Poppers Risk (96)

Poppers aren't illegal to take or possess.

"If no sexual offence is being committed it seems very odd indeed that there should be an offence for having an image of something which was not an offence," Lord Wallace of Tankerness

Funny how a thread on poppers comes up about once a month, with the same old misconceptions and the same people putting them right. Well done for having the patience.

Probably time for another thread on poppers before the end of the year. That and prostate massage/milking.

Zen S&M: The sound of one hand slapping.
'()_/)
(>'.'<)
(")_(") < MINE!

Edited 27 Dec 11, 8:41 AM by proccie

Supplier of classic motor omnibuses for weddings and all sorts of events in the south of England.

I have a few questions, but before all I have to make a few things clear: - popper can be legal in UK but is considered illegal in other countries. - I do not use popper (have tried it once, but not during any form of bdsm related play. didn't find it interesting so never tried it again). - from what other said and from what you can read, the purpose of using popper is to get to results (ie. anal dilatation) that are not as easily reachable (or are not reachable at all) without popper, right? wouldn't you consider that some sort of "impairing" judgment? ie... you don't feel as much pain when doing something, so you keep doing it - there are other substances which are legal and which, aswell, alter/impair judgement. - there's a big difference between drugs used for recreational purpose and other used for medical reason (I read someone mentioning aspirine, as it may have side effects). I think that if someone uses a drug for medical purposes he's well aware of the side effects, plus he can/should not stop taking his medicament. He doesn't have that option. He could choose NOT to play, if the drugs he's taking might impair his judgement. - if the last statement are correct, what's the difference of using popper rather than drinking alchool or using other substances (ie to numb an area so that it can take more pain/abuse?)

My main concern is that, when BDSM is involved, I consider that full consent has to be given at any time. If my senses are somehow altered/impaired, then also my consent is not at 100%. This happens both if I've taken altering/impairing substances before starting the scene or if I use them during the scene itself. In my opinion, if there's not full consent, then what you do can't/should not be called BDSM. So, let's make some examples: if I'm drunk or even just dizzy, I'm not technically doing BDSM, and I should not start any BDSM activity. Same if I'm lucid when I start and then my Dom/Mistress gives me something "as a form of control" (I read something like that in this thread...). What if the Dom gives you xtc or other substances that knock you out? where do you draw the line between what is acceptable and what is not in terms of altering/impairing substances being served to the sub? A glass of wine is fine? and what about 2 glass of whiskey? and what about a bottle of gin? same goes for popper or any other substance. do you think this apply to your vision of BDSM aswell?

I'm not a moron, but if I decide to drink, if I'm not able to drive, then I consider myself not able to play.

Another common misconception. *sigh*

Poppers do not impair judgement. Poppers are not analgesics. Poppers are not mind altering. Poppers do not stay in your system for very long at all.

Poppers affect your physiology; lowers your blood pressure, relaxes smooth muscle, and increases your heart rate.

Poppers are nothing like alcohol, speed, coke, etc etc. The effect of poppers lasts a couple of minutes at the very most.

"If no sexual offence is being committed it seems very odd indeed that there should be an offence for having an image of something which was not an offence," Lord Wallace of Tankerness

Anna, I'm here to learn and improve. I'll be glad if you, or anyone else, might help me clear my mind from common misconceptions.

In which way affecting someone's physiology during BDSM play is "less" important/dangerous? How well we know what kind of reactions it has on that specific subject's physiology, in relation with his actual health and past health history?

And how many minutes must an effect last in order to be considered potentially dangerous or even life threatening? would you use popper while whipping or suspending someone? will you let them use it while doing those things? what if his altered physiology, affects the way he/her perceives his/hers body reaction to pain or nerve pinching or blood flow or breathing? You talk of lowering blood pressure or increasing heart beat as if they were simple things that might not create a "butterfly effect". Are we "that" prepared to this kind of medical emergencies? WHat if the person has already low blood pressure and has a vagal crisis? (my dad died in my arms because of a vagal crisis, so I know what kind of shit I'm talking about).

To me it seems that it's just adding an external unpredictable factor to the equation.

In Italy popper is listed among drugs. Thus, for example, there's no difference, at least from a legal point of view, if you drive after sniffing coke or popper. if they catch you, you're in big trouble (even if you don't cause any incident, which just would worsen your situation).