Playing on the Edge: Sadomasochism, Risk, and Intimacy (27 page)

The margins of the SM community, then, are marked by the activities and participants that straddle these lines. “Edgeplay” is about playing on the boundaries of SSC—between safe and unsafe, sane and insane, consensual and nonconsensual. Edgeplay threatens the efforts of SM activists toward social and legal tolerance and recognition of SM, and is therefore controversial in Caeden. Emerging from related debates over the subjectivity of “safe” and “sane,” parts of the community have argued to adopt an alternative to SSC: RACK—Risk Aware Consensual Kink. RACK (which appears to have been posited as a half- serious, frustrated response to a heated email discussion) eliminates these more nebulous concepts, but keeps SM ensconced in the discourse of sex. In part because of the potency of SSC as a political concept, RACK has not gained much ground in the community.

Though all SM is concerned with boundaries, edgeplay is about negotiating
internal
boundaries—boundaries set within, for, and by SM community mem- bers. In practice—that is, beyond the rhetoric of SSC—these boundaries end up being those between consent and nonconsent, consciousness and unconscious- ness, ethical and unethical, temporary versus permanent, and life and death.

Edgeplayers occupy a marginal role in the scene. From the perspective of the rest of the community, edgeplayers play on the boundary between SM and assault. They represent the outer limits of what can be called SM, and the most salient threat to the political safety of the community. Edgeplayers are the rogue members, the outlaws of the scene; they are alternately reigned in, policed, and excluded from consideration. Despite the high value placed on “pushing” lim- its, “stretching,” “growing,” edgeplayers are those who go the furthest—who push limits that too few people are comfortable pushing.

Edgeplayers also enjoy the notoriety of outlaws. Their names are spoken with an uneasy mix of reverence and disapproval. Edgeplayers are “feared”— the idea of playing with them elicits displays of nervousness or awe. The status

of edgeplayers, though tainted, is generally high; because they play on edges, they are considered extremely skilled and safe (as tops) and particularly tough and strong (as bottoms). Despite the “fear” of edgeplayers, then, they have little difficulty finding play partners.

There are no criteria for edgeplay per se, and community members generally identify it intuitively; “We know it when we see it.” I identify five particular edges, or boundaries, on which play constitutes edgeplay for the members of this community.

The Edges

ETHICAL AND UNETHICAL

Because of the physical and psychological risks involved, the responses of onlook- ers, and the need for control of space in order to ensure safety, most edgeplay is limited to special events and private parties. Edgeplay along ethical lines is the most regularly visible in public play spaces, the most readily discussed, and for many, the least controversial. Given that SM itself, to many outsiders, is under- stood as transgressing ethical boundaries, this is not surprising.

Like the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that “community standards” determine obscenity (upheld in 1997), this kind of edgeplay is recognizable by the extent to which it offends the community on moral grounds. Some role play is includ- ed here, such as incest play (as illustrated in Weiss 2006b), rape scenes, and race play. Extreme pain scenes can also be understood this way, as well as sym- bolically unethical transgressions, such as hitting in the face (particularly when man-to-woman). Though bestiality is generally not considered SM, the idea is sometimes invoked in the context of humiliation or degradation. Should such a scene actually occur in this context, it would likely fall into this category.

CONSCIOUSNESS AND UNCONSCIOUSNESS

Risking unconsciousness in scene is generally considered edgeplay. These activ- ities include extended bondage (and particular kinds of bondage), knife play, breath play, blood play, or pain intense enough to result in fainting. Edgeplay is not defined by the actual fainting, however; bottoms sometimes lose conscious- ness because of low blood sugar, unintended psychological trauma, or weakness. These (uncommon) occurrences are viewed as unfortunate accidents. Because they are considered preventable, these unintended circumstances do not confer edgeplayer status. Accidents are more likely to occur among new players, and edgeplayers tend to be veterans in the scene. Therefore, what is generally under-

stood as resulting from inexperience or negligence detracts from the reputation as a player for both tops and bottoms.

TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT

The temporal boundary in SM refers to physical, emotional, or psychological effects of play on players. It overlaps with other boundaries, particularly the lines between consciousness and unconsciousness, and ethical and unethical. Community members make distinctions on these grounds often enough that it warrants separate consideration, however. Body modification is one example; although branding, piercing, and cutting also play with the boundaries of con- sciousness and unconsciousness, it is the permanence of the effect on which the play is judged. Similarly, catharsis scenes—those in which players engage with past trauma in order to work through them—run a risk of leaving last- ing psychological damage, and as such are edgy on both ethical grounds and temporal grounds.

LIFE AND DEATH

SM play that deliberately negotiates the boundary between life and death is relatively rare in public SM play, but engaged in privately by some members of the community. Edgeplay along this boundary involves a riskier version of other kinds; namely, advanced play with breath control, blades, guns, blood, and fire. This is the edgeplay most frequently considered “not sane.”

CONSENT AND NONCONSENT

Criteria for sanity being nebulous as they are, the most serious of the boundar- ies with which to play, from the perspective of the community, is not the line between life and death, but the edge between consent and nonconsent. In the consciousness of the community, deference for a sharply drawn line here sepa- rates SM from criminal behavior, though this is not always the case legally. When edgeplayers play here, however, they play
on
this boundary; though factions of the community might argue otherwise, most edgeplayers concern themselves with these questions and continually evaluate their actions in these contexts.

Scenes along this boundary include those in which tops attempt to defy negotiated limits in an in-progress scene, take a non-negotiated action that can- not be revoked once taken, or begin a scene during a moment or in a place that is not understood by the bottom as “scene space.” However, in much the same way as unintended unconsciousness signifies incompetence rather than edge- play, casual attitudes toward consent are breaches of moral obligation instead

of edgeplay. The boundaries negotiated by edgeplay are, in this sense, privileges of veteran players (at least veteran tops). They are not simply the boundaries between consciousness and unconsciousness, consent and nonconsent, but these boundaries contextualized in paradigm of power and powerlessness, and in the negotiations of morality in which SM participants regularly engage. The con- structions of power differentials both justify and reinforce particular instances of edgeplay, rendering it understandable to the rest of the community.

Negotiating Risk

Edgeplayers negotiate these boundaries repeatedly, with play partners who are willing to play this way. Tops who simply ignore limits or push boundaries in the absence of a relationship in which this kind of behavior is permissible are not considered edgeplayers; this crosses the boundary on which edgeplay- ers play. Further, the consideration of these actions as edgeplay is restricted by community standards of edge; if a top plays with a bottom whose range is narrow and limits are many, her pushing of those limits will not be regarded as edgeplay.

Edgeplay is not recklessness. SM participants play the edges because they are trusted to do so. The perception of heightened risk increases the salience of the experience of being trusted. The limit-pushing of edgeplay becomes a way of ensuring repeated engagements with trust, by consistently increasing the sever- ity or perceptions of the likelihood of potential consequences. This continual ramping-up of risk, or “crowding the edge” (Lyng 1990) in SM maintains trust as active and emotionally potent. Actual risk, though, can sometimes be less relevant than perceptions of risk. Eric, for example, said that breath play can be (merely) “a mindfuck.” When I asked for elaboration, Eric replied:

Yeah, I’ll tape it [the bag] shut. But the point is that you can tape it shut or you can pull it down. The point is that there’s a lot of air in the bag. Even though you tape a bag shut, you’re not actually cutting off air, it’s not an air pipe. I’m being distinct about it because even though I may have used the word “mindfuck,” it’s a dangerous thing to people, in their minds this is “Danger Will Robinson.”
1

Eric implies that danger and risk are contextual and relational. The very con- cept of “mindfuck” in SM seeks to capitalize on this relativist aspect of risk experience; a player sometimes seek to understand the risks as dangers, thus necessitating and constructing a greater level of trust.

When Kyle mentioned to me that he plays with a partner without a safeword, he couched it in terms of the extraordinary trust that this takes.

Me:
What are you trusting her with, to play without a safeword?

Kyle:
Trusting her not to damage me. No matter how painful something gets, that it’s not going to cause damage. Trusting her not to violate any of the limits that [we agreed on], which are things like pedophilia, bestiality, things like that. Like, intense bad things. What I consider to be intense bad things. Like not sexy bad things.

Me:
And if she violated a limit, you would safeword?

Kyle:
I would say “Hey, remember [our agreement],” or something like that.

For Kyle and his partner, the idea of the safeword increases the sense of trust. The agreement to play this way evidences and constructs a deeper sense of trust. It feels riskier, for even though Kyle’s reminder about the agreement might, on the surface, serve the same function as a safeword, his partner is under no “obligation” to stop when he tells her to stop. This increases the per- ception of risk and his actual risk, while playing privately. In public, however, the utterance of a safeword will likely result in intervention by other commu- nity members.

Policing the Edge

The interruption of another player’s scene is a severe breach of etiquette in Caeden. Members generally avoid speaking too loudly while watching a scene, and keep their distance during aftercare, waiting for a signal from one of the participants before approaching to talk. Hosts of parties or events that uti- lize “dungeon monitors” (DMs) to ensure event safety provide instruction and training and select people who will be cautious about even covert distraction from play, and judicious about interruption.

Much of this is an economic issue; clubs exist for profit, and parties are host- ed by organizations who need party attendees to stay afloat and scene mem- bers who wish to have more parties. The interruption of a scene is disturbing enough for SM participants that it threatens event attendance. The interrup- tion of scenes is rare.
2
The most common impetus is that a DM, or sometimes an onlooker, sees a danger the top
does not,
such as a loose bolt in the wall (to which the bottom is attached) or a nonresponsive bottom. In this case the observer normally attempts to get the top’s attention without speaking, but will speak if s/he must. If it is clear that the top also sees the danger, experienced

DMs and onlookers will usually assume that the risk has been calculated or that the top is making adjustments. It is far more common for an observer or DM to ask for a second opinion than to interrupt a scene. In the following case, the players were not part of the Caeden scene, but visitors from a nearby city, and familiar enough to the club’s owner and veteran scene members.

A large, solidly built but big-bellied, relatively handsome Hell’s Angel– looking man was standing in the front of the room flogging a very over- weight woman, who was standing above him on the stage and wearing only underwear. He was wearing jeans and a leather vest, and had a lot of tattoos, long hair in a ponytail, a full beard, and blue eyes. They must have been doing something else before then; I vaguely remember seeing them set up, but they were on my radar clearly when the flogging became intense. He was very skilled, and used a two-handed florentine, mostly on her ass, though he hit her back occasionally. She made a lot of noise throughout the flogging, which may have been what caught my attention in the first place. He appeared to be completely immersed in what he was doing and did not seem to notice anyone around him.

The flogging continued for a bit, and I directed my attention else- where. When I looked back, he was inserting small needles into her back. Josephine had come out from behind the soda counter and was watching closely; I assumed that James (the owner) had sent her. She stood about three feet away, with her arms crossed and her eyes focused intently.

He threaded each needle vertically, under her skin and then out again. He was wearing latex gloves and I noticed that she was standing on a blanket on the stage; I thought it had been there before.

The needles were about two inches long and had green plastic tips at one end. He worked very methodically, threading the needles into her skin. He began at her left shoulder blade and traveled down the middle of her back, down to her waist. A second line of needles mirrored this pattern on her right shoulder blade, and then he placed several needles across the mid- dle that didn’t really belong to a row. (He may have been making a letter, but I couldn’t tell.) In the end, there were about twenty needles in her back.

She didn’t make any noise while he was doing this. I tried to watch her face . . . she seemed not to be reacting much. At one point, I thought she was smiling, though I couldn’t see her very well.