Why Is It Important To Practice SSC?

Because otherwise you have a crime, assault, kidnapping, rape, etc... instead of something loving and caring.

SAFE, SANE, CONSENSUAL

by Gil Kessler (gilkessler@worldnet.att.net)

[Gil is a longtime Board member of GMSMA and for many years was president. While his formulations are not "official" GMSMA policy, they have been widely disseminated and formed the basis of those in the "S/M vs. Abuse" statements adopted at previous Leather Leadership Conferences. This most recent version, however, seems to rule out "consensual nonconsensuality" -which is important not only for S/M edge players but also for lifestyle dominants and submissives -purely by definition.]

SAFE is being knowledgeable about what you're doing.

This means knowing your equipment and how to use it, and knowing your partner and how to keep him healthy both physically and psychologically.

SANE is knowing the difference between fantasy and reality.

And observing that difference. You may know how to do something, and even get consent for it, but it may be best left for one-handed reading.

CONSENSUAL is respecting the limits imposed by each participant.

Consent is an ongoing right, and can be withdrawn at any time. Thus you cannot consent to give up the right of consent! "You can do anything you want to me, even if I really want you to stop" is a statement that only an irresponsible top would take seriously.

SAFE SANE CONSENSUAL: DEFINITIONS

by Tammad Rimilia

[These are extracted from a longer discussion of the concepts that is well worth seeking out online. Tammad is a longtime player in the Baltimore-Washington area who is especially known for his bondage skills -he was unable to be with us today because of a prior commitment to teach a bondage workshop.}

SAFE. That all parties to the activity have considered the potential risks involved, and have decided that the risk is ACCEPTABLE TO THEM.

SANE. That all parties are engaging in this activity by direct intention and can judge the effects of their actions.

CONSENSUAL. That all parties have consented to being involved in the activity. Consent might be given for every scene, or in more long-running relationships this consent might be given just once, at the beginning of the relationship, to cover all subsequent activity.

SSC: DEFINITIONS

by Scott from APEX (Arizona Power EXchange), a.k.a. NoCyberDom online

[Extracted from a post on the sm-activists list. While the formulations for "safe" and "sane" are not especially useful, and indeed may be considered circular, the "sub parts" 1) and 2) for "consensual" make important points.]

Safe: Safe from unreasonable risk of physical injury.

Sane: Safe from unreasonable risk of mental, emotional or psychological harm.

Consensual (3 sub parts): Consent of all parties involved must be given of their own free will.

1. Involved parties does include spouses or significant others of participants who may not be participating themselves. This statement is meant to clearly show that if a person is cheating on their spouse or significant other that this is not condoned. The reason that this is not condoned is that, in SSC BDSM, trust is the most important factor and if a person is cheating on their life partner then it is unreasonable to think anyone else could truly trust them.
2. To give consent an individual must be of legal age to make decisions on their own behalf, not have been deemed mentally incompetent to make legal decisions on their own behalf and not be under the effects of chemical substances that would inhibit their ability to make decisions. In short: no kids, no booze or drugs and the mentally impaired cannot give consent. If a person is truly incapable of making a sane decision then they are covered by this.
3. Neither animals nor the deceased can communicate consent.

THE THREE Cs:

COMMITTED, COMPASSIONATE, CONSENSUAL

by SARRAS

[SARRAS is an Australian leather Master who was initiated by "old guard" practitioners. His Web site features very extensive and thought-provoking writings about the ethics and spiritual context of leathersex, of which the following is only a snippet.]

Safe Sane and Consensual then, is an attempt to give the would-be dominants of the world a users guide to the management of the sexual force they are wielding, and the would-be submissives a philosophical structure for trust and the limitations of permanent damage. For what it is, as an ideal for those who are actually using it, I can say by experience and observation that Safe Sane and Consensual does a reasonable job as a widely held belief. But to me, personally, its not a true code of life, not a structure or set of wisdom protocols capable of actually producing the results that those who use it think they are aiming for -i.e., the creation of self-powerful and emotionally resonant S/M Leathermen from the practice of sexual interplay.

I was brought up in Leather under its predecessor -the Three Cs. You'll find various translations of this around the world, wherever you find remnants of Old Guard Leather S/M thinking (Incarnations of the old Gay Bike Clubs -like Chicago Hellfire for example), though its spoken of in whispers these days if at all. Anyway, the code that I was born into Leather S/M under is Committed, Compassionate, Consensual -or the Three Cs. To get your head around this one you almost have to come at it from the opposite point of view than safe, sane, consensual. For example, in common with many of my Dominant brothers, I know about anger -the god of war in our lives. It is a powerful emotion and spirit and it does make us naturally powerful humans, albeit in a coarsely rendered form initially, for better and worse, and the Three Cs are a management tool or sexual power philosophy for shaping and using that terrible anger that lives in most humans. Its a code for the wise use of this anger -the shaping of it into a sexual power.

THE DRAWBACKS OF SSC TODAY

by Gloria Brame, from private e-mail
gloria-brame.com

[The following puts in a nutshell some of the key ways that "safe sane consensual" tends to be misused today, particularly by dominants. I would add only that it isn't Heterosexual male Doms alone who are guilty of it!]

I think Heterosexual male Doms in particular (with many notable exceptions, of course) often use SSC as an easy out from their extreme guilt/shame about doing SM. In a perfect world, Doms deal with the demons of their sexual repression before they take on the leadership role in a power relationship. SSC provides lazy, dull-witted, or malicious tops an easy out. In the 80s, I hear from male Doms who said they were afraid that if they did SM, they were "just like" Ted Bundy. Nowadays, by loudly announcing that they are SSC, they chase that demon away... or do they? As bad as it may be to compare yourself to a criminal, if you are struggling with profound guilt, its better to do the comparison, IMO, and then, point by point, logically analyze the ways in which one is different.

People are using SSC as if its a magic cloak -wear it and no one sees the guilt! -not a philosophical point of departure for deeper analyses of their behaviors. But if you haven't tackled the underlying issues, come to terms within yourself with your own ethical standards, and if you aren't living up to the true spirit of SSC, then really you haven't overcome the "am I a vicious criminal or just a nice guy who likes to beat consenting partners for fun?" conundrum. You're just put a fresh coat of paint on your termite-infested house.

In this way, stuff like SSC, safe words, negotiation, and all the other truly marvelous concepts designed to help us create a moral structure, and which should protect submissives from dangerous tops and assist tops in establishing ethical principles, have become so diluted and distorted, they almost seem now to be used more frequently by unsafe and casual players than real sadomasochists.

Also, what's particularly galling to me, personally, is that its part of another trend in the Scene: this need people have to assert their superiority and place themselves in some imaginary hierarchy of sexual enlightenment. Obviously, over-compensation for insecurity... but also something that is very dangerous in a dominant, i.e., Major Ego Problems! Its used at times to enforce an "us vs. them" mentality... All you have to do is say you're SSC (whatever it means, whether or not you're really given any thought to what it means, whether or not what you think is right or not or has any basis in reality)... et, voila you're a top who deserves respect and even kudos for "playing by the rules."

PERSONAL REDEFINITIONS

by Grey
( astralle@pacbell.net )

[excerpted (with a few edits for clarity) from a post to the gl-asb list, September 1999]

After a few go-rounds of "Chex Party Mix SM" (lots of nuts and flakes but little of any substance and not very satisfying) I have changed a lot of my ideas about SSC.

I've expanded "safe" past "physical safety" and more into the realm of, "Is it a good idea to have this person in my life?" I don't think I've ever had any problems with basic SAFETY. I don't do anything nutty, I try stuff out before doing it in a scene, I have a first-aid kit, safety shears, panic snaps, condoms, dams, lube, and UL approval...

I'm now defining "sane" as "emotionally stable enough that I am convinced this person is able to engage in BDSM without having any negative repercussions." This includes the necessity that dealing with the person does not challenge my own sanity...

What I'm replacing SSC with these days is something closer to HRC Honesty, Regard, and Communication. I'm only playing with bottoms who can clearly and honestly define what they want and what works and doesn't work for them. This gives me the opportunity to match it against what I want and what works and doesn't work for me. I like this much better than

"Do whatever you want."

"Okay."

"Oops! That wasn't what I wanted you to want."

I'm only playing with bottoms who can demonstrate a grip on reality, success somewhere besides "in the scene" (not to put down scene success, but so much of it is simply claimed, unproven, and subjectively determined), and ability to be together with me as a friend in a relationship where there is true regard.

I'm no longer using safe words. I'm using English. "I'm having trouble with this," or "Oh, I love that," gives me information. Moans and gasps give me information. Weird code words give me weird code words.

I'm no longer using contracts. I'm using the same skills I use to work things out with friends and lovers to work things out with friends and lovers. Oh, I mean slaves. I suppose those same skills have replaced "consent." I don't have to sit down and say, "On October 14, you consented to anal play," because being clear about what each person wants and enjoys, and feels like doing today, is the way I do other things with my friends. Like organizing a barbecue:

"You want burgers?"

"Well, lately I'm avoiding red meat."

"Okay, chicken."

Scenes/SM/sex should work that way. I think we've let a lot of things become cool slogans or almost equivalent to secret passwords, and we don't know what they mean anymore...

I have dropped a LOT of the trappings, which may make me a heretic, but like most heretics, I am having fun. I still think what I thought back when I started in BDSM, which is that the safest route is to hang with (or, hang) people I really care about, who care about me, and who are honest, rational people with common sense who have values similar to my own and are interested in having a relationship in which we both are getting our needs met.

The chances of someone who is rational and has common sense letting you do something truly dangerous are reduced. The chances of someone who cares about you and is a friend turning on you are reduced. The chances of misunderstanding consent with someone who is honest and can communicate with you are reduced. And, if BOTH of you are the same way, its even MORE reduced.

And, I think that what works best is forgetting all the opinions and rules and doing what works best for me and my partners.

That is the road I知 on lately, and it feels like the high road.

"The author's views on the matter of SSC continue to evolve, and as of mid-2001 he has shifted farther toward the position of the more thoughtful critics of SSC than he'd ever have thought possible. Two factual corrections about the history: The S/M-Leather Contingent banner for the 1987 March on Washington did *not* include the SSC slogan; this was added for the S/M-Leather-Fetish Contingent in the 1993 March, but the slogan *did* appear in all of the Contingent's publicity in the months leading up to the 1987 march. Also, the slogan was *not* chosen by a GMSMA committee but was adopted at an open planning meeting for the Contingent, held in New York City that July and sponsored by GMSMA along with other participating groups."