|
Chapter
1
The Asj Community
Chapter
2
Resource Information
Chapter
3
Subbie's Couch
Chapter
4
The Dom's Lounge
Chapter
5
The
Library
Chapter
6
BDSM
Chapter
7
Useful
Links
Chapter
8
Members
share their thoughts
Chapter
9
Members
Only
Chapter
10
Asj's
Site Index
Chapter
11
Asj's
Book Store
Chapter
12
Recommended
Reading List
Screw
the Roses, Send Me the Thorns
 
The
Rear View

other
titles:
Sex
and the City
the
complete 3rd Season
|
|
Hurt
vs. Harm
Author Unknown
Jay
Wiseman recently published a definition of hurt vs. harm that has been kicking
around local BDSM circles for many years. I agree with it wholeheartedly. It has
been shared with medical doctors and mental health professionals, who recognize
and have helped refine the definitions and distinctions between healthy,
consensual BDSM play and abuse.
To hurt someone means to cause them temporary pain which goes away after a
reasonably short duration without any outside intervention. In other words, the
bruise or redness fades, the bleeding stops, the tears dry up, the marks and
effects of the hurt go away and the person returns to their former state of
physical and emotional health, whatever that state might be, with the help of no
more than perhaps a Band-Aid.
To harm someone means to cause them damage that seriously needs the intervention
of an outside professional to heal, i.e., you need more than a Band-Aid to fix
it. A doctor needs to tend your injury, or an outside counselor is needed to put
your head back together. Psychological "damage" can be harder to
quantify, but it can certainly be inflicted in the boundaries of a relationship
- whether that relationship is SM or not.
Some borderline activities between hurt and harm include permanent marks, scars,
tattoos, brands, etc, which are of long term duration and which do not go away.
Generally, if the person who has been permanently marked actively
consented to the mark, it isn't considered harm. If the person wasn't expecting
to be permanently marked or scarred and it's done to them anyways, it's
generally considered to be harm.
IE, it's rude to carve your initials in people's butt cheeks at play parties
without a bit more negotiation and consent first - that would be causing harm.
On the other hand, you are free to visit a piercing studio or a tattoo parlor
and seek out modifications to your own body if you wish; nobody should accuse
the professional piercer or tattoo artist of doing you "harm".
Many more sports injuries (i.e., real harm) happen on the football field than
have ever occurred in anybody's dungeon, even if you adjust statistically for
the greater number of football players to BDSM players.
While BDSM play, like any other enjoyable but strenuous physical activity, might
result in bruises, scrapes or welts needing a Band-Aid, it does not directly
result in sprains, dislocations or broken bones. There are always a few
instances where someone might have fallen down the stairs and tripped over a
flogger, or injured their arm because they whipped someone too vigorously, or
slipped and taken a fall during a scene, but this sort of mishap is equally
likely to happen to the top or the bottom. Experienced BDSM players take very
careful precautions to avoid any such accidents during their scenes, and as a
consequence, such accidents are relatively rare.
The safety factor in BDSM as a sport is considerably higher than football. If
you followed through with the logic that no one should play BDSM because
sometimes people get bruised or hurt, the much more dangerous sport of football
should logically be targeted long before BDSM.
People can enjoy playing football, even though it is a physically strenuous
sport in which you are very likely to get at least somewhat bruised or scraped
up when you participate. An attempt at legislating against football because
"people get hurt" would result in howls across the nation about how we
damn well have the right to take those risks if we want to. Unfortunately,
legislation against consensual BDSM play, because it involves the taboo subject
of sex and sensual enjoyment, is quite another story, and fewer people are
likely to protest even though the issues are very similar.
In consensual BDSM play, "hurt" and "pain" is often simply
defined as "strong sensation" by the players involved. While stubbing
your toe outside the bedroom or dungeon is cause for yelping and cursing, a
similarly hard, swift smack in a safe place by your lover during lovemaking is
simply a strong sensation which can be interpreted as pleasurable.
Part of the attraction of BDSM play for many is the ability to explore the outer
limits of your body and your sensations in a safe way with your partner. You
know that while you may choose to experience strong sensations, i.e., what would
normally be pain in a non-erotic context, there will be no real harm done. IE you
won't need a doctor when you're done, or have any long lasting effects beyond a
sense of "gee, that sure was intense and exciting!"
Others seek out BDSM play for reasons which are almost more spiritual or
exploratory than sexual, and cite an ecstatic, altered state of consciousness as
their primary motivation for seeking strong sensations in the context of SM
play.
Historically, almost every culture has provided to its members some acceptable
outlet for these apparently universal desires to seek an altered or "shamanic"
state of consciousness. Our culture, which is based on a monotheistic religion
which anthropologists classify as Apollonian, i.e., non-ecstatic, has no such
outlet for ecstatic ritual practices and the
resultant achievement of the SSC (shamanic state of consciousness). Thus, BDSM
may possibly be seen in this context by knowledgeable anthropologists as the
current and inevitable outlet for ecstatic ritual practices in this culture. See
the works of Mircea Eliade, Joseph Campbell and more recently Michael Harner for
some solid historical documentation and further explanations in this field.
Still others liken playing BDSM to the "safe thrill" of visiting the
Haunted House at Disneyland, riding a roller coaster or watching a scary or
exciting movie. You get all the vicarious enjoyment of living out the fantasy
scenario - perhaps you are a kidnap victim, or a slave, or conversely a rapist
or a kidnapper - but you also know that it's only a fantasy, and that it's being
played out safely and consensually so that nobody will really suffer any harm or
damage.
For some players, BDSM is not really that much unlike a visit to an amusement
park or enjoying an exciting movie or play, except that you're much more
directly involved and in control of the action, and of course you can stop it at
any time. You have the thrill of excitement and "danger", much as you
do on a roller coaster ride, but you also know that the danger is mostly
illusory, and you can feel safe enough to enjoy yourself.
Part of the definition of consensual BDSM play is that to the best of the
ability of the players involved, nobody gets harmed. Experience strong
sensations of their own free will, yes. Go beyond their stated limits of
exploration, or have real harm or damage done to their minds and bodies, no.
The argument that "BDSM is bad for you and nobody should do it" is
rather similar in my mind to the argument that tattoo parlors or scary movies or
sexy books are bad - it attempts to limit what people have the power to do with
their own bodies and minds for their own exploration and enjoyment. I don't
think that this kind of censorship is a good idea.
If I choose to explore, safely and consensually, the outer limits of strong
sensation and fantasy play with my partner, who gives anybody else the right to
say we mustn't? Alternatively, if my spirituality is such that I choose to use
pain or abnegation to alter my level of consciousness to achieve a religious or
spiritual end, I have the weight of considerable historical affirmation behind
me.
The bottom line is that I have the right to make healthy personal choices as to
what I want to do with my body, what I want to read, what I want to view and
what thoughts and fantasies I want to have. And nobody except me, with the
possible exceptions of professionals in the health field, can really effectively
judge my motivations or my degree of health.
Still, most arguments which are sweeping generalities tend to have their flaws,
and the argument that BDSM play is 100% good and healthy for everybody who does
it is no exception.
We, the BDSM community, are not immune to mental illness, dysfunction, neurosis,
co-dependence and other emotional problems that can and do afflict people from
all walks of life and all sexual orientations. There certainly do
exist dysfunctional individuals who have internalized guilt and shame and who
are using BDSM play in a harmful or damaging way against themselves or their
partners.
Where are they? Some of them see pro dommes as clients. Others stay more
completely hidden and never "come out" to anybody. Very, very few of
this type become actively involved in the BDSM community and merrily go to play
parties and socialize with other BDSM players. And if they do, they don't tend
to last long - they either heal and come to accept themselves, or they cannot
come to terms with the openness and focus on health and safety in the community,
and they leave.
If an individual is doing things that cause himself or other individuals real
harm, most BDSM community members would choose to disown him and suggest that
what he is doing has nothing to do with safe-sane-consensual BDSM play at all -
it's simply abuse or self destructiveness, and we don't want to watch or
participate.
The question that keeps being asked is "how do you tell the
difference?" That's actually a good question. Knowing the distinction
between hurt and harm is a very good start. Certainly there are blatant examples
of people who are doing harm as opposed to SM - rapists, muggers, kidnappers,
spousal abusers, child molesters, etc. What are the differences?
For starters, there's the obvious one - consent. Negotiation also goes hand in
hand with this, so that expectations of what will happen during a fantasy scene
being played out between two (or more) partners are consistent, sometimes down
to a virtually exact script of who will do what and to whom when and with what,
where.
Informed and competent consent is also a biggie; we don't want to do BDSM with
somebody who is not capable of giving meaningful consent - i.e., somebody who is
drunk, drugged, too young or too mentally impaired to have a full understanding
of what it is they are consenting to.
My personal yardstick for consent goes like this. Does this person strike me as
a rational, functional, responsible adult? Do they fully understand what BDSM
play involves, and are they actively seeking it out because the idea is fun and
exciting to them? Are they old enough in their culture of origin to drink,
drive, vote and have sex? (OK, that one's arbitrary, but I did say this was a
personal yardstick.) If so, I consider them capable of giving meaningful and
informed consent to BDSM play with their own bodies.
Consent can be withdrawn at any time via a safeword, a pre-arranged signal that
stops the BDSM play for real. A player who does not honor a safeword and
continues without consent is considered to have committed an act of criminal
violence, and would be shunned by the BDSM community as a whole, if not outright
turned in to the police. There is a very great perceived difference in the BDSM
community between playing out a consensual fantasy scene and doing something to
someone without their consent, i.e., after they have safeworded. The former is
OK and the latter is most definitely not.
Another big difference between consensual BDSM play and abuse is openness and a
concern for safety. You can do safe-sane-consensual BDSM play at a public party,
and people will cheer you on. You cannot commit an act of violence or abuse at a
public event, or do something unsafe (see the definition of "harm")
without people blowing the whistle on you. Scenes that look unsafe or
nonconsensual are stopped by dungeon monitors and the participants questioned
closely. Abuse flourishes in silence; fun and mutually exciting BDSM exploration
can be done and talked about freely in front of your friends, and often is.
The BDSM player generally strives to be constantly aware, moment to moment, of
his or her partner's feelings and reactions. How the submissive or bottom
partner is feeling is very important to the dominant or top in BDSM play.
Many tops even feel as if they are catering to the bottom's desire for specific
sensations, and this is a well known issue in the BDSM community. Many players
"top from the bottom" and ask that specific sensations be given to
them during a play session, i.e., "Whip me a little harder on the left butt
cheek....now use that thuddy flogger on my back, would you? Oh, now I'd like a
few more nice stingy cane cuts on my thighs....yeah, that feels nice. Wow, that
got the endorphin rush going....Ok, now go harder.... faster...." Long time
BDSM players will chuckle as they recognize this very common sort of dialogue
from a "do-me queen" bottom.
This is not a criteria that applies to abusers, obviously. It sounds more like
what it is, a person getting catered to with what is essentially a complicated
back massage that involves much stronger sensations than most people enjoy.
Another element of BDSM play that most of the BDSM community strongly feels
should be present is something called aftercare. This is generally where hugs
are exchanged between top and bottom, and emotional reassurance is given from
both sides as well as a physical assessment of the condition of both partners.
Food or drink or a warm blanket might be offered if needed, and Band-Aids and
Betadine put on scrapes or welts. The specifics of aftercare might vary as much
as the specifics of BDSM play itself, but many people in the BDSM community feel
very strongly that some sort of aftercare is very much a necessity for scenes
that go beyond a certain level of intensity.
To reiterate, the factors which typically distinguish safe-sane-consensual BDSM
play from abuse or self-destructive behavior are: consent and the ability to
withdraw consent at any time, clear negotiation and matching expectations,
openness (lack of secrecy), a deep concern for safety and health, a focus on the
sensations and feelings of the bottom or submissive, and emotional reassurances
exchanged after the play is over.
While experienced players might get by in long-term, established relationships
without a few of these things, these factors have been 100% present in all
public BDSM play which I have observed and in the private play of most BDSM
community members I know.
People can choose to believe what they want to believe about how BDSM play must
be "sick", even in the face of convincing testimony from medical and
mental health professionals, sociologists and researchers that strongly suggests
otherwise. But if you examine the objective data - and take a close look at the
people who are actually doing BDSM - you will see a radically different picture
than what is presented in either the popular media or by the "Moral
Majority".
Author
Unknown: If you know
*who* the author is, or you are the author please email: CJ@asubmissivesjourney.com
Join Alt.com -
largest BDSM/Alternative Lifestyle Personals!
Questions about our site? Click the ask live icon to chat live or leave a
message with our site host. CJ isn't always available, but generally
you can find Him here from about 8:30 - 11:00 pm Eastern time. Your
questions about the site, the Asj community or just about the lifestyle
in general are always welcome. If nothing else, take a moment and tell
us what you think of this feature!
Copyright
© 2002 - 2012 [A submissives journey]. All rights reserved.
Revised: January 11, 2012

|