I have just read this fantatic quote given to me by another online friend:

"Every noble acquisition is attended with its risks; he who fears to encounter the one must not expect to obtain the other."
--Metastasio

Risk is something we encounter every minute we live.  The riskiest time in a human's life is the moment we are born.  The reason for the reduction in neonatal deaths and of those of the mother may be due to improved care before, during and after the process of birth itself, but that does not detract from the fact that risk is our birthright.

Risk is the realm of the gamblers.  We all gamble.  Gambling - with feelings, with lives, with money becomes addictive because no noble acquisition - nothing in fact - can be gained without the danger we may fail.

The more noble the acquisition, the more to lose.

BDSM has its own language associated with risk.  We may talk about Safe, Sane, Consensual or Risk Aware Consensual Kink but it boils down to two things: what you do with the risk that is always going to be there, and doing it with full and certain positive desire.

I have read many medical ethics papers which talk about the nature of consent.  The reason I talk of medical ethics in the same breath as BDSM is because, without doubt, you lay your life on the line when you undergo medical treatment but it is for your benefit.  In BDSM we lay open our bodies and our hearts and our minds to the real risk of genuine physical, emotional or financial harm for our own benefit and the benefit of others when we receive or take up the lash.

In terms of medical ethics, we talk about "consent" and "informed consent".  Is it sufficient to rattle off a list of what is to be done with our bodies and for us to say "yeah, OK then?".  Or do we have to understand the nature of what may go wrong if we do say yes?  Medical ethics has evolved from agreeing that the patient needs to say yes, to the patient has to know what might go wrong before that yes is said and signed off.  This leaves us with the question of what must the patient understand might go wrong.  The physician must answer the question, what are the attendant risks?  This leads to further question on how much must the patient be told of the risks, so what are they?  Those that the patient are able to comprehend?  How "informed" must "informed consent" be? 

In BDSM, Risk Aware Consensual Kink could be rephrased as "Informed Consenual" Kink.

(Hang on - that leaves us with ICK rather than RACK - which doesn't actually do much for me, but this is by the by.)

It is the nature of the awareness of the risk that we need to consider, and it boils down the following: probability and impact.  If something is likely to go wrong, would we do it even if its impact were minimal?  If the probability of it happening is minimal but its impact devastating does that make it less important?

No.  Both are equally important, although this might be viewed very differently.  Therefore we need to take steps to either a) ameliorate that risk or b) deal with the impact of the risk.  This is where the risk assessment comes in.  Assessment of risk - quantifying the probability and impact is inherently unsexy.  It is.  It's like turning trying to understand the need of a sub through Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.  It's turning sex into a technical exercise and one, which may detract entirely from the point of the sex and turn the pleasure from visceral thrill to ashes in the mouth.  This does not mean it is any less important than making sure our doors are locked at night.

Such is life for a responsible dominant.

Submission consents: does it give consent or informed consent?

And this is the hardest part to write because I feel the answer is one that I believe is personally risky - i.e. it says more about me than of my understanding of the nature of BDSM - and I too have assessed that risk and found it acceptable.

Submission does not give informed consent.  Submission says "yes", not "I understand what will happen to me, do it".  The dominant wields the power as the surgeon the knife, with every skill and art they have and can bring to muster to ensure that the sub's consent is not illadvised, that their trust is misplaced.

What can be done to ameliorate the risk?  Ultimately it is down to certainty of intention of outcome.  What is the dominant intending to achieve?  Does the dominant know for sure what they are going to achieve through doing it?  Are they capable of achieving it?  I speak only of myself when I say that there is only one thing worse than a too-trusting subbie and that's an incompetent dominant.

There are, of course, safewords.  Their use too requires a great deal of assessment of risk - risk that the subbie may not use them when needed, risk that the dominant may mishear, misread signs, mistake their intention and misplace their confidence.  There are other options, such as bringing in another party to act as observer.  There is, in my view no substitute for giving up the one thing that brings me here as a dominant; my own sexual enjoyment of the act itself.  If I lose myself in that moment, then I am not aware of the risks and I cannot dominate if I am lost.  So is there anything, anything which can possible ameliorate any of the risks at all?  And that brings me back to why I write, to clarify my own understanding, to amplify and define my senses and sensibilities.  I write to inform.  I write to inform myself.  And it is through that knowledge - both of self and the subject which allows me to ameliorate any of the risks that come my way.

Knowledge is in itself power and that alone is sexy.

What I do with that knowledge is the difference between me being a responsible and irresponsible dominant.

Bright blessings on you all,

Gloriana