If you *think* you have "No Limits"....READ THIS!!

[Ne****]

Too true. If I see that then I know the person isn't safe to play with. It's okay to want to try things, or even to maybe have zero or near to zero limits with someone you have a trusting committed relationship with, but to jump to that straight away? Absolutely no way. Those situations rarely happen and the people who put themselves out there as no limits right off the bat? They'll find a limit the wrong way, with someone completely unsafe, and be traumatised.

[Bo****]

GREAT THREAD! So many users of this app need to truly explore and become educated in BDSM before throwing around such recklessness. EVERYONE has limits. Period.

[DR1804]

Would a better response be something akin to "not sure yet, lets discuss"?

[ar****]

TBH, the thing that unnerves me most, is that illegal things are apparently negotiable. I know kinky things should be considered "NO, unless mutually agreed upon". But surely, illegal activities will stay in that NO zone?

[Sp****]

7 minutes ago, arnhem961 said:

TBH, the thing that unnerves me most, is that illegal things are apparently negotiable. I know kinky things should be considered "NO, unless mutually agreed upon". But surely, illegal activities will stay in that NO zone?

In some (probably most) jurisdictions ANY consensual bdsm play is technically illegal.

[ey****]

17 minutes ago, arnhem961 said:

TBH, the thing that unnerves me most, is that illegal things are apparently negotiable. I know kinky things should be considered "NO, unless mutually agreed upon". But surely, illegal activities will stay in that NO zone?

yep - in the UK and most, if not all of the US - and certainly many other countries

While a lot isn't en***d 

Any form of impact pay is illegal 
Having any form of sex while one partner is in bondage 
I mean, hell, the US has laws which ban sissy, crossdressing, etc. 

While there are some things which are illegal which everyone would agree on.  There's a lot which is technically illegal.   

[Go****]

This gave me a lot to think about. I never thought to look into my local laws on legal/illegal play is here in OR.

Thank You

[QXX666]

5 hours ago, Finally_Jen said:

No. No, you wouldn't, and if you would, you need to rethink your place in this community and society.

I don’t think it’s up to you to decide. 
there are people who are free to chose that path, for any reason they have . And it’s not up to you to judge them. There is a reason why it’s called bdsm and I will never accept anyone to judge or condemn what other do with their choices. 
bdsm it’s not only about having a spank and cuddle afterwards…. 

[Deleted Member]

Safe sane and consensual. Legality does not equal morality as we have seen with 99% of prohibition laws.

[Cu****]

4 hours ago, eyemblacksheep said:

- but actually listed every limit would also be insanely time consuming

The box is there, for people to fill in as part of their profile. So  with your educated hat on (no disrespect meant by that), what do you recommend would be an acceptable list of limits to display on a profile? Those which the individual feels are appropriate to them? Or just write “Please ask”, which indicates that the area hasn’t been ignored?

[Ha****]

5 hours ago, SeekerJ said:

No limits? Oh, so you like scat!

And what if someone answered yes to that question. No idea what is being insinuated here, but it has all the appearance of kink shaming.

[ey****]

11 minutes ago, CumbriaLeather said:

The box is there, for people to fill in as part of their profile. So  with your educated hat on (no disrespect meant by that), what do you recommend would be an acceptable list of limits to display on a profile? Those which the individual feels are appropriate to them? Or just write “Please ask”, which indicates that the area hasn’t been ignored?

I think... never no limits.   But, stuff that might not be obvious deal breakers

Myself, I prefer to discuss limits as part of scene planning - especially as some of my limits might depend on the context.   There's no sense me saying "I don't suck cock" if I'm meeting someone one on one - nor raising scat as a limit for a film day since it can't really be filmed (it can, and does, but very few places accept and it's on borrowed time on most of those) 

I think someone can write in, if it's in their limits, things like ***, marks, yeah the hard/wet sports, etc.

but for example if someone says "No marks" then there can still be a lot of *** without marks - say, electrics or bastinado.  Things they may not have considered.  Suddenly a set of sounding rods come out.   

So I think the ideal is for what them to feel is known and comfortable to list - but also themselves being aware this won't be exhaustive and conversations and planning still should happen.  And that equally someone seeing these limits shouldn't assume that everything else is fair game.

 

[Cu****]

Thank you eyemblacksheep. The hard part is finding ways of successfully addressing the issue, by educating and informing, so that individuals can see the importance, for their own protection, and to state (as you rightly point out) that it’s in no way suggesting that everything else not mentioned, is fair game. Those of us who’ve responded, to the OP, appreciate the need to indicate something in the limits and are concerned enough to do something. Doing nothing, shrugging shoulders and walking away, isn’t an option. If we’re a community, then being open and helping is being positive. To turn our backs on a problem is showing we don’t care, we’re cliquey and unhelpful.

[lo****]

I literally will not talk to those who say no limits. If it's I will try everything once and decide, that's different. There's also the possible flag from said statement that the person doesn't have much experience and wants to attract someone more easily saying so, but not realizing how much danger that puts both parties into.

[Deleted Member]

3 hours ago, HarshDictator said:

And what if someone answered yes to that question. No idea what is being insinuated here, but it has all the appearance of kink shaming.

Just a question bro, lighten up. If you say you have no limits, then you’re open to anything. Most people don’t like scat. Even here it’s still a taboo. Sorry if I triggered you.

[ho****]

Most people don’t know until they know.  I typically recommend the use of a BDSM checklist. Likes and limits will shift with experience; I highly suggest revisiting your checklist on an annual basis. 

[Gr****]

I agree with what you posted. People really be saying the have not limits there’s a difference of being open to try new things.

[ey****]

8 hours ago, CumbriaLeather said:

The hard part is finding ways of successfully addressing the issue, by educating and informing, so that individuals can see the importance, for their own protection, and to state (as you rightly point out) that it’s in no way suggesting that everything else not mentioned, is fair game.

Yep absolutely.

A lot comes down to context - but I know if you're flipping profiles and someone has "I'm up for anything! I have no limits!" it's eyerolling and frustrating especially if it's the 5th one that morning.  Same if someone barges into a chat.   

When I was new - there was a talk at a local club from a sub who claimed he was genuinely a no limits sub - he was booking Pro Dommes (or at least the ones that understood he was not a timewaster) and making it clear nothing was off the table.  However, even in there this is context.   That of course his limits included "don't chop off my leg" but, really, does any Dominant *actually* want to chop off a subs leg?  Certainly it hurts repeat business on a Pro side.    And so the kinda limits everyone does have don't always need to be spelled out.    

I think sometimes the "I have no limits"/"OK so I can cut your arm off?" doesn't actually help with the education side - and actually, what if the sub said "OK, yes, if you desire" - although I totally get where folk come from with that response.

And I also agree most "I have no limits" cases also translates to "I have no clue about BDSM"

I think a lot then depends on how you get into conversation with someone.  If someone is hard work ("I have no limits, I'm up for anything!") it's probably not going to work - but if there's conversations and you're sure someone can say yes or no, then there's potential.

I do think some folk get into a kinda paradox also that if they make things too much about what they're into they're accused of topping from to bottom or making it all about their fetishes, but when they push those to the back seat it's seen as time wasting - I definitely think finding the happy medium is hard for some folk

 

[ar****]

19 hours ago, eyemblacksheep said:

yep - in the UK and most, if not all of the US - and certainly many other countries

While a lot isn't en***d 

Any form of impact pay is illegal 
Having any form of sex while one partner is in bondage 
I mean, hell, the US has laws which ban sissy, crossdressing, etc. 

While there are some things which are illegal which everyone would agree on.  There's a lot which is technically illegal.   

Oh right, not all countries or even states have the same things considered illegal.
Perhaps underage/maiming is even allowed in some cultures too, yet I don't think people who allow that would listen for consent in the first place.

[ey****]

17 minutes ago, arnhem961 said:

Oh right, not all countries or even states have the same things considered illegal.
Perhaps underage/maiming is even allowed in some cultures too, yet I don't think people who allow that would listen for consent in the first place.

yep

there's a lot that's not en***d.   I mean, obviously.

but certainly the UK, most if not all of the US, any form of impact play is GBH and you can't consent to GBH so in the eyes of the law, if someone had been consensually caned and turned up to a police station with marks, they'd have to take it seriously. No matter how consensual, in writing, etc. it was 

[Je****]

14 hours ago, honey_and_killabees said:

Most people don’t know until they know.  I typically recommend the use of a BDSM checklist. Likes and limits will shift with experience; I highly suggest revisiting your checklist on an annual basis. 

My point is, everyone has limits. 

Basically anything illegal- being 

Underage, beasts, ***ing and maiming. 

 

If someone doesn't think these are limits at all... they are the ones I'm concerned about.

Every single decent and responsible human being has these limits. So everyone has limits. 

If they don't,  they're foolish and dangerous to everyone. 

 

Its common sense and stuff yeh, those shouldn't even come into it but someone saying no limits can and will end up in a situation where they're participating (God forbid) in a scenario where someone or something unconsenting may be introduced, or end up seriously injured. 

 

Sad people don't know their limits either.  But for most people they should know really xx

[Ha****]

3 hours ago, Finally_Jen said:

My point is, everyone has limits. 

Basically anything illegal- being 

Underage, beasts, ***ing and maiming. 

 

If someone doesn't think these are limits at all... they are the ones I'm concerned about.

Every single decent and responsible human being has these limits. So everyone has limits. 

If they don't,  they're foolish and dangerous to everyone. 

 

Its common sense and stuff yeh, those shouldn't even come into it but someone saying no limits can and will end up in a situation where they're participating (God forbid) in a scenario where someone or something unconsenting may be introduced, or end up seriously injured. 

 

Sad people don't know their limits either.  But for most people they should know really xx

Basically anything illegal you say. If a sub/slave is fixed by means of, for example, rope or chains, or locked up in a cage, this already constitutes a deprivation of liberty. Spanking or any other form of impact play already constitutes physical ***. A knife is often used in *** play and then there is already a prohibited possession of weapons (with the exception of the US, where you can even use an assault rifle). Much within BDSM violates human rights or the criminal code.

[CopperKnob]

1 hour ago, HarshDictator said:

Basically anything illegal you say. If a sub/slave is fixed by means of, for example, rope or chains, or locked up in a cage, this already constitutes a deprivation of liberty. Spanking or any other form of impact play already constitutes physical ***. A knife is often used in *** play and then there is already a prohibited possession of weapons (with the exception of the US, where you can even use an assault rifle). Much within BDSM violates human rights or the criminal code.

A Deprivation of Liberty is actually legalese for Adults who cannot consent to care arrangements which include constant supervision and control and who are not free to leave and can actually be lawful despite breaching Art5 and Art8 of the HRA98 because they aren't Absolute Rights. To use that phrasing within a BDSM arena is out of context.
.
With regards to knives, not all are considered to be weapons if found to be in possession of one in the community (will likely depend on country). I mean, having a piece of wood on your person whilst being arrested for D and D could get you charged for being in Posession of an Offensive Weapon depending on the Arresting Officer and what they know of your history.
.
So whilst I get what you're attempting to say, context is everything

[Je****]

1 hour ago, HarshDictator said:

Basically anything illegal you say. If a sub/slave is fixed by means of, for example, rope or chains, or locked up in a cage, this already constitutes a deprivation of liberty. Spanking or any other form of impact play already constitutes physical ***. A knife is often used in *** play and then there is already a prohibited possession of weapons (with the exception of the US, where you can even use an assault rifle). Much within BDSM violates human rights or the criminal code.

I literally named the 3 things that are classed universally (to my knowledge) illegal 

[Ha****]

29 minutes ago, CopperKnob said:

A Deprivation of Liberty is actually legalese for Adults who cannot consent to care arrangements which include constant supervision and control and who are not free to leave and can actually be lawful despite breaching Art5 and Art8 of the HRA98 because they aren't Absolute Rights. To use that phrasing within a BDSM arena is out of context.
.
With regards to knives, not all are considered to be weapons if found to be in possession of one in the community (will likely depend on country). I mean, having a piece of wood on your person whilst being arrested for D and D could get you charged for being in Posession of an Offensive Weapon depending on the Arresting Officer and what they know of your history.
.
So whilst I get what you're attempting to say, context is everything

The context is not important here, but it is about the laws that apply in each country, and I am not familiar with the UK codes and the international treaties and jurisprudence that (still) apply after Brexit. And if you scour the internet you will find enough judgments that show that when there is an *** that consent does not matter, and depending on the country, health insurance does not reimburse treatments. I'm giving something to think about here, partly because of "consent - risks - consequences" and don't intend to turn it into a legal pissing contest, I have more than enough of that during the day at work. Sometimes prevention is better than cure, that's my verdict