Arguments about rope bondage.

Home/Bondage, Rope/Arguments about rope bondage.

Arguments about rope bondage.

This post arose out of some on-line arguing about rope bondage ages ago. I thought there were some worthwhile points about the type of arguments used however so I’m rehashing it here. The main thrust was people trying to justify practices undertaken without full knowledge of the risks with arguments like…

Bondage is dangerous anyway. That’s besides the point.

There’s a difference between the danger of deliberately and knowingly engaging in a practice with knowledge of the risks and possible consequences and the danger caused by someone not knowing what they’re doing. That whole argument is a red herring.

The same applies to models peculiarities. There’s a real difference between making an adjustment to a bondage for a specific model because an adjustment is being deliberately made and rope placement varying because the person just doesn’t know where they might risk causing harm.

Also the models likes and degree of masochism aren’t arguments that apply to something that’s done badly. A more masochistic model doesn’t mean horrible rope work should pass without comment.

Distinctions between fractional differences in ideas on construction or microscopic differences in placement aren’t the issue. I have to believe that it is possible to spot the difference between something that might be subjective or even questionable and a total and monumental horror.

The thing about bad bondage is that you have to be lucky every time in order not to harm someone.
The better the bondage the more you have to be actually unlucky to harm someone.

The notion of ‘no harm no foul’ isn’t valid either.
To suggest that simply because no one was hurt it wasn’t bad is not in any way logical. Being lucky not to hurt someone doesn’t make the unintentional potential risk the model was exposed to OK in any way shape or form.

The key phrase there is not ‘risk’ but ‘unintentional risk’.

By | 2017-03-17T09:57:17+00:00 July 31st, 2012|Categories: Bondage, Rope|Tags: , , |3 Comments

About the Author:

3 Comments

  1. BenHart September 2, 2012 at 2:05 am

    I really wish I could disagree and start an argument in your post about arguments,

    but you make too much sense – of course sometimes new risks come to light thanks to advances in science, or someone else’s research that we come across, but I think one ought to know and acknowledge the common risks (dropping, nerve damage, etc.).

    Calculated, risk allows you to mitigate dangers as you approach them, I would compare it to a Casino – if you don;t know about gambling, you might try the slots or the roulette, where you have to be VERY lucky to win. If you know a little more, you’ll be drawn to card tables, games of skill, and you might break even. and if you take training seriously, you get really good at blackjack or poker, you learn to count cards, and the only thing you have to worry about is the pit boss.

    knowledge of risk in rope bondage not only makes your consent more legitimate, if you let it inform your actions, it dramatically reduces the risk you’re engaging.

  2. Gray Miller (@Graydancer) November 26, 2012 at 3:39 pm

    I believe, however, that there is a difference between “justifying” something (saying that this should happen) and saying “people are going to do it anyway.” I’ve dedicated an inordinately large portion of my life towards educating people about the dangers and joys of rope bondage, and a couple of things have come to light: one, whatever the popular theory is at the moment about what is or isn’t safe is likely to change (circulation, ankle suspension, inversions, a recent talk about radial nerves & rope placement just to name a few) and two, whatever people say “can’t” or “shouldn’t” be done will almost certainly be done safely and repetitively by first one or two and later many more.

    I completely agree with you that bad bondage has no excuse. I’m still ashamed that so many of us tolerated that One Performance at the LFAJRB that should have been stopped; the fact that no one was actually injured does NOT excuse us from just sitting there and watching it. “Yeah, I drove at 140kph through the schoolyard, but I didn’t hit any kids, so it must be ok…”

    Where you and I disagree is that we can somehow reduce the rate or risk by NOT putting certain educational materials online. I feel that people are going to try it anyway, and that even a little education can mitigate the risk somewhat.

    I also am GLAD that people will try it anyway. There’s an image in “Sky” by Doug Kent of a woman laying on the floor in an arch with a ring (also on the floor) next to her. I commented, at an event in Ohio, that it was a beautiful sight, and it was “too bad it’s impossible in an actual suspension.”

    Later that day, at the GRUE, a guy named Nom called me over, to show how he and his bottom had done it. It was amazing, and beautiful, and risky, but in the aware-kind-of-way.

    There’s that saying: “Listen to what the experts say can’t be done. Then go and do it.”

    I’m digressing; my point is that “good bondage” and “bad bondage” are not objective; they are subjective, based on individuals and communities and what point we are in history. I think we’d be better served to talk about “effective” and “ineffective”, acknowledging that even those may change depending on the goals of the tie.

    Damn you and your interesting posts anyway; I got work to do! Cheers, mate.

    • wykd November 26, 2012 at 7:53 pm

      I feel like this overlaps a few subjects covered in other posts more than this one which was just about what I felt were bogus justifying arguments.

      I believe, however, that there is a difference between “justifying” something (saying that this should happen) and saying “people are going to do it anyway.” I’ve dedicated an inordinately large portion of my life towards educating people about the dangers and joys of rope bondage, and a couple of things have come to light: one, whatever the popular theory is at the moment about what is or isn’t safe is likely to change (circulation, ankle suspension, inversions, a recent talk about radial nerves & rope placement just to name a few)

      I think the above for instance is a different discussion but nevertheless an interesting one. I think that ‘popular theory’ must give way to fact. I believe that as we learn more and more you come to understand the actual dangers and that they wont move with fashion, the realities of nerve damage will remain regardless.

      and two, whatever people say “can’t” or “shouldn’t” be done will almost certainly be done safely and repetitively by first one or two and later many more.

      I think that’s a completely different issue. Maybe it will be done, but some things really shouldn’t be done. I could list lots of extreme examples but I’m sure you can think of plenty yourself. Here’s one for comical illustration purposes… Single nipple suspensions should not be done! I look forward to your images of them being done safely and repeatedly.

      Honestly that proposition depends on the sanity and reality of what people are saying “shouldn’t” be done. Sometimes people are mistaken and what was once thought “shouldn’t” be done really can. But! And it’s a big but, that does not logically imply that everything that “shoulnd’t” be done, should!

      I completely agree with you that bad bondage has no excuse. I’m still ashamed that so many of us tolerated that One Performance at the LFAJRB that should have been stopped; the fact that no one was actually injured does NOT excuse us from just sitting there and watching it. “Yeah, I drove at 140kph through the schoolyard, but I didn’t hit any kids, so it must be ok…”

      Yep, that was horrifying. The way she was balanced the call was hard though, if she’d tipped forward yep rush the stage. If not then maybe rushing on would cause an accident. It was an impossible call at the time. Anything more and it’s an easy one. It was fucking awful to see.

      Also I think many people were stunned a little because it was so unexpected, you don’t expect someone performing at an international bondage event to be such an utter incompetent. He should not have done a suspension in my opinion. Are we glad that he tried it anyway?

      Where you and I disagree is that we can somehow reduce the rate or risk by NOT putting certain educational materials online. I feel that people are going to try it anyway, and that even a little education can mitigate the risk somewhat.

      Yep, advanced materials certainly. I’ve written my opinion of that extensively and about the associated risks so I wont repeat it here.

      I also am GLAD that people will try it anyway. There’s an image in “Sky” by Doug Kent of a woman laying on the floor in an arch with a ring (also on the floor) next to her. I commented, at an event in Ohio, that it was a beautiful sight, and it was “too bad it’s impossible in an actual suspension.”

      Later that day, at the GRUE, a guy named Nom called me over, to show how he and his bottom had done it. It was amazing, and beautiful, and risky, but in the aware-kind-of-way.

      Yes I know the image you mean, I never thought it was an impossible suspension though, just that it was going to be impossibly time consuming for my tasted to tie. Also for practicalities sake it would take longer than I’d prefer to untie. Also I prefer to suspend dynamically and that would probably have to be done on the ground and winched up. (you can tell me if that was actually as time consuming and done in the way I think it was)

      There’s that saying: “Listen to what the experts say can’t be done. Then go and do it.”

      I always hate statements like that. When people use them near me I feel that they’re putting me into a category with everyone they feel is ‘expert’ (some of whom btw. I might not feel are expert) and attributing the same opinions to everyone they’ve lumped into that group. I have my own opinions and I’d prefer if people asked instead of assuming them.

      I’m digressing; my point is that “good bondage” and “bad bondage” are not objective; they are subjective, based on individuals and communities and what point we are in history. I think we’d be better served to talk about “effective” and “ineffective”, acknowledging that even those may change depending on the goals of the tie.

      Good and bad are to an extent subjective but only to an extent; nobody who cant really tell the good from the bloody awful should be teaching. This does drive me crazy because people seem to want to fudge around the issue, if we really can’t tell then we can’t tell that the bondage performance in London was terrible can we?

      Let’s take that example of the performance at the London festival. Could you really not tell it was bad? Your comments here seem to suggest very strongly that you could in a way that was not subjective at all.

      Damn you and your interesting posts anyway; I got work to do! Cheers, mate

      Always interesting to converse with you man.

%d bloggers like this: