I am active now and then in a Swedish BDSM forum and yesterday I bumped into a submissive male 19 years old, that in the forum claimed that he wanted to be kicked all over his body and that he had no limits. This guy could of course be emo playing the forum, but he is not the only one I have bumped into claiming to have no limits.
Being kicked all over is a kink to some people, but the thing that made me really react was the statement “I have no limits”. My response to a statement like that is a simple question “Then it is ok that I crap in your mouth?” In almost every case I get a clean cut answer saying “No!”
Saying that you have no limits is, in my opinion, utterly bullshit – And a submissive claiming that, is a danger to themselves and to the dominant. First of all; It creates too much guesswork and believe me, everyone have limits.
Second of all, it tells me that you don’t have the required knowledge about yourself in order to engage in BDSM related activities.
Finally, you are putting yourself in a dangerous situation because sooner or later you will end up with a person crazy enough to take your word for it.
One thing that characterizes BDSM to me is the fact that there actually are limits which has to be established, discussed and then gradually be pushed. It doesn’t give you extra credits in my book if you tell me that you have no limits as a submissive. It doesn’t make you look cool as a submissive and it sure doesn’t make you into a good, stable and reliable submissive.
It’s just plain stupid and that is how you will look – Stupid…
Well said. I’ve also seen people who don’t know their limits stating they have none. A better approach from my point of view is to say that you don’t know where they are, and to do some serious thinking about what they might look like.
Not knowing where your limits are is dramatically different than having none. It still is not ideal, but at least then everyone involved knows that they are working to figure out what they are rather than unexpectedly bumping into one. It also gives the Dominant something to work with in gently pushing those limits and isn’t that part of what it’s all about?
Still, your point is really well taken. It is far and away better to know even in the most general terms where your limits lie for everyone’s safety.
I consider the “I have no limits” statement to be stupid, yes, but also insulting to the Lifestyle. Real BDSMers are committed to Safe Sane and Consensual, or Risk Aware Consensual Kink. Without limits, you are not IMHO competent to consent, and are a hazard.
Those who claim it in SL basicly are telling me, “I am not actually investing anything of myself in the psychological play I ask for.” That makes them boring to me.
DESIRING to have no limits is another thing. But I think it also is a sign of ignorance. If more than a passing whistful thought, serious Doms cannot deeply trust such submissives; they may not reliably provide feedback about pain or discomfort, which Doms NEED to make choices during Play. A better goal, a more pleasing submission, is to become MORE self aware, MORE communicative, MORE honest, about limits and reactions.
I couldn’t have put it better myself. In fact I didn’t 😉
The only people that I can think of truly without limits is those that have nothing to lose nor anything to live for. For these people it just truly doesn’t matter what happens to them.
But that’s not what turning someone on is all about.
To me, the whole ‘no limits’ thing is from a person who doesn’t think. I agree with an above statement about this type of person not investing into the rp, but it also seems that they are not investing in themselves. They are not thinking about what they would like, what turns them on, what they would like to happen. They are not taking an active part but are looking for someone else to do all the action to them.
This type of thinking is the victim role. And while there might be plenty of kinks out there that appeal to the victim, imho, this shouldn’t be one of them.
I have to agree with Moonglow’s comment about the person not thinking, but I’m not sure the “no limits” claim comes from the lack of investment. That implies laziness, which, I will be the first to admit, is not outside the realm of possibility.
To me, the self-proclaimed subs who make such statements seem to be more into the fantasy world of what BDSM is all about and less into the reality of it all. Your counter-question, Master Stoltz, is a good one to jolt them out of that fantasy and force them to take a good, long look at the reality of what they are facing.
To give an example, when I first started my own exploration, I spoke online with a Dom who asked me my limits. I replied, “no kids, no animals, no blood.” He asked if that was all and I, in my naivete, said yes.
This was a good Dom and he then started probing, asking specific questions designed to get me to truly consider what I was claiming. Within three questions I realized what he was doing — and realized how lacking my first response had been. BDSM has no clear-cut definition because the entire concept is lived by human beings, each one with different needs and different desires. He helped me to understand cookie-cutter responses were useless. And to me “no limits” is a cookie-cutter response indicative of a n00b who just doesn’t know any better.
Good post and good discussion!
Diana
“So you have no limits, huh?”, I asked smiling my amused smile knowing I could find out the truth in the statement in a matter of seconds. Little did he know that I had yet to see a man with no limits though I had worked and played with a number of hard-core masochists whom, as I assessed the young man, would probably put him to great shame in their ability to withstand what I could put him through.
Nevertheless, there was an undeniable sadistic feeling coming over me…one that I had to quickly push back down into my soul…and so I turned to the kid, “Get out of my face kid, I am not for you, go find some nice little playclub somewhere that likes to teach you how to do things.” The young man looked around to see if anyone was looking and saw the others at the bar turn their faces from him. He said, “Fuck you!”, and left the bar. A few months later he came back to the bar and hesitantly strode over to where I was sitting and kneeled at my feet, “I am sorry Sir, please forgive me, I know now I was wrong.” I turned in the barstool and put my feet to the floor in front of him, saw he was looking at my boots from about 2 inches away from them, “Alright boy, lets talk, what have you learned?” Without raising his head he asked, “Sir, may I greet you properly?” I smiled, “Yes boy, you may.” I already knew the truth before he had even set foot in the bar. After he had left the bar that night some months ago I had called the Dominant who ran the local BDSM club and had been kept up to date from the time the kid had gotten there to the time he had decided to come back to the bar. He had gone through the progressions well enough and had learned a few of his limits along the way. Now it was time to take him the rest of the way……..With Love In BDSM, -LordSir Ninetails
Hi, cool post. I have been pondering this topic,so thanks for sharing. I’ll certainly be subscribing to your site. Keep up the good posts
Interesting interpretation, but I don't believe that a Dominant's choice of not wanting to damage his property is much of an argument for what i believe a majority of people would define "submissives without limits" Most people don't want to take a key down the side of their car, but if they chose to. That car will take it. So your thinking, that car still has limits. Yes it does. There are physical limits. The Dominant wants that car to go 200mph. Most cars won't or can't (how ever you want to see it) go that fast. The real beauty in it is that the car will spit, sputter and most likely blow the transmission trying to obey and please the Dominant. OK, beyond your interpretation of a Dominant "Choosing" what he wants to do with his property.
I believe when the relationship has become a Dominant with complete control and a submissive without limits, means that if the Dominant choses to cut their skin or even brand them. They have no choice or I believe better said is they will except or do so, because they were told to.
I believe the strangest part about this view on the subject is the part about a Dominant being perceived as having to have done or interested in every aspect out there in the BDSM world for there to be no limits. To me that's dangerously placing standards on what a Dominant is or should be. One Dominant may choose to gag his submissive when they punish them, because he takes pleasure in the failed attempts to scream out. Another Dominant chooses not to use a gag, because they take pleasure in hearing their submissive scream out. Does this make the Dominant who chooses not to use a gag (tool of control) any less of a Dominant.
I may be way off base here, but like i said interesting interpretation or view.
Diane Hunter states ""no limits" is a cookie-cutter response" and I thank her for using the words "Cookie Cutter" You could say that also with these words " Dominant or submissive."
A Dominant does not dominate all submissives. Same as, I am submissive to one man only.
With him there is no limits to what he may ask or expect me to do. I don't believe my will to do what he asks of me without question and possibly failing to do it as well or exactly as stated means that I have limit i won't do.
Last night he stated he was going to finish with 20 with a certain implement and that I was to count and stay in position. This was on top of an already very well punished bottom. I'm not exactly sure how many times he had to start over, but the last time he stated that we will go to 10.
Wanting to do what I was expected to do, I spoke up and said "Sir, i will take my 20" and I did. Was it dangerous or unsafe? No
I understand that there are so many out there stating to anyone that they have no limits. But I believe you might be making a blanket statement on no one being "no limits" if you don't look at the idea of each Dominant and submissive relationship being uniquely different and a wide variety of capabilities in the dynamics of it.
Hi,
I have been thinking about limits and SSC. Would it be okay to do tattoos? Scar body modifications? Exactly what is the limit…permanent damage to the body that is not only aesthetic and becomes a disability? I guess an extreme case would be if someone wanted to amputate a finger.
Best regards
~ Famarus
Your question is quite easy to answer from one perspective: According to SSC it isn't very sane to cause permanent damages. On the other hand some permanent damage would probably be acceptable if you look at it from a RACK perspective.
Some permanent damages are more acceptable depending on the context, giving birth to a child can cause permanent damages, but is to most people an acceptable sacrifice, while permanent damages in a BDSM context might be considered to be just stupid to some people and in the long run lead to social stigma.
It's all about how much you believe in and adapt to social norms.
Personally I prefer to stay within damages that are reversible, because causing permanent damages would affect my feeling of guilt and it is also a question about responsibility.
The answer is, as you might understand, both easy and complex depending on the perspective that is applied to it.
Thank you for your answer. I learn a lot by reading this blog.