One of the best feelings for both parties

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 26 points 6 days ago (13 children)

To be honest everyone has emotional triggers like this. For example comparing me with my father makes me very angry.

However I kinda think it is a bit wrong to have someone in a very emotional dependant state, which is also not prior discussed as far as I see, perform sexual acts. For me this is a consent Problem.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 6 days ago* (3 children)

    My interpretation is that the sexual act was already ongoing when the comment was made.

    If they were just, I dunno, hanging out on the couch ans went from that, to the comment, to cumming, that would be a little weird, yeah. But I really don't think that's the case.

    Whether it makes sense to make emotionally sensitive remarks during such acts, I mean, such acts are inherently emotional. And I would assume one has the good sense to know in which ways they can push/explore a little and in which ways they really should not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 6 days ago (2 children)

    Well this is a question of ethics. Basically this is where you are on the scale between: "Would you stop if your partner gets unresponsive? Most ppl would I guess.

    Would you stop when your partner gets goosebumps? Most ppl won't."

    And

    "Would you play with an intoxicated partner?"

    Here they stated that the sub was extremely vulnerable. When you are vulnerable you are suggestable. If you are very vulnerable you are very suggestable. And if you are suggestable you may don't use your safe word even if you want to. This is also a part of consent. When you start a session you are consenting to a degree to this. (This is Position agnostic btw)

    If someone gets extremely vulnerable unexpectedly during a session you get to the spectrum above. If you play without consent with intoxicated ppl this will not matter for you, but also you are already kinda a bad person.

    On the spectrum above you have different states of ecstasy at the highest discribed (assuming they are physically fine) they are unable to revoke their consent. In fact they will get more and more unable to revoke their consent. And this is also fine because to a degree they consented to it.

    When you stop to respond or are unable to safeword you are into CNC territory. If you have direct or indirect consent that's fine. I will not advocate against CNC play because, like the situation in the op, it is hot for a lot of ppl. For example with my wife I would also keep going if they are unresponsive because I know their limits pretty well and we discussed it.

    The OP does not mention consent. To the contrary it even suggests that they are still in a starting phase and thatneither they not their sub did expect this situation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 12 points 6 days ago

    I can see the argument, but exploration is part of the journey. I think in this case, intent does matter quite a bit, and it's clear to me at least that the OP had good intentions.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 6 days ago (4 children)

    How do you know it wasn't discussed beforehand? It's entirely possible finding triggers like this was explicitly one of the goals of their play.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 days ago (3 children)

    Because they didn't say that so I assume it is not. Especially because they put it up on twitter to show off.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 days ago (2 children)

    That's pretty messed up to me. We don't need to be rape-jacketing D/s dynamics like this. There's no reason to assume this was a negative experience.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 child)

    Well I try to assume the best of everyone, so I would also assume that this was a positive experience. However this does not invalidate my post. Something can be positive and still against consent or negative but under consent. The post pictures the situation in a exploring phase of the dynamic where consent may not be established for edge play or Tunnelspiele ( I don't know if this even has an English word sorry, it's a situation that can't be opted out for example when you eat a hot pepper and have to wait till it's not spicy anymore)

    For me this is not about invalidating BDSM dynamics, I life in a pretty happy one myself. it is about awareness that stuff like this should be discussed and can have a negative impact on the dynamic if it is not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Okay, I see where you're coming from and can agree with the perspective. I only take issue with the assumption that there was a lack of consent because it wasn't explicitly mentioned. We don't know what their safety system is, and the dominant could very well have been acting on something that was discussed, just exploring methods on how to achieve that result. But you're right, for something like this, you need to both have discussed exploration like that beforehand AND have a decent understanding of how your sub in that moment may end up in subdrop. Thanks for clarifying!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

    …that doesn’t mean that everyone has triggers like that

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments