Safewords

The use of safewords is a complicated issue, in my opinion. Many people think a couple should always have a safeword, but many others feel like an important part of the trust and submission involved in DD is the acceptance of spanking without a safeword. Personally, I've come around to the point of view that ultimately it doesn't really much matter in practice whether a safeword exists or not.

On the one hand, safewords are not nearly as big a protection as is sometimes asserted, for a variety of reasons. If the purpose is to give safety when you don't fully trust a spanker and fear he may be unscrupulous, I don't quite understand how that works – if he's unscrupulous enough to go beyond agreed-upon limits, isn't he equally likely to ignore a safeword? In the more common case, the point isn't to protect against an unscrupulous spanker, but instead to allow communication of something the spanker doesn't see or understand. While that's fine so far as it goes, there are a lot of reasons it often doesn't work. If the spankee is really in distress for some reason, she may well not be able to say the safeword. Even if she can, almost every woman I've ever talked to has been extremely reluctant to actually use a safeword – to many it feels like admitting failure of some sort, even though that's not the intent. In other instances, the safeword comes too late to be of much use – the spankee doesn't become aware of the problem until it's already happened. To use a very extreme example, suppose a spanker is using a heavy paddle, and accidentally strikes too high and hits the tailbone, bruising or even breaking it. Saying a safeword at that point doesn't help much since the damage is already done. For these reasons, the spanker still has to be very aware and careful at all times how he is spanking, and how the spankee is reacting, both verbally and nonverbally. Assuming that everything is fine as long as the spankee doesn't use a safeword can be a very big mistake...

On the other hand, I don't think having a safeword automatically changes the dynamics of the DD relationship and is equivalent to “topping from the bottom”. While that may be true in an erotic setting where the couple agrees on a red/yellow/green (stop/ease up/continue) scheme to control intensity, I don't think it's true in a DD setting where the safeword is intended only to signal when something unexpected has happened. A couple can arrange it so that misuse of a safeword doesn't have any real benefit, and may itself be a punishable offense. As such, a safeword isn't the spankee's way of controlling the spanking, it's just a method of communicating important information to the spanker, and can even be viewed as the duty of the spankee, as part of making the spanking a cooperative effort to improve behavior.

On a third hand, I think those who profess not to use safewords are largely kidding themselves. After all, is any half-way responsible spanker going to ignore a frantic “Yeowch! You broke my tailbone!!” just because the couple doesn't have a safeword? Particularly when just starting a relationship, a spanker would have to be crazy to ignore unexpected protestations or movements – it's probably safe to ignore squirming and “Please stop,” but I sure wouldn't ignore a concerted effort to get away coupled with “If you don't stop this instant, I'm going to call the cops!” Heck, even if a safeword does exist, I think the spanker in a new couple would be foolish to ignore such a statement just because the spankee didn't say “safeword.” At a lower level, why would a spanker ignore a statement like “Stop for a minute and empty your pockets; your keys are digging into me” or “Hold on – I've got a cramp in my leg”? Of course, I'm assuming that a responsible spankee won't make these things up, but that's just the same as assuming the spankee won't inappropriately use a safeword.

Having said all that, I'll admit to requiring a safeword when I'm disciplining a woman I haven't dealt with before or frequently, even though I'm not convinced it's all that useful to protect her. I think there's a little value in having a safeword to protect me, as the spanker. Although this is rarely discussed, I think it's important for people to keep in mind that anytime a spanking is given, the spanker is opening himself to both civil and criminal liability in most states – spanking fits almost any definition of assault and/or battery. So when meeting a new woman, there's always the chance that if things go badly for whatever reason she may decide to call the cops or a lawyer. Although the consent of the “victim” is largely immaterial in the eyes of the law – I'm still guilty of assault even if the woman asked for the spanking – as a practical matter I believe that I'm in a better position if I can show that the entire spanking was consensual, and the presence of a safeword helps there. Although if the woman is really out to get me, there's no way for me to prevent her claiming she used her safeword and I ignored it... I sincerely hope this concern will always remain hypothetical, but it's something for spankers to keep in the back of their mind. For that matter, spankees should understand it's another reason why some spankers may be reluctant to be as firm as desired; there may be a fear, either conscious or subconscious, that if he really hurts her she's going to call the cops.

Another factor in favor of safewords is a little paradoxical – the existence of a safeword, which a spankee may fear will result in her ending a spanking early, may instead have the effect of enabling a more severe spanking. Without a safeword, a reasonably responsible spanker is likely to err on the side of caution, and spank less severely than desired. After all, it's a lot easier to correct that next time by spanking harder than it is to make up for a too-hard spanking that leaves the spankee feeling unfairly treated or even abused. The existence of a safeword may give the spanker confidence to go further, knowing that the safeword will keep him from going too far over the line.

Finally, all of this is largely theoretical. In practice, although I know people that have safewords, I don't think I know of any instances in a disciplinary setting in which the spankee has actually used that safeword. The fact is, most spankers and spankees, especially in DD, are pretty responsible, and unexpected situations (such as cramps) are pretty uncommon, so the need for safewords doesn't actually arise.

BTW, In case I wasn't clear, none of this was meant to recommend either for or against having a safeword. I think that's a decision best left to the couple, but I just wanted to give some more information for them to base their decision on.

Doug

Have you seen the following articles?
I want it all, and I want it now!
Form over substance
Secretary: what did you think of this film?
Help! The one I love nowadays rarely wants sex!
What does the man get out of it? Many things!
What kind of site is this? D/s? TPE? CP? DD? ABCD?
My fascinating journey
The difference between dominant and controlling
Finding a good man
She wants to be taken in hand against her will?!

2003 Nov 6 - 11:56 | login or register to post comments | latest article | previous article | next article |

the boss's opening para

I think I'm completely with the boss on this one. Safewords shout at me that the spanking is going on in role play that the purpose is titilation during game playing.

We don't have a safe word but then we're not in a spanking relationship, we're in a DD relationship where spanking is used, only when necessary, for the purposes of discipline. My husband has spanked me extremely hard - just last night in fact - but he is very careful and the breaking bones bit just wouldn't occur - as for cramps, well they might happen but I guess his reaction would be that I can put up with it, I'm not being spanked for the fun of it, I'm being spanked because I've behaved in such a manner as to need it.

He's my husband and I obey him, to have a safeword would, in my opinion, be agreeing to disobey him if I didn't feel up to it, whereas I believe that if I don't want the spanking, I can always behave a little better in the first place. I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that my misbehaviour patterns are related to a form of laziness, when I just can't be bothered to make the effort and that's just not on and not fair because I certainly don't get that complacency from Mark. So, I get spanked and then I make more of an effort. If I could make it stop by using a word, I'd never get a spanking that taught me anything and then there would be no point in getting a spanking in the first place.

On the other hand, I think if spanking were a purely erotic thing for me that a safeword would be an absolute necessity.

by Issie on 2003 Nov 6 - 18:19 | login or register to post comments

Don't rely on a safeword!

Having a safeword would be no protection at all, legally, if the woman were to claim assault. To use a safeword to protect yourself legally would be madness, I think. If you do not know the person well enough to trust her not to take legal action against you, I strongly advise you not to start spanking her.

And the fact that the man is making himself legally vulnerable in this way is one thing to keep in mind for all those woman who are frustrated by the slow pace at which their man is introducing the desired violence. (Yes, spanking is violence! Consensual violence is still violence! Check the dictionary if you don't believe me.)

by the boss on 2003 Nov 11 - 14:39 | login or register to post comments

Clarification of legal status and safewords

I apparently didn't make myself clear about the legal significance of safewords, so let me try again...

I strongly agree with the boss that one should never rely upon the existence of a safeword as a legal defense. As she says, the single most important thing is knowing the woman well enough to trust her. Unfortunately, that doesn't always happen -- all of us have made mistakes in judgement at various times and misplaced our trust, to one degree or another. So I don't think one should completely ignore the consequences of legal action, even if one strongly believes that no legal action will be taken.

In that vein, I do believe safewords might provide a small amount of help. The law in this area is not very well settled, and varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. The two key questions are whether a safeword is evidence of consent, and whether consent is legally significant. If you can prove that you had a safeword and the woman didn't use it, I think it does demonstrate that the spanking was consensual. The proof can be very difficult, of course, and will essentially come down to a matter of credibility. But that's still better than not even having a safeword to point to.

The trickier question is whether it even matters legally whether the spanking was consensual. It is true that most jurisdictions theoretically don't allow consent as a defense to an assault or battery charge -- you can't waive your right to be free from injury. But that's not true in all jurisdictions, and there seem to be exceptions in others. Think, for example, of a boxing match. What allows one boxer to hit the other, and possibly inflict injury or even death? It may be labelled something like "assumption of risk" or "joint illegal enterprise," but in essence it boils down to the fact that each boxer consents to being hit by the other. I sure wouldn't want to rest my future on a defense of consent, but I'd also much rather be in the position of telling a jury that the woman consented than that she didn't consent.

Because of the unsettled legal status of consent, I think it is safe to say that many -- but not all -- police officers, prosecutors, and civil attorneys will be swayed by the existence of consent. They're likely to be at least a little more reluctant to pursue charges in a situation where the woman agreed in advance to a spanking and didn't object until after the fact.

The upshot, in my opinion, is that there may be a little bit of gain to having a safeword. Again, no guarantees, but I can't imagine how it could possibly *hurt* to have a safeword as an indication of consent. So I personally opt to have a safeword any time I'm dealing with a woman that I haven't previously or frequently disciplined. But it sure isn't something I rely on!

by DougK on 2003 Nov 12 - 01:58 | login or register to post comments

Where did that come from?

It's interesting how people who believe in being "Taken in Hand" want understanding for their lifestyle, and in fact would love to convince the rest of the world that it is the only way to go, since it is "natural" for men to be dominant over women. But at the same time, people who practice spanking for other reasons, such as erotic fun and games, are dismissed as "sham."

Maybe the rest of the spanko world would understand and accept you better if you didn't look down your noses at other people's choices. Hm?

The above comment seems to have no relation to this thread, and little relation to this site in general. Many different opinions and sexual choices are represented here, and most of us are very accepting of others' choices. I've never seen anyone express the opinion that everyone should live their way, and I haven't seen any rejection of "erotic fun and games" here. Some argue that male dominance is "natural" and others think not. Perhaps this person stepped on a tack this morning?

Melanie

by Melanie on 2004 Feb 16 - 17:30 | login or register to post comments

legal status, legal shmatus

As a practical matter, going to the police and prosecutor and explaining that yes you wanted your man to start spanking you but he didn't stop when you said your safeword raises some real problems.

A lawyer

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2004 Apr 27 - 02:20 | login or register to post comments

Safewords

Of course, what's far more comforting -- and a whole bunch sexier -- than a safeword is a partner you know and trust. Torture isn't discipline. But loving discipline goes on a little longer than the woman wants it to -- a little longer. That's the loss of control that really goes to the heart of an agreement for the male to have authority. And to spank.

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2004 Apr 27 - 02:25 | login or register to post comments

safewords

I've been submissive for 4 years now, at the begining of the relationship, my master and I tried using a safe word, but I didn't feel as though I was truly submiting. There was that lingering feeling that if I ever didn't like what he was doing I could stop it, which seemed to put me in more control. I had the last say in everything. But when I think of submission I see it as freely giving myself to serve my master to treat him with the total respect, no matter what. Sure I may be uncomfortable with things such as clothing he chooses for me, or things he does during scenes, but I've chosen to submit to him freely which means I trust him. If you truly trust your man then there is no reason for a safe word, I think. You, as a woman, should trust that your man won't go too far, and if he does, you must trust that he will understand when you tell him to stop.

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2005 May 29 - 19:39 | login or register to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.