Safe and sustainable bondage positions?

I'm planning to get myself tied while my domina's going to shop with my money.
I'll last approx. 2-3 hours, but I'd need an interesting and safe position to be tied of.
Could you, more experienced users show me some? Thanks

aluzion said:

I'm planning to get myself tied while my domina's going to shop with my money.
I'll last approx. 2-3 hours, but I'd need an interesting and safe position to be tied of.
Could you, more experienced users show me some? Thanks

Click to expand...

I suggest getting a domina that has an interest in keeping you safe.

yup. No unsupervised self bondage is ever safe.

In fact, no matter what tie you use, you may end up having your limbs sleep just because you are kept in the same position for too long and can't move. This, in turn, can cause serious nerve and tissue damage.

So yeah. I suggest you never tie yourself up without anyone watching you, who can quickly release you in case of emergency.

There is NO safe and sustainable position to be tied for 2-3 hours. In fact, even supervised I wouldn't tie anyone for that long.

Collar chain post

Something you can get yourself out of if needed. I would suggest a position to be maintained while D is out. I won't even leave the room if my wife is tied up, none the less the house... Safety first as others have mentioned.

Physical injury is a real possibility when you've been immobilized too long, even if your body isn't stressed by the binding.

On top of that, being immobilized without someone being right there and aware you cannot escape to safety in the event of an emergency is kinda stupid. No one can predict a natural disaster, heart attack, or something else equally catastrophic.

Wouldn't it matter how tight the bonds are? Wide velcro straps with rings that hold the 4 limbs to some structure but allow for some movement? Say face down on a bed, or face up and spread out to the corners?

Noose.

No need to worry after it is used.

HisArpy said:

Physical injury is a real possibility when you've been immobilized too long, even if your body isn't stressed by the binding.

On top of that, being immobilized without someone being right there and aware you cannot escape to safety in the event of an emergency is kinda stupid. No one can predict a natural disaster, heart attack, or something else equally catastrophic.

Click to expand...

You folks are "gloome's", you always look at the down side.
Get some good restraints and small locks, go to the hardware and get some small decretive chain, like for a lamp, they have a low strength and can be pulled apart easily if trouble arises.
Then you can be chained to anything but escape if you need to. If you worry about a heart attack or natural disaster you will never do anything. In those cases even if someone is right there they still may not be able to get to you before its over.

Live a little and have some fun and adventure.

No, actually, these folks are just Sane.
One of the first lessons of Safe,Sane and Consensual is to never leave the pyl bound and unattended. Looking to what "could" go wrong is absolutely the first responsibility of any PYL.

Leaving a playmate bound as suggested is neither Safe nor Sane.
There are a number of ways to achieve the desired goal that don't introduce serious risk.

SissySalina, it is critical to be safe when playing dangerous games. Safety is paramount. The wonderful people in this thread aren't "gloome's" (sic), but rational people who would never want to risk serious injury or worse for a thrill.

Where is the *like* button for the last post?

SissySalina, I get where you are coming from, at the end of the day problem solving and creativity are key...but then the concept of "restrained" can be induced in a safer way if the PYL won't be present.
Yes, stuff happens no matter how safe or planned things are, but at the end of the day promoting wise choices is never out of order.
I'm reminded of a great story I read on a site waaayyy back when re: sharing. The pyl was originally very nervous that her PYL had organized a play date for her and he was out of town. She was ordered to be in a state of readiness door unlocked and blindfolded when PYL she didn't know entered her home ( don't worry do not cue horror music). She did as told but was really struggling. A short while later it was known that unknown PYL was *her* PYL. He had set it up as such so he could push that boundary a bit, but in a completely safe controlled way.
In this case if OP's domina wanted to do so, she could "leave" but not leave. To LEAVE is just... Reckless...

SissySalina said:

Live a little and have some fun and adventure.

Click to expand...

It's not gloom, it's just being safe. Even if the bondage itself is unharmful, there're a million things that can go wrong.
What if there's a fire or another emergency and a person is left bound on the bed, helpless, with no one close to untie them?
Or even easier - what if a person gets sick, stomachache or headache? And they'll like there helpless, and depending on the tie possibly even in danger of dying. Even if there's no mortal danger, I don't think it'a a great experience - being tied up and throwing up onto yourself with no help in sight.

Sure, you can argue that those things are rare. But even if a 1000 times it's ok, and one time it's a disaster - I prefer not risking it.

Hell, I try to never even turn away from a bound sub, let alone leaving the room or HOUSE. For several HOURS.

It's a Russian Roulette. If you want to play it - by all means, but I have other means to tickle my nerves.

I would suggest using a rope which is tied in such a way which allows the loop ends to be locked with padlocks. It would restrict your movement to a certain degree, for example a wrist tied to an ankle, or a wrist tied to another rope around your hips / thigh (obviously with a padlock holding it in place and the keys nowhere near you).

This would allow you to feel some element of bondage; you would still be locked up but you would also be able to cut the rope if you had any type of a problem with your free hand.

Personally, I would never allow a submissive to be alone in a position they were unable to get out of. (I all of a sudden feel like a preaching Bondage-Mother that wasn't my intention.) I wish you all the best and hope you enjoy a safe session.

MistressCassy said:

I would suggest using a rope which is tied in such a way which allows the loop ends to be locked with padlocks. It would restrict your movement to a certain degree, for example a wrist tied to an ankle, or a wrist tied to another rope around your hips / thigh (obviously with a padlock holding it in place and the keys nowhere near you).

This would allow you to feel some element of bondage; you would still be locked up but you would also be able to cut the rope if you had any type of a problem with your free hand.

Personally, I would never allow a submissive to be alone in a position they were unable to get out of. (I all of a sudden feel like a preaching Bondage-Mother that wasn't my intention.) I wish you all the best and hope you enjoy a safe session.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the answer!

Sigh. So we have 10 people warning him, but he actually only answers for what looks like the most unsafe bondage suggestion. Because people come to BDSM forums to hear only what they like to hear sometimes.

Nezhul said:

Sigh. So we have 10 people warning him, but he actually only answers for what looks like the most unsafe bondage suggestion. Because people come to BDSM forums to hear only what they like to hear sometimes.

Click to expand...

My answer was in no way unsafe. Having a wrist bound to an ankle (or hips) with rope with a loop by padlock enables a person a free hand, mobility and a means to escape easily no matter the problem. If you're dumb enough to not have adequate scisors around that degree of stupidity is beyond my ability to fix.

Anything tied with a rope for 2-3 hours is unsafe in my opinion.
Biggest problem is that you may not notice that anything's wrong before it's too late because of the numbness, and this is doubly true when we talk about wrists, which are known to have nerves and blood vessels close to the skin and very easily obstructed by any bondage.

Yes, maybe I went a bit far with the "most unsafe" but this is still unsafe, even if the other hand is free.

Personally if I had the inclination to do something along these lines. Rather than leave her tied up unattended I would set something up so that if she moved she would knock something over or somehow leave a mark that she had moved. I Love my wife so leaving the house with her tied up is not an option. I wouldn’t be able to stop worrying about her safety. On the other hand. She does not lie to me so if I told her not to move and left. If she had to move weather for an emergency or she just hit her limit and couldn’t go any longer she would tell me. If this is how you want to play then get down on all fours and balance a bowl of water on your back until your PYL returns. At least then you would not be risking your life to prove your devotion. We already play on a line that puts us at risk. Why add unnecessary risk on top of that

A locked cage with the sub inside but unrestrained achieves pretty much the same effect. In a modern house with a conventional central heating system the chance of a fire occurring is vanishingly small. I have used this method for a couple of hours at a time.

suboots said:

A locked cage with the sub inside but unrestrained achieves pretty much the same effect. In a modern house with a conventional central heating system the chance of a fire occurring is vanishingly small. I have used this method for a couple of hours at a time.

Click to expand...

If there's a vanishingly small chance of a disaster, but I can avoid it by just not doing stupid things - I will do that. Besides, most fires come from electrical malfunction nowadays.
And fire isn't the only possible emergency. A burglar gets into the house and your loved one is tied and helpless. Or an earthquake strikes, or anything, really.

And we hadn't even talked what if something happens to YOU. You get hit by a car, have a sunstroke or get in trouble and get arrested - and there's a restrained person in your house with no food and water. Even if you manage to send someone to get them out for you - this may take HOURS, not to mention that unwanted exposure to outsiders is real damage that will leave your mate emotionally hurt. And if you can't send anyone? It could be days before friends and family get worried enough to break into your house and save them.

And if fire DOES happen, I can just imagine how TERRIFYING that death would be, burning alive while fully conscious but unable to get away. Even if there's a fraction of a percent chance - I would not risk it. Especially if avoiding it is as simple as not playing dangerously.

Risking life for entertainment is stupid. Yeah, I'm aware that you can say that every extreme sports is risky, but then again the control is always in your own hands. No one's pushing you out of a plane or down the mountain. This risk is acceptable.
But when there're two people involved - just no. If something happens, it won't be a tragic accident - it would be a murder. If something happens, the victim can't try and struggle for their life - they are pretty much doomed. If something happens, the "dominant" will always live with knowledge that his/her negligence caused someone to get hurt or die.

Yes we are talking about small odds. But the ramifications are TERRIFYINGLY serious.

You have to see it in context though. People go mountaineering, motor bike racing, horse riding, hang gliding. All those activities carry far greater risks than being locked inside a cage for a couple of hours within an otherwise safe environment. But people do them because they enjoy them to such an extent that it outweighs the risk.

Whilst I would agree that for example putting someone into a tight hogtie for two hours and leaving them unsupervised is unwise I think that two consenting adults have the right to do these things with care. In a situation like that I check every few minutes on circulation etc. I think the house fire angle is over emphasised, it's a bit like being scared of flying when the crash risk is minimal. It's those pictures we see of air crashes that terrify.

hi

A picture is better than words.

If an activity is less risky than simply driving a car, we should probably not wring our hands over adults doing it.

suboots said:

You have to see it in context though. People go mountaineering, motor bike racing, horse riding, hang gliding. All those activities carry far greater risks than being locked inside a cage for a couple of hours within an otherwise safe environment. But people do them because they enjoy them to such an extent that it outweighs the risk.

Click to expand...

Sigh. I think I'll have to answer with my own quote from the very previous post, because clearly you read only the first sentence.

Risking life for entertainment is stupid. Yeah, I'm aware that you can say that every extreme sports is risky, but then again the control is always in your own hands. No one's pushing you out of a plane or down the mountain. This risk is acceptable...

Click to expand...

...because it involves only you and no one else. Or the responsibility is equally split.