Demystifying CNC

Demystifying Consensual Non-Consent (CNC) and clearing-up some misconceptions.
Resource by Sera Deep
Trigger / Content Warnings: Discussion of coercion, abuse, and consent violation. Some discussion of specific CNC activities including interrogation, punishment, consensual blackmail kink, emotional masochism, and more. Rape role-play is mentioned but not a focus (despite the misconception of CNC as another term for rape role-play, it’s just one of many things under the umbrella of CNC)

Purpose and Audience, Disclaimers and Caveats

• The goal of this presentation is to demystify Consensual Non-Consent (CNC) and discuss how to navigate negotiations, and how to “keep it consensual” when consent is damaged by the kink. This is a non-comprehensive overview of CNC within kink and ways it can manifest in dynamics, and frameworks it can be discussed with.
  • The framework being presented here helps to refocus conversation to emotional motivations. By categorizing CNC activities and dynamics into emotional motivation categories, it may even help to discuss specific acts with less potential for shame. That means being more likely to experience what you want to, feel the way you want to, and generally have hotter, better CNC!
  • I embrace the extremes. Kink can involve both temporary hurt and lasting effects some would define as harm, and I frequently seek both within dynamics. I speak from the perspective of someone who sees it all as valid to seek, so long as you’ve properly introspected on why you want it. This presentation is a tool to help you do that self-reflection.
• It is NOT the goal to equip you to jump into trying a CNC dynamic or scene with no experience or knowledge. Discuss at extreme length with your partner(s). This presentation is one tool to communicate. Intimately understand topics like negotiation, aftercare, and your unique risk profile. Consent is always an ongoing collaborative effort and not simply granting permission.
• When writing beginner-level resources, I recognize that the truths within will always be partial in nature, but try to make the resource more helpful than harmful or misleading.
• Fight, flight, freeze and fawn are critically important things to be aware of in all BDSM. In CNC, the likelihood of encountering this is quite a bit higher and sometimes for some people even the goal. Always be aware of this process. Here’s one brief write-up I like: https://mcasa.org/newsletters/article/trauma-and-the-brain-understanding-tonic-immobility
• No one is an “expert.” I’m one person, and this is one framework. There are many other valid frameworks and ways to look at things which I also value.

What is CNC?

• The term Consensual Non-Consent (CNC) is understood differently by different people. I interviewed many. Here’s some highlights that show how varied answers are:
  • “Negotiated scenario that includes a dynamic that otherwise would be non-consensual.”
  • “You have my consent to violate my consent. I love feeling like my consent doesn’t matter.”
  • “Consenting to a dynamic, not activities.”
  • “Here is the sandbox we are both going to play in. Here are the rules and limits of this dynamic. You can play in there without asking or if I say no.”
  • “Difference between a session (like an abduction fantasy) or CNC as in “free use” or play without asking first.”

What is CNC?: “Don’t stop if I say to”

• Many people describe CNC simply as “you don’t have to stop if I say ‘no’ or ‘stop.’” While this is a description that is superficially representative of one type of CNC scene or dynamic, it is pretty reductionist. Some people may also say this because they are uncomfortable or unsure of how to ask for the specific things that they want, or how to ask for how they want to feel. By being so simplistic, it risks stopping further conversation and negotiation, and risks not discussing emotional drives.
• “But what if I want to do a rape roleplay scene where I’m not allowed to say no and no safewords at all and all consent is prior to it?”
  • This presentation will provide you with tools to introspect on why you want that and what motivations are fulfilled by it, and you’ll have a safer and better time if you think about that! But the thing that keeps it “consensual” when consent is damaged is everything surrounding it.

Wait, what actually is “usual” consent?

In our community, we often put qualifying words in front of consent, such as ongoing, enthusiastic, sober, risk aware, affirmative, and freely given.

• Ongoing: Consent isn’t giving permission once or at the start of a scene. It’s given in a fluid, ongoing way similar to an emotional headspace, and can be withdrawn or end at any time. Consent is also collaborative, not just coming from one person.
• Enthusiastic: Consent isn’t saying “maybe we can try that”–if someone tells you maybe when negotiating or during a scene, take it as them saying no. “Enthusiasm” can look different in some types of play, such as emotional masochism–but this term represents, at the end of the day, a genuine desire.
• Sober: Consent isn’t given without a clear head. You can’t consent while very tired, stressed, emotionally vulnerable, or while anything but completely sober.
• Risk aware: Consent requires knowing what you’re signing-up for and consenting to. But this isn’t a legal exchange; in BDSM, there can often be risks or consequences unforeseen by anyone involved.
• Affirmative: Consent isn’t “they didn’t say no”–not saying no isn’t saying yes. Yes is saying yes.
• Freely given: Consent isn’t something given under pressure, when afraid or nervous to say no, when there’s a benefit or bribe to say yes, or when power dynamics create imbalance that forces a yes.

What is “usual” consent?: Breaking that down

• So many things can impact ongoing, enthusiastic, sober, risk aware, affirmative, freely given consent, that some modern progressive discourse questions if this ideal consent can truly be achieved.
  • Put another way, one could argue that all kink is consensual non-consent. Even if the play doesn’t intentionally impact those qualifying words, there’s inherent risk of them being unintentionally impacted.
• All play carries risk. Most of the time when things “go wrong” in BDSM, there was no malicious intent, but the harm and impact is there. Acknowledging this inherent risk is not an excuse to blame someone that is harmed. Play with willingness to accept consequences, and to offer support if things go wrong.
• Some types of activities or play may inherently or intentionally impact those qualifying words about consent. That’s where CNC comes in.

What is CNC?: So in general, what is it?

• Essentially, any consent sensitive situation in BDSM, kink, and relationships where those qualifiers are impacted, such as commonplace power exchange, is consensual non-consent.
  • Yes, that is extremely general and seemingly comprehensive of nearly all BDSM and useless.
• What makes CNC different from other kink? Ongoing enthusiastically consensual, but there’s an element of non-consent:
  • The non-consent is “this activity or dynamic inherently compromises or damages usual, properly shared consent and the ongoing consent is less direct.”
  • The non-consent is NOT “surprise” in a relationship or “we didn’t negotiate or agree to this.” It could involve aspects of that, but then it’s still within this same understanding of navigating kink when proper consent is compromised.

What is CNC?: It’s not transactional consent

• “Obtaining consent” as frequently said in medical or legal industry is not the same thing as consent in scenes/dynamics. Consent is not “contractual” or “transactional.”
• Consent is not indefinite after being “obtained.” While that may make sense for undergoing a medical procedure or a one-way legal decision, it doesn’t for signing-up for a long term relationship/dynamic or scene (unless you’re unconscious in the scene, I guess?). If you cannot “withdraw consent” it’s non-consent (and I am using “withdraw consent” very loosely–consent is not granted/revoked, consent is a collaborative state).
  • Something can become non-consent after consent is obtained, even in legal and medical fields. If that wasn’t the case, no one would ever leave a job or apartment they rented. That’s why contracts that are not for a simple procedure or one-way decision usually have clauses for how they are exited.
• CNC is recognizing that the scene, dynamic or play going on exerts pressure or otherwise undermines some or all of those descriptive qualifiers in front of consent (ongoing, enthusiastic, sober, risk aware, affirmative, freely given…). Putting pressure on someone with a threat of punishment, kissing a sleeping partner’s forehead, playing without a safeword–these all impair that definition of consent, so if that’s what consent is, then CNC activities do indeed involve genuine non-consent (and so does most sex).
  • Even if “consent was obtained,” once those qualifiers are impacted it still involves non-consent–but it can still be something participants want to experience! So we need to be very aware of the impact on consent. What keeps it safer and keeps that first C in consensual non-consent is what surrounds it.
• CNC is often present in D/s dynamics, but doesn’t have to be.
  • …which is why I’d like to start by discussing CNC and D/s.

CNC and D/s: negotiated, not assumed

• CNC is a type of power exchange, but not all D/s dynamics are focused on CNC. CNC should be a negotiated aspect of a D/s dynamic.
• A lot of harm happens when a sub does something or feels pressured to do something “because their dom told them to” and there’s confusion around consent in a D/s dynamic. You never have to do anything you don’t want to do. Unless that’s specifically what you’re seeking, and the point of the dynamic or play you’ve negotiated. And if you have, you’ve also negotiated strategies for check-in, communication, and safewords.
  • One more time–If you are in a D/s dynamic you don’t need to do anything you’re uncomfortable with. Do not assume CNC dynamics are the “default.” Do not assume your sub has to listen to what you say, or that you have to obey your dom even if you’re uncomfortable. CNC is something you negotiate, not assume.
• This is not “we communicate so well” or “it’s just how negotiation is for us I guess” or “it just feels easy to initiate and start scenes with my partner.” All of that is compromised consent. Initiating compromises consent. Asking after you start is not consent, even if they say they consent, as pressure was applied.

CNC and D/s: Different types of dynamics

• In most D/s dynamics, the s-type doesn’t have to do anything that makes them uncomfortable. It’s generally pretty good advice to say this, too! But, in many ongoing CNC dynamics, discomfort may be a primary goal.
• To achieve that mutual goal of genuine discomfort, a CNC D/s dynamic may involve ongoing collaborative consent to the dynamic, rather than to individual actions–but often also to individual actions.
• Within many CNC D/s dynamics, a key difference may be that a sub’s behavior need not correlate with treatment. This is an intentional undermining of “traditional D/s,” where creating that safe space through clear expectations and dominants sticking to their word is essential. Instead it may be creating a false sense of that to intentionally, consensually, mess with expectations and make things kinda scary and uncomfortable.
  • Again, this is something done with intent and awareness that’s what you’re doing, not lack of awareness and unintentional abuse. If you are interested in darker dynamics like this, it is essential to not skip the first part of actually learning the rules before you can break them. Both from a safety perspective, and the perspective that you can’t subvert rules in a hot fun way if you don’t know the rules in the first place.

Limits in CNC

Many people into CNC think about limits differently than usual ways people use the word “limit.” Reflect on your mutual goals for a dynamic or play!

• Many CNC dynamics are a form of “total power exchange,” with the sub giving significant authority to the dom.
  • They may enjoy the idea of “not being allowed limits” and having to do whatever the dom says.
  • Or they may have limits, but want a dynamic where they trust the dom with the freedom to push or break them.
• Many people who CNC dynamics or scenes have low limits or limits that are harder to explain than something like “no clamps.”
  • Sometimes, limits can only be learned through experience and are very specific.
  • Some people may have limits they absolutely never want touched, or ones they’d only be okay having pushed or broken in a CNC context like emotional masochism or a punishment.
• For many including myself, some limits are about interpretations of consent theory, such as not wanting to do things that could impact someone outside of the dynamic.
  • This may be directly, like common concerns about why play in public spaces can be inappropriate.
  • Or indirectly, like how it’d impact people in your life who care about you if you developed an uncontrolled physical or psychological issue from kink.
• Limits may be less about actions and more about emotional objectives or goals of a scene or dynamic. If a particular act or way of going about a kink doesn’t go towards the shared goals of a dynamic, it may be avoided. These are very specific to different people, so I’m offering some personal examples:
  • Example 1: Dynamics I have often emulate abuse, and I like being controlled in manipulative ways. I know from experience that threats of abandonment push me away and break fascination in someone, not make me want to do better to please them. So I sometimes describe threats of abandonment as a limit because it can damage control they have–and the point is for them to have control.
  • Example 2: For me as an emotional masochist, what I want is an emotional sadist being the one hurting me. My emotional limits are less “things I will never do or topics you can’t mess with” and more “things that are likely to become me making myself hurt by getting too lost in my own head.” That takes control away from them being the one making me miserable, and that’s against shared motivations because I want to give control that they want to have.
  • Example 3: I’m into sleep deprivation play. But, it depends on the goal behind doing it. I want my partner to be getting-off on using sleep dep as a sadistic act to hurt me. Or using sleep dep to break me down and make me easier to manipulate. Or pairing it with a torment or task, during sleep dep or the next day, to either have my focus challenged or be made more mindless or subby. Without a motivation framing it like that, I’m not into it and losing sleep is just frustrating.
• Motivations matter a lot for understanding what consent looks like and how to reflect on what your goals are. Read on…

Types of CNC: Coercion vs Violation

• One framework to understand CNC is the motivations for wanting it–I’m presenting this as coercion or violation. These words often carry negative connotations, but they don’t in this presentation. Both drives are valid to feel or want!
• Coercion: “Making someone do something they don’t want to do to avoid something they want even less. Or, being pressured into things.”
  • A dom that wants to threaten the sub with things they don’t want to to do, to control them and make them do other things, is seeking to control someone via coercion.
  • A sub that wants to be controlled by threat or use of things they do not want, or to be pushed down and made to submit if they resist, is seeking control through coercion.
• Violation: “Breaking someone’s boundaries through dynamics or acts that inherently compromise consent.”
  • A dom who wants to break someone’s will, limits and boundaries, is seeking violation.
  • A sub who wants to be “broken,” or have limits or boundaries passed, is seeking violation.
• You don’t necessarily need to be aligned on these interests to have a scene or dynamic. But in some cases, motivations may clash. (For example, if a sub wants the dom to follow-through with a threatened act and the dom only wants to gain control via the threat, it may be incompatible).
• These are imperfect categories–it’s just one framework for organizing thoughts.
  • Each category can be present in the same dynamic or scene at different times.
  • Types of play or dynamics within these are categories may also overlap.
• To follow are a bunch of examples, and then examples applying this framework and seeing how consent may look in an activity or dynamic. Within these emotionally-based categories, consent is similarly best conceptualized like an emotional state, because as we’ve discussed, those qualifiers are greatly impacted.
  • Understanding the drive is insightful for better communication in kink, and having a framework can assist with brainstorming and organizing thoughts. How do these activities make you feel? Do they fulfill or threaten any needs? Read along with emotion wheels! This set of wheels shows “uncomfortable,” “comfortable emotions,” and “needs.” Think about these activities, what emotions they make you feel, and what needs that relates to: Click to see the emotion wheel set!

Types of CNC: Coercion

What does consent look like? Within this category, consent is compromised (it’s “non-consent”) because pressure is being applied. Ongoing consent is being given to have that pressure applied.

• Punishments and discipline that are actually undesirable (not “funishments”)
• Bribery (As opposed to punishments, coercion through positive reinforcement. Not always a CNC context. But, can compromise consent in similar ways.)
• D/s, M/s largely fall here, but can fall into other categories.
• Orgasm denial as part of a dynamic usually falls here–it’s used as a reward as coercion, and teased to apply pressure.
• Consensual blackmail kink. (Following orders to do something you don’t want to do is valued over the threat of information or pictures being exposed).
• Interrogation roleplay and scenes.
• Coercion or use of fear, threats, during negotiations or commands

Types of CNC: Violation

What does consent look like? Within this category, consent is inherently damaged or compromised (it’s “non-consent”) by the act itself. Ongoing consent is being given to do these activities prior to, after, and sometimes explicitly expressed during* via check-ins. (*Consent during is compromised and should not be the only thing used.) Communication and debriefing surrounds play.

• Emotional masochism, fear play, and panic (cannot consent in these headspaces)
• Limit breaking/engaging with limits as a form of play/degradation/emotional masochism
• “Somno,” including even just touching a partner you fell asleep in the same bed with (cannot consent)
• Privacy violation (tech dom, consensual viruses, cameras, “inspections”)
• Rape roleplay (even if negotiated, the same fight-flight-freeze-fawn responses can kick-in)
• “Free use” (“you can do XYZ things to me in these specific circumstances or times)
• Exposure kink (wanting pictures or info shared publicly)
• Gaslighting and abuse (manipulation damages consent)
• Play surrounding sleep deprivation (intentionally damages judgement)
• Anything to do with alcohol or other drugs.

Types of CNC: Examples of these categories – Coercion

Coercion Play / Acts / Scenes

• Interrogation play–Classic example of doing something you don’t want to do (provide information) to avoid something you want less (continued torments)
  • Ongoing consent: To the acts before and after, but also during–consent is compromised by pressure.

Coercion Dynamics / Arrangements / Relationships

• D/s with Punishments and threats–Being told to do things or be punished is coercion. But the punishment is, essentially, a form of violation.
  • Ongoing consent: To the dynamic itself. Limits can still exist; some things may be okay or not.
• Consensual blackmail kink–Not wanting information, pictures shared/exposed (Coercion). But, may still want feelings of violation. So the dynamic is based on coercion, but the play may involve acts of violation.
  • Ongoing consent: To the dynamic itself. Often features scheduled check-ins, safe chats, debriefing.

Types of CNC: Examples of these categories – Violation

Violation Play / Acts / Scenes

• Hypnosis–I would not consider Hypnosis itself CNC, but induction (guided meditation) can lower inhibitions and affect judgement, and triggers can have effect regardless of desire for them to when thoroughly practiced. Thus while it’s an imperfect fit, hypnosis would be mostly under violation in this framework, as induction follows a traditional pattern of ongoing affirmative consent but any play after it does not.
  • Ongoing consent: To the scene, or to having triggers used. Consent is compromised during trance.
• Emotional masochism–If headspaces involved that couldn’t normally consent, it’d be under Violation in this framework. But, emotional masochism can also be a form of coercion (Example: “You’re only good for <insert thing being pressured to do here>” to gain compliance)
  • Ongoing consent: To having this sort of play in the dynamic. Debriefing is very common and valuable.

Violation Dynamics / Arrangements / Relationships

• “Free use” arrangements–Explicitly negotiated actions that can be done without asking, at negotiated times. Consent is damaged by initiation itself–“they didn’t safeword” is not indicative of consent, may feel unable to via fight-flight-freeze-fawn.
  • Ongoing consent: To the dynamic, and having this a part of it. Often features active and scheduled check-ins, debriefing. This is not “we communicate well and I don’t have to ask first!”–that’s not good communication, it’s damaged consent.
• Pseudo-abuse and abuse emulating dynamics–Relationships or dynamics where the patterns and cycles of abuse are intentionally done (such as gaslighting, blame, manipulation, limited or no aftercare). Consent is very damaged by the ongoing-manipulation; these patterns are powerful and not easy to break out of, even if they are entered into with risk aware consent.
  • Ongoing consent: To the dynamic, but consent becomes very unreliable. Likely active check-ins and scheduled check-ins, from either side of the D/s slash. Safe chats can be a powerful tool to be able to express needs, especially if real affirmation is needed.

Risks

Risks need to be discussed, to talk about how to mitigate them or continue with awareness, and do the things we want to do!

• CNC has lasting psychological effects; These may be wanted, or unexpected.
  • Repercussions in your relationship with your partner(s) can include negative emotions outside of scenes. Discuss how you’re going to navigate that.
  • Many of these kinks can be draining on the top as well as the bottom. Know aftercare needs for all! (When I bottom for serious scenes I still thank my top for facilitating it, even if I’m not able to say “thanks so much for making me have a panic attack”)
  • A writing I generally appreciate on this topic about emotional masochism in particular: https://fetlife.com/users/3055227/posts/5489251
• Intense, deeply vulnerable play can involve showing someone the worst parts of yourself; things you are genuinely uncomfortable with and don’t like about yourself. Top or bottom. If after an intense scene or a change in the dynamic things go badly or end suddenly, it can risk feeling like a judgement on you in a very real, painful way that is not easy to process. Debriefing (including when ending dynamics) is incredibly important to avoid unwanted trauma.
• CNC can have serious legal repercussions “if it goes wrong.” (Anything from accidental physical harm, to accidentally viewing a confidential work file while consensually RATing someone’s computer)
• CNC adds mental pressure, and can activate existing or new mental health struggles.
  • Safewords alone are not reliable. Fight/Flight/Freeze/Fawn are so likely you should prepare for them. That responsibility is not only on the top. Fawn causes significant harm to the top; bottoms need to be aware of their responses, too, and ensure they can engage in these activities.
  • Panic is desired by some. But, unexpected panic can happen. Be aware of your risks and triggers and ensure you are in a setting, and relationship, that can support unexpected mental health episodes.

Safewords?

• Yes, safewords can still exist in CNC. No, this doesn’t make it “fake.”
• Safewords are not a particularly great form of communication.
  • They are mostly used when something has already gone wrong, if they are able to be used at all. Fight/Flight/Freeze/Fawn makes safewords wildly unreliable.
  • They mean different things to different people. If you use safewords like green, yellow, and red, ask your partner(s) what they mean to them. For example, I may say something is yellow if it’s causing me significant distress and it’s fine to continue but not increase intensity; others may use yellow to say that intensity needs to be reduced.
• Some people say they play without a safeword. Ultimately, another form of communication will be used first long before a safeword because they have layers of communication.
• If it’s a dynamic or type of play centered around feeling uncomfortable, frequently communicating your current level of discomfort is both healthy communication and basic day-to-day flirting. Same with the dom asking the sub how they are feeling, most sadists want the masochist to express it–It’s not “immersion breaking.” But, sometimes there’s a need to “highlight” something to be taken extra seriously and with extra weight, which is one way a safeword can be used.
• There are many other types of communication in all kink, and some that may be specific to or especially useful in CNC dynamics. Let’s talk about some of them!

More than Safewords: Types of communication

• Safe chats– Idea of having more than one method of communication like texting or DMing your partner with different apps. Have a text chat that’s “no protocol, dynamic is paused” and things communicated as “equals.” Also a great way for subs to flag “green” or offer reassurance and make it clear something is genuinely OK to push.
• Calling “green”– Safeword adjacent. It is extremely valuable to say when things are okay, even or especially if they are difficult.
• Protocol/Dynamic “Pause” Safewords– Similar to safechat. Safeword not to stop a scene, but to stop protocol and communicate as “equals.”
• Active check-ins– Both ways! Subs can check in with their doms. This doesn’t need to be a big thing, just creating a relationship culture of communicating openly.
• Scheduled check-ins– Some dynamics or scenes may have additional, designated pre-scheduled times to discuss how things are going.
• Debriefing– Discussion after scenes about how things felt. May not always take place immediately after. Notes, journaling, open discussion, things you may want to experience again and things you don’t, no matter if you were top or bottom (in CNC, this might not be the same as things you “liked” or “disliked.”) Great way to foster a culture of communication in your relationships–make a habit of debriefing when it goes well, and it’ll be more comfortable and feel safer to do when things go wrong.
• Threats– Yes, really. Particularly in on-going coercive CNC dynamics, a dominant throwing an idea out there to their sub, and investigating and giving them a chance to signal green, can be a genuinely powerful tool.
  • Yes, this is a type of dubious consent, but many desire that. It is part of a greater framework of communication I’ll discuss more below.
• Negotiation– This is big, so let’s break it down!

Negotiation and CNC

• In all of kink, negotiation is essentially just talking and mutually deciding what is going to happen in the scene or what rules will be implemented.
• The prior strategies like debriefing and safe chats are also part of negotiation, especially in coercion dynamics like D/s and blackmail.
• Negotiation in CNC is often for things outside of scenes, or more general in scope.
  • Can I put a virus on your computer to stalk you? Can I have a rule to control my spending habits/food/sleep/exercise? Is it OK if I grope you without asking first each time?
• Threats can be a negotiation tool depending on the dynamics. In addition to the aforementioned use of giving a chance to signal green, giving a threat and judging reaction can be helpful. Some may intentionally want to play with this sort of dubious consent; I’ll discuss this more in a bit in a later section.
• Depending on the tone or type of dynamic, negotiation may be the dom gathering preferences or limits to take under advisement, with other communication used if there’s a serious problem, rather than mutually deciding what is going to happen.
  • For many, “immersion” is broken if their dom “wouldn’t actually publicly post my lewd pictures or wouldn’t really break that hard limit I said I don’t want touched.” Solutions:
    • The dom lies saying they would even if they wouldn’t.
    • The dom genuinely would, and many want to be in a dynamic where they would.
    • It’s all okay to want but communicating here matters. Which leads to…

Role-Playing?

(also see: Is D/s Power Exchange Roleplaying? Is Roleplaying “real?” Finding alignment with productive conversation.)

• Some people say that CNC, and/or all kink, is role-playing. Others do not. Some say role-playing “isn’t real” or is “fake.” Others do not.
• Tends to be a real hot-button issue for many, with a lot of immediate emotional response towards people who are on the “other side.” Some people who view it as role-playing see those who feel it as identity as inherently problematic or dangerous, and some people who don’t see it as role-playing act elitist towards the people who do.
• Talk about this topic with your partner–Do you see this as role-playing? Why or why not? Discussing this can lead to valuable insights!
• Alignment on “is it role-playing or not” may not be needed to have a dynamic. But, communication is.
• Regardless of how you feel on this topic, all actions are real in their effects. Kink can have psychological effects. Role-playing or not, “real” or not. Acknowledging this is critical for risk aware kink.

Something will go wrong

• If you want to do a scene that involves humiliation, degradation, power dynamics or the like, you should play understanding not everything may go exactly as you want it to.
  • In a scene where a top says 30 mean things and does dozens of different actions, probably not everything is going to land perfectly and be hot.
  • Even more so within a long-term dynamic with thousands of mean things and actions, it’s likely boundaries are going to be passed occasionally.
  • It’s hard to call these moments “mistakes” or “failures,” because they aren’t. It’s an inevitable part of the things we do. The longer we do them, the more likely until it goes wrong.
  • Going into play understanding things won’t always be perfect is important because it means expecting to communicate. But that communication can still feel hard, and it can get complicated.
• I’m not really talking about a “consent violation.” As this presentation has explored, consent is genuinely compromised in every CNC scenario. Thus, consent is not necessarily the best framework for harm reduction when navigating these sorts of issues, nor is it something that can be solely relied on for harm prevention.
  • Consent as a framework feels safe. It makes a lot of people uncomfortable to challenge consent as the be-all and end-all because the idea of “as long as we have consent, everything is and will be fine!” is very comforting.
  • But we need other frameworks to navigate kink with if we recognize that CNC and a lot of other kink can invalidate that concept of ongoing, enthusiastic, sober, risk aware, affirmative, freely given consent.

Something serious will go wrong, too

Almost no matter what, eventually, it really won’t go well. Something will go very wrong. This probably won’t be because any person involved intentionally did something wrong. There more than likely won’t be malicious intent. It won’t even be something that more communication could have solved.

• As this presentation explores, a lot of people want serious, lasting effects out of CNC that may be defined as harm by themselves or by others. That’s not what I am talking about here. I’m talking about unwanted harm.
• As in the prior section, consent will likely not be the best framework for harm reduction.
• There probably won’t be blame to assign. There will be harm to be reduced together by processing what happened.

Debriefing can get messy

• Debriefing was mentioned before, as a tool that’s extremely important even when things are going well. Debriefing is important because it practices the formula for harm reduction once something goes wrong. It will feel easier if you’ve already been debriefing when it’s going well.
• Like with usual debriefing, it may not be immediately after serious unwanted harm that you talk about it.
  • It may also take time to identify that something serious actually happened at all. But when serious unwanted harm occurs, it should at least be communicated as soon as it is identified, even if it cannot yet be fully discussed. If it cannot yet be communicated the dynamic should be paused until it can be, or it may cause further harm to all involved.
• I personally feel it is utterly essential and mandatory for me that those I play with, be they subs or doms, agree that when something goes wrong it will be discussed. That to explore darker dynamics and experiences, you need to be prepared to support one another if it goes wrong.
  • Everyone is allowed to feel unable to talk about it, too. But, for me and the way I tend to do dynamics, this sort of debriefing is an expectation, not a failure.
• This is a heavy section–debriefing when there’s a serious issue can sometimes mean an end, but more often than not, that discussion will have a good resolution that strengthens and betters a dynamic. Together, you have just gone through something challenging, introspected and communicated about it, and learned something new–and that’s a really good thing worth celebrating!

Debriefing and intentionally messy, dubious consent

Of a lighter more fun fucked-up note–Depending on who you are and the sort of dynamics you build, this sort of debriefing after serious harm may kind of be the default, desired, expected cycle of your dynamic! (This is similar to what some people mean when they say they want to do a scene where they will “go until they call red.” It’s going until it goes wrong, then talking about it.)

• “Messy Dynamics and Play”: Doing things that have a very high chance of “going wrong” in an undesired way, be that in a scene or in the nature of an ongoing dynamic.
  • It’s acknowledged from the start of any play or dynamic that moments of lines being crossed could happen (and if you didn’t already acknowledge it now you do because you’ve made it this far into the presentation and I’m telling you!). Some people, recognizing that things will occasionally go wrong in any scene or dynamic, may choose to lean-in and explore dynamics or play that is quite likely to go wrong.
  • Using the coercion/violation framework:
    • Violation: Examples of dynamics like this would be ones with a lot of ongoing manipulation or that emulate abuse–less structured, chaotic dynamics where rules and expectations are intentionally not very clear.
    • Coercion: The structure of a coercive dynamic like heavy D/s or blackmail kink is more stable, because expectations are often very clear (or else!). But you could intentionally create a scenario designed to fail, like setting the sub up to fail orders given.
    • Scenes might be anything that is breaking a limit in a strong way.
• “Dubcon”: Wanting to play with “dubious consent,” and understanding that it will involve debriefing and processing wanted or unwanted harm done.
  • Essentially, understanding consent well enough to fetishize “invalid consent,” such as basing a scene or rule or dynamic off of a negotiation that was influenced, imbalanced, or one-sided in some way.
  • Depending on how a dynamic or scene started or continues, there can be “fun” questions pondered if any consent expressed in the dynamic or scene is possible to be valid–if power exchange or negotiation began intentionally imbalanced and with “invalid consent,” can it ever “become valid consent” again? There’s no good answer to that, which is why it’s hot to people into dubious consent.
  • Using the coercion/violation framework, dubious consent could be via acts of violation or coercion:
    • Violation: Physical things like initiating and touching when starting a negotiation, or having physical control already present. Or more psychological things like negotiating with unclear headspaces or under the effects of sleep deprivation, or drawing-on ongoing manipulation, gaslighting and confusion.
    • Coercion: Threats invalidating the legitimacy of negotiation, or creating fears of saying no, such as in a dynamic like blackmail kink.
    • Or, something as direct as a dom ordering a sub to say they consent. Doing so immediately violates negotiation and creates a coercive situation.
• “Can’t say no?”: In the “don’t stop if I say to” section at the start, I mentioned that some people express wanting scenes “where they can’t say no and absolutely all consent is prior to it.”
  • I said that if consent cannot be withdrawn, it’s just non-consent, not consensual non-consent. The way to take that and slowly move it back towards consensual non-consent is with a strong expectation that there will be debriefing done, and you will both emotionally and physically support one another after the mistakes you have, essentially, intentionally made. It can be hot to make messy mistakes together, but being aware that’s what you’re doing and being willing to support each other when you do is important.

Conclusion

• CNC is not a synonym for rape roleplay. CNC is not “it’s okay to initiate without negotiating.” CNC is recognizing that the qualifiers that define consent within kink are impacted by the activities.
• Consent is not a transactional agreement. Consent is a collaborative state, similar to an emotion.
• CNC is just as much about collaborative ongoing consent as all kink, but the dynamic or play changes how consent looks and can compromise consent during play or a dynamic.
• If this is your only exposure to CNC, you are NOT now prepared to engage in CNC. This presentation is a tool to help organize your thoughts, exploration and communication with partners.
• As I said at the start, I embrace the extremes. I consider it a fantastic experience if I’m left with nightmares or traumatic reactions to mundane things in my daily life. If you thoroughly introspect on what you want and how to explain it, why you want it and what emotional needs it fulfills, and seek it with awareness, it’s okay to want what you want. I hope this presentation gives you some new ideas to reflect on <3