Beyond consent

Content Note: Explicit mention of various hard kinks and discussion of non-consensual activities, including rape

Photo of a rollercoaster with a big sign: "THIS RIDE ONLY STOPS IN AN EMERGENCY. CRYING IS NOT AN EMERGENCY"

Table of Contents

The basics: FRIES

Let's first look at some simple and straightforward consent models. Most people have probably heard of "no means no", or, preferable in most cases, "yes means yes". But those quickly fail to capture the complex depth of what it means to consent to something.

A more thorough tool to ensure proper consent is called FRIES. It's an acronym: Free, Revocable, Informed, Enthusiastic, Specific. Even if you haven't heard of FRIES before, its definition should hopefully be intuitively clear and easily be mapped onto common practice. If all of this is complete news to you, I'd suggest sticking to this for now.

More on FRIES in this excellent writeup by LilaHexe

CNC is an umbrella term for various practices in which consent is still present, but not always as clear cut as in the above. However beware, people may sometimes say CNC to refer to a specific practice, and moreover they may be having wildly different and incompatible definitions about it. In order to explain these differences, understanding the concept of safewords is essential.

At its most basic, as safeword is a word or phrase which when spoken will pause or end a scene. Common safewords include Pause/Stop, Green/Yellow/Red (Red means Stop, Green and Yellow can mean different things so always make sure to clarify which one is what), and Mayday (commonly used by kink events to call for external help). Safewords can also be uncommon words with no associated meaning, like "Penguin". Having nonverbal safewords is strongly recommended, for example snapping fingers or "tapping out".

For some people, CNC means the following:

CNC is play that requires the usage of safewords. In CNC, "no" does not necessarily mean "no" anymore, it can be ignored, but a safeword cannot. This contrasts CNC to fully consensual play where no dedicated safewords are necessary, because every word can keep its usual literal meaning. Examples include scenes that involve begging for mercy or rape play. Fundamentally, CNC is about role-playing non-consensual scenes.

However for other people, CNC means this:

CNC is play with limited or no safeword options. Consent is mainly or fully pre-negotiated, which contrasts to fully consensual play where consent is always revocable at any point in time. Examples include "five more hits after the safeword" or hard kinks like torture. Fundamentally, CNC is consensually pre-committing to the enactment of possibly non-consensual elements within a scene.

See the difference? See the big, glaring issue that may arise when people miscommunicate what they specifically mean?

People who use the second definition argue that the first definition is not CNC, it's just common role play. People who use the first definition argue that the second one is not sufficiently consensual and should not be enacted or endorsed.¹ Some people argue that both definitions fit onto the spectrum of "CNC" as an umbrella term. In my experience, when prompted of a definition, people will say the first definition, but when they talk about actual "CNC" activities then often times those will include some aspects of the second definition instead.

I argue that at this point, the term "CNC" is semantically burnt and should be avoided in favor of more specific communication. "Meta-consent" is already on the rise as the new umbrella term for all kinds of play where consent is not as straightforward as with FRIES. Additionally, I propose the term "Pseudo non-consent (PNC)" to talk about consensual roleplay of non-consent (our first definition here).

Meta-consent is the preferrable umbrella term for all the kinds of activities where consent is still present, but not always clear cut. The term emphasizes that that at any time, there still is some form of consent on some level, and it avoids the semantic ambiguities of "CNC" (as well as the emotional baggage, as CNC is quite stigma affected).

I like to categorize meta-consent by the aspects of FRIES that are missing in the negotiation. We've already talked in detail about revocability of consent during the scene as part (or not) of CNC, and that is the most common form of meta-consent given. If instead, the consent is unspecific and/or uninformed, this leads to blanket consent instead (see below). Consent may be given "unfreely", for example under the influence of drugs or manipulation.

All of these can be necessary for certain kinds of play, but should not be goals on their own. For example you should never accept the consent of someone on drugs, unless that aspect specifically is an integral part of a scene, and the other person (meta-)consented to this happening in advance.

I'm coining this term to give the first definition of CNC a dedicated name: Pseudo non-consent defines all kinds of play that desires to mimic non-consensual situations. This typically requires dedicated safewords to allow interrupting the play where necessary. The name emphasizes that this is about pretense of non-consent. Elements of the play may require meta-consent, but this needs additional communication.

Blanket consent is the meta-consent given in advance for broad, unspecified kinds of play or under partial lack of information. This can be as ordinary as the consent to bite each other at any time (to the point that some people forget this does require consent!²) or as exciting as agreeing to a surprise scene.

In most situations, consent is not a commodity: It is not something you "obtain" and then "keep" and "use"; instead it is a property of any given situation and has no value in any similar future situation. Blanket consent as a concept is important precisely because it is the exception from this rule.

This specific form of blanket consent is worth explicitly mentioning, because most consent models fall short for various "mental" kinks like corruption, training, manipulation, hypnosis, personality erasure etc. In these kinks, the dom may initiate some action with the goal to (semi-)permanently alter the sub's mind in a certain way. Given that these processes typically happen on a deep, unconscious level and may affect the sub's desires, it quickly becomes impossible to properly ensure that any consent was given fully freely. (Of course, these questions of "free will" and desire in the presence of e.g. trauma are always of relevance for kink, but nowhere are they as prominent and unavoidable as here.)

"Treat success as consent" sidesteps these issues by transforming the question of consent into a meta-level tug-of-war game: "You may try to clicker train me in whatever way you want, but treat success as consent." If it succeeds, we assume that the sub consented to the mind alteration. If it fails, this could either be because of a lack of skill in the dom's execution, or because of a lack of consent. The ambiguity here is unavoidable: When playing on such a deep, raw level of the mind, consent (or the lack thereof) may be decided on an unconscious level. Importantly, in that "failure" scenario nobody is to blame. The dom may thus try again with more skill or a different approach (unless the consent is revoked in the meantime).

It is important to understand that this approach inherently assumes that the subconscious tends to be more averse to change which is not desired. In reality, this is of course not as clear-cut, and some people may be more suggestible of being manipulated into things they don't actually want than others. Be aware of these risks before getting involved into play with such profound consequences.

Closing words

When planning a scene or initiating a dynamic or a scene, it is important to always look for ways to have the fullest consent possible. Every meta layer carries the risk for things to go wrong, and should be avoided if possible. Always ask questions like: Do I really need uninformed consent? Or is there a way to fulfill that kink with full information? A lot of the time, kinky activities can be made a lot safer with only minor adjustments that don't impact the experience, and that's what we always should be striving for.