The blank check of consent

I would like to hear your thoughts on this...

There are many things that would be considered to be normal consented to activities within a D/s or M/s relationship. For an example, requesting or demanding a blowjob might be something that would fall normally under the relationship's consent, and most of the time would be something eagerly done.

But suppose that a bit of a spat breaks out, and in the midst of the arguement the dominant/master says....somthing to the effect of....

"I don't want to hear another word come out of that mouth, get over here right now! Get down and open your mouth."

Then they shove their cock into their mouth and tell them to suck on it.

My question is, this would be something normally considered consentual, but given the circumstances due to the argument, consent would not be present at that moment on the part of the submissive.

What are your thoughts concerning this? Does the blank check of consent apply here? The actviity is certainly within limits.

I am not stating a pro or con position, I just want to start a discussion to see what others have to say about something like this.

Personally I find the situation has some rather hot aspects to it. I think what might even be hotter is to allow the argument to continue but only as long as she has my cock in her mouth while she continues to talk. I don't know why hearing the words, "fucking bastard" being mumbled at from lips wrapped around my cock, I just do But aside from the issue of whether its hot or not, I would still like to hear what you think about how this falls within the normal parameters of consent in the relationship, but in the moment consent is not really there.

Guess it depends on the relationship terms, for us consent would still be present.

Catalina

To cite your example RJ, I would say that on being ordered to kneel & suck cock the sub would have the opportunity to refuse & withdraw consent rather than kneel compliantly. I think that in most situations the opportunity is there for a sub to communicate that they're unhappy & will not continue to submit until an argument is resolved. I think it's important to suspend any power exchange in order to resolve a serious argument.

RJMasters said:

What are your thoughts concerning this? Does the blank check of consent apply here? The actviity is certainly within limits.

Click to expand...

For several reasons, it's difficult for me to project myself into your hypothetical. However, I'll answer your question with a general description of the way things work in a relationship with me.

1- I don't do Master/slave, and a partner of mine retains the right of refusal at all times.

2 - She refuses by uttering a single word. "Red". When that word comes out of her mouth, I am honor bound to stop whatever I am doing. She is honor bound to have a damn good reason for safewording.

3 - A woman who calls Red over a blowjob because she's in a bad mood, grumpy, tired, irritated with my behavior, or ticked off about something I just said, is not a woman who would remain long in a relationship with me.

Alright RJ, you know I love you and I hope you can keep that in mind while I proceed to disagree with you on this, a topic that isn't exactly virgin ground for us.

I admire that you're searching for answers here, because I do feel that the ideas you've expressed on consent in the past are somewhat simplistic, probably due to a lack of experience.

To answer your specific question, consent is not physical, it's mental. That is to say, it isn't defined by the action, but by the state of mind.

Here are a few examples:

1. I promise to come home by 5pm so we can go to some event. I end up going out with some friends and don't come home until after midnight. My sub says "where have you been? I've been trying to call you all day!" I say "fuck you bitch, I do what I want." She slaps me in the face. I grab her by the hair, wrestle her to the ground and fuck her while she protests, physically and verbally.

With every appearance of being nonconsensual, this sort of action would not only be acceptable but quite likely appreciated by the kind of perverse females I fuck with. It's not something I would pull every day, but transcending the immediate argument there is a more important understanding, that she is my woman and I'm allowed to take control.

In a healthy D/s relationship, consent isn't a by-law, it's more like the constitution.

2. My sub tells me we need to speak. She's very unhappy about some serious things in our relationship and demands we address these issues or she's ready to walk. I tell her she's not going anywhere and force sex on her.

In the spectrum of consent, this is far closer to an actual violation of the consent constitution. Being able to have serious discussions where she will be taken seriously is a requirement for the relationship, if I condescend that right, I forfeit my rights as her dominant.

3. My sub breaks up with me, tells me we're done and she doesn't want to see me anymore. Two weeks later I stalk her and rape her in an alley.

This is way, way, on the nonconsensual side of the spectrum. I may still feel like I have some claim to her, but she doesn't share those feelings and she has made that clear. This is completely nonconsensual.


I'm using sexual examples because you used one, but any of these could just as likely be non-sexual issues. Just because I can assume consent to fuck her doesn't mean I can assume consent to open her mail. Just because I have consent to open her mail, doesn't mean I have consent to sell her possessions on ebay.

It's just not that black and white RJ.

Interesting topic JR. In my relationship, it would depend on the situation. If we were having a little quarrel over something trivial, say I want to go out for Chinese but he wants mexican yet again.... I might grump at his order but would still comply. In fact, it would probably be exactly what we needed to get past the situation. Just the outragousness of his saying that would crack me up and the argument would be over (and I'd probably be eating Mexican for dinner to boot. ) On the other hand, if it were something on the scale of breaking an agreed upon limit or some other breach of trust, my consent would be withdrawn until we reached a satisfactory agreement or understanding.

Marquis said:

Alright RJ, you know I love you and I hope you can keep that in mind while I proceed to disagree with you on this, a topic that isn't exactly virgin ground for us.

I admire that you're searching for answers here, because I do feel that the ideas you've expressed on consent in the past are somewhat simplistic, probably due to a lack of experience.

To answer your specific question, consent is not physical, it's mental. That is to say, it isn't defined by the action, but by the state of mind.

Here are a few examples:

1. I promise to come home by 5pm so we can go to some event. I end up going out with some friends and don't come home until after midnight. My sub says "where have you been? I've been trying to call you all day!" I say "fuck you bitch, I do what I want." She slaps me in the face. I grab her by the hair, wrestle her to the ground and fuck her while she protests, physically and verbally.

With every appearance of being nonconsensual, this sort of action would not only be acceptable but quite likely appreciated by the kind of perverse females I fuck with. It's not something I would pull every day, but transcending the immediate argument there is a more important understanding, that she is my woman and I'm allowed to take control.

In a healthy D/s relationship, consent isn't a by-law, it's more like the constitution.

2. My sub tells me we need to speak. She's very unhappy about some serious things in our relationship and demands we address these issues or she's ready to walk. I tell her she's not going anywhere and force sex on her.

In the spectrum of consent, this is far closer to an actual violation of the consent constitution. Being able to have serious discussions where she will be taken seriously is a requirement for the relationship, if I condescend that right, I forfeit my rights as her dominant.

3. My sub breaks up with me, tells me we're done and she doesn't want to see me anymore. Two weeks later I stalk her and rape her in an alley.

This is way, way, on the nonconsensual side of the spectrum. I may still feel like I have some claim to her, but she doesn't share those feelings and she has made that clear. This is completely nonconsensual.


I'm using sexual examples because you used one, but any of these could just as likely be non-sexual issues. Just because I can assume consent to fuck her doesn't mean I can assume consent to open her mail. Just because I have consent to open her mail, doesn't mean I have consent to sell her possessions on ebay.

It's just not that black and white RJ.

Click to expand...

Great post Marquis.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/98/365962194_36b5de840d_s.jpg Catalina

Marquis said:

It's just not that black and white RJ.

Click to expand...

I agree that consent is a grey concept, particularly as it relates to non-sexual issues, areas on the edge of a partner's physical or mental limits, questions relating to informed consent, crossing the line of coercion, extortion, etc., etc., etc.

But consent over a simple blowjob in the middle of a "spat"? This is D/s 101, as far as I'm concerned.

In non-D/s relationships, the woman gives blowjobs when she's in the mood to do so. In my flavor of D/s, the woman gives blowjobs when I tell her to, unless she has a damn good reason for refusal.

Irritation over a petty quarrel is not something that I consider to be an adequate reason for refusal. If that were the standard, the relationship might as well be non-D/s because you'd basically be back to: whenever she's in the mood.

JMohegan said:

I agree that consent is a grey concept, particularly as it relates to non-sexual issues, areas on the edge of a partner's physical or mental limits, questions relating to informed consent, crossing the line of coercion, extortion, etc., etc., etc.

But consent over a simple blowjob in the middle of a "spat"? This is D/s 101, as far as I'm concerned.

In non-D/s relationships, the woman gives blowjobs when she's in the mood to do so. In my flavor of D/s, the woman gives blowjobs when I tell her to, unless she has a damn good reason for refusal.

Irritation over a petty quarrel is not something that I consider to be an adequate reason for refusal. If that were the standard, the relationship might as well be non-D/s because you'd basically be back to: whenever she's in the mood.

Click to expand...

I can't necessarily agree with you here JM as Marquis was referring to the terms of his relationship just as I was mine. For him, it is part of the agreement that serious discussions are taken seriously and addressed, not squashed, and to MArquis' credit, he sees it as a violation on his part if he then decides to cast that agreement aside in the interests of getting his own rocks off. Similarly in my own relationship, there is not such a strong rule in that area which would make RJ's idea a breach of trust, though for F he would normally prefer to listen and discuss the issue until it was settled or at least to a point that both parties knew what the issue was....if he chose to demand a blowjob when I was upset and we were at that point discussing that upset he would not be breaching consent as we have blanket consent, but he also would not usually see it as a step he wanted to take in terms of having a healthy relationship, but at certain points he might. Does that all make sense? Once again it is back to shades of grey and all inbetween more so than a definate B/W issue.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/155/358667783_e0d6908f50_s.jpg Catalina

RJMasters said:

I would like to hear your thoughts on this...

There are many things that would be considered to be normal consented to activities within a D/s or M/s relationship. For an example, requesting or demanding a blowjob might be something that would fall normally under the relationship's consent, and most of the time would be something eagerly done.

But suppose that a bit of a spat breaks out, and in the midst of the arguement the dominant/master says....somthing to the effect of....

"I don't want to hear another word come out of that mouth, get over here right now! Get down and open your mouth."

Then they shove their cock into their mouth and tell them to suck on it.

My question is, this would be something normally considered consentual, but given the circumstances due to the argument, consent would not be present at that moment on the part of the submissive.

What are your thoughts concerning this? Does the blank check of consent apply here? The actviity is certainly within limits.

I am not stating a pro or con position, I just want to start a discussion to see what others have to say about something like this.

Personally I find the situation has some rather hot aspects to it. I think what might even be hotter is to allow the argument to continue but only as long as she has my cock in her mouth while she continues to talk. I don't know why hearing the words, "fucking bastard" being mumbled at from lips wrapped around my cock, I just do But aside from the issue of whether its hot or not, I would still like to hear what you think about how this falls within the normal parameters of consent in the relationship, but in the moment consent is not really there.

Click to expand...

in our relationship consent is given for everything as we have a total power exchange, so if in the midst of an argument He ordered me to suck His cock, well i'd do it, though i'd probably be saying some not so nice subbie things. i gave control over to Him, therefore consent is implied always. i really really hope He would not do it because like i said i'd end up in more trouble because i would not be being nice about it and i'd probably be mumbling not so nice names under my breath...which would probably turn Him on more i suppose. but yea, that's my opinion.....

catalina_francisco said:

I can't necessarily agree with you here JM as Marquis was referring to the terms of his relationship just as I was mine. For him, it is part of the agreement that serious discussions are taken seriously and addressed, not squashed, and to MArquis' credit, he sees it as a violation on his part if he then decides to cast that agreement aside in the interests of getting his own rocks off. Similarly in my own relationship, there is not such a strong rule in that area which would make RJ's idea a breach of trust, though for F he would normally prefer to listen and discuss the issue until it was settled or at least to a point that both parties knew what the issue was....if he chose to demand a blowjob when I was upset and we were at that point discussing that upset he would not be breaching consent as we have blanket consent, but he also would not usually see it as a step he wanted to take in terms of having a healthy relationship, but at certain points he might. Does that all make sense? Once again it is back to shades of grey and all inbetween more so than a definate B/W issue.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/155/358667783_e0d6908f50_s.jpg Catalina

Click to expand...

Yes, that makes perfect sense.

I should emphasize that my comments, too, were solely relating to my own relationships. That's what I meant to say when I referred to "my flavor of D/s". And I was not projecting myself into Marquis' hypotheticals, but returning to a discussion of RJ's example instead.

I should also note that I consider the word "spat" in RJ's hypothetical to indicate a disagreement that is *not* serious or causing material distress. Something along the lines of Callinectes' Chinese vs. Mexican example is what I am imagining here.

I still think this boils down to the seriousness of the argument and the dynamic of the relationship. Let's take Marquis' first example. If my partner promised me we would go to a particular event and plans were made but he chose to blow me off to go out with his friends, I would consider that a serious breach... akin to lying. No way in hell is my consent still assumed. In Marquis' relationship, that apparently would not be considered a serious breach and consent is intact.

ETA. JM posted as I was..and said it much better...so, what he said.

JMohegan said:

I agree that consent is a grey concept, particularly as it relates to non-sexual issues, areas on the edge of a partner's physical or mental limits, questions relating to informed consent, crossing the line of coercion, extortion, etc., etc., etc.

But consent over a simple blowjob in the middle of a "spat"? This is D/s 101, as far as I'm concerned.

In non-D/s relationships, the woman gives blowjobs when she's in the mood to do so. In my flavor of D/s, the woman gives blowjobs when I tell her to, unless she has a damn good reason for refusal.

Irritation over a petty quarrel is not something that I consider to be an adequate reason for refusal. If that were the standard, the relationship might as well be non-D/s because you'd basically be back to: whenever she's in the mood.

Click to expand...

Actually, I agree with everything you're saying here, I was just broadening the perspective of RJ's question.

ive enjoyed reading everyones opinions on this. i'll add my own, but im not sure how helpful they will be. i feel like in my situation, shades of grey is a bit of an understatement, since Sir and i are NOT 24/7. anything sexual i submit to him, as well as a few other areas, but not all of them. so i suppose that breaks my answer into a few catagories.

1- the argument is about something non-sexual in which i was not expected to submit. in this case, by bringing the sexual in, he was invoking the aspect of our relationship that is BDSM. in a normal situation when something like that is brought up, i jump at a chance to submit. if im pissed off, ill submit, but probably end up being a little bratty becuase i would have been annoyed at how the situation was handeled. if i was flaming mad and he invoked our D/s relationship in a (what i see as unfair) way to regain control of the situation, i would seriously consider refusing and walking away. im not sure what i would actually do in that situation but if i ended up submitting there, i may end up harbouring some feelings of resentment due to Sir's behavior.

2- the argument is about something sexual OR while i was submitting to him in a sexual situation or a situation that we both knew was already D/s in nature. in this case i would already know that i was expected to obey this command, no questions asked. as we were arguing in this situation, i would probably have said some not very subby things as i was kneeling and preparing to take him in my mouth, but i would take him in my mouth without thinking about if it were the right thing to do or not. i just would do it.

The way I look at it, a "blank check of consent" doesn't exist for anyone. Consent is always conditional/situational. If we could get a "blank check" for consent, the moron flagging orange out of his right pocket at the gay leather bar couldn't say diddly squat if some Top beats him black and blue, breaks bones, or pulls out the chainsaw and cuts him up into little bits. Flagging "No Limits" would be a blank check for murder - "Hey, the guy was 'anything goes, do it to me!' " and we all know that won't fly.

I understand that there are people who live in TPE relationships where the slave gave consent at the time they accepted their collar and after that they feel that it's whatever Owner says, goes. But the truth of the matter is that the slave has the option, has the choice, day in, day out, command by command, to obey, to consent, or to disobey, withdraw consent, to end the relationship. The fact that the slave chooses to consent does not mean the option is no longer there.

I believe that if the option to withdraw consent truly no longer exists, the slave is no longer a human being with a free will , but an automaton. They are no longer submitting, they are simply performing assigned tasks with the all the motive of a robot. My slave is a slave by her choice and free will and she serves me by her choice. This is what seperates consentual slavery from chattel slavery, the difference between BDSM and slave trafficking.

*grins and shrugs* But what do I know? I'm just an old fat, balding, ugly, evil, sadistic bastard with a bum ticker.

I just realized my post above sounded as though I was snarking on Marquis' relationship. I just wanted to highlight differences. It wasn't my intent to sound snarky, I am simply exhibiting poor writing skills today.

I agree with Cat on it depends on the relationship terms. In some respects this is where at the very beginning of a relationship there is some agreement about what various terms actually mean and how they will be used if the PYL & pyl become a couple.

In Marquis example the first scenario is something I would find hard to deal with. If he let me down because he chose to (not because other circumstances dictated it) I would see it as a lack of respect for me. This would escalate into a full blown argument. He would still have all consensual rights, but his behaviour would lead me to Marquis's second scenario of wanting to talk about how his actions affected me.

In JM's example of a blow job, he describes the simplistic dynamic of D/s which works so well for me.
If I refuse then our relationship is fundamentally changed from what we initially agreed upon, and gave consideration to, when we started out together.

The most challenging aspect of D/s for me, is not doing the consensual, fun, erotic etc things when I want to but when he wants to. It is pretty easy to do things when you are excited or aroused, it is not so easy at other times.

It is an easy situation to fall into. It mirrors the vanilla 'I have a headache' scenario. It is up to both partners to ensure that the agreed dynamic is maintained or changed by open agreement and not by underhand tactics. It is fair to say that the dynamics in a relationship sometimes change by stealth without either person realising what is happening, but at the point it is realised it needs to become an open honest discussion. No matter how difficult that may be to deal with.

I do believe that a PYL should always listen and consider a pyl's viewpoint, although that discussion may not happen instantly (for example in Marquis first scenario). Looking at JM's example it is sometimes the pyl's responsibility to explain in advance why they may find a particular task difficult. That allows the PYL an opportunity to think, discuss and decide if they see it as a short term problem or if it hides something deeper which is not being discussed.

Edit to add: On a lighter note, if we were arguing and he ordered me to suck his cock I would probably find it erotic and it would shut me up!

callinectes said:

I just realized my post above sounded as though I was snarking on Marquis' relationship. I just wanted to highlight differences. It wasn't my intent to sound snarky, I am simply exhibiting poor writing skills today.

Click to expand...

Not a hijack, but I never read your post as snarky. Maybe I have poor reading skills today

when i think of blanket consent, i think of slavery, where consent is typically given once and then becomes a moot point. obviously in the case of slavery, the Owner has the right to demand a cock sucking or anything else at any moment, however odd or seemingly inappropriate. however, even in the case of a non-ownership D/s relationship, i have to piggyback JMohegan's comments, and say that if the submissive would or could refuse to obey a command because, in a given moment, she's not in the mood, that just reeks of a vanilla relationship, where she holds all the real power.

While I appreciate that is your way of doing M/s EG, it isn't ours, nor does it make me an automaton. For us, I understood perfectly and gave up my right to choice of my own free will and because I wanted to when I committed to taking our relationship to TPE. If not I may as well have remained in the position I was in with our relationship where I did have a choice, I was able to leave if things went belly up, and I could withdraw consent at any time....that is what for us makes the difference between submitting with limits and TPE. I gave up the right to decide I didn't like something so withdraw my consent at whim, just as I gave up my right to walk out the door if I decided my needs were not being met. Actually just before reading your post I was thinking 'Sheesh, give me TPE any day, it is so less complicated than what others are speaking of where they have to decide continuously what is OK, what is not, and on what day and in which way'!

I just never get why someone would enter into TPE if they believe they still have the option to leave etc.,....why bother, it then becomes no different to submitting with limits except they may dress it up to look otherwise on the surface? I understand for you it is still an option for your slave to end the relationship or withdraw consent on a daily basis, but that is your agreement and understanding and I don't see why you feel it then applies to all others in a M/s TPE relationship or they are deemed to be robots or fakes. For us it was TPE we wanted, not TPE on the days it suits, and the rest is then up to me to decide what it will be..where is the TPE in that? I understood the terms, I accepted them, and I live them...it may mean my life is at times more difficult and that if I stil had a choice I might choose to withdraw consent, but bottom line is I no longer have a choice and I am more than happy to accept that was my choice of my own free will..IOW, I chose to give up my free will to choice because that was the only way I could relate to TPE. I am under no illusions as to what would happen if I decided to change my mind and assert my right to choice....that does not make me stupid, but it does make me responsible enough to take the committment seriously.

Catalina

Evil_Geoff said:

The way I look at it, a "blank check of consent" doesn't exist for anyone. Consent is always conditional/situational. If we could get a "blank check" for consent, the moron flagging orange out of his right pocket at the gay leather bar couldn't say diddly squat if some Top beats him black and blue, breaks bones, or pulls out the chainsaw and cuts him up into little bits. Flagging "No Limits" would be a blank check for murder - "Hey, the guy was 'anything goes, do it to me!' " and we all know that won't fly.

Click to expand...

Not to pick on you Geoff (ok, maybe I am a bit ) but this is why I usually avoid discussions like this. It often comes back to these far fetched examples of why lack of consent can't be "real" and whatnot.

Slavery isn't "real" in the BDSM sense either when compared to slavery in history, but most of us involved in it don't knit-pick the obvious to death because it's pointless. Some things just need to naturally be assumed as a given. In slavery, it is a given that the BDSM slave has more rights and are treated more humanely than slaves of history. It doesn't even need to be said, most understand that unspoken assumption.

Besides, aren't we speaking of "blank check of consent" within a relationship of some type? My Owner has a blank check of consent. Some top in a gay bar most certainly does not. If you are speaking of blank check of consent to any tom, dick and harry out there, I agree, the concept is ridiculous. However, that wasn't how I read the discussion or phrase to mean, so I'm commenting based on that. Apologies if I am misunderstanding.

I have no limits. I have given all consent to my Owner. If she wanted to fuck me in the middle of a serious fight, I would be upset and angry and whatnot, but I would submit to it without protest (although I can't guarentee without attitude, heh). If she wants to shave my head, pierce me, cut me, tie me up and lock me in a room for a day alone....I wouldn't like all of it, but I would accept it without crying abuse.

Does that mean if she wants to kill me or amputate my leg, I am going to allow it? No. The consent I gave was under the realization that I trust this person, I trust her judgement even when I may not agree with it or understand it. Of course there is a line where that consent no longer applies, but it is also a very far-fetched line that won't come up for most normal, well adjusted people. If someone is using a BDSM relationship to torture people by removing their fingers and has plans to kill them, the relationship no longer falls under a BDSM category so is redundant as an example. We are talking of crimes and psychos now. That line of consent is a basic human one that any sane person is going to automatically accept.(or else they wouldn't qualify as sane).

So I disagree, total consent is very possible in a BDSM relationship, assuming neither person is fucking crazy.

I think Marquis' post summed up the topic very well. There are tons of grey areas here that are defined by the relationship itself and the people in it as others have said. For myself and my relationship however, it is pretty clear for me. Ma'am does what she damn well pleases, and I accept it because I trust her judgement and intentions. The consent I gave was based on that judgement and trust. I don't always do well at remembering how solid that trust is when she is doing something that scares me or that I do not like, but it is still there. For us, my consent is pure and my limits nonexistant. I consented knowing that HER limits are in the same realm as mine.

ownedsubgal said:

when i think of blanket consent, i think of slavery, where consent is typically given once and then becomes a moot point. obviously in the case of slavery, the Owner has the right to demand a cock sucking or anything else at any moment, however odd or seemingly inappropriate. however, even in the case of a non-ownership D/s relationship, i have to piggyback JMohegan's comments, and say that if the submissive would or could refuse to obey a command because, in a given moment, she's not in the mood, that just reeks of a vanilla relationship, where she holds all the real power.

Click to expand...

i don't think that because a 'submissive' doesn't obey a command in the midst of an argument means she is 'nilla' or not a true submissive, i think it means she is human and angry and wants to work out whatever the issue is before doing anything sexual. yes, i said in the midst of an argument if i was ordered to give HIm oral, i would do it, but i would also be angry, probably very angry that He thought little enough of my feelings in the argument to stand and work it out instead He felt He needed oral right then and there, that would say alot, to me, about my feelings and what they mean to Him. He knows He could order it, but luckily for me, He's all about talking and resolving issues at the time they are brought up, rather than ordering me around when i'm upset. i think there is a time, when you can step outside of the D/s dynamic to discuss things as equals..ask for a time out or whatever, but i don't think that simply because i am submissive that i don't have a right to be upset and angry and i also don't think i have to agree with Him on everything He says or does....

serijules said:

*Big snip* I consented knowing that HER limits are in the same realm as mine.

Click to expand...

Great Post Seri

For me, this line sums up TPE, the grey areas and everything else that is involved with D/s.

In order to know you have to have had several conversations about your views, wishes, morals, ideas, limits. They are not all easy conversations and people change.

Limits are not always about practical items: whips, floggers, anal, age play. It much more about reactions in situations, belief structures and subjective issues.

OSG, Cat and I all use the term 'slave' but we all use it differently. However we have PYL's who have the same understanding as 'slave' as we do.
It is not about how upset or angry we would be in the situation given by RJ or the situations given by Marquis, it is about our limits being within the same realm as our PYL It is also accepting that we trust the decision of our PYL with regard to us and the relationship as a whole.

RJMasters said:

I would like to hear your thoughts on this...

There are many things that would be considered to be normal consented to activities within a D/s or M/s relationship. For an example, requesting or demanding a blowjob might be something that would fall normally under the relationship's consent, and most of the time would be something eagerly done.

But suppose that a bit of a spat breaks out, and in the midst of the arguement the dominant/master says....somthing to the effect of....

"I don't want to hear another word come out of that mouth, get over here right now! Get down and open your mouth."

Then they shove their cock into their mouth and tell them to suck on it.

My question is, this would be something normally considered consentual, but given the circumstances due to the argument, consent would not be present at that moment on the part of the submissive.

What are your thoughts concerning this? Does the blank check of consent apply here? The actviity is certainly within limits.

I am not stating a pro or con position, I just want to start a discussion to see what others have to say about something like this.

Personally I find the situation has some rather hot aspects to it. I think what might even be hotter is to allow the argument to continue but only as long as she has my cock in her mouth while she continues to talk. I don't know why hearing the words, "fucking bastard" being mumbled at from lips wrapped around my cock, I just do But aside from the issue of whether its hot or not, I would still like to hear what you think about how this falls within the normal parameters of consent in the relationship, but in the moment consent is not really there.

Click to expand...

I can soo see me getting into this type of thing. Mumbling curses and my arguments as best I can with an angry little pout on my face. But eventually the curses and argument would stop and my angry pout would turn to want, and I imagin we'd both end up more relaxed and in a clearer head to talk about what the problem was to begin with.

shy slave said:

Edit to add: On a lighter note, if we were arguing and he ordered me to suck his cock I would probably find it erotic and it would shut me up!

Click to expand...

Yup, there is a definite hotness factor...it almost makes me want to be pouty about something to see if he will do it..almost being the key word there. I feel sure I'd end up getting way more than I bargained for, and not in a good way. He's a very laid back man, but he doesn't put up with any crap from me either.