"Hates" category on the main site

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

"Hates" category on the main site

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Submissive >> "Hates" category on the main site

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

"Hates" category on the main site - 7/3/2017 9:46:42 AM

Posts: 18
Joined: 2/3/2017
Status: offline

So maybe some subs can help me shed light on this, i noticed there is a category "Hates" under Interests but separated from hard limits, so it is something that sub is obviously not keen on but also not excluded, now as this Gordian knot is sometimes hard to untangle i find myself wondering, is it possible for a sub to hate something and be aroused at the idea at the same time, thereby putting it in "hates" as opposed to hard limits, are there some subs who are aroused at the idea of being made to do something they dislike? Or am i just reading too much into it?

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/3/2017 2:13:10 PM

Posts: 450
Joined: 7/16/2016
Status: offline

If I was looking for a dominant, I sure as hell wouldn't post what I hated. Give them wayyyyyyyy too much ammunition.

(speaking as a masochist who has a sadist who thinks it's funny to make me swear when he does despicable things to me

)

(in reply to ffffff333)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/5/2017 2:38:29 PM

Posts: 337
Joined: 11/5/2013
From: Pennsylvania
Status: offline

We have always taken the "Hates" category on this site to stand for "Soft Limits," for those folks who are confused as to what the difference is between a soft limit and a hard limit.

My Mistress not only respects my hard limits, but my soft limits as well.

A sub buddy of mine has a soft limit when it comes to Coldplay. (He originally claimed it was a hard limit, but it was not.)
When he royally f---s up, guess what songs he has to listen to while performing an act of contrition??? Yeah, you guessed it.

Then there are dominants who enjoy pushing soft limits, since those are not customarily automatic deal breakers.

-- Cub

_____________________________

"The most precious possession that ever comes to a man in this world is a woman's heart."-- J.G. Holland

(in reply to ffffff333)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/5/2017 2:40:02 PM

Posts: 337
Joined: 11/5/2013
From: Pennsylvania
Status: offline

WTF happened to our forum avatar, which we did not change??? SOFT LIMIT!

_____________________________

"The most precious possession that ever comes to a man in this world is a woman's heart."-- J.G. Holland

(in reply to HoneyBears)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/5/2017 2:41:42 PM

Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline

you have no avatar because your wanton like the many

_____________________________

wE arE tHe voiCes,
We SAtuRaTe yOur aLPHA brain WAveS, ThIs is nOt A DrEAm The wiZaRd of Oz, shoES, CaLcuLUs, DECorAtiNG, FrIDGE SProcKeTs, be VeRy sCareDed – SLoBbers,We DeEManDErs Sloowee DAnCiNG, SmOOches – whisper whisper & CaAkEE

(in reply to HoneyBears)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/5/2017 7:06:30 PM

Posts: 508
Joined: 3/20/2017
Status: offline

I take them as meaning she will cut your dick off while sleeping if you push them.

_____________________________

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQeNASx7ksM

(in reply to WickedsDesire)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/5/2017 8:36:24 PM

Posts: 5490
Status: offline

quote:

is it possible for a sub to hate something and be aroused at the idea at the same time

Absolutely.

quote:

there some subs who are aroused at the idea of being made to do something they dislike?

Absolutely.

_____________________________

Not your average bimbo.

(in reply to ffffff333)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/6/2017 12:07:54 AM

Posts: 5158
Joined: 10/18/2005
From: Montana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ffffff333

is it possible for a sub to hate something and be aroused at the idea at the same time, thereby putting it in "hates" as opposed to hard limits, are there some subs who are aroused at the idea of being made to do something they dislike?

For me the "hate" category is something I really do hate to do. I'm not aroused by it at all. However, if I were in a committed relationship and the partner really felt a need to do that, then I would be willing to please my partner.

_____________________________

We are stardust, we are golden, and we got to get ourselves back to the garden.

Yes, I am crazy about feathered creatures. I have a dozen chickens, 3 ducks, 5 geese, and 2 parakeets.

Revise that number. Just got 14 new chicks and 5 turkeys.

(in reply to ffffff333)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/6/2017 1:16:51 AM

Posts: 3693
Joined: 7/28/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: peppermint

quote:

ORIGINAL: ffffff333

is it possible for a sub to hate something and be aroused at the idea at the same time, thereby putting it in "hates" as opposed to hard limits, are there some subs who are aroused at the idea of being made to do something they dislike?

For me the "hate" category is something I really do hate to do. I'm not aroused by it at all.

You're missing the fact that it's possible to be aroused by doing things you really hate.

People who don't have this have a hard time understanding that. They think: well if it can arouse you, you must have not really hated it to begin with. You must have secretly liked it, and it's because you actually really like it that you're aroused by it.

Which misses the point that it's not the thing that's being hated that is causing the arousal, but rather the act itself, of being made to do something you hate by somebody in charge.
The thing being hated itself is irrelevant. It could be any random thing you hate, as long as there's a strong dislike for it. What's essential isn't the hated thing, it's the Dominant enforcing that the hated thing happens, while they full know that they're making you do something you hate.

That sadism, of the Dominant on purpose doing something you hate, is what's causing the arousal.

OP... don't expect the random Collar sub to have a hate fetish though. 99% of them will really not want to do the things they hate.
Even in a circumstance where they might consider doing something they hate for a Dominant they really want to please, they still won't be aroused by doing it.
It will just be a feat of endurance they suffer through for the joy of pleasing.

_____________________________

I can be your whore
I am the dirt you created
I am your sinner
And your whore
But let me tell you something baby
You love me for everything you hate me for

(in reply to peppermint)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/6/2017 5:35:26 AM

Posts: 18
Joined: 2/3/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar

quote:

ORIGINAL: peppermint

quote:

ORIGINAL: ffffff333

is it possible for a sub to hate something and be aroused at the idea at the same time, thereby putting it in "hates" as opposed to hard limits, are there some subs who are aroused at the idea of being made to do something they dislike?

For me the "hate" category is something I really do hate to do. I'm not aroused by it at all.

You're missing the fact that it's possible to be aroused by doing things you really hate.

People who don't have this have a hard time understanding that. They think: well if it can arouse you, you must have not really hated it to begin with. You must have secretly liked it, and it's because you actually really like it that you're aroused by it.

Which misses the point that it's not the thing that's being hated that is causing the arousal, but rather the act itself, of being made to do something you hate by somebody in charge.
The thing being hated itself is irrelevant. It could be any random thing you hate, as long as there's a strong dislike for it. What's essential isn't the hated thing, it's the Dominant enforcing that the hated thing happens, while they full know that they're making you do something you hate.

That sadism, of the Dominant on purpose doing something you hate, is what's causing the arousal.

OP... don't expect the random Collar sub to have a hate fetish though. 99% of them will really not want to do the things they hate.
Even in a circumstance where they might consider doing something they hate for a Dominant they really want to please, they still won't be aroused by doing it.
It will just be a feat of endurance they suffer through for the joy of pleasing.

yeah, that is why i am asking, the fact is for me, if i am engaging in any sort of play the sub has to enjoy it on one level or another, if they are just going trough it because they feel obligated to that does nothing for me, for me it is all back and forth, some people would say dominant should not care for what the sub wants and instead focus on his/her own pleasure, but IMO the key is to make the sub believe that is the case but in reality always step carefully, doing the wrong thing can easily turn positive experience into negative, that is why we have safe words in the first place, at the end of the day it is all make believe.

(in reply to UllrsIshtar)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/6/2017 6:06:25 AM

Posts: 3693
Joined: 7/28/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ffffff333

some people would say dominant should not care for what the sub wants and instead focus on his/her own pleasure,

The only people I'v ever seen say that are wankers online. Nobody I know in person, in the community, actually believes that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ffffff333

but IMO the key is to make the sub believe that is the case

Most subs I know wouldn't enjoy being made to believe that their Dominant doesn't care about anything but their own pleasure.
Most subs I'm familiar with very much expect their Dominants to make clear that they care about the subs welfare.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ffffff333

that is why we have safe words in the first place,

I don't use safewords, except in casual play with people I don't know very well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ffffff333

at the end of the day it is all make believe.

I don't engage in make believe. If what we're doing isn't authentic, I'm not interested.
Role play isn't my thing.

_____________________________

I can be your whore
I am the dirt you created
I am your sinner
And your whore
But let me tell you something baby
You love me for everything you hate me for

(in reply to ffffff333)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/6/2017 7:02:13 AM

Posts: 18
Joined: 2/3/2017
Status: offline

quote:

Most subs I know wouldn't enjoy being made to believe that their Dominant doesn't care about anything but their own pleasure.
Most subs I'm familiar with very much expect their Dominants to make clear that they care about the subs welfare.

IDK if Fm is any different to Mf that i am most familiar with being a male dominant, but i ran into quite a few Fsubs that sought exactly that, in fact i run into a few subs who were asking for advice on how to get themselves castrated so they can focus on their partner alone, and while i consider this an extremely unwise thing to do as a dominant i gave a lot of thought what stance to assume if i happen to find myself in a relationship with a sub exhibiting this desire that seems to be so prominent in the population i am interested in.

Also as i said it is make believe, at least 24/7 thing often is, we use words Master/Slave frequently but of course you can´t own another human being, so in this sense it is just make believe, they can leave whenever they want, also take the example of consensual non consent, it is oxymoron in and of itself, since consent was in fact given prior and everything since then has been roleplay, it may not be your cup of tea, god knows no two fetishists are alike, but it is definitely a thing.

I read that the first rule of the club kink is that you do not judge, and it is a principle i try to guide myself with, as long as it is between consenting adults it is ok in my book, don´t seek to impose my views on other people, there are some things i would not do out of safety concerns, i have no desire to ruin somebody´s life over a few minutes of pleasure even if that someone is begging me to do it, but for most other thing am not really opposed to them, and i could very well pretend to hold a belief i do not in fact hold if i for example had a partner who was into race play, it would not be disingenuous of me either, i have the ability to compartmentalize my brain this way.

(in reply to UllrsIshtar)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/6/2017 8:04:03 AM

Posts: 3693
Joined: 7/28/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ffffff333

we use words Master/Slave frequently but of course you can´t own another human being, so in this sense it is just make believe,

According to Merriam-Webster, one of the definitions of slave is: "one that is completely subservient to a dominating influence"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/slave

So it's perfectly possible to REALLY be somebody's slave (by definition).
Legal ownership isn't required. All that's needed is that you're completely subservient to a dominating influence, which is a psychological state, and has nothing to do with what your legal rights are.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ffffff333

they can leave whenever they want,

Not necessarily. It's totally possible to induce a psychological state akin to Stockholm syndrome/capture bonding, in which it becomes nearly impossible for the submissive partner to leave, despite their legal right to do so.
You also often see this state in domestic abuse victims, where the victim cannot leave, even when their family and friends tells them they should, because they're psychologically dependent on their abuser.

Though, hopefully, in a BDSM relationship, such a state would not be created with the aim of abusing the submissive.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ffffff333

also take the example of consensual non consent, it is oxymoron in and of itself, since consent was in fact given prior and everything since then has been roleplay

My consensual nonconsent play isn't like that at all, and I'm probably one of the most well known CNC player around these parts.

My CNC play consist of: giving consent once, and then not being able to revoke consent after that point, even if the bottom really really seriously wants to. In practice this means that safewords are no longer used, 'stop', 'no' and so on are agreed between both parties to be ignored, and the bottom has literally no way to stop the Top from doing what they want to do, no matter how much they don't like it.

I don't consider any play to be CNC until the bottom is to the point where they want to stop, and are attempting to get the Top to stop (genuinely and for real) and the Top ignores them and continues anyways.
If the bottom doesn't want to stop yet, it's not CNC, because it's still just plainly consensual at that point.
It's not CNC until the bottom wants to stop, and the Top carries on because the bottom priory gave consent to ignore the bottoms desire to stop.

That's not roleplay though. There's no faking involved. The bottom isn't pretending that they want to stop, they REALLY want to stop. And the Top isn't pretending that they're doing something they don't have the consent to do, because they know prior consent has been given to ignore the bottom's current desire to stop.

Trust me, if you agree to CNC with me, and I do something like... oh say... waterboard you during a 3 hour session, there will be no roleplay involved.
You will be waterboarded. It will actually be torture. You will really want to stop at some point. And I will really ignore you and carry on for as long as *I* want to.

_____________________________

I can be your whore
I am the dirt you created
I am your sinner
And your whore
But let me tell you something baby
You love me for everything you hate me for

(in reply to ffffff333)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/6/2017 9:40:36 AM

Posts: 18
Joined: 2/3/2017
Status: offline

quote:

My consensual nonconsent play isn't like that at all, and I'm probably one of the most well known CNC player around these parts.

My CNC play consist of: giving consent once, and then not being able to revoke consent after that point, even if the bottom really really seriously wants to. In practice this means that safewords are no longer used, 'stop', 'no' and so on are agreed between both parties to be ignored, and the bottom has literally no way to stop the Top from doing what they want to do, no matter how much they don't like it.

I don't consider any play to be CNC until the bottom is to the point where they want to stop, and are attempting to get the Top to stop (genuinely and for real) and the Top ignores them and continues anyways.
If the bottom doesn't want to stop yet, it's not CNC, because it's still just plainly consensual at that point.
It's not CNC until the bottom wants to stop, and the Top carries on because the bottom priory gave consent to ignore the bottoms desire to stop.

That's not roleplay though. There's no faking involved. The bottom isn't pretending that they want to stop, they REALLY want to stop. And the Top isn't pretending that they're doing something they don't have the consent to do, because they know prior consent has been given to ignore the bottom's current desire to stop.

Trust me, if you agree to CNC with me, and I do something like... oh say... waterboard you during a 3 hour session, there will be no roleplay involved.
You will be waterboarded. It will actually be torture. You will really want to stop at some point. And I will really ignore you and carry on for as long as *I* want to.

Isn´t that illegal? And really risky? Since if the sub really changer their mind he or she can go ahead and report you to the police.

(in reply to UllrsIshtar)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/6/2017 10:02:30 AM

Posts: 1076
Joined: 6/10/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ffffff333

So maybe some subs can help me shed light on this, i noticed there is a category "Hates" under Interests but separated from hard limits, so it is something that sub is obviously not keen on but also not excluded, now as this Gordian knot is sometimes hard to untangle i find myself wondering, is it possible for a sub to hate something and be aroused at the idea at the same time, thereby putting it in "hates" as opposed to hard limits, are there some subs who are aroused at the idea of being made to do something they dislike? Or am i just reading too much into it?

I would say for purpose of the "Interests" section of this website is to highlight what one is interested in. If they hate, I would generally take it they do not like it and do not want to do it. If the person is a masochist, I would think they will list it as a like and not hate since they are a masochist.

_____________________________

Master of the Mystic Arts
Proprieter Verließ Von Strange
Rubber Fetishist
SciFi Fanatic

(in reply to ffffff333)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/6/2017 11:27:44 AM

Posts: 3693
Joined: 7/28/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ffffff333

Isn´t that illegal? And really risky? Since if the sub really changer their mind he or she can go ahead and report you to the police.

Depending on where you live, almost everything BDSMers do is technically illegal. You cannot legally consent to being beaten. That's because you cannot consent to breaking the law, and the law says you can't beat people.

So if you consensually beat somebody, and they agree the entire time, and they have a safeword and don't use it, and they don't tell you to stop at all, and you think everything is good and nice... they can STILL go to the cops afterwards and press charges against you.
If they have bruises or any other kind of mark, you're going to get convicted. Period. No matter how many time you say it was consensual.

As a Top, any time you play with anybody, you run the risk that they'll go to the cops afterwards. Usually, when you play with safewords, the -slim- line of protection you use against that risk is the fact that the bottom can always say 'stop', so you usually can count on the fact that as long as they don't say 'stop', they still like what you're doing. Though this doesn't always work out, because there's been bottoms who have accused Tops of consent violations after scenes where the bottom neither said stop, nor no, nor safeworded, nor gave ANY indication whatsoever that they wanted to stop.
If that happens to you as a Top, you're pretty much screwed, because nobody will believe you, and everybody will take the bottom's side.

When you engage in consensual nonconsent play, your risk goes up, because now you don't only have the situation where, if the bottom after play goes to the cops you're screwed, you also have the type of play going on where you know for sure that the bottom WILL say during the scene that they want to stop. They will safeword, they will yell 'no', they will beg you to stop, they will threaten you, they will plead. And despite all that, you continue, because they promised, before the scene, that even if they wanted you to stop during the scene, they would be okay with you not stopping once they cooled down after the scene was over.
So you're basically counting on the promise they made before the scene that they won't go to the cops after the scene, even though you'll on purpose violate their consent during the scene (because they want their consent to be violated during the scene, and consented to you violating their consent mid-scene, hence consensual nonconsent).

Can you trust their promise that they won't go to the cops after the scene?
Maybe... maybe not. But that's really a risk you're taking any time you play with anybody.

Even so, it's best to not engage in CNC with somebody unless you know them really well, and even then, it's best to start slowly and build up to more drastic scenes over a period of a few months.

_____________________________

I can be your whore
I am the dirt you created
I am your sinner
And your whore
But let me tell you something baby
You love me for everything you hate me for

(in reply to ffffff333)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/6/2017 12:28:36 PM

Posts: 5158
Joined: 10/18/2005
From: Montana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar

quote:

ORIGINAL: peppermint

quote:

ORIGINAL: ffffff333

is it possible for a sub to hate something and be aroused at the idea at the same time, thereby putting it in "hates" as opposed to hard limits, are there some subs who are aroused at the idea of being made to do something they dislike?

For me the "hate" category is something I really do hate to do. I'm not aroused by it at all.

You're missing the fact that it's possible to be aroused by doing things you really hate.

You're missing the fact that I was speaking for myself when I said "For me" and was not speaking for others. For me means, for me and me only. I was relating how I might use the "hate" choice. How you use it is up to you. How anyone else chooses to use the term is up to them. If they want to use it for something they hate but also arouses them, then so be it. I will not. Thank you.

_____________________________

We are stardust, we are golden, and we got to get ourselves back to the garden.

Yes, I am crazy about feathered creatures. I have a dozen chickens, 3 ducks, 5 geese, and 2 parakeets.

Revise that number. Just got 14 new chicks and 5 turkeys.

(in reply to UllrsIshtar)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/7/2017 1:32:25 AM

Posts: 1035
Joined: 1/9/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar

quote:

ORIGINAL: peppermint

quote:

ORIGINAL: ffffff333

is it possible for a sub to hate something and be aroused at the idea at the same time, thereby putting it in "hates" as opposed to hard limits, are there some subs who are aroused at the idea of being made to do something they dislike?

For me the "hate" category is something I really do hate to do. I'm not aroused by it at all.

You're missing the fact that it's possible to be aroused by doing things you really hate.

People who don't have this have a hard time understanding that. They think: well if it can arouse you, you must have not really hated it to begin with. You must have secretly liked it, and it's because you actually really like it that you're aroused by it.

Which misses the point that it's not the thing that's being hated that is causing the arousal, but rather the act itself, of being made to do something you hate by somebody in charge.
The thing being hated itself is irrelevant. It could be any random thing you hate, as long as there's a strong dislike for it. What's essential isn't the hated thing, it's the Dominant enforcing that the hated thing happens, while they full know that they're making you do something you hate.

That sadism, of the Dominant on purpose doing something you hate, is what's causing the arousal.

OP... don't expect the random Collar sub to have a hate fetish though. 99% of them will really not want to do the things they hate.
Even in a circumstance where they might consider doing something they hate for a Dominant they really want to please, they still won't be aroused by doing it.
It will just be a feat of endurance they suffer through for the joy of pleasing.

I completely agree with this.

I always get frustrated when someone says that your arousal at being made to do something you hate is because you must have secretly been aroused by it in the first place. It is the Dominant's arousal at making you do the thing you hate that becomes your arousal.

Occasionally over time you may come to associate that thing with arousal and you positively want it to happen to feel that same arousal again but that's not the same thing as wanting it in the first place. Unfortunately if that happens part of the arousal of being forced disappears and it's just not the same, a bit like the way that a film with a really good twist in it only works the first time and can seem very ordinary on second viewing.

You have to have a really good relationship with your Dominant to do this stuff in practice though because you are not necessarily consenting as such, you are instead not "not consenting" (or you are giving a consent that is too general to be of practical use to someone who doesn't really get you). I wouldn't leave myself in the position where someone I was not 100% sure about could do anything that I hadn't had the good sense to state as a limit in advance. I think I know my limits fairly well but I wouldn't want to chance it with someone I didn't really know or trust.

Similarly I tend towards your description of CNC. Of course it's risky but I am turned on by fear and the Dominant's joy and arousal in pushing and stretching me. I also find such experiences strangely life-affirming even if they are troubling at the time. Knowing I can stop something and safeword out takes all the edge out of something and makes it feel like an mechanical endurance test. However trusting that someone will choose a point to stop which falls short of actually permanently damaging you, and recognise what that point is, is a difficult thing.

The problem is that the alternative can become a bit like you deciding upon the menu as a sub and the Dominant only picking what they like on a day to day basis from that menu. That can feel a bit like being surprised by doing things you know you like and can handle but not knowing which ones are coming up, which takes all the edginess out of things. For me that feels more bottomy than subby, and whilst I might enjoy bottomy, it's just not the same as going on an uncertain scary journey with big stomach-churning drops.

(in reply to UllrsIshtar)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/7/2017 5:42:32 AM

Posts: 18
Joined: 2/3/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome
Knowing I can stop something and safeword out takes all the edge out of something and makes it feel like an mechanical endurance test.

I would just like to point out that even with safeword there is still a dose of risk, dominat can still, at any point, decide to refuse to hear it, this goes against every rule established by the community but it is a possibility, this goes doubly for M/f relations since in most cases the dom is also physically stronger but even in F/m relations the sub is often restrained and helpless. I think there are many people, mostly first timers that see safeword as a sort of protection, when what it really is is just a signal to the dominant that you are no longer enjoying the game, that says nothing of the fact that the dominant can continue on with it despite this, it should not happen but i heard of the cases where it did. So having a safeword in no way means you can stop it whenever you want, you are still at the dominant´s mercy, only this time you are making it clear you really want that mercy.

On a side note, isn´t waterboarding in particular extremely dangerous? I only know of it from those reports on Guantanamo Bay but IIRC it can easily lead to the person being waterboarded actually drowning.

(in reply to longwayhome)

RE: "Hates" category on the main site - 7/7/2017 6:08:36 AM

Posts: 3693
Joined: 7/28/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ffffff333

On a side note, isn´t waterboarding in particular extremely dangerous? I only know of it from those reports on Guantanamo Bay but IIRC it can easily lead to the person being waterboarded actually drowning.

Yeah it can be extremely dangerous, especially if you don't know what you're doing. It's certainly not something you should try without getting instruction by somebody with experience on how to do it.

Interestingly enough, when you do it within certain tolerance limits, the biggest danger in it isn't actually drowning, it's infection. Every time you introduce foreign substances into the lungs, you're risking infections. So if you're going to waterboard somebody for play, especially if you do it frequently, you need to make sure you clean/sterilize your tools (cloth, cans/buckets, water) to minimize the risk of infections.

You've got pretty good control as the Top on whether or not you're putting the bottom at risk for drowning... you can waterboard somebody to the point of utter hysteria with about 2 cups of water (generally not nearly enough to risk drowning, especially considering that the majority of that water will be absorbed into the cloth you're using)... but what you can't control is whether or not those two cups of water, and the fibers from the cloth you're using, are going to cause an infection or not after you introduce them into the bottom's lungs. You can only be aware of that risk, and attempt to minimize it by using clean tools/water, but you cannot control or eliminate it, like you can the risk of drowning.

Waterboarding also isn't the top most dangerous things you can do kink wise. There's other things in my repertoire that are far more risky.

Suspension rope play, for instance, has -statistically speaking- a far greater likelihood of causing serious, lasting injuries, than a controlled breath play technique like waterboarding.
Likewise, over nigh breath play restrictions by wearing collars at night, or gags, statistically speaking have far greater mortality risks associated with them than actively controlled breath play such as waterboarding.

That's not to say waterboarding is safe... but just to point out that very very very little which kinksters engage in is actually 'safe'.

_____________________________

I can be your whore
I am the dirt you created
I am your sinner
And your whore
But let me tell you something baby
You love me for everything you hate me for

(in reply to ffffff333)

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Submissive >> "Hates" category on the main site

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.047