What makes a dom/domme a dom/domme

[The_Rev_]

I am a Switch. Although primarily a Dom, during my training, I subscribed to the idea that one must receive it before one gives it. I also felt obliged to be the Bottom sometimes so that I could be a fully empathetic Top. Now, although I love being the Dom, it's so good to let go and let someone else do all the work sometimes, just for a rest. So I am a very passive, 'just get on with it' sub, though only with the right person, who might well be one of my subs!

[Ge****]

Energy makes a huge difference. Trust is always ALWAYS key as well. I ALWAYS am a Dominant. (Yeah, I know… sorry for the excessive exaggeration… I might be a bit passionate about some things lol). One has to trust to let themselves go with a partner… and that really goes both ways. It’s easy to tell someone what to do for a D-type. It’s easy to be told what to do for an s-type (or someone in either headspace for you greedy switchy types that get it both ways! 🤣). But how in the heck can you know what’s safe to tell someone to do if you don’t actually know them? Or know that you are being led to do something that serves you both? So trust, certainly. But also energy. Some people I find I am naturally Dominant with. And it’s definitely not “just because they’re women and I’m straight”. I have some very good friends in real life who are amazing Dommes that I treat as such. So there is also an intangible energy we tend to exude and pick up on. To the OP, if you are wanting to find a good Dominant to let go with… get to know them first. You’ll find with the right one… you will naturally slip into that headspace without effort. What gets you there? That will depend on you… and them. I’ve had at least one girlfriend who is ALWAYS bratty… and found she just…wasn’t with me. She couldn’t explain it, either. I’ve got a sometimes play partner who is NEVER bratty…. And can’t help herself but to sass me and can’t explain that, either. So look for energies that feel right, not necessarily what you expect to happen. And yeah, sadly, steer clear of “Domineering”. Narcissism finds easy pickings with submissives, and that is unhealthy as fuck. … and that brings us right back to trust. 😏

[sardonicus87]

The whole trust and responsibility and self-control is important for everyone, regardless of whether you're a Dom, sub, both or neither. I don't really think that speaks to "what a real Dom is" but just, what a decent person is.
.
I feel like some qualities are getting conflated with being a Dom, and that someone that doesn't identify as a Dom is inherently unsafe or something somehow. And I don't think it's my imagination either. On a different discussion, someone actually said that because I am purely a Sadist and not a Dom, that there is "no guarantee of self-control" (as if Doms aren't put on blast all the time for their lack of control), or some other such nonsense.
.
You don't need to be a Dom to care, or to have self-control, or be responsible. All you have to do for that is not be a piece of shit.

[sardonicus87]

15 hours ago, TallBastard said:

Anyone can be a sadist, but the true hallmark(s) of a good Dom(me) is the capacity to restrain oneself, exhibit empathy and compassion, and perform necessary maintenance e.g. aftercare/routines/rituals for their sub. That’s right I said FOR. Just because you are bot the one serving does not mean you aren’t also providing a service. Call it filling a role, call it whatever you want, but when you strip away the semantics, a Dom(me) and a sub both serve each other by providing the desired role for the other, not by taking what you please from the other, and the difference between falling into a role (D or s, doesn’t matter) and BEING D or s is having the dedication to performing your respective role to the best of your ability. Agree or disagree, that’s my perspective on this matter.

I've seen many masochists online that would beg to differ with you on the notion that "anyone can be a Sadist"...

[Th****]

2 hours ago, sardonicus87 said:

The whole trust and responsibility and self-control is important for everyone, regardless of whether you're a Dom, sub, both or neither. I don't really think that speaks to "what a real Dom is" but just, what a decent person is.
.
I feel like some qualities are getting conflated with being a Dom, and that someone that doesn't identify as a Dom is inherently unsafe or something somehow. And I don't think it's my imagination either. On a different discussion, someone actually said that because I am purely a Sadist and not a Dom, that there is "no guarantee of self-control" (as if Doms aren't put on blast all the time for their lack of control), or some other such nonsense.
.
You don't need to be a Dom to care, or to have self-control, or be responsible. All you have to do for that is not be a piece of shit.

I feel this comment really highlights how important it is to seek knowledge and education up front, and continuously, from multiple reputable sources before diving in blindly to this lifestyle. 

[Hy****]

Time to drag Hegel into this.
God help me.

In Game of Thrones (TV), Varus poses to Tyrion a riddle: “A King, A Pope, and a Merchant Lord all bid a mercenary to kill the others. Who lives, who dies?” Tyrion takes a few stabs at it but in his fifth drink, dismisses it with “I’m not fond of riddles,” after which Varus, trying to teach the young noble a lesson, poses an answer (not necessarily the correct answer, as all men die, but the most useful one for a politician): “Power resides where men believe it resides. No more and no less.”

I’m going to treat your questions in a literal/philosophical sense rather than a figurative sense. The question of “what makes a “TWUE” Dom/sub is an essentialist one and that sort of gatekeeping isn’t really all that useful as a norm, as individuals have different power needs.

Dom isn’t a quality, it’s a role. We use it as self identifiers to signal to other our needs/intent, but relationships aren’t social norms, they’re interpersonal and therefore subject to more individualized standards. What makes a Dom isn’t their identifier, instead it is when a sub accepts them as their superior; A Dom on a deserted island rules no one.

This logic will piss of an misogynist incel (or anyone else that assumes that power roles are owed/bestowed through some sort of essentials trait such as sex/race/etc), but not even they would argue that a kidnapper, no matter how much they shout or *** their captive, cannot “insist” the other into becoming a spouse, at least in a free society.

Under this logic the same criteria should also be applied to subs, but subordination doesn’t hold the same power stakes that Doms require for there to be consensus about that role; “I am powerless” doesn’t have the same proof required as “I am powerful” does. If you choose to never swing your hammer, even if you have one, you will hammer no nails; saying you will hammer no nails then becomes true. If you have no hammer, proclaiming you shall hammer nails doesn’t put nails in a board.

A better question to ask is “what do I require from another to allow myself to grant them my subordinance?” It completely supersedes the original question posed because it directly addresses your needs, while the above question assumes you have none; that power roles are a universal. BDSM is about power, but relationships are about needs.

Start with the latter, you’ll find your truth easier.

[Th****]

1 hour ago, Hyrrolar said:

Time to drag Hegel into this.
God help me.

In Game of Thrones (TV), Varus poses to Tyrion a riddle: “A King, A Pope, and a Merchant Lord all bid a mercenary to kill the others. Who lives, who dies?” Tyrion takes a few stabs at it but in his fifth drink, dismisses it with “I’m not fond of riddles,” after which Varus, trying to teach the young noble a lesson, poses an answer (not necessarily the correct answer, as all men die, but the most useful one for a politician): “Power resides where men believe it resides. No more and no less.”

I’m going to treat your questions in a literal/philosophical sense rather than a figurative sense. The question of “what makes a “TWUE” Dom/sub is an essentialist one and that sort of gatekeeping isn’t really all that useful as a norm, as individuals have different power needs.

Dom isn’t a quality, it’s a role. We use it as self identifiers to signal to other our needs/intent, but relationships aren’t social norms, they’re interpersonal and therefore subject to more individualized standards. What makes a Dom isn’t their identifier, instead it is when a sub accepts them as their superior; A Dom on a deserted island rules no one.

This logic will piss of an misogynist incel (or anyone else that assumes that power roles are owed/bestowed through some sort of essentials trait such as sex/race/etc), but not even they would argue that a kidnapper, no matter how much they shout or *** their captive, cannot “insist” the other into becoming a spouse, at least in a free society.

Under this logic the same criteria should also be applied to subs, but subordination doesn’t hold the same power stakes that Doms require for there to be consensus about that role; “I am powerless” doesn’t have the same proof required as “I am powerful” does. If you choose to never swing your hammer, even if you have one, you will hammer no nails; saying you will hammer no nails then becomes true. If you have no hammer, proclaiming you shall hammer nails doesn’t put nails in a board.

A better question to ask is “what do I require from another to allow myself to grant them my subordinance?” It completely supersedes the original question posed because it directly addresses your needs, while the above question assumes you have none; that power roles are a universal. BDSM is about power, but relationships are about needs.

Start with the latter, you’ll find your truth easier.

Careful now with the asking people to flex the brains and be open minded. 

1 hour ago, Hyrrolar said:

BDSM is about power, but relationships are about needs.

Agreed... with the caveat that BDSM is often about power, but not always. Many people engage in BDSM without the D/s portion and, from my perspective, it feels like those of us who do include it are in the minority on this site at least. 

[sardonicus87]

To me, it seems people make too many presumptions about the labels. All that makes a Dom(me) or sub or D/s thing is that power exchange dynamic, which oversimplified is just a "command/obey" or "lead/follow" thing.
.
There's different ways that power can be exchanged, like DDlg, Brat Tamer/brat, traditional D/s, TPE Master/slave, whatever.
.
Setting ground rules, responsibility, self-control and all that other stuff is part of anything BDSM.
.
There is no "one true way" with that power exchange. Different people want that power exchanged in different ways, that's where communication is key. Regardless of any sub-type or style of D/s, some people want that power to be taken, some want it given. For some, that means you can't say no (within reason of course based on pre-negotiated boundaries), for others you can say no. There's also different degrees of "protocols" (which is rules within the dynamic; for example, "you [the sub] are not allowed to talk to anyone else identifying as a Dom without my permission").
.
Anything beyond that basic power exchange is just personal preference. Often "what makes a good Dom" is actually "what makes a good Dom FOR YOU". Now obviously there's bad players regardless of role or position, and it's true of all roles, and that's things like lack of communication, violating established boundaries (consent), etc., but that's not specific to just D/s and power exchange, that's true of everything under the BDSM umbrella.
.
Too often, people have an idea in their head of their ideal or what it means FOR THEMSELVES and they think anyone carrying a particular label has to fit that idea, and anyone that doesn't isn't "true" or is "bad". They also make too many presumptions based on a label.
.
And I think way too many people confuse "Dom" with "Top" and "sub" with "bottom", and that does help things either. So many people are just a Top and they call themselves a Dom. And too many people presume power exchange is inherent to all of BDSM when it's not, it's only inherent to the D/s portion of BDSM, and often the S/M and B/D portions get confused as being under the D/s portion.

[Fa****]

4 hours ago, Hyrrolar said:

Time to drag Hegel into this.
God help me.

In Game of Thrones (TV), Varus poses to Tyrion a riddle: “A King, A Pope, and a Merchant Lord all bid a mercenary to kill the others. Who lives, who dies?” Tyrion takes a few stabs at it but in his fifth drink, dismisses it with “I’m not fond of riddles,” after which Varus, trying to teach the young noble a lesson, poses an answer (not necessarily the correct answer, as all men die, but the most useful one for a politician): “Power resides where men believe it resides. No more and no less.”

I’m going to treat your questions in a literal/philosophical sense rather than a figurative sense. The question of “what makes a “TWUE” Dom/sub is an essentialist one and that sort of gatekeeping isn’t really all that useful as a norm, as individuals have different power needs.

Dom isn’t a quality, it’s a role. We use it as self identifiers to signal to other our needs/intent, but relationships aren’t social norms, they’re interpersonal and therefore subject to more individualized standards. What makes a Dom isn’t their identifier, instead it is when a sub accepts them as their superior; A Dom on a deserted island rules no one.

This logic will piss of an misogynist incel (or anyone else that assumes that power roles are owed/bestowed through some sort of essentials trait such as sex/race/etc), but not even they would argue that a kidnapper, no matter how much they shout or *** their captive, cannot “insist” the other into becoming a spouse, at least in a free society.

Under this logic the same criteria should also be applied to subs, but subordination doesn’t hold the same power stakes that Doms require for there to be consensus about that role; “I am powerless” doesn’t have the same proof required as “I am powerful” does. If you choose to never swing your hammer, even if you have one, you will hammer no nails; saying you will hammer no nails then becomes true. If you have no hammer, proclaiming you shall hammer nails doesn’t put nails in a board.

A better question to ask is “what do I require from another to allow myself to grant them my subordinance?” It completely supersedes the original question posed because it directly addresses your needs, while the above question assumes you have none; that power roles are a universal. BDSM is about power, but relationships are about needs.

Start with the latter, you’ll find your truth easier.

It’s been a minute since a read a forum comment and thought “wow” in a good way. This comment really hits hard. Thought provoking, answers the question and redirects to more appropriate questions and doesn’t contain a tonne of self entitled, waffling b*llsh*t.

This, in my opinion, is exactly what this place ought to be about and I’d very much like to see more content/comments of this ilk. 

[SK****]

I think it all comes down to.. as someone has already said... respect. A good Dom respects their sub enough to seek consent. To communicate. To check in. To make sure everyone is aware of risk.. including you..

Two good rules of thumb are.

R. A. C. K
(Risk Aware Consensual Kink)

And S.S.C. (Safe, Sane/Sober, Consensual)

I'm more advanced D/s dynamics, there are kinks that require prior consent..

Typically this is between two folks that know each other well. They know limits, and how to push them. Trust has been established. These are dynamics with Violent roleplay on which consent is removed, like CNC for example. Or dangerous activities, like Needle or knife play, suspensions, maybe, etc.

Safe words, or some kind of alert in the event they're gagged. Because as a good Dom, you want to know if they're having a bad time.. because you CARE about them, right?

So.. Maybe they hold a tennis ball during a gagged suspension.. If they drop the ball, cut them down.

The traffic light system works well to gauge comfort. Green=all good, yellow=pushing limits but ok, Red=all stop.

And in the event you're in a club environment doing a scene, any DM that hears ”Red" uttered louder than a speaking voice will come check..

You know that your sub gifted you with the trust required to fulfill their needs.

You know you have a responsibility, if you accepted that gift (you don't always have to, and sometimes you shouldn't) to do your best to fulfill them, and yours, which you also communicated to them.. in a safe, sane and sober manner..

There are some good videos on the Web site (as opposed to the app) that will do a far better and more thorough job informing you than I am.

People are, for the most part, correct here. It's all subjective. Everyone has their own definition.. However, for the sake of the community, there are some widely accepted notions that most folks agree upon. And even if you don't use them in your dynamic, you should be aware if you interact with the wider community. Say, in clubs, or at events.

People take many of them very seriously. And for good reason.

[Th****]

53 minutes ago, sardonicus87 said:

To me, it seems people make too many presumptions about the labels. All that makes a Dom(me) or sub or D/s thing is that power exchange dynamic, which oversimplified is just a "command/obey" or "lead/follow" thing.
.
There's different ways that power can be exchanged, like DDlg, Brat Tamer/brat, traditional D/s, TPE Master/slave, whatever.
.
Setting ground rules, responsibility, self-control and all that other stuff is part of anything BDSM.
.
There is no "one true way" with that power exchange. Different people want that power exchanged in different ways, that's where communication is key. Regardless of any sub-type or style of D/s, some people want that power to be taken, some want it given. For some, that means you can't say no (within reason of course based on pre-negotiated boundaries), for others you can say no. There's also different degrees of "protocols" (which is rules within the dynamic; for example, "you [the sub] are not allowed to talk to anyone else identifying as a Dom without my permission").
.
Anything beyond that basic power exchange is just personal preference. Often "what makes a good Dom" is actually "what makes a good Dom FOR YOU". Now obviously there's bad players regardless of role or position, and it's true of all roles, and that's things like lack of communication, violating established boundaries (consent), etc., but that's not specific to just D/s and power exchange, that's true of everything under the BDSM umbrella.
.
Too often, people have an idea in their head of their ideal or what it means FOR THEMSELVES and they think anyone carrying a particular label has to fit that idea, and anyone that doesn't isn't "true" or is "bad". They also make too many presumptions based on a label.
.
And I think way too many people confuse "Dom" with "Top" and "sub" with "bottom", and that does help things either. So many people are just a Top and they call themselves a Dom. And too many people presume power exchange is inherent to all of BDSM when it's not, it's only inherent to the D/s portion of BDSM, and often the S/M and B/D portions get confused as being under the D/s portion.

I can't love this comment enough. Perhaps that last paragraph most of all. 

[Ho****]

I usually avoid these posts because they either descend into some kind of pissing match (and not a fun kind) or a sort of exercise in navel gazing. But Hyrrolar’s response to the question is so accurate (IMO) and well thought out, that I just have to say Bravo, sir. 

[CopperKnob]

14 minutes ago, SKInfidel said:

I think it all comes down to.. as someone has already said... respect. A good Dom respects their sub enough to seek consent. To communicate. To check in. To make sure everyone is aware of risk.. including you..

Two good rules of thumb are.

R. A. C. K
(Risk Aware Consensual Kink)

And S.S.C. (Safe, Sane/Sober, Consensual)

I'm more advanced D/s dynamics, there are kinks that require prior consent..

Typically this is between two folks that know each other well. They know limits, and how to push them. Trust has been established. These are dynamics with Violent roleplay on which consent is removed, like CNC for example. Or dangerous activities, like Needle or knife play, suspensions, maybe, etc.

Safe words, or some kind of alert in the event they're gagged. Because as a good Dom, you want to know if they're having a bad time.. because you CARE about them, right?

So.. Maybe they hold a tennis ball during a gagged suspension.. If they drop the ball, cut them down.

The traffic light system works well to gauge comfort. Green=all good, yellow=pushing limits but ok, Red=all stop.

And in the event you're in a club environment doing a scene, any DM that hears ”Red" uttered louder than a speaking voice will come check..

You know that your sub gifted you with the trust required to fulfill their needs.

You know you have a responsibility, if you accepted that gift (you don't always have to, and sometimes you shouldn't) to do your best to fulfill them, and yours, which you also communicated to them.. in a safe, sane and sober manner..

There are some good videos on the Web site (as opposed to the app) that will do a far better and more thorough job informing you than I am.

People are, for the most part, correct here. It's all subjective. Everyone has their own definition.. However, for the sake of the community, there are some widely accepted notions that most folks agree upon. And even if you don't use them in your dynamic, you should be aware if you interact with the wider community. Say, in clubs, or at events.

People take many of them very seriously. And for good reason.

I'm replying to this as I'm aware some will be reading/not commenting and thinking that your statement below is accurate. It's not.
.
You said:

"In more advanced D/s dynamics, there are kinks that require prior consent"
.
In all dynamics consent is required regardless of the act. Consent can only be given prior to an act being undertaken. Not retrospectively.
.
In fact, in all relationships, before anyone does an act of any type to another, consent is required. Its right there, in legislation.

[SK****]

55 minutes ago, CopperKnob said:

I'm replying to this as I'm aware some will be reading/not commenting and thinking that your statement below is accurate. It's not.
.
You said:

"In more advanced D/s dynamics, there are kinks that require prior consent"
.
In all dynamics consent is required regardless of the act. Consent can only be given prior to an act being undertaken. Not retrospectively.
.
In fact, in all relationships, before anyone does an act of any type to another, consent is required. Its right there, in legislation.

You seem to be assuming the negative.

What I meant by this was, that for some reason or another, by the nature of the scene itself. CNC, Gags, etc.. checking in becomes difficult and the ability to communicate non-consent is restricted, or easily misunderstood.. So you have to find a way to communicate that is clearly understood.

I did not mean, or imply that consent isn't necessary the rest of the time.

Just that during those types of situations, you need to take extra care and have extra communication to ensure you maintain consent.

[SK****]

In fact.. I mentioned actual widely-accepted frameworks for maintaining consent, and communication. But.. I hope that clarification helped.

[Th****]

57 minutes ago, SKInfidel said:

You seem to be assuming the negative.

What I meant by this was, that for some reason or another, by the nature of the scene itself. CNC, Gags, etc.. checking in becomes difficult and the ability to communicate non-consent is restricted, or easily misunderstood.. So you have to find a way to communicate that is clearly understood.

I did not mean, or imply that consent isn't necessary the rest of the time.

Just that during those types of situations, you need to take extra care and have extra communication to ensure you maintain consent.
 

She was pretty clear in explaining her comments were also for the benefits of all readers and *especially* new/less informed people. You aren't being attacked. 

[SK****]

39 minutes ago, ThaliaV said:

She was pretty clear in explaining her comments were also for the benefits of all readers and *especially* new/less informed people. You aren't being attacked. 

Right, I figured that might be the case. That's why I said *might*

[SK****]

Err *seem (not might) sorry. I'm a little distracted at the moment.. Still the middle of the work day.

[Th****]

So instead of going on the defensive, maybe think about how you worded things and how it might read to someone else who still needs to learn a lot and consider if you could have phrased things more clearly. 

This just happened to me the other day on a different thread where I was responding before the proper amount of morning coffee 😆

[CopperKnob]

1 hour ago, SKInfidel said:

You seem to be assuming the negative.

What I meant by this was, that for some reason or another, by the nature of the scene itself. CNC, Gags, etc.. checking in becomes difficult and the ability to communicate non-consent is restricted, or easily misunderstood.. So you have to find a way to communicate that is clearly understood.

I did not mean, or imply that consent isn't necessary the rest of the time.

Just that during those types of situations, you need to take extra care and have extra communication to ensure you maintain consent.

Newbies are here, and they read the forums quietly, squirrelling information and becoming confused by it putting themselves in harmful situations.
Clear communication, particularly when comments lack tone, inflection, etc, is always useful.
.
But also, RACK/PRICK/SSC may be a starting point, but they are just that, a starting point.

[Th****]

8 minutes ago, CopperKnob said:

Newbies are here, and they read the forums quietly, squirrelling information and becoming confused by it putting themselves in harmful situations.
Clear communication, particularly when comments lack tone, inflection, etc, is always useful.
.
But also, RACK/PRICK/SSC may be a starting point, but they are just that, a starting point.

And so many probably haven't yet learned those yet either and since we're talking consent, let's add FRIES to the acronym list 

Edited April 10 by ThaliaV

[SK****]

Yep yep.. I probably should have waited till after work when I had time to give it the appropriate attention.

I didn't mean to come across as defensive. Just acknowledging there might be a misunderstanding and trying to clarify.

And then proceeding to totally jam that up as well.. 😂😂😂

[Th****]

Woohoo!! Look at us... communicating like civil adults!! 🎉🎉

[Fa****]

7 hours ago, SKInfidel said:

I think it all comes down to.. as someone has already said... respect. A good Dom respects their sub enough to seek consent. To communicate. To check in. To make sure everyone is aware of risk.. including you..

Two good rules of thumb are.

R. A. C. K
(Risk Aware Consensual Kink)

And S.S.C. (Safe, Sane/Sober, Consensual)

I'm more advanced D/s dynamics, there are kinks that require prior consent..

Typically this is between two folks that know each other well. They know limits, and how to push them. Trust has been established. These are dynamics with Violent roleplay on which consent is removed, like CNC for example. Or dangerous activities, like Needle or knife play, suspensions, maybe, etc.

Safe words, or some kind of alert in the event they're gagged. Because as a good Dom, you want to know if they're having a bad time.. because you CARE about them, right?

So.. Maybe they hold a tennis ball during a gagged suspension.. If they drop the ball, cut them down.

The traffic light system works well to gauge comfort. Green=all good, yellow=pushing limits but ok, Red=all stop.

And in the event you're in a club environment doing a scene, any DM that hears ”Red" uttered louder than a speaking voice will come check..

You know that your sub gifted you with the trust required to fulfill their needs.

You know you have a responsibility, if you accepted that gift (you don't always have to, and sometimes you shouldn't) to do your best to fulfill them, and yours, which you also communicated to them.. in a safe, sane and sober manner..

There are some good videos on the Web site (as opposed to the app) that will do a far better and more thorough job informing you than I am.

People are, for the most part, correct here. It's all subjective. Everyone has their own definition.. However, for the sake of the community, there are some widely accepted notions that most folks agree upon. And even if you don't use them in your dynamic, you should be aware if you interact with the wider community. Say, in clubs, or at events.

People take many of them very seriously. And for good reason.
 

 

6 hours ago, SKInfidel said:

In fact.. I mentioned actual widely-accepted frameworks for maintaining consent, and communication. But.. I hope that clarification helped.

 

4 hours ago, CopperKnob said:

Newbies are here, and they read the forums quietly, squirrelling information and becoming confused by it putting themselves in harmful situations.
Clear communication, particularly when comments lack tone, inflection, etc, is always useful.
.
But also, RACK/PRICK/SSC may be a starting point, but they are just that, a starting point.

 

4 hours ago, ThaliaV said:

And so many probably haven't yet learned those yet either and since we're talking consent, let's add FRIES to the acronym list 

And as an addendum any and all of these acronyms are, frankly, only as worthwhile as the people who are interpreting them.

 What seems safe and same to one person may not been the same to another. Likewise risk awareness is different for everybody dependent on their previous exposure.

@CopperKnobis right, the acronyms are simply starting points (which I’m sure is what @SKInfidel was also meaning) x

[Th****]

24 minutes ago, FatefulDestiny said:

 

 

 

And as an addendum any and all of these acronyms are, frankly, only as worthwhile as the people who are interpreting them.

 What seems safe and same to one person may not been the same to another. Likewise risk awareness is different for everybody dependent on their previous exposure.

@CopperKnobis right, the acronyms are simply starting points (which I’m sure is what @SKInfidel was also meaning) x

Right, everyone's risk profile is going to be different for a load of different reasons, as basic as different comfort levels with various risks to pre existing health or physical issues.