Consent is an important part of everything we do with kink. So important in fact that it is the one thing that separates kink from abuse. But consent is a wily little devil. What do I mean by this? Well I myself have experienced a bad relationship where I agreed to things I didn't want solely because the alternative (mentioned at the time or not was worse. It didn't need mentioning most times, as it was always the same sorts of things.) So the appearance would be there was consent. However many would agree that it was not, as would laws of most countries. It would be termed coerced consent, because there was a threat applied to refusal. So if consent can be coerced can we ever be sure it is truly consent?
Well, kink has an answer to that, three actually (that I know of.) S.S.C, R.A.C.K and P.R.I.C.K all different models of consent.
S.S.C (or Safe Sane Consensual) Well its in the name, be safe, be sane and get consent.
R.A.C.K (or Risk Aware Consensual Kink) A bit more involved, aimed at learning the risks of the kinks you engage in before consenting to them. Which is a sensible step with any kink as most have some type of risk in some ways.
P.R.I.C.K (or Personal Responsibility Informed Consensual Kink) Which is similar but emphasizing the responsibility not just knowing the risks, but the potential of things going wrong. The defining factor between R.A.C.K and this is not just being aware of the risk, but accepting responsibility (With the obvious exclusion of consent violation) which means that every one involved shoulders equal responsibility for knowing and accepting both the risks and potential of accident and resulting damage. Which can be beneficial in not just laying it all at the dominants feet.
So what douse this mean for consent? Well, it means a lot of people in our community have thought highly on how to create the best model for consent that reduces the most harm and prevents the blaming for accidents on one sole person. I think that is a good thing, I think there is always room for us to improve and where we can we should. (Though over complication can bean issue, I don't think we are there yet.) So why am I blogging about this? Well, for each new model it seems to focus on the risk side, which by all means is a side that is important to view. But the consent side, usually it is the same model, enthusiastic consent. Something about that irks me, always has. I don't think enthusiastic consent is a bad thing, it is the most clear consent possible. Also I can't deny that it is a wonderfully amazing feeling to suggest something and hear the breath catch, see the effect of the pulse quicken and watch the excitement at pure suggestion spikes in a partner, it is a moment that makes my breath catch just as much. Enthusiastic consent is beautiful.
However, as an asexual person. I have just never gotten anything from sexual contact. It douse not disgust me, but neither douse it excite me. I am purely indifferent to it, so under the right circumstance with the right person. Sure I could go there, but I would never be enthusiastic. Sure I will enjoy said partner enjoying it, but for me. I still wont get anything out of it. So wont be enthusiastic. As a result by everyone of the models it shouldn't go ahead, because it wasn't enthusiastic, but it wasn't coerced either. I know what that feels like. It was consent based on knowing what I am consenting to, but also knowing the only satisfaction I will get is that my partner has some. I don't see a problem with that happening. Obviously these models are guides to follow and we each will follow them differently, but I do think that the models of consent bare some thought, as my example is just one of another. Non enthusiastic but freely given consent is not the only pitfall, there is also the trap of implied consent. Both submissive and dominants can fall into this one when in a TPE or PPE dynamic. Because of the dynamic there can be an assumption of implied consent as the dominant and from the submissive side an assumption that the consent is already given. But consent is always an ongoing thing and it is always good to reaffirm that consent.
So I don't know that I have a perfect answer here. I am not sure there is one. I just know for me, ensuring that consent is always freely given without any incentive or punitive connection and that it is regularly reaffirmed is a practice I want to follow. Is it perfect, probably not. It is still possible I miss something important. But it is the best I can think of to cover all the basses that consent stays forefront to everything. But I am also not saying other approaches are inherently bad. The only bad approaches are the ones that break someone's consent.
I would be very interested to hear other opinions and views on consent. We all see things so much differently, but consent is important to us all. And I truly am interested how others approach this.
Well, kink has an answer to that, three actually (that I know of.) S.S.C, R.A.C.K and P.R.I.C.K all different models of consent.
S.S.C (or Safe Sane Consensual) Well its in the name, be safe, be sane and get consent.
R.A.C.K (or Risk Aware Consensual Kink) A bit more involved, aimed at learning the risks of the kinks you engage in before consenting to them. Which is a sensible step with any kink as most have some type of risk in some ways.
P.R.I.C.K (or Personal Responsibility Informed Consensual Kink) Which is similar but emphasizing the responsibility not just knowing the risks, but the potential of things going wrong. The defining factor between R.A.C.K and this is not just being aware of the risk, but accepting responsibility (With the obvious exclusion of consent violation) which means that every one involved shoulders equal responsibility for knowing and accepting both the risks and potential of accident and resulting damage. Which can be beneficial in not just laying it all at the dominants feet.
So what douse this mean for consent? Well, it means a lot of people in our community have thought highly on how to create the best model for consent that reduces the most harm and prevents the blaming for accidents on one sole person. I think that is a good thing, I think there is always room for us to improve and where we can we should. (Though over complication can bean issue, I don't think we are there yet.) So why am I blogging about this? Well, for each new model it seems to focus on the risk side, which by all means is a side that is important to view. But the consent side, usually it is the same model, enthusiastic consent. Something about that irks me, always has. I don't think enthusiastic consent is a bad thing, it is the most clear consent possible. Also I can't deny that it is a wonderfully amazing feeling to suggest something and hear the breath catch, see the effect of the pulse quicken and watch the excitement at pure suggestion spikes in a partner, it is a moment that makes my breath catch just as much. Enthusiastic consent is beautiful.
However, as an asexual person. I have just never gotten anything from sexual contact. It douse not disgust me, but neither douse it excite me. I am purely indifferent to it, so under the right circumstance with the right person. Sure I could go there, but I would never be enthusiastic. Sure I will enjoy said partner enjoying it, but for me. I still wont get anything out of it. So wont be enthusiastic. As a result by everyone of the models it shouldn't go ahead, because it wasn't enthusiastic, but it wasn't coerced either. I know what that feels like. It was consent based on knowing what I am consenting to, but also knowing the only satisfaction I will get is that my partner has some. I don't see a problem with that happening. Obviously these models are guides to follow and we each will follow them differently, but I do think that the models of consent bare some thought, as my example is just one of another. Non enthusiastic but freely given consent is not the only pitfall, there is also the trap of implied consent. Both submissive and dominants can fall into this one when in a TPE or PPE dynamic. Because of the dynamic there can be an assumption of implied consent as the dominant and from the submissive side an assumption that the consent is already given. But consent is always an ongoing thing and it is always good to reaffirm that consent.
So I don't know that I have a perfect answer here. I am not sure there is one. I just know for me, ensuring that consent is always freely given without any incentive or punitive connection and that it is regularly reaffirmed is a practice I want to follow. Is it perfect, probably not. It is still possible I miss something important. But it is the best I can think of to cover all the basses that consent stays forefront to everything. But I am also not saying other approaches are inherently bad. The only bad approaches are the ones that break someone's consent.
I would be very interested to hear other opinions and views on consent. We all see things so much differently, but consent is important to us all. And I truly am interested how others approach this.
I need a good sleep soon, clear my head. But thank you Butterfly. That helps 