Vetting/Bürgen, Handhabe in Kanada (anonymer Beitrag)

    Diese Seite verwendet Cookies. Durch die Nutzung unserer Seite erklären Sie sich damit einverstanden, dass wir Cookies setzen. Weitere Informationen

      Vetting/Bürgen, Handhabe in Kanada (anonymer Beitrag)

      Ich (Anonym1) hatte vor kurzem eine spannende Diskussion über das Thema Bürgschaften im BDSM, die ich euch nicht vorenthalten möchte. Da meine Gesprächspartnerin Kanadierin ist, war die Diskussion auf englisch. Um es euch ein wenig zu erleichtern, habe ich ein paar englische Vokabeln schon ein mal übersetzt. Ich bin gespannt auf eure Ansichten zu dem Thema.

      vetting = Überprüfung potentieller Spielpartner. Man fragt in der BDSM-Szene nach Leuten, die schon mal mit der Person gespielt haben und holt sich Meinungen über die Person als Spielpartner_in ein.
      scene = Entweder BDSM-Szene oder Spiel-Session
      limits = Grenzen/Tabus
      yelp = Eine Webseite auf der Waren und Dienstleistungen bewertet werden können
      shit-talk = Lästern

      --------------------------------
      Anonym1:
      I would be really glad to hear your opinion. I'm curious about the practice of vetting in the american BDSM-Scene and differences between the German and the american bdsm scenes in general.

      Is vetting before play really a common practice? I mean like asking different people "Is person X a safe player?" If so, doesn't it do more harm than good?

      ---------------------------------
      Anonym2:
      Well, I'm Canadian, so I don't know much about the scene in america. I also have only been in my own community in one city in Canada. The answer is no though. I myself practice it, but I don't know anyone else who does.

      However, I personally think it's a very good thing to do. I don't see how it could be harmful.

      I think it's an uncommon practice here because people are not very honest to each other. They don't want to talk "badly" about someone else and become known as someone who shit-talks rather than telling someone the truth so they can be safe and make an informed choice. Often times people find it awkward, too, which I also think is a bad reason to not do it.

      That's just my experience here though.

      ---------------------------------
      Anonym1:
      The opinions here seem to be very much on the other side... And I'm not a fan of this idea either. To me it seems like a sort of yelp for doms. My problem with this kind of thing is that, you would actually have to categorize people into "safe players" and "unsafe players". But opinions can vary strongly at that point. I have heard often times, that people would claim some dom is an unsafe player just because they did "no limits" play with someone. Even if they would agree to limits when playing with someone else, there are enough people who would consider that to be an irresponsible person. And once you are branded as "unsafe" it will be hard to change that, if at all possible. Also wouldn't you think that people would actually shit talk over their ex-partners? Scenes can go bad from time to time, even with the most responsible dominants.

      Also why would you trust some random person more than the one that you are planing to play with? I mean you have to have a good amount of trust in someone before playing with them.

      ---------------------------------
      Anonym2:
      That's where your own personal critical thinking comes in. Do you trust someone who does that, or not? If you do, those concerns aren't a huge deal to you. But the idea is that others can tell you things you don't know about someone you're going to play with, who you probably haven't known very long. Other people will often have perspectives and experiences that you personally don't. Furthermore, just because you have grown to trust someone doesn't mean they are trustworthy in reality, which you wouldn't know unless you asked.

      I get where you're coming from. It could easily happen as you see it - people getting labelled one way or another. However, vetting is also not gossip. It's a process of finding out about someone's play style and their play history. It's less like yelp (because doms are not goods or services) and more like seeking a partner in general. You listen to your friends, you know?

      --------------------------------
      Anonym1:
      Hm... I would simply think that it doesn't really say anything about one's personal safety. To me it just seems weird to ask others about someone's play style while they themselves could explain it much better. But I guess that different perspectives play an important role in this argument. Vetting seems to make more sense if you are into changing play partners frequently and also playing with people you haven't had the chance to get to know properly. I personally would usually play only with people that I consider at least part of my wide circle of friends.

      -------------------------------
      Anonym2:
      People usually won't tell you if they have unsafe practices or don't take limits seriously, though. You can tell someone whatever you want and they have no choice but to believe you (or not) if they don't have someone to verify that.

      A good example is when I vetted riggers in Germany. I asked their bunnies if the riggers had been safe with them in terms of the ties they used, and if the rigger listened to them when they talked about their limits or interests.

      Yeah, vetting is usually only used on people you haven't known for more than a couple of months. I didn't feel the need to vet [my submissive] because I saw him at events and saw him play with others. We also didn't play until we had been on several dates. I could have still vetted him, though, if I wanted reassurance on whether he was good at communicating his needs and wants, and if he actually listens in scenes, etc.

      Vetting isn't just for doms.

      -----------------------------
      Anonym1:
      I guess you are right. Also vetting submissives is an interesting point, although I personally would probably prefer to find out their behaviour myself by starting with very safe things, observing reactions, asking questions and only after some time go over to things that are potentially more dangerous and where a well working communication is actually crucial for safety.
      "Es ist gleich willkürlich, ob man den Leuten sagt: ihr sollt nicht frei, oder: ihr sollt und müsst gerade auf diese und keine andere Weise frei sein." Joseph von Eichendorff

      Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 1 mal editiert, zuletzt von Gentledom ()