Next up, is the emotionally charged subject of 'abuse'. The word elicits a truly amazing "knee-jerk" reaction from the general public. The word has developed such an aura that merely questioning the validity of an accusation of 'abuse' is often seen as sin, in and of itself. Needless to say, such power in a word makes the word ripe for misuse. While 'abuse' may be an emotionally charged subject, actually defining 'abuse' in general terms is fairly straightforward:

In simple terms: Abuse is something that falls outside of an agreement.

Obviously, that definition is bit terse and could use some elaboration. First, 'agreement' has different meanings depending on circumstance. In the context of 'abuse', it refers to a specific contract or arrangement between specific parties. We are not talking about two people 'agreeing' on the best way to get to the store. We are talking about two to more parties coming to a mutual arrangement.

The purpose of any agreement is to restrict the parties involved to a certain set of behaviors. This is true if we are talking about a business agreement, where the behaviors might mean the manufacture of goods. Or if we are talking about a sporting match where all parties are agreeing to a contest based on certain rules. It even applies to personal relationships between people. In personal relationship, two people who are dating might agree to stop dating others, and to date each other exclusively (one example). Whatever the type of agreement, it is in essence an agreed upon limitation on behavior.

Abuse is something that violate such an agreement. To give example, if a police officer turns on his flashing lights to race to a bank that is being robbed, that is an acceptable use of his authority. However, if that same officer turns on his flashing lights, and races around at high speeds for fun, we would say that is an abuse of his authority. The difference between to the two is that the officer is within his agreement with society in one action, but not in the other. In this case, when he was in training, he would have been told specifically when he could and could not use his lights. When he accepts a job as an officer, he agrees to abide by the rules. Using the lights for fun would be breaking that agreement.

That is a fairly straightforward example; However, if someone ties a girl up and then takes a hardwood cane to her, leaving red marks across her back, did he abused her? Well, that depends; if the girl is his neighbor's daughter whom he abducted against her will, I think most would agree that is abuse. But, if that girl is was his long-term BDSM partner and they were are doing a scene, there is nothing abusive about it. The difference is consent. In the latter case the girl had an agreement with the gentleman where such behavior was acceptable. This is where we start to see that the specific agreement in place affects what behavior constitutes abuse.

Now comes the bit more tricky part, and it is where most of the confusion comes in. Using the BDSM example: say for instance, I tie my partner up and instead of using the quarter inch hardwood dowels I normally use, I cleverly decide I will surprise her by beating her bloody with a baseball bat. Now we are obviously into the area of abuse, and again, the reason is, I am breaking our agreement. She may never have outright said, 'Don't use a baseball bat.' but I am still breaking the agreement, because there is an 'assumed agreement'. The assumption is that I am not going to do that level of damage to her. Assumed agreements can cause of all sorts of trouble.

We live in a society of assumed agreements. The problem with having so many assumed agreements is that not everyone has the same list of agreements. For instance, I might think that since we are in a Lifestyle D/s relationship, it is perfectly reasonable for me to yank you to your knees by the hair when you back talk me. However, if your idea of a Lifestyle D/s relationship is that we do a pre-planned scene once a year at a BDSM club, we are likely run into some difficulties. You may see me as 'abusive' because I am too rough. In such a case, what we really have is a gross misunderstanding. We both think we are acting within the agreed upon bounds, however we have not communicated effectively.

Adding to the difficulty, agreements are generally dynamic rather then static, so pinning down what the agreement is at any given point in time becomes even more difficult. There may be an assumed agreement that the Dominant should push the submissive to go farther during scene. But push how hard or how far? Both parties may think they understand the other, but do they? With both the spoken and assumed agreements constantly changing, the challenge of communication becomes even greater

All too often bad communication is seen as abuse. In fact, to one partner it most certainly appears to be 'abuse' because they see the behavior as outside what they agreed to. While the other party is left thinking that their behavior is well within the bounds of the agreement. This point cannot be stressed too much; clear communication is critical. This is especially important when you are entering a relationship where the assumed agreements deviate from the socially accepted norm (as in D/s).

The issue of bad communication raises another question: Who is responsible for ensuring accurate communication in a D/s or BDSM relationship? This doesn't differ from any other type of agreement, both parties are responsible for understanding the privileges and limitations placed on them by the agreement. Both parties are also responsible for making sure they understand how their partner perceives the agreement.

All parties are consenting to "their understanding of the agreement'. They are only agreeing to what they believe the agreement to be. Regrettably, the fact we are all human means that we misunderstand each other from time to time. This is part of the risk we take when entering into a relationship that isn't in lock step with the mainstream view.

Of course, none of this is talking about someone who intentionally misrepresents or tries to trick someone else. If someone is actively trying to mislead the other party then they know they are not operating within the other parties understanding of the agreement. They know they are violating the agreement the other person believes is in place, and that is abuse.

Abuse is defined by the limits of the agreement between the people involved. If in our relationship, we have agreed that we randomly attempt to stab each other in the arm with a toothpick, then weird as that may be, it isn't abuse. The same goes for any agreed upon lifestyle choice. If the parties involved agree to it, then it is not abuse. It doesn't matter one bit that we personally may see it as 'improper'.

Unfortunately, the confusion doesn't stop there. There is an endless list of things we have been taught about what we should expect in a relationship with another person. However, no two people have the exact same list. People tend to assume there is a certain 'key list' of expectations that everyone shares, but this isn't the case. Humans tend to believe that everyone else's expectations are the same as our own. We make endless assumptions about what is outside of acceptable.

These types of assumptions are often the basis of the 'danger signals' articles seen scattered about the web and other places. Nearly every 'danger signal list' out there, while compiled by 'experts' of one type or another is based on the norms of vanilla relationships. . In general they cannot be applied as a standard for Lifestyle D/s and BDSM relationships. The authors of these lists have assumed that the agreements in place are in line with typical mainstream relationships. Since we are talking about Lifestyle D/s they make some very incorrect assumptions. Several of these lists have attempted to 'adjust' for the differences, but unfortunately they still generally retain many unspoken assumptions that just are not applicable.

We in the D/s and BDSM community must very careful of allowing someone else's context of assumed agreements to be forced upon us. What one person sees as 'abuse' might be desirable, and perfectly within the scope of someone else's arrangement. The one thing we can all count on is that other folks will attempt to force us into their own moral and social perspectives. It seems to be human nature to extrapolate our own core wants and needs onto everyone else.

The closer a person is to the mainstream, the harder it is for them to realize that what they 'take for granted' may not be true for others. The reason for this is simple, because their assumptions are commonly shared they have rarely had to justify their assumptions. The more mainstream your views, the more peer pressure support you have for those views. What we have never had to question we generally accept.

Often, it is not until we are required to dig inside ourselves, to understand why we are different from those around us, that we come to understand just how vast the core differences between people can be. What is fundamentally bad for you or I may be quite the opposite for someone else; recognizing why that is true requires us to understand the other person at a level that is often deeper then our present understanding of ourselves. So, it is more common to hear it claimed, that something or another is 'wrong' no matter what the parties involved might have agreed to.

The debate about whose moral perspective is correct is not one that will be settled in this or any other writings. That debate, I leave to those who feel it is resolvable. But for our purpose here, it is enough to say that we must not allow context to be assumed. If we do, we as outsiders, stand to be the first to be judged.

Now, I want to make sure I am clear about one thing. None of this is to be taken to say that abuse does not occur in D/s and BDSM relationships. Regrettably, it does show up in our culture as well. But we must be clear that what makes something abuse is not the 'severity' of it in a vanilla person's eyes. What makes it abuse is whether or not it falls outside of the agreement between the parties involved. If someone has a hard limit with electrical play and once they are tied up the Dom pulls out a TENS unit, that is abuse. If a couple has an agreement only for planned scenes and one partner yanks the other's hair out of scene that could be abuse. However, if the couple is a 24/7 Lifestyle couple living a Master/slave relationship smacking the slave when they speak out of place might be a sign of a perfectly happy and functional relationship.

Abuse is something that falls outside of an agreement. The hard part is making sure that all parties involved have a very clear idea of what they are agreeing to. Before we rush to label something 'abuse' (or not), we need to make sure we have a full understanding of the agreement between the people involved. To rush to a judgment either way is promoting the same 'my lifestyle is your lifestyle' mentality that is rampant in the vanilla world. And most all of us in the lifestyle have been victims of that at one time or another.

All images and materials on this site protected by copyright. More: credits

© domsub.info

Site Map