as your safeword.  It’s about being completely open and honest through every step of the process.  It’s about establishing and maintaining that respect through every part of the situation.  If communication isn’t happening, then there’s going to be a whole lot of problems.

Communication problems are not a D-only issue.  s-types are also very good at miscommunicating or confusing things because it’s not completely clear when things are going on.  All sides need to stop and ensure that everyone knows what’s to be expected and where the comfort level lies.

“Gee, that’s a lot of stuff to do if I just want my ass flogged.”

Yes.  That’s true.  But what’s the alternative?  Having traps and triggers sprung up because all this negotiation work is seriously affecting your hard on or insatiable need to orgasm? If you’re not willing to stave off your loin lust for 30 minutes so that you can talk to Bob about the flogging scene, then I question the sanity of the situation.

What is completely lost in the entire abuse debate is that the d and s form a close mutualistic dynamic – whether it’s just for a scene or longer.  They both seek something from the other.  Hence they ultimately share in the responsibility before, during and after.

Both Bob and Sally could’ve used some outreach, education, communication and respect before they started talking about meeting up at the Motel 6 for a beat and greet.  They both get red marks for not getting to know each other when they should’ve.  They should’ve been more communicative. However, If Bob is a serial perpetrator then there should be consequences for him.  Society, not just our lifestyle, can do away with the likes of the serial abusers … but in your average situation where things can and likely can become miscommunicated, misinterpreted or misunderstood – the “blame” is mitigated and distributed accordingly.  There has to be a willingness to share the responsibility in most cases.

While I openly admit that there are predators out there – the reality is that the real world is full of them.  If there’s the perception that the lifestyle can somehow protect and guard against such horrific conduct …  then I do have some swamp land for you to see that guarantees gold.  Predators are going to find their way wherever they can.  No amount of policing or pitch-forking is going to stop that.  The best what we can do to counter that is to educate, improving our outreach and be there for those that find themselves in such situations.

As community, we need to apply some patience when fact gathering so that we don’t admonish someone out of the gates when there was a misunderstanding.  Sally’s plight is very serious and needs to be heard.  Bob is going to have some explaining to do, but both entered into a situation where outside the line behavior did not happen.  How things got awry becomes a two-person operation unless it can be well established that Bob is a serial abuser and bad person.  Before that conclusion can be reached, we all need to exercise a bit of patience and absorb the factual components of what’s known about the situation before making the leap across the dangerous abyss.

We need to accept the reality that misinterpretations can happen just as much as we have to accept the reality that there will be those that push past lines and limits to achieve whatever they wanted.

—————————————————————-

Consensual Issues (part 1): Rape culture & the lifestyle
Consensual Issues (part 2): The Problem is in the Definition
Consensual Issues (part 3): Separating facts from projections
Consensual Issues (part 4): The Unfortunate Death of Communication
Consensual Issues (part 5): Scolding the Dominant
Consensual Issues (part 6): Personal Responsibility
Consensual Issues (part 7): Community Responsibility


His, Not My Own

-written February 13, 2014

I’m finally getting it. I am finally understanding that my body is not my body, my money is not my money, even my rental is not my rental, my car is not my car. I have surrendered my life to a man who I want to be my Master. He hasn’t chosen that, yet, but I want it very badly. Why? I do not know. That is another of those judgments I’m still dealing with. But I do! I want to give my control to Sir in everything. In everything! I want him to control me – through and through.The pussy that I have is Sir’s, not mine.

To spend somebody else’s money without asking is wrong and I would never dream of doing it. I am now learning to ask for the simplest things (e.g., coffee), as it is not my money; it is Sir’s. I’m also taking somebody else’s body places whenever I go somewhere. What right do I have to take it places, if I do not communicate with the owner where I’m taking his body? His submissive. His property.

This is beginning to click, and only began to do so within the last few days. It’s been four months. We just celebrated our 4-month anniversary. And I’m understanding. I don’t know if that’s fast or slow–a shake of the head or a fist pump.

Last night, Sir went to use a rubber band on me. My first instinct, and everything in me, objected. Oh, I wanted it, yes. I did, but I had to complain. I had to flinch. I had to move. How do you not? Then danae told me from across the room to pretend I was a statue. I added onto that in my mind, that I was his statue to do with what he wants. I am Sir’s property and if he feels like marking me with a rubber band, then I should only say, “Thank you for the opportunity.” Because…oh my god…does it feed something in me!

And I do love the bruises. I love it. I don’t view the bruises as I have in the past, as something to show off – something to be proud of – showing that I went thru that trial. Now, the feeling is an amazing and slow-moving warmth filled with love, that he chose to mark me. Sir spoke of a piercing, something I have refused to do because of propriety – because of shyness. In the moment he mentioned it, I found myself not even questioning it. This is his body and if he wants that done, I have no say in this. I don’t want a say in this. I surrender my say, my thoughts, my feelings, my fear, my embarrassment, my concern…to him.

Wow. It is an amazing thing to have this new thought process develop, not necessarily as a natural thing, but as something that I no longer have to force myself to think about. It just started being there. Not that it occurs all the time, trust me! Last night I totally forgot the very first thing I was taught – to ask to eat when in his presence. It is an interesting development, though. I like it – this new way of thinking. I hope it continues to develop.

Consensual Issues (part 2): The Problem is in the Definition

It’s amazing how so much of what we do in the lifestyle turns on a single word:

CONSENT

It seems simple.

I consent to a surgical procedure.
I consent to you preparing a meal as I selected from the menu.
I consent to kiss you.
I consent to giving you a hug.
I consent to you leaving my ass to be a bloody mess.

Ah, consent.

It’s an extremely powerful, seven-letter word.  In lifestyle terms, it is the most sacred word we use. It establishes an agreement – an understanding – and gives permission for us to move forward in doing something.  It’s the green light and the antithesis to “Red!,” “Stop!” and “Quit using that &#$@% thing, dammit!”

Consent is at the heart of the things we do to one another.

In the outside world, we keep assuring the vanillas that, because there’s consent, there’s nothing else to worry about.  “I know what I’m doing; it’s okay.”  Even if it seems to them that we’re completely insane for doing something, if we’re consenting to it, it’s okay.  We sometimes compare ourselves to the likes of those that partake in extreme sports (e.g., skydiving, climbing tall buildings or radio towers, motorcycle jumping and other daredevil antics).  “We are doing the same thing. We know what we’re getting into, therefore, my vanilla worriers, it’s okay.  I know what I’m doing.  I’m a trained professional.”  🙂

Definition problems:  I’m not a boxing or ultimate fighter championship fan.  I don’t see how the goal of beating your opponent into submission (or death) is an adequate sport, and this would be why I wouldn’t last very long in a gladiator ring.  The opponents agree to, and consent to, engage each other to the brink of brutality.  No problem, right?  As long as boxer A and boxer B consent, we should get our rumble on and let them duke it out, right?

That’s when some folks start to question the sanity of the decision to consent.  That’s where folks start questioning whether or not we’re capable of deciding – if we’re sane enough to consent.  It goes back to “no self-respecting person would allow themselves to be beaten by another.”  Yet, here we are – here the community is.  That’s also usually when they start commenting how “crazy” that is and quickly pigeon-holing us into the “special needs” folder.

That’s the problem with consent: others are trying to make the determination for us.

Folks tend to invoke their own thoughts and prejudices, without considering that it is not their place to judge, scorn, or shun.  If folks say they consent, then we need to take them at their word that they rationally arrived at that decision, even if we have severe misgivings, suspicions, or hunches to the contrary.  In another words:

It’s not their place.
It’s our decision.
It’s our consent.

Normally, once consent is agreed upon and the scene played out, there are no issues.  Folks consenting to an established parameter of things, who then play within that established sandbox, reach its conclusion amicably.

But the predators and dangerous folks out there use the lifestyle’s consent paradigm against us.  They use consent like toilet paper – before discarding and flushing it away.  They misuse consent, disrespect it, and ultimately damage those around them, who come away wounded, hurt, and otherwise scarred.  That’s the origin for the the discussions happening out there.

Folks who habitually violate consent, whether in the lifestyle or not, have no place in society.  It’s really straight forward.  Either they get help and see why they did what they did or they face the ramifications for not owning up to it.  If someone repeatedly violates the consent derived between two people, it becomes a non-consensual situation.  Period.

Know what you’re consenting to:  If we went into a restaurant and ordered steak, we would be pretty upset if what we got was a veggie omelet.

“But I ordered steak?”

“I know, but veggie omelet was also on the menu and that’s what the cook decided to make you.”

We would leave in a huff and probably wouldn’t be back.

If that happened in a scene, it would be pretty easy to see that what was anticipated to occur, didn’t happen at all.  “All I wanted was a flogging; I didn’t expect to hug, kiss, and cuddle afterwards!”

Here enters the problem with consensual negotiations:  Know what you’re consenting to.

How does the d-type you’re considering having a scene with, handle their menu selection of things to do?  Are they going to expect you to endure a veggie omelet or are they going to give you what was consented to?  If you can’t answer either question, then you’re going into that situation knowingly blind.  You’re risking that things might fall outside the parameters that were negotiated.

Don’t assume:  One thing that drives me crazy at restaurants is when the server automatically assumes that I want lemon in my water.  Even if everyone else around me orders lemon and I say no, there are times the assumption (i.e., mistake) is made that I, too, wanted lemon.

It may seem like a small and trivial bit, but it’s also the exact same reason why some folks believe that it’s perfectly okay for “touchy-feely, huggy groping and kisses on the cheek” are acceptable.  Ask before doing that.  Get the other person’s consent and don’t assume  that just because you got permission to spank, flog, or whatever, that it’s opening the door for other things to happen.  Going back to the restaurant analogy:  just because you ordered the steak doesn’t automatically mean you wanted the appetizer, dessert, and happy hour drinks added to your bill without your authorization or consent.

Ask, don’t assume.

Consensual expiration dates:  Believe it or not, consent can expire.  Just because we had a great time doing that intense scene last month does not automatically mean I have received permission, or consent, today to do anything.  Look above:  don’t assume; ask before doing anything.  We are organic folks that change constantly.  How we react to a hug, spank, or grope may also change.  What conduct was okay before, may not be okay today or tomorrow.

Consensual relationships: If you partake in a relationship which may involve an ongoing dynamic, your consent is going to be radically different.  Yes, you’re going to agree on stuff “happening,” but, how the parties arrange it and forge it from the smelter, ultimately determines the scope of what happens, when, and how.  It’s much more complicated, as we tend to think of consensual relationships as being the sandbox of doing whatever we want.

It’s complicated because it’s not scene-dependent.
It’s ongoing.
It’s evolving.

Your relationship might just be that menu selection or your relationship can be any shade therein.  There’s no right way or wrong way for relationships except whatever works best in your situation and/or dynamic.

To summarize the core principles of consent:

* It always begins between two or more people
* It is negotiated
* It is discussed
* It defines the things we do
* It can be finite
* It can expire
* It should be absolute
* It is not an automatic hug, kiss, grope, fondle or touch card
* It can be revoked
* It must be respected
* It mustn’t be assumed
* It is at the core of how most of us define the thing we do
* Is mutual
* Is not a one-way street
* It can be scary
* It can be freeing
* It can be damaging
* It could be “awesome! Out of this world!”
* It could go down in smoldering flames of defeat

Consent is not abuse when the parties involved maintain their conduct within the parameters that they agreed to.  When either side (yes, either side) violates the conditions they agreed to.  Consent has been violated  (More on this in later chapters.)

Consensual non-consent: The other raging debate is the concept of CNC or  affectionately (sarcasm) referred to as: “the acceptance of abuse or abusive relationships because the d-type has taken the s-type’s right to say “no.”

That just sounds harsh.

Reality:  consensual non-consent starts with consent.  It’s the agreement to come into the restaurant and watch the doors lock behind you.  It’s the agreement that you’re going to accept anything, everything, and nothing that happens to you after the doors slam shut.  It’s the agreement that such an arrangement was sought out and rationally arrived at.  It’s the agreement that you choose to be there.

Consensual non-consent is not for everyone.
Consensual non-consent can be freeing.
Consensual non-consent can be horrifying.
Consensual non-consent can be empowering.
Consensual non-consent is not founded on the principles of abuse.
Consensual non-consent does not dismiss responsibilities from the parties involved.
Consensual non-consent can remove choices from the menu selection.
Consensual non-consent can activate internal triggers and other landmines.
Consensual non-consent should not be looked upon as something one aspires to become.
Consensual non-consent does not come with guarantees, waivers, or warranties.  Consensual non-consent is largely linked to those that believe in the concept of a surrendering dynamic. 
While consensual non-consent can be a horrifying prospect to most anyone, there’s also a foundation of trust and respect that is always there .(At least, that’s how it works for us.)  I’m not about to ink out a blueprint for everyone to follow, because I don’t have any idea how something like that would work in YOUR situation, YOUR scene, or YOUR dynamic. 
Also, there’s nothing that says trust or respect must be a component for a consensual non-consensual dynamic to work – there are some CNC dynamics where it was agreed from the onset of the conditions that were going to happen.  Parties agree and the dynamic was filled out without trust or respect.  It may not be the cup of tea I want, but it doesn’t mean there is anything wrong with CNC with the absent trust and respect … it just means that in those dynamics, it works by not having those components installed.
Consensual Issues (part 1): Rape culture & the Lifestyle
Consensual Issues (part 2): The Problem is in the Definition
Consensual Issues (part 3): Separating Facts from Projections

Consensual Issues (part 4): The Unfortunate Death of Communication

Consensual Issues (part 5): Scolding the Dominant
Consensual Issues (part 6): Personal Responsibility
Consensual Issues (part 7): Community Responsibility