that eyebolt because I don't trust it", "no, I'm not interested in doing that roleplay because I wouldn't be comfortable with it", or "I don't do play piercing because blood is a hard limit for me." We all have a right to say no to sexual acts we don't want; even if we're topping. ok This can be found on the Internet at: http://vyesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2010/07/07/the-annotated-safeword/ Clarisse's original post on safewords can be found on the Internet at: http://clarissethorn.com/blog/2010/07/03/sex-communication-tactic-derived-from-sm-2- safewords-and-check-ins/ ok ok ok oe COMMUNICATION: [theory] Sex Communication Tactic Derived From S&M: Checklists This is part of the same 2010 series as the previous article -- in fact, it came first. ok Checklists S&M checklists are long lists of different acts that sexual partners can use to discuss different acts and measure each others’ interest in those acts. Each act on the checklist usually looks something like this: FLOGGING -- GIVING OO000 FLOGGING -- RECEIVING OO00O0O Each partner rates each entry by filling out 1-5 bubbles, with 1 darkened bubble meaning "Not interested" and 5 bubbles meaning "I crave this!" I think this concept is brilliant because: 1) Too often, it's assumed that "sex" encompasses certain acts, and if you're interested in a sexual relationship you must be interested in all those acts. Or there's assumed to be a kind of linear progression, as exemplified in the "base system," where "first base" is groping and "home base" is penis-in-vagina sex. Talking about each sexual act as its own self-contained idea short-circuits those problematic ideas about sex and makes it easier for couples to turn down some of the "assumed" acts (e.g., if I don't want oral sex but I do want penis-in-vagina...). 2) It provides an easy way to communicate desires -- if a person is nervous about saying, "Hey, is it okay if I flog you?" then the couple doesn't even have to talk about it right HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018472