I get my ideas are maybe less passionate then people want but I genuinely think that’s safer in the long run. I’m curious what made you (@joeylittle) feel like meeting ahead of time would be more dangerous (genuinely curious I’m not being facetious).
Because, it's not unusual for this common misunderstanding:
A: How do you feel about [insert specific sex act or position here]
B: I don't know, I've never tried it. Though I've been curious.
A: So you'd be open to that?
B: Sure, why not?
The more abstract the conversation is [ETA: abstract meaning rooted in hypothetical descriptions of scenarios, not the immediacy of the moment], the less real it feels, and
the easier it is to impulsively think "yeah, I'd be OK with that" - when under the reality of the moment, B may quickly discover that they don't want to attempt that idea. Not that they get into it but don't like it - I'm talking about when it suddenly feels wrong, even though it hasn't happened.
So everything's generally fine, but B in the moment doesn't feel ready for that one thing.
Except A heard B say a few days ago, "sure why not?", and B was confident, and open, and genuine. No doubt being expressed.
Now, add in the possibility that A has been extremely built up about introducing you to this thing....and might want to try and assuage B's fears. The impulse might even be genuine and not at all selfish. Doesn't matter. There's no room for A to make any error here - even saying, "are you sure?" starts to create pressure on B.
This is assuming that both A and B are incredibly good people. If A is willing, in that moment, to ignore B and just go ahead, because they're not hearing the "no", they're remembering the yes? That's
extremely common, and while I fundamentally believe that A is in the wrong for continuing - I think that the entire set-up - having this architecture conversation completely separate from the event - was flawed from the get-go.
now with this idea of let’s just lean on personal responsibility I’m bothered and I don’t totally know why.
Let me be clear - I'm not saying, ONLY use personal responsibility. I'm saying, shift it to the primary position, and let the taking responsibility for your partner stuff be in there, absolutely - just consider it as the second line of defense, not the first.
I'd rather
first be able to expect that my partner is willing to talk to me about where they're at - instead of first expecting that we are responsible for each other. We can ALSO be responsible for each other, but right now? The conversation is leaning that way so hard that I believe we're completely skipping over normalizing the open sharing of our own experience.
Or, the short version: There's a reason why you put on your own mask before helping others. There's a reason why we talk in mental health about how, in the end, we can't make other people do things - we can deal with our own reactions and experiences and be willing to validate ourselves.
On BDSM: it's very obvious, to me, why it can't be the leader in conversations about consent. Much, if not all, of the vast spectrum of BDSM engages with the power. dynamic. There's a mutual agreement on the taking and giving of power. And of course, being dominant isn't about taking the power, it's more complicated than that. Same thing for submission. But in BDSM we are deliberately allowing others to enter into our own locus of control. That's a huge part of the fun.
Without first understanding and operating from an equal power dynamic, where there aren't roles, there's just the unvarnished self - without knowing how to do that, how could one possibly know how to do the much more sophisticated willing surrender of power, or willing assumption of power, that comes with the dance of BDSM?
Yeah, I think it's vital for BDSM partners to meet away from the actual heat of the moment, because they need to memorize each other's boundaries. They want to memorize those boundaries. But the power dynamic they've mutually chosen to work within is specific, and therefore provides some structure that vanilla sex doesn't have. I just think it's naive to mix them together, or think that they should borrow from each other. BDSM has predators, just like life.
But mostly, my point is: It's one thing to be cool with going skydiving for your BFF's 40th birthday when you're having a nice day on the ground, and feeling in that moment like nothing could be better.
It's a very different thing to be getting suited up.
And a concretely different thing to be jumping out of an airplane.
Sex is a highly-charged act. Doing something that creates a false sense of security around planning, runs the risk of damaging the willingness to be honest right in the moment, and it can compromise one person's ability to receive a sudden "no", when the plan dove into the ideas of "yes".
