Abel wonders about how “no limits” play works, and whether some limits are too fundamental to dispense with.
Relevant links:
“The one in which my girlfriends got tortured” on The Spanking Writers
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Abel wonders about how “no limits” play works, and whether some limits are too fundamental to dispense with.
Relevant links:
“The one in which my girlfriends got tortured” on The Spanking Writers
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
This really is an interesting topic. When I first heard of the idea of playing without limits, it appealed to me greatly, but I didn’t understand just how far that play goes. After reading EmmaJane’s account and looking into the idea further, I have realized that playing without limits means experiencing things that I never thought people would actually do. I am fundamentally opposed to anything that is relatively likely to cause permanent damage, be it physical or psychological. I now realize that people that play without limits do not share that position.
As I have explored my own feelings on the matter, I have realized that playing without limits isn’t exactly what I think of when I hear the term. When I thought of playing without limits, I thought more of playing without a safeword. In the right context, that is still an idea that appeals to me immensely. With the right person, these could seem like the same thing, because he would know me well enough that I wouldn’t need to explicitly state any limits before the scene.
If I understood you correctly, Abel, I think I agree with you. It seems like there are some lines that simply shouldn’t be crossed.* However, I have come to realize that I draw those lines in a different place than others, so no limit play really isn’t for me.
*I’m sure that everyone would agree with that to at least some degree. At the very least, I hope no one would assert that it is acceptable to actually kill someone during play. As long as we all agree on that, we agree that there must be some limit to “no limit” play. The question becomes, how do we know if we draw that line at the same place as those with whom we’re playing if we insist that limits are not allowed and thus cannot be discussed? Given the degree to which no limits works for some people, this becomes a difficult dilemma.
Hi, Melanie
Thanks for the long and interesting comment, which continues the discussion I started in the broadcast in some really interesting ways.
Just to re-assure you (and anyone else reading this)…. The people I know who play without limits do absolutely share your caution about inflicting permanent damage. They’re incredibly careful in the way they plan and carry out scenes, and are totally trustworthy.
Thanks again for such interesting perspectives. I’d welcome others’ views too!
I’ve been trying to think of a way to ask this so that it doesn’t come across as a challenge, and I haven’t come up with anything that seems quite right. I think I’ll just preface it by saying that this truly is an honest question, so please take it as such.
You said that the people you know that play with no limits seek to avoid permanent damage. This makes me wonder: Is it possible to waterboard in such a way that you negate the risk of psychological harm? I hadn’t considered that possibility until I read your response, and I’m quite curious to know. If it is possible, how? And how can we be sure?
Fair question, Melanie. I think they’d argue that they’re very careful in who they play with (so they’re confident that the individuals will cope); that they’re incredibly careful to monitor reactions during the scene; that they try to provide good aftercare; and that fundamentally, whilst the physical experience is the same, there’s a world of difference in deep-down mindset between someone who’s chosen to participate in a scene and someone who’s being tortured entirely against their will. But its certainly an edgy area!