domestc discipline

[redpepper]

I was going to suggest going to fetlife first, but it seems you have and have found some success.. glad to hear it.

[SchrodingersCat]

Originally Posted by saudade

When Ariakas talks about dominance and submission, he refers to a context in which the submissive person can choose to end the scenario at any point by saying a 'safe word', which essentially calls a time out to discuss what's wrong. If the submissive does not have the power to set boundaries in this fashion, or some other, then it is not consensual and I would not call it polyamory on that basis.

Lack of safe words does not equal non-consensual. Consent does not require safe words.

You can consent to enter a D/s relationship with no safe words, and in so doing, you consent to anything that happens within the relationship. You are still a legally free citizen with the right to end the relationship at any time you see fit, even the middle of a scene. Staying in the relationship constitutes continued consent to the things that happen in that relationship.

This type of relationship is sometimes referred to as "Master/slave" as opposed to "Dominant/submissive" in order to emphasize the level of control. However there are some Master/slave relationships which also use safe words, so you can never take anything for granted.

I have a friend who has a slave, and when they were setting up their relationship, it was the slave who insisted that he not be permitted a safe word. He felt that for him personally, having a safe word would prohibit the feeling of total submission. It was a personal decision and he's never claimed that no submissives should have safe words, only that it was not appropriate to have one himself.

That being said, there were times where he's said "no" when ordered to do something during a scene. he would be punished for saying "no." You cannot, by definition, be punished for using your safe word.

But afterwards, they would discuss why he had refused the order. She knew that being a Mistress did not grant her omniscience, that there would be times when her slave would see dangers that she could not see. She likened it to a seeing eye dog preventing its Master from entering a busy intersection. She trusted his loyalty and knew that his refusal was an issue of safety, not insolence.

They've been happily married for 27 years, so I think it's safe to say, that's what works for them. She has other submissives with whom she insists on safe words. So there you have it: polyamorous with a relationship that has no safe words. Proof by example!

[saudade]

I'll clarify my point. The emphasis in my prior point is on 'consensual', with the safe word as one (albeit likely) method for ensuring consensuality.

At least IMO, It matters that the slave/bottom/submissive/whatever label you choose be able to walk away-- call time out, leave the room, end the relationship-- whatever line they choose to draw. Otherwise it crosses over from BDSM to abuse, and the latter doesn't belong in my poly. I'd feel comfortable leaving abuse out of everyone's poly, to be honest; it's about the only line of that sort I can imagine myself drawing.

In cahoots,
~me

[SchrodingersCat]

Originally Posted by saudade

At least IMO, It matters that the slave/bottom/submissive/whatever label you choose be able to walk away-- call time out, leave the room, end the relationship-- whatever line they choose to draw. Otherwise it crosses over from BDSM to abuse, and the latter doesn't belong in my poly.

Okey dokey, now we're on the same page. I agree that if someone has no ability to walk away whatsoever, that's kidnapping.

Safe words came about because it's not uncommon for a bottom to squeal "No no stop please stop!" as part of the scene, but what they really mean is "Yes yes more please more!" You need some way to distinguish "no means no" (rape) from "no means yes" (acting out a scene). That's where safe words come in. You're unlikely to yell "banana!" as a natural expression of pain.

In some relationships/scenes, there are no "safe words" per se, because "no means no" and "stop means stop". As long as this has all been negotiated ahead of time, there's no necessary reason your safe word can't be "no" or "stop" or "wait a sec"

I don't really see the preclusion between "abuse" and "poly" unless you necessarily include "healthy" into a definition of "poly." In my books, poly just means having multiple loving relationships where your partners know of each other's existence. While, ideally, no one would be in any abusive relationship, poly relationships can be abusive just as easily as mono ones.

In other words, I don't think it's fair to all the struggling people who don't have healthy relationships to say "that's not poly." That makes it sound like we're some elitist group that only allows healthy people to be members. But poly people can have mental illnesses, poly people can have poor communication, poly people can make repeated mistakes. All of those can lead to unhealthy relationships, but none of them (in my books) preclude those people from being poly.

It's like saying, abusive relationships aren't relationships. Well, of course they are, they just aren't healthy relationships...

[russgm]

Pam-
We have a polyamorous relationship with domestic discipline with Me(the one male) as head of household. So, yes we are out there. Anyone else?

[ray]

Yeah, abuse definitely does not preclude poly. Both the men I've dated acted in an abusive fashion and both were poly. There are no set ways to determine consent in kink. It's different for a lot of different people. I prefer to judge on a more individual basis. I am a spanko but I prefer more light-hearted role play to actual 24/7 power dynamics. However, I see no reason why there could not be DD poly household. As long as everything is negotiated to your satisfaction. Just like there are M/s and D/s poly dynamics.