An amazing group of edge-players I’m in recently was having a conversation about those of us who like play that’s more… well, as @zel put it, “less hip-checking the edge and more Kool Aid man.” There is a subset of people out there who want play that doesn’t just bring us to our boundaries but sometimes leaps over them. This may include bottoms deciding to forego our safewords and/or negotiation, tops intentionally pushing further at signs of distress, picking at emotional scabs, gaslighting, or any number of things that could, sometimes, lead to going too far. (Note: if you do not believe that this sort of play should be done, even if both parties personally want and seek it out, this note won’t be relevant to you.)
In my CNC Negotiation and Communication class, I refer to this possibility as an unintentional consent violation. In relationships or scenes that purposefully play this way, it’s possible for consent to be violated in a way that isn’t with intent. Both parties play understanding it’s a possibility and fully want to be playing that way still—and yet navigating how to move forward and rebuild after a consent trauma of this nature can be very difficult, particularly if you know you do want to continue playing like that in the future.
I believe unintentional consent violations are a when, not an if, with no-safeword arrangements like the one I’m in and rather likely with other similar CNC structures, and there is *nothing* that will guarantee anyone involved will be okay when this happens. I tend to think that this sort of play should never be engaged in without that being understood by all parties. The best chances of this turning out well may rely on a sort of communication that becomes more difficult after-the-fact, so it can be best to prepare for it in advance.
Below are a few considerations I have when talking to folks about how to navigate this. Please note that this is my process, that everything I say always has a “this may not necessarily apply” asterisk on it, and that those quoted should not be considered as having endorsed anything beyond the inclusion of their quotes.
Behold, a list with confusing and somewhat arbitrary numbering.
Step 1: Figure out systems.
Systems, in this case, refers to anything set up in advance for you to lean on in a time of crisis. I put this as step #1, but in many ways, it’s step all-encompassing. Everything I am suggesting you discuss is setting up a system, a big one: “This is what we will do when an unintentional consent violation occurs.”
This is the part where I address that you can’t always know how you’ll react to something going wrong in this manner—one that may be with someone who you actively ignored the protests of because that’s what they deeply desire in their play and/or sexuality, one who you are hurt crossed a line all while knowing they couldn’t have possibly known the line was there. Cognitive dissonance of that variety *does* change the “typical” trauma responses that rarely have a “typical” in the first place. In fact, you likely *won’t* get it all right. But with systems, there is something to lean on as it gets figured out so that you aren’t having the “What the fuck do we do and when??? What if our needs conflict?” conversation when you really need to be having the “Are you still eating and sleeping?” conversation.
- On the more specific level of systems, this could look like:
- Knowing one partner’s trauma response is going to involve a much lower energy for a while and deciding that if an unintentional consent violation happens, the other partner takes on their household tasks
- Knowing taking medications on time can get lost in the shuffle and ensuring the other partner has the correct information to check in during the days following to remind or confirm.
- Knowing that someone needs to withdraw emotionally to feel safe at the same time that the other will need other support and establishing—you got it—a support *system.* In discussing playing this way at all, @arrogantslut mentioned “wrapping in the support system of existing partnerships. Telling them I am doing it and asking them if they will be able to catch and hold me if things fall apart.” This is valuable for any sort of play. It is especially valuable in cases where there is a mismatch of needs.
The more specific you can be about systems, the better. Saying you have a support system is one thing. Knowing exactly the people in your sphere who understand and support this sort of play—because it isn’t everyone in kink—may be another. Another still to have people who’ve preemptively agreed that, in such a situation, they’ll ensure those eating/medicating/existing in your world things are happening.
Step 2: Figure out timelines.
In the aftermath of an unintentional consent violation, you may have different aftercare needs than otherwise. Tops may want to know this happened as soon as the scene is over so that they can process where things were misread with the memories still fresh. Bottoms may need extra time to process without physical touch. All of this may even have caveats, such as what sort of violation occurred. In addition to immediate needs, think about debrief conversations, amount of time systems should be in place, and amount of time you might wait before considering trying something similar again.
Step 3: Figure out what you will do next with your play.
This might be an automatic “this sort of play is off the table for x amount of time” or “we move back from exclusive negotiation with no-safeword play to exclusive negotiation with-safeword” or “we take a step out of 24/7.” It can also be “we don’t play again” or “we don’t change play at all; we just go forward with new knowledge.” This one is important to discuss in advance (especially for those engaging in deeply emotional S/m) because in the trauma-recovery state, some may have a “fawn” reaction where they’re likely to acquiesce to their top’s desires, or a “flight” reaction where they back all the way off in a way that makes their bottom feel they’re no longer interested, and so on and so forth. Knowing what direction you’re headed before you start, even if it does change, means that there’s no questioning from either party on if the other is able to both be self-aware and compassionate to the other’s needs in that moment (which you may not be!)
In terms of both this and the prior step, you may wish to set an amount of time to wait before determining to end a partnership. Of course, if someone wishes to walk away, they walk away—but some may want a reminder that they agreed to wait however long before making drastic decisions.
But that all brings me to…
Step 0.5: Figure out that you can indeed do all this with the person you’re considering engaging in this kind of play with.
Not everyone is the right partner for the variety of CNC which may lead to unintentional consent violations, even if they’re the perfect partner for other things. In fact, some may not want to do this with a life-partner because of the possibility of these occurring. You might do this through reflection on your own, and/or you might do it through negotiation conversations. There are questions with concrete answers here, but some may somewhat require believing the other party saying they will be able to do something or you making a judgment. @Pepper_Pots suggests asking (or at least considering how the other might answer) specific questions like “what is the max time/energy you can spend fixing this? Also, do you like/trust me enough to do that sort of work with?” You might also ask if they’ve had other incidents in the past, how those were handled, and what did and didn’t work about that. Of course, this is all irrelevant if you don’t know what qualifies someone as this person for you, so…
Step 0: Figure out *what* your who-can-I-do-this-with requires.
This probably will take a lot of reflection, maybe over time. It could include more abstract factors, such as
- the ability to own up to mistakes
- the ability to communicate and listen in the ways you operate best
- willingness to see the process through with as much honesty and openness as possible, even if that’s saying “I’m no longer finding it easy to be honest and open”
But don’t ignore the more practical aspects either: for this kind of play, do you need…
- someone who is able to unquestionably able to prioritize you if you need, and therefore unable to do this with someone who has a different primary partner in a hierarchical poly structure?
- someone who is willing to drive you and stay with you with medical professionals in case of emergency, even if that potentially means discussing the reality of maybe doing things that can’t legally be consented to in your area?
- someone with certain preexisting medical skills?
Again, go specific with all of this, particularly the abstracts. “I need someone I can trust to go through these things with me” is worthwhile, but there’s more to it. @zel, for example, takes it a step further by breaking down what trust means for her:
when i say trust in this context, i mean that i need to trust:
* your ability to consistently do what you say you will do, and communicate constructively when that becomes difficult or prohibitive.
* your ability to proactively and intelligently participate in risk assessment, mitigating, and care planning.
* maybe most importantly, your ability to own your mistakes and receive honest and compassionately-given feedback with grace and curiosity rather than defensiveness, and to meaningfully learn from those situations for the future.
this last “why” is maybe the most important: consistency for me doesn’t mean making few mistakes or causing no harm; it means consistently working together to handle mistakes and repair from harm. if you can’t emotionally handle hearing that you fucked up or hurt me (given my trust in your intent and my disinterest in casting blame), handling mistakes and repairing from harm becomes very likely to create more things to recover from.
@Darren_Campbell says,
I think it’s also important here to understand what we are talking about when we say “trust”. Am I trusting your truthfulness and ability to make promises you intend to keep? Am I trusting your ability to keep to the word of your agreements, or to the spirit of your agreements (these are 2 VASTLY different things in my experience). Am I trusting in your ability to assess how you feel during and after what we are negotiating? Am I trusting in your ability to adapt and communicate after the fact should expectations not be met? Am I trusting in your ability to read me really well? Am I trusting your own self knowledge? Am I trusting your intent or am I trusting your abilities or am I trusting a combination of both? To me, as I get older, I’m really valuing people who know themselves as best they can and then say “I don’t know” a lot. If I can trust your ethics and your ability to own your mistakes, we can build something cool.
One final step, a step ∞ for anyone still here:
Realize that doing this is still playing with fire — and for all us edge-players’ nice words about risk awareness and safety protocols and mitigation, those risks are real and can be devastating. Physically. Emotionally. To your relationships. Be upfront about these possibilities using your imagination and your self-awareness. Communicate best you can. I really loved these two examples of what that might look like, which come from @suspenddisbelief:
“If you do this, I might feel angry at you for a long time afterwards. Not in a hot way, in a really unsexy resentful way. I might devalue your intelligence in my head as a defense mechanism. Is that okay with you? Why is that okay with you?”
“If you speak to me this way, I might have behavioral spirals that you can’t fix with the number of words you used to set it off. I might require intensive outpatient treatment. Past partners actually came to this treatment with me even though they weren’t the ones who set me off. How does that sound to you? I’m not able to quantify the risk. It’s low, but possible.”
When we were talking about this sort of process, @Chayla said, “I think for me, maybe the way I conceptualize the thing that you’re pointing to is doing what feels necessary to build a foundation where forgiveness is available afterward. This is generally building some level of trust in the other person’s good faith and their intentions, and one of the ways that can happen is conversations about what’s for real badbad.”
The thing that stands out for me is how many of us who play Kool Aid Man style have had things go badbad in various ways. Permanent scars that change how we move through the world. Relationships that end. Trauma responses that bring us back to nightmares we thought we had dealt with and cause major problems in our lives. And yet, these are stories I know specifically from those who play in that space—present tense. There are of course an unknowable number who have had things go badbad and never return, to this kind of play or even to kink at all. But it is doable to have it happen and not regret it. I’d argue many of us play accepting that it one day will, not letting it stop us. We deserve to: to follow our desires. To feel intimacy in the ways that we specifically do. To be fulfilled alongside others drinking the same Kool Aid we are.
Join the conversation on this post in the comments on Fetlife!