Twitter Thread: CNC, Consent, and Safewords | 9/16/21

Original thread: https://twitter.com/h_sleepingirl/status/1438516146496409602 

There's a discussion on reddit that's asserting that CNC can't be consensual unless there's a safeword in place. This is a horrifically bad take for a number of reasons. 

CNC has two main definitions that tend to be used interchangeably and without specifying.

1) "A simulated rape/ravishment scene where 'no' doesn't necessarily mean 'stop.'"

2) "A dynamic where there is blanket consent of some form."

Safewords are optional in both.

A safeword is a word with an agreed-upon meaning that does not change. This word should generally denote some action. I.e. "red" = "stop". I am generally not big on safewords that are ambiguous, such as "yellow" = "slow down". Too much room for interpretation.

CNC doesn't mean "it's opposite day" and the Top interprets all "nos" as "yeses". There are "play nos" which don't mean the bottom wants to stop, and "real nos" where the bottom is genuinely saying they don't want something.  CNC means it's the Top's choice what to do.

A safeword adds clarity: a bottom can give a real no to something that the Top pushes, but both parties can know that if they need to stop, there is an unambiguous way to do that. "I don't want to do this" is very different from "I won't do this." No desire =/= no consent.

But this doesn't change just because there is no safeword. Consent is NOT A SIMPLE BINARY METRIC. In no safeword CNC, consent is expressed explicitly and/or implicitly before and throughout the scene. The nuance of communication (verbal/nonverbal) becomes even more important.

Presence or lack of presence of "consent" (a flawed binary, again) is also not the only metric for if a scene was OK for someone. Bottom has safeword but doesn't use it in CNC = consensual on paper, but what if they froze up and Top didn't realize? Etc. Not simple.

Two people meet at a bar and coyly flirt until they go home together and have sex. At no point did they negotiate or express explicitly, "I want this." In fact, lots of playful "nos". It was all on the fly, no safewords. On paper, not consensual, but they had an amazing time.

I have two long-term no safeword CNC dynamics: one where I'm the Top and one where I'm the bottom. We do both kinds of CNC. I feel WAY MORE SAFE/COMFORTABLE playing in those relationships than I ever do with a casual/new partner with whom I need a safeword.

Safewords are often the better choice for new/inexperienced partners. But they are not a replacement for a deep understanding of nuanced communication. The Top cannot be blind to and barreling through the bottom's "nos", real or play. They must acknowledge every one of them.

No safeword CNC forces both parties to be intentional about giving and receiving communication. There is no crutch. It's no longer just about explicit communication and consent. Implicit communication and consent become more necessary (they are always necessary).

Anyways, we NEED to stop asserting one-way-ism re: safewords and especially consent. Consent is obviously important in kink but it's incredibly nuanced.