From BDSM Wiki Dev
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I think this page needs to be broken into pieces somehow. It's getting far too long and far too difficult to navigate. Also, some of it is horribly leaning towards one specific role when the topic regards multiple roles, i.e. 51 How come no one respects that I'm a Master/slave/other role? talking about being respected as a Master and nothing about being respected as a slave or (insert x role here).

"Open to debate"[edit source]

The header of the page currently says "much of the content is open to debate and alternate viewpoints are indeed valid" -- I'm sorry. It's open to debate, yet locked to editing? If there are people actually vandalizing the page, can we at least get a template a la wikipedia's vandalism template? Simply disagreeing with alternate viewpoints isn't a good reason to lock a page. At least use this discussion page for debate. -- Wulfrath

I definitely vote for using the discussion page for debate at the moment. I think the page is currently locked to editing from non-members because of the vandalizing. A good part of the FAQ was completely destroyed because of people posting the extremist negative view that the kink community is just a place for harboring abusers and rapists. I do vote for the vandalism template if we can get one here. -- Sabryna

By the way, use a leading colon to reply with indentation. That makes it easier to read the comments. If you think that a 54-item list should be discussed in a single talk page, that's not going to happen. A single topic can generate enough controversy to fill up an entire talk page. Have you ever seen wikipedia? This article needs to be split. We should be using categories to track FAQ items, not having a single monolithic page with one guy's opinions. -- Wulfrath 07:44, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Holy shit, magical indentation. I know I'm crazy, but I'm not that crazy. I'm currently posting ideas on how to split the goddamn page into actual articles because I keep getting lost. I've been working on answering the questions I can and figuring out how to categorize them as I go. Help me out with categorization? I started a new topic in here for it. -- Sabryna

Use of drugs / alcohol during play[edit source]

This section, as shown, is quite frankly horseshit. However, since I can't fix it, I will start off by pointing out that "drugs" includes mind-altering prescription medication, including acute anxiolitics. The page should at least be nuanced enough to make the distinction between drugs that make someome more lucid versus less lucid. -- Wulfrath 07:51, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

How would you like to see it reworded? It's honestly making a whole lot of no sense to me at the moment as well, as it reads more like a rant than anything. -- Sabryna

Sorting Things Onto Pages[edit source]

Some of these questions really should belong on pages about the things they're asking about. List time! Feel free to edit

For example, under BDSM (as a page on its own):

  • What does BDSM Stand for?
  • This BDSM stuff sounds interesting, what is good starting advice?
  • Is BDSM abuse? How could someone possibly like getting hit with things and not be insane?
  • Is BDSM illegal?
  • I'm all about getting kinky in the bedroom, but some of this stuff people do is just plain disgusting and/or crazy. How can people possibly like that extreme stuff? It all just seems so sick to me.

Relationships and BDSM

  • I have kids, how can my partner and I possibly do this stuff?/I want to have kids one day, I don't think I can get into this stuff.
  • Do dominants really love and care for their submissives?
  • What if BDSM ruins my relationship with my significant other?
  • How can I make my boyfriend/girlfriend into my dom/sub?
  • Is it really cheating if...?

Under Consent:

  • Is it really a consent violation just to touch someone's hand/hair/etc.?
  • My bottom didn't negotiate sex with me before the scene because that was kind of an uncomfortable topic, but when we started playing we had this amazing connection... Is it OK to have sex with them? That's what they are really there for anyway, right?
  • I saw someone not following best practices concerning BDSM like I read in all the books and now I'm freaking out and hyperventilating into a bag; what should I do?

Under Negotiations (could go hand in hand with consent, or separate pages)

  • How do I negotiate a scene?
  • My bottom didn't negotiate sex with me before the scene because that was kind of an uncomfortable topic, but when we started playing we had this amazing connection... Is it OK to have sex with them? That's what they are really there for anyway, right?
  • I have something I'm having trouble telling my Dom, what should I do?
  • Do I have to have sex with someone in order to play with them?

Checking in on this, yes the page was locked due to some vandalism. It's not locked to admin status, just those with confirmed accounts (did you respond to the email confirmation?). The notion of splitting it into pages is likely in the works because it's a huge mess that is still being initially authored, but even with breaking it down keeping the question itself posted to the FAQ for easy nav to the section. I'm thinking many pages are going to end up with a Best Practices area, even disciplines, such as mentioning most fire play experts suggest starting with 70% iso... point being a lot of this can and should be reworded, probably through several edits, and if you have an edit to suggest, consider dropping it right here or in the fet group if you think it's big enough that others should have a crack at tearing it up before it gets posted. As far as structuring data, there is a quasi-plan, but it is a wiki, so things change and evolve over time, hopefully for the better.

--Admin (talk) 12:40, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

page's POV[edit source]

The POV of this page is of a male, heterosexual d type talking to other male, heterosexual d types. That is (1) not even remotely neutral and (2) kind of useless and alienating for a big chunk of kinksters.

POV = point of view. 15:47, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

consent violation to touch without permission[edit source]

Currently this section has several issues, probably due to it being written by someone who himself doesn't respect consent or boundaries a great deal. Admin writes,

"That said, consent violations do indeed have levels. There is a big difference between getting a little too close to someone and rape and there is a huge spectrum in between... and further, what bothers one person may not bother another."


  • "there is a big difference" -- this minimizes the effect of many small violations, which can add up
  • Going out of your way to emphasize a "don't worry about small violations" attitude, which is shit
  • Making it sound as if it's just up to the whims and vagaries of the individual whether something is a violation or not, rather than sticking to a hard-line approach of "it is wrong, period".

Who are you trying to defend?

"Saying, "Hey, can I give you a hug?" shows respect for the person's preference and chances are that show of respect and help develop small levels of trust."


  • It doesn't show respect for that person's "preference", which, um, what does that even mean. It shows respect for the person and their boundaries.
  • "Chances are" -- do a control+F and see how often you use the phrase "chances are". What you find may surprise you.
  • This is written like you're gaming and manipulating them into trusting you more. They might never trust you more, and that's okay. You're not doing this to make them trust you more, you're doing it to show a basic level of respect.
"and if you respect them, you respect their right to choose that sort of relationship for themselves."


  • This is opinionated language that doesn't belong on this wiki. It is written with a paternalistic tone. The wiki should stick to facts, not telling someone who they should respect.

Overall, this is all quite telling of how the Admin himself views consent and boundaries, but that's not fitting for a wiki which represents the community's opinions. 15:45, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

These are all great points that can be used to help refine the article, thanks! Right now the FAQ very much exists in a first draft format and I don't believe it's even close to be ready to be used, however, it's great that we have contributors that are working so hard to make it better. For the record, I very much value consent as a practice :) --Admin (talk) 16:25, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

I'll work on making it more language and opinion neutral. When it's done, tell me what still needs to be changed. I don't want to say I'm an expert on wording things correctly, but I'll definitely try to help. -- Sabryna 19:28, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
thanks Sabryna, I think it's important the technical data be there but that it be presented in a more neutral manner.--Admin (talk) 11:42, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Do we call this resolved? It's been three days since I fixed it and I haven't seen another complaint regarding it. Sabryna (talk)

Newbie Advice[edit source]

"Pay it forward" was in the newbie advice section. I ate it. For 4:30am snack. Because it really doesn't belong in the newbie advice.

I also edited the bigger groups to include warnings regarding events. I DO wish for more citations regarding consent violations in the kink community and I would like to eventually make a blacklist of events that have known, backed up sources on abuse and consent violations not being dealt with, but for now, I'm stressing warnings about doing vetting and being smart about meeting people and such. These sections now read more smoothly, as well. Sabryna (talk)

blacklists and allegations are not only territories I don't think we should be travelling into, but in many cases is illegal (libel, slander, liability). Stick to giving good advice on what to do, not what not to do. What you can do is if there is a criminal conviction you can link to it on the page for that event as a source. Further, I'm not victim blaming here, but lets remember that allegations do not necessarily = fault. In many cases consent can be given and then retracted after the time, some people live for drama, as a result, only closed convictions listed and in a news reporter dispassionate style of writing, and further, it needs to be stressed that an event and an individual are not the same. One person causing a consent violation at a 1000 person venue doesn't mean the venue is patently unsafe and I won't allow that we should present such an image. Yes we want to protect victims, but I won't go making new victims based on allegations, that is not reasonable. This wiki should never represent a creeperpedia, again because that's illegal, and because it's very much not part of the intent of the wiki. Also, please remember to keep edits to appear academic in phrasing, we want to pull out opinion, idiom and bias whenever possible save for best practices and criticisms sections.--Admin (talk) 22:08, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Exactly. See, Sabryna, the most important thing is to uphold image of the Respectability of the Scene in general. 'No matter what cost. Don't let these drama-stirring consent-withdrawing "victims" hurt our bottom line! What a bunch of complainers. One person in a thousand isn't bad! At all! That's like slipping in the shower, or like, climbing Mount Everest or something. Besides, how many people could that one person possibly play with at a weekend event? Five? That's just five people getting raped and their rapes being covered up by the old boys network. Okay, this is pretty abstract. To be more detailed, I, for one, would not want any new person in the scene to know what happened at Grove Lane Studio. I'd rather that dungeon's business thrive, even if some people's bones need to be broken every now and then. Because the important thing is that business thrive, and the Leather Community maintain its Veneer of Integrity. Besides, I think victims are lying. 22:29, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
By the way, regarding the legal question, see . 23:10, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Or this which guarantees immunity: 'provides immunity from liability for providers and users of an "interactive computer service" who publish information provided by others:' -- not that you care, I realize that. And you'll probably just delete these comments anyway, since you disagree with them. :) But in case you don't, I hope other people see this and realize that the libel thing is just bullshit. It's more about protecting rapists. 23:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate your research and it has cause me to readjust the policy regarding real world persons. This is not to protect predators, as a matter of fact you can still link a news article about consent violations in regard to an event for the purposes of education in the criticisms section of the event, but I'm not wanting to deal with publishing information that can be potentially libel... while it's not libel if it's true, it is libel if it's untrue, and I'm not about to spend all day playing investator. This is not a sex offender database, nor will it be. FYI, please note the policy update in the wikihelp about real world persons. --Admin (talk) 00:47, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
So first off, the "news article" thing is unrealistic, because instances of abuse in the scene are not actually reported in the news. And even if they did make the local news, it's unrealistic to expect that they would definitely show up on the internet somewhere you could permalink. But that's beside the point. There is no realistic way to take scene abuse to any kind of authority outside the scene. In most jurisdictions BDSM activities are illegal, so right off the bat a top is committing assault. They don't even consider consent. And you KNOW that. Thus by saying "Only if it's in the news", you are effectively saying "Never". I want you to realize that's what you're saying, and if it's your preference that it be never, just admit that. Don't act like there is a scenario in which you might permit it to be linked here, because there isn't. And you're being dishonest.
Second off, you misspelled "invetigator". Third off, if you actually read the link I posted, you would see that whether or not it's libel doesn't matter, because section 230 exempts you. And finally (for now), if the U.S. law changes, you'll hear about it, because it will change the entire landscape of the internet legally. You aren't some special website where accusations can be made. They happen all over the internet. From google to Wikipedia to message boards to anywhere else. All of those sites would be in MASSIVE trouble if they had to start policing the content they hosted or delivered. So it's again a giant straw man to say "Oh, the law might change". No, it isn't going to. Again, stop being dishonest about the reason you don't want to host the information. It isn't legal risk. It isn't because you want to link to outside sources in the news. It's because you don't think this is important for people new to the scene. It's because you don't think this is important safety information. When in fact you are FAR more likely to get raped than need to be cut out of rope with safety scissors.
So when you write your article on rope safety, you better not be saying to have safety scissors on hand, when you demonstrably do not care about protecting newbies. 01:25, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Just for one moment, try to have empathy for another human being, and imagine what it would be like. You've just been violated during a scene. Imagine that you are going to go to the police about that, and imagine how that would go for you. Then tell me honestly that you think the police are a valid option. 01:31, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
By the way, if you're wondering why FetLife has that peculiar thing in the TOS about not being able to report abuse, I have a strong suspicion it is related to the fact that John Baku has been accused of sexually assaulting someone. . Note: I did not accuse him, I only stated that someone else did.
Gee, I make a basic suggestion on maybe saying some EVENTS (dungeons/parties) don't follow best practices and this happens. I'm just going to stop making comments so I don't have to deal with the added stress of having to read this shit every time I do and Admin suggests a solution that doesn't include straight-up inflammatory content. -- Sabryna
I do think you do have some great points 67.248, but the fact is, I don't want to have a sex offender database, that is not what the scope of this project is, period. I would also ask that you consider using a little less inflammatory rhetoric because we are all working hard together to make this website great, and it behooves us to remember we are all on the same side. That said, what measures that do not include having individual records on file of persons, and having to sort through allegations, would you suggest outside of the planned articles on the topic and resources linked in the resource section? I am empathetic to the point where that sounds like a great project somewhere else that I will happily link to in the resource section. If you have other ideas to be able to contribute, I'd love to hear them, because it is a concern, and it is an issue, but it is not the mission of the wiki to tackle that particular situation --Admin (talk) 02:35, 14 March 2014 (UTC)