Limits Of BDSM – Black London Mistress

When speaking of agreement and consent, we consider it necessary to mention the limits, which are defined by the participants as the maximum point of pain that a person reaches or as any sexual practice that is excluded from the tastes and preferences contemplated in the agreement, when we speak We speak of limits in the sense of things that you do not practice, that is, that you will never practice (Petra). It is essential to note that all participants place special emphasis on the issue of limits, Elisa clarifies the CSS, the healthy, safe and consensual. The limits are absolutely and totally basic within BDSM Black London Mistress .. Thus, crossing the limits without premeditation would mean breaking that agreement and therefore violating the will of the other, which of course generates displeasure and discomfort.

There are those who think that disrespecting the limits is equivalent to living BDSM in an unhealthy way if either of those two breaks or the person does not have the confidence that they will respect the limits or that they will respect the safe word, that is what What shows you is that the dominant is not a person … serious. He is not a person who lives this, but he is a person who is living it in an unhealthy way (Xavier).

For these people, when talking about limits, we are not only talking about what is agreed before reaching the session, but we also take into consideration the limits that can be established during a session or the course of the moment in which they are carried out. BDSM practices. Because of this, practitioners use the safe word as a quick and effective method of communication during the session. For Castleman, it is a “stop” signal used by the sub that automatically implies that whatever activity is being carried out must be stopped.eleven. This can be used at any time during the session and a word like “red light” is usually chosen instead of a negative word like “stop, stop or not”. Petra argues But then you have that safe word so if you have reached your limit point that you can’t take it anymore, that you want to stop or that you didn’t like something, right, you say the safe word and Black London Mistress One somehow already has reins you let go because you know that there is the word that if at some point you overdo it, that happens and everything stops. You don’t have to be like ‘oh, look is this okay? Is this a little more, a little less? ‘

According to the participants’ discourse, there are two elements that can affect the rigidity or flexibility with which limits are imposed: fear and trust. Given this, Xavier comments, Why do you set a limit for yourself? I would say out of fear. I mean, we all set certain limits out of fear … I mean, look at an example, I don’t use the subway after 9 at night … the subway is open until 11, nobody is setting that limit on you, you yourself you are putting for a question that well, look, fear that something could happen to me …, which may suggest that once fear is lost there may be a greater willingness and openness to go beyond the limits.

In contrast to this, trust appears. Having a relationship of this type not only means maintaining a more open and deep communication, but it also implies high levels of trust between the submissive and the dominant. It gives the impression that the greater the trust between the parties, the greater the willingness and openness of both will be to cross the limits and go further in practice, as Petra expresses what it is to accept and to be able to try a large amount. of things, if he is a person for whom you may not feel affection or not so much, you may not care so much about the other person or that he is enjoying so much, likewise he is a person with whom you love more or … even if he is a person with whom you suddenly have a lot of confidence one manages to go, so to speak, further. Thus, it is considered that the further the limit of a submissive-masochist reaches, the greater will be her level of trust with her dominant, giving it a connotation of merit and recognition.

As has been observed, BDSM is a complex practice, therefore, limits are not far behind, not all limits are equal, Elisa points out that there are soft limits and there are hard limits. The hard limits are those that will never be realized, they are prohibited, these can be about intervention in other contexts of the practitioner’s life -even for those who experience it as a lifestyle- such as family, work, economy and friends will never be able to order me in those areas as such you are not going to call your mother. You are going to call her in 15 days, why not, because that is poop, it is not touched … friends. All the friendly relationships with which I have years. None of that can touch(Elisa). On the other hand, the soft limits refer to those that you do not rule out from the beginning, they can be uncomfortable but they are not a problem, before this Octavio says that you can take them little by little.

Given this, we wonder why the limits are not given sharply and now, what is prohibited that should not be done, but we consider that Black London Mistress is a practice that is worked progressively, that encourages the experimentation of new sensations, tastes and activities that were previously not thought possible and that would generate pleasure.

Along the same lines, others refer to it as two types of limits: the passable and the impassable. The former refer to the submissive’s process in which he is testing his limits, in which he can change what he considered prohibited or unpleasant in order to give himself the opportunity to try new practices I believe that, a submissive or submissive in some way it is in a discover, it is in an experiment…. It is in a meeting Xavier also adds that So obviously this is a process of both, also the dominant knowing more about the submissive and all that, indicating that both submissives and dominants have limits.

We are struck by the way in which the participants pose the question of limits: as something that must be respected, but at the same time a fundamental part of the practice is to be able to cross them. In fact, BDSM seems to offer a range of unlimited possibilities, where everything is allowed as long as it is healthy, safe and consensual. The factor that limits are considered a fundamental, adjacent and obligatory element in practice is incongruous, but that somehow underneath they seek to break or transgress, making BDSM a practice of “everything is possible ”.

It would seem then that the main motivation of these people to try something different from conventional sexual practice lies in the feeling of lack and dissatisfaction that their previous sexual experience has left them, which leads them to feel the need to undertake a search for what they want. They lack and that BDSM offers them, the sexual relationship from the constant search for what is not there, which is beyond the limits.


Carrying out this research led us to understand that in order to approach and understand the experience of people who practice sadomasochism it was necessary to cover a broader category, leading us to redirect our attention towards BDSM; which is based on the exchange of roles and power. In other words, from the earliest stages of conducting this research, it was essential to approach BDSM with a methodology that would allow us to work with the subjectivity of those who star in it and at the same time adapt and mold the research design according to the results. to emerge, within a limited time, as does the projected pop-up design.

The in-depth interview technique was essential to capture the speech of each participant and try to make the closest approach to their experiences. Beyond the in-depth interviews, the immersion in the field and the experiences we had together with the participants significantly helped us to understand much more about the BDSM experience of these people in a more everyday and natural environment, providing us with essential information that they did not give us the results of the interviews. In this way, having used the qualitative methodology, under the grounded theory method, allowed us to generate knowledge about the experiences of BDSM practitioners and the practices related to it.

It could be said that, in this case, what stands out the most is the paradox of the question of limits in BDSM practice, since the agreement and establishment of these limits are a fundamental rule even before starting the sessions, more to the point. At the same time, always seeking to go beyond the limits is also an essential characteristic of these practices.

Now, from psychoanalysis, the explanation of BDSM as a perversion refers to something that is reflected in these experiences, the denial of the law. The limits established in conventional sexual practice are denied, putting aside the prohibition and giving way to permissiveness within the range of possibilities in BDSM sexual practice, and then creating their own limits themselves. Everything is allowed under a healthy, safe and consensual premise, as a way to standardize their activities. Meanwhile, postmodern approaches refer to BDSM as a world of possibilities, a creative and innovative sexual culture, there are infinite alternative ways to achieve sexual pleasure, many times apart from conventional sexual practices, among which is intercourse.12.

All of the above can be extrapolated to the current modern situation, in which “the sky is the limit.” It allows us to give way to the beyond, by always wanting what is not there, perhaps what is missing for the participants in vanilla or conventional sexual practice and constantly looking for BDSM. We have thrown ourselves under a pattern of addiction to comfort and security, and the fear of feeling fear, we accept it as if it were logical, or at least inevitable, to such an extent that we contribute to normalize the state of emergency13. We live so obsessed with security that we run the risk of losing our freedom and for this we create our own rules that allow us to feel a “healthy, safe and consensual”, we regulate what is not allowed so that it is possible.

Likewise, we live under liquid, changing, superfluous societies, where the bond is weakened, where there is the possibility of being the sexual object of the other, beyond the bond13Of course, because we want everything for now, the impossible for “right now.” Under this discourse where everything is possible, before many sexual desires remained in fantasies, now it is possible to act them. Now everything can be bought and sold in order to satisfy us. Are our desires so different or the only difference is daring to live them? How much are we alike or different at the end of the day? This question is interesting in light of how “closed” we can still be as individuals and as collectives. We live in an “anything goes” that constantly segregates the different, posing what we could call a paradox of the time, the discourse of everything is possible in the face of not accepting diversity. We wonder if the question is in the possibility of new discourses but with walls so high that they do not allow inclusion. Is the difference in the endogroup not tolerated, but is the right to create a new one respected Black London Mistress? We dare to think that precisely this postmodern discourse, under which everything is possible, is the one that allows for diversification in the manifestation of human sexuality, allowing BDSM to emerge as a subculture, something that in other historical times, possibly, it would not have happened.


No Responses

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.