Limits (or lack thereof)

[ha****]

9 hours ago, DomNox69 said:

All valid, and another layer I've noticed: some use "none" as a weird flex to signal "I'm the ultimate dom, I can handle anything." It's performative more than practical. Seasoned players know the opposite is true....listing thoughtful limits (and asking for yours) shows you understand risk, consent, and the mental side of power exchange. Blank means they're either clueless about the risks or pretending not to be.

Yes, I get this feeling too!!!

[Ro****]

If you don't have or know your limits it's better to put still exploring rather than nothing. At least it shows a willingness rather than a non effort answer

[Co****]

From the Dom side, a list of my limits doesn’t really make sense to me. If I am in control I simply don’t do things that don’t interest me or turn me off. If a submissive is doing something I don’t approve of I tell her to stop or we end the encounter. Expectations are discussed in advance, but I don’t really see the need to publish a list of everything I don’t do or won’t tolerate. That seems unnecessary if I am in control.

[ey****]

"no limits" is a giant red flag - but there's a lot I guess, which can be confusing or daunting.

I've known subs who have insisted they have no limits, and while they DO have limits - they play with people with a high level of trust.  So any hypothetical straw examples ("Oh, you got no limits, so I can cut off your hand?!") it's well - no, obviously, but they trust people not to raise these suggestions that they're not going to do anyway.

This said, despite their situation - they wouldn't be writing this on a profile.  And when quizzed about it in any scenario they would explain the kinda lines - that - yes we can do high ***, edge play, so on - but I trust the people I'm playing with not to do anything stupid (life threatening, etc etc)

Anyhooo

the thing is - if someone says my limits are... I dunno.... cutting to draw that red stuff, people would just accept that and not be "AH, so I can break your arm" err, no... "empty your bank account" err, no, "Take your phone and send obscene messages..." err no -- so the whole thing is non-exhaustive anyway.

Whilst limits shouldn't be crossed, they are a guide not an exhaustive list of limits - so it's still important to have open discussions on things you WILL do - regardless of deemed limits. 

[Go****]

5 hours ago, BigDDaddyDom said:

 

I don’t get those here assuming that the project who list on their profiles (which people fill out to all degrees of completeness) that they don’t have any limits, aren’t having discussions about limits and boundaries, and are making assumptions.

Nobody here has said or assumed that those people aren’t having discussions with people about their limits. You, however, have made plenty of assumptions and projections about several commenters in this thread. The O. P’s question was purely about the lack of listed limits on a profile. 

 

When I make a decision based on someone’s profile, particularly one with ‘no limits’ written in their limits section, I do so based on all of the information, including my experiences and instincts, just as we do for all people we meet when we decide whether to engage with them. 
 

 

[Ca****]

I met one new sub who said that because she was only thinking about normal sexual and kink activities she had been exposed to and had no idea how far past that some people go. However in general it is a very cautionary thing when I see it, because it often signals someone who might be far newer than they are pretending to be.

[Su****]

Huge red flag!! And how can you trust them to honor your limits if they claim to have none of their own. Too dangerous in my opinion.

[wb****]

6 hours ago, BigDDaddyDom said:

Last thing I’m going to say:

I think many of y’all are assuming everyone thinks exactly like you about this single field on a profile, and is answering it in the same way as you.

For example (to the person who said, “How do you feel about extreme ***? Ball-busting? Being branded? …”): I’m 100% dominant, I’m not interested in anything that puts me in a submissive position. So maybe YOU think I should put anything submissive in that field asking about limits. But there’s a separate area to indicate roles, just as there are areas where I can indicate my sexuality, what kind of interactions and/or relationships I’m looking for, and more. AND there’s even a place where I can use my words to say even more, if I want to, called a Profile. Why should I be expected to restate in this field, what I’ve already made clear in a different place? If I’ve indicated that I’m strictly dominant, why should I have to include submissive acts in my limits? That’s already been ruled out. By the time you get to my limits, you should have noticed that I’m only dominant, and if I list any limits, you should understand those as acts I am not willing to engage in AS A DOM. So maybe I would absolutely never want to be ***ed on—but if it’s already been made clear that I’m only dominant, then if I say I won’t engage in that, it means I do not want to *** on anyone.

Or maybe not! Maybe someone else approaches the way they want to fill out their profile differently! Who am I to say my way is the only correct, acceptable, or valid way?

But then, who are you?

You know what that brings us back to? The conversation we’re all able to have, which this tiny field at the bottom of your profile was never meant to replace.

Most of what I see here is a bunch of people throwing stones from the stoops of their glass houses—forgetting why they’re here; being just as judgmental and closed-minded as uneducated yet highly opinionated vanilla folks; and acting self-righteous and condescending toward those that don’t approach deathly serious act of filling out a damn profile the way they do, i.e., the “right” way.

“ “How do you feel about extreme ***? Ball-busting? Being branded? …”): I’m 100% dominant, I’m not interested in anything that puts me in a submissive position.” You’re making an assumption that there are things only for submissive’s and only for dominant’s there aren’t.

What a person does or doesn’t not have as a kink is not inherently dominant or submissive. For instance someone who is Dominant may have a ball-busting kink, while being the person leading the scene.

Having a list of hard limits lets the people looking at your profile know, in general, what is not going to happen. I believe the point of this thread is the OP question what could someone’s reason be for say “none”.

Having a general limitation list can be and is helpful to those checking you out. Even if what you put there is something as simple as “will discuss as needed” or “still figuring it out”. Instead of “none” even as a dom there will be things you are unwilling to do. If a sub is into needles and you want nothing to do with them you shouldn’t put “none”.

[Ba****]

I see what you mean but as a dom, I consider all feelings before doing anything.

[Curiously_Exploring]

1 hour ago, CasesAdobesDom said:

I met one new sub who said that because she was only thinking about normal sexual and kink activities she had been exposed to and had no idea how far past that some people go. However in general it is a very cautionary thing when I see it, because it often signals someone who might be far newer than they are pretending to be.

Aye, back in my ***s, I had a lot of friends who were into the "modern primitives" ideas and they engaged in some pretty extreme stuff. I also have a friend who lectures in law - her specialism is in consent, and she's often asked to explain laws around consent in the media when there are high-profile news articles around BDSM topics.
I feel quite fortunate that, by the time I started my personal journey exploring kinks, I had already been talking openly with people on the scene for nearly 30 years and was well aware of the things that people engage in. It really helped me understand the hard and soft limits that I would want to initially establish.

[ra****]

They aren't very experienced at all

[Bi****]

2 hours ago, wbl51265 said:

“ “How do you feel about extreme ***? Ball-busting? Being branded? …”): I’m 100% dominant, I’m not interested in anything that puts me in a submissive position.” You’re making an assumption that there are things only for submissive’s and only for dominant’s there aren’t.

What a person does or doesn’t not have as a kink is not inherently dominant or submissive. For instance someone who is Dominant may have a ball-busting kink, while being the person leading the scene.

Having a list of hard limits lets the people looking at your profile know, in general, what is not going to happen. I believe the point of this thread is the OP question what could someone’s reason be for say “none”.

Having a general limitation list can be and is helpful to those checking you out. Even if what you put there is something as simple as “will discuss as needed” or “still figuring it out”. Instead of “none” even as a dom there will be things you are unwilling to do. If a sub is into needles and you want nothing to do with them you shouldn’t put “none”.

You’re making the same point I’m making, and not realizing it. I’ll use your example. I’m not interested in being the subject of needle play. At all. For that matter, being the Dom using needles on my sub doesn’t exactly call my name, I have no particular urge to engage in that. But I’m not opposed to it either… and who knows, maybe once I try it as the dom, I’ll discover I love it. So while it’s something that would be a hard limit for me as the sub, it’s not as the dom. Which is exactly in line with your point.

I made that clear in the comment you’re responding to, by the way. I literally said later in that same comment, “… if I list any limits, you should understand those as acts I am not willing to engage in AS A DOM.” I have it in all caps like that in the comment you quoted, so I’m not sure how you missed that I was literally saying what you’re saying. Perhaps you were a bit too eager to tell me how wrong I am?

I put, “If I find any limits, I’ll let you know,” in that spot in my profile, specifically because I’m not currently aware of anything a sub might ask me to do that I wouldn’t be willing to try. If I try it, and don’t ever want to do it again? I’ll let them know. If we’re having a conversation, and they ask if I’d be willing to do something to/for them that I haven’t considered before, which it turns out I’m not willing to try even once? I’ll let them know. And then I’ll update my limits on my profile.

[su****]

If you're in power, then what's the point to share your limits? You're in control so you can always stop the session. The limits of the one gagged, blindfolded, hogtied and upside down Are important here, since maybe (s)he doesn't have the chance to pronounce the safety word... 😀

[Mo****]

I definitely have limits and with more experience will find out more of them I’m sure 😅 I am also definitely a dom, just look at my BDSM results or ask me what I like in bed.
Maybe there is a unicorn or two out there with no limits, but I would guess it’s a combination of all 3 that you wrote.

[on****]

7 hours ago, ColoShark said:

From the Dom side, a list of my limits doesn’t really make sense to me. If I am in control I simply don’t do things that don’t interest me or turn me off. If a submissive is doing something I don’t approve of I tell her to stop or we end the encounter. Expectations are discussed in advance, but I don’t really see the need to publish a list of everything I don’t do or won’t tolerate. That seems unnecessary if I am in control.

This makes total sense at one level.

But as I read the replies here it occurs to me that there is a certain amount of privilege in this sort of response.

As a masc-presenting and in fact presumably cismale dom, your expectation is that your sub will be femme, and therefore your expectation is also that what you say, goes.

Which is doubtless the case.

I’m not sure that that’s the case for any femme presenting domme however. She’s more likely to be pushed, cajoled, challenged… all the way through to ***ed for not giving someone what they want.

As someone who is masc presenting but reasonably short in stature, it happens fairly often that I scene with men and masc folks who are much bigger than me.

One of my hard limits is no ***. It’s a hard and fast rule because I had a regular sub who started doing ****, showed up altered, and became dangerous. He was a big, powerfully built guy.

Fortunately I was playing in a public space.

But by having a “nothing illegal” limit, or if you like rule, it’s something I go over when negotiating. It’s also on my profile because I want it clear from the get go.

[TG****]

I know for me, I'll post to ask me about something rather than say anything out right. Not because I have no limits, but tbh I don't know everything that someone is into, so I'd rather have a discussion about it. But I do agree not having any limits is a big red flag.

[musubu]

Whatever role one associates, 'no limits' in their bio is a red flag for me

[Wo****]

I wrote *** and direct homosexual contact as my limits as those are things that I will never appreciate and that would be a dealbraker if it's a must-have for them. I guess I could add "***" and some other things. But I have never been in such a scenario where a sub has had a kink that I haven't accepted, so I had to really think about it to have something to write. So I get why some people "don't have" any limits.

[Wo****]

2 hours ago, onecrow said:

This makes total sense at one level.

But as I read the replies here it occurs to me that there is a certain amount of privilege in this sort of response.

As a masc-presenting and in fact presumably cismale dom, your expectation is that your sub will be femme, and therefore your expectation is also that what you say, goes.

Which is doubtless the case.

I’m not sure that that’s the case for any femme presenting domme however. She’s more likely to be pushed, cajoled, challenged… all the way through to ***ed for not giving someone what they want.

As someone who is masc presenting but reasonably short in stature, it happens fairly often that I scene with men and masc folks who are much bigger than me.

One of my hard limits is no ***. It’s a hard and fast rule because I had a regular sub who started doing ****, showed up altered, and became dangerous. He was a big, powerfully built guy.

Fortunately I was playing in a public space.

But by having a “nothing illegal” limit, or if you like rule, it’s something I go over when negotiating. It’s also on my profile because I want it clear from the get go.

Well that was very sexist, wasn't it? You assume that the gender of a dom and sub indicate weather or not they respect their partner, where you basically assume that men will *** women for not doing what they want?

[Dr****]

I’m a domme woman. I don’t set limits because I believe m@ney buys comfort zones and boundaries

[on****]

On 2/15/2026 at 3:41 AM, Wolfrahm88 said:

Well that was very sexist, wasn't it? You assume that the gender of a dom and sub indicate weather or not they respect their partner, where you basically assume that men will *** women for not doing what they want?

Yes, I do assume that. Statistically speaking men will tend to ass@ult women not the other way around. This is doubly the case in sexual and kink contexts.

It isn’t about respect, it’s about privilege and who has historically gotten away with what. It’s about who assumes they have the right to something and how that’s been codified into law over and over.

That group is men.

It is not all men, but it is most often men.
 

[Su****]

11 minutes ago, onecrow said:

Yes, I do assume that. Statistically speaking men will tend to *** women not the other way around. This is doubly the case in sexual and kink contexts.

It isn’t about respect, it’s about privilege and who has historically gotten away with what. It’s about who assumes they have the right to something and how that’s been codified into law over and over.

That group is men.

It is not all men, but it is most often men.

There are a lot of men who are victims of *** and don't come forward, or try to come forward and aren't believed, especially if the perpetrator is a woman or fem-presenting. Also a lot of men who are sexually ***ed think they should be fine, because messages out there insist that if they got an erection, or had an orgasm, they must have wanted it. We know that isn't true.

When we eventually learn the true stats, it may still be skewed, but not as much one may think.

[Ma****]

There are always some limits. When you don't share there are two reasons.
1. You want to be seen as "wow he is open to everything wow"
2. You don't want to create conflict.

[ey****]

8 hours ago, sub-come-almejas said:

If you're in power, then what's the point to share your limits? You're in control so you can always stop the session. The limits of the one gagged, blindfolded, hogtied and upside down Are important here, since maybe (s)he doesn't have the chance to pronounce the safety word... 😀

I'd say yes, but also.

the Dominant may not like certain words, languages or behaviours from a sub.   It'd be unfair to punish or stop a session for something the sub didn't know

Particularly in F/m there is sometimes a problem with subs who will test boundaries, for example during worship/massage moving hands/lips higher than they should be - again if this is clear as a limit then there's no plausible deniability.

 

[no****]

I don't understand why people put sick or illegal things in limits. As if that has to be said.