BDSM Philosophies

First chapter of my book, written for an audience that may be completely new to BDSM.

The dynamic explored in this book is consensual and negotiated using compassion, respect, and established BDSM principles. One of the most well-known BDSM mottos is SSC, coined in 1983 by David Stein in a GMSMA report (Gay Male Sado-Masochists Activists).

SSC stands for:
Safe
Sane
Consensual

While some interpret SSC very literally and simplistically, it’s important to remember that the discussions and thoughts that preceded the phrase becoming popular were much deeper and encompassed by more than can be captured in three words. Those discussions included concepts like community, responsibility, tradition, education, and gay liberation (Stein, 2000).

There are varying definitions of SSC, but below I’ve summarized my own interpretation.

• Safe means that participants are informed and risk-aware.
• Sane means that participants are autonomous and know the difference between fantasy and reality.
• Consensual means that all participants consent to activities enthusiastically and without coercion, respect each other’s limits, and understand that consent can be withdrawn at any time.

The SSC philosophy makes a clear distinction between BDSM and abuse, separating willing and enthusiastic participants from victims of predators. Since its origin, there have been many discussions and some criticism for SSC being too simplistic.

When interpreting safe and sane at a literal level, we can see how SSC may be difficult to apply during edge play activities that push the boundaries of what is conventionally safe and sane.

A common edge play example is the Takate Kote (TK) shibari harness; a box-tie that involves two bands of rope around the upper arms. When the rope bottom is suspended in a TK harness, they will experience intense and painful pressure. Due to the positioning of the rope across the arms, there is an increased risk for ulnar, radial, or median nerve damage. It can be difficult for a rope bottom to discern good pain from bad pain, and even harder for the rope top to perceive what the bottom is feeling.

If a rope bottom consents to being suspended in a TK harness but is not aware of the potential risk for nerve damage, and does not know how to perform hand checks, they are not informed or risk-aware. They are not safe.

Using a dictionary definition of safe, one could argue that by the SSC philosophy, you shouldn’t engage in TK suspension because it is not safe. However, common sense allows for a less rigid interpretation, understanding that safety is dependent on an individual’s knowledge, experience, and risk profile. Nonetheless, criticism for SSC has led to meaningful discussion and additional philosophies.

The term RACK was coined in 1999 by Gary Switch of the The Eulenspiegel Society as an attempt to provide a more complete framework to describe and structure BDSM participation.

RACK stands for:
Risk
Aware
Consensual
Kink

The concept within RACK that SSC has been criticized for is the idea that no activity is completely safe. Instead, individuals practicing BDSM should be aware of the risks.

Criticism for RACK arises when considering how a BDSM participant becomes risk-aware. Hence, PRICK was the next framework to be developed. I am not sure of its origins, but some have claimed that it was coined in 2009 by an individual using the online alias Mythos.

PRICK stand for:
Personal
Responsibility
Informed
Consensual
Kink

In the TK harness example, the PRICK philosophy emphasizes the importance of both the rope top and rope bottom taking personal responsibility for their rope education and partner vetting to determine if their experience, risk profiles, and play styles align. But the responsibility is not shifted entirely on the rope top or rope bottom, it is shared and ideally both will communicate transparently prior to participating in a scene.

This brings us to the 4C Philosophy (Williams et al., 2014) which encompasses the spirit of previously discussed frameworks, adding in the concepts of communication and caring.

The 4C’s are:
Consent
Communication
Caring
Caution

Like SSC, there are a lot of underlying components within each of the 4C’s. I recommend reading the article from the Journal of Human Sexuality that I’ve cited at the end of this chapter if you are interested in taking a deeper dive into the 4C’s.

All these acronyms may seem redundant, and the principles may seem obvious, but explaining BDSM to someone who does not practice it, and separating it from abuse, is made easier by these terms and philosophies. Additionally, they provide opportunities to reflect, communicate, and expand on our understanding of BDSM.

None of the philosophies discussed above are wrong or outdated. There is no BDSM dogma or one true way.

The point I want to make with discussing the evolution of BDSM philosophies is not to identify a hierarchical framework or say that one is better than the other. Rather, the point I want to make is to simply recognize the thought process behind each philosophy, and how we can apply that thought process to our own engagements with BDSM.

One final acronym I came across in my research was this:

Balls
Out
Reckless
Kink

Don’t be a BORK.

Stein, David. “‘Safe Sane Consensual.’” Leather Leadership Conference, Inc. — the Origin of Safe Sane Consensual, http://www.leatherleadership.org/library/safesanestein.htm.

Williams, D & Thomas, Jeremy & Prior, Emily & Christensen, M. Candace. (2014). From “SSC” and “RACK” to the “4Cs” : Introducing a New Framework for Negotiating BDSM Participation. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality. 17.
http://www.ejhs.org/volume17/BDSM.html