Thinking again about that scene. You know the one. (Sherlock spoilers)
Honestly, of all those explanations in there, the one that rings most true to me is the S&M one. Because it doesn’t just explain this episode. It explains the entire pattern of their behavior toward each other for the whole…
This is such a great wrap up of The Scene theories. I tend to agree with the S&M one too, but as you yourself say, just because you know the other person finds it comfortable and or ‘reads’ it as love doesn’t make it right.
Well, if it is indeed S&M and they both understand and agree to the rules of this dance, then it isn’t abuse. The issue of consent is primary. Going by this theory, both of them desire and accept their relationship in the form it’s in, and the actions they take toward one another. That’s not abuse; that’s giving each other what they explicitly (or what passes for explicitly in the code of their relationship) ask for.
What THEN becomes a concern is not abuse, but their own respective methods for ‘self-medicating’ their mental issues. Because BDSM in itself is not unhealthy; it’s just a way of two people having a relationship. But why they WANT what they want…well. Sometimes that’s fine, and sometimes it represents an issue they should be seeking treatment for.
Thank you for this, and I love it, and I’m only asking this because I’m not informed enough about BDSM and got into an unfortunate spat with another tumblr user: even if everything you say here is absolutely correct, can it really be consensual s/m without explicit agreement and especially without a safe word? I think what’s niggling at my brain every time I want to sign onto this theory is: how would John ever be able to indicate his limits?
Well, there’re different approaches to BDSM, and it’s important to note that ‘BDSM’ itself can represent multiple related but not identical things.
1: There’s the BDSM community, which like fandom is an interconnected but not highly structured network of people all over the world, the policies by which they play and socialize, the places where they play and socialize, and the various organizations, non-profits, community groups, etc. which protect, operate, educate, organize and liaise among them all.
2: The structured methodologies and approaches to BDSM and kink which have been developed over the years by the BDSM community, along with the practitioners who follow them. These people may or may not be active in the BDSM community, but they have made themselves informed and largely abide by the methodologies.
3: BDSM in the loosest and oldest sense, as a collection of kinky practices that anyone can engage in (bondage, sadomasochism, dominance/submission, etc.)
So in some senses, loads and loads of people who like to play with fuzzy handcuffs but have never even heard the abbreviation ‘BDSM’ are still engaging in BDSM.
Now, in terms of structured, informed approaches, two popular philosophies are SSC (Safe, Sane, Consensual) and RACK (Risk-aware Consensual Kink).
SSC says that the participants sit down and talk everything out—the negotiation. All participants make sure they understand where everybody’s coming from, what they like, what they know they can’t handle, etc. BDSM in any form is, just like the human minds it stems from, somewhat shifting, so sometimes things change and sometimes participants have to improvise, and that’s part of the reason safe words exist.
RACK is a somewhat more permissive approach. It still includes the negotiation, but it accepts more risk than SSC—‘risk-aware’ as in the abbreviation. RACK practitioners know that the things they get up to are not always safe (especially for those who actively desire edgeplay and danger), so they engage in activities based on a well-informed understanding of the risks, and a sense of personal responsibility that they have accepted doing this to another person/having this done to them. ’Kink’ is used instead of ‘sex’ to signify an understanding that BDSM isn’t always about sex and doesn’t have to involve sex.
But there are other approaches. There are people who practice Total Power Exchange, where one person submits absolutely to the other. In arrangements like that, safewords do not always apply; that’s part of the agreement. And there are people who, either because they’re poorly educated about the more structured approaches of BDSM or because they desire to participate on the far edges of riskiness in areas where most people would never tread, or where the very concept of ‘consent’ starts to break down (such as long-term TPE relationships), don’t really fall into any of these structured philosophies.
And there are also people who practice kink or BDSM activities but have nothing to do with the BDSM community, and some of them come up with whatever approaches work for them.
So, all that is to say that there’s a great deal of personal style and taste involved in how people approach BDSM. And to your question: it’s hard to say.
For one thing, even if the theory is true, we can’t know for sure—because we don’t see every moment of their lives on screen—whether Sherlock and John might have ever explicitly stated and negotiated their relationship.
Or maybe, like some informal practitioners or relationships where the participants’ exploration of their desires takes them in a BDSM direction but they don’t actually research and adopt structured practices, they could have developed an unspoken pattern that they never verbalized. (People do this, sometimes even on purpose, but there’s always an element of increased risk, because there will always be pitfalls and nebulous areas you can trip into without knowing it.) Given Sherlock’s unique gift for observation, part of the game could even be trusting him to see without John having to say anything.
So, TL;DR: for certain definitions of BDSM, their relationship could still be BDSM even if it never involved explicit negotiation, discussion of limits, or safewords. (For other definitions of BDSM, BDSM practitioners would have screaming fits to have such a nebulous relationship associated with their practices.)
And furthermore, if the theory is true, then I would say we’ve seen John set new limits at least once, at the end of Hound when he tells Sherlock he’s never to pull a stunt like the drugged coffee/lab thing again. And Sherlock’s response? ”It won’t happen again.”