Before Play

Prevention Is the Happy Path

Most of what this book covers is what to do when things go wrong. But the best way to handle mistakes is to prevent them.

Before engaging in play, intimacy, or sex with someone, have a conversation. Not just “do you consent?”—a real conversation that covers the things that, if you don’t discuss them, often turn into the mistakes this book is about.

Consent Is Contextual

Early in my journey, I learned this the hard way. I’d spent the night snuggling with a woman — in bed, in underwear, warm and close. The next day, at a community house with her friends around, I walked up and put my arm around her.

She didn’t want it.

Not because she hadn’t enjoyed the night before. She had. But snuggling privately and being touched publicly in front of friends are different contexts — and she’d said yes to one, not the other. Her feelings about our new connection may have shifted overnight too. Either way, what was welcome last night wasn’t welcome today.

A yes is not a blanket yes. It’s specific to the moment, the setting, and the context it was given in. When the context changes — public vs. private, day vs. night, alone vs. with friends — check in again. Even if it feels like it should be obvious that you’re welcome.

What Is a “Good Thing”?

Let’s define what we’re trying to create:

A “good thing” is an experience where each participant feels good—both during and after the interaction.

That’s the goal. Not just pleasure in the moment—but something you both feel good about afterward.

The opposite is an hour of sexual pleasure followed by three months of emotional hell. That’s not a good thing, even if it felt good in the moment.

RBDSMT exists to make sure what you’re creating is a good thing, not a bad thing.

RBDSMT: The Safer Sex Conversation

This framework comes from ISTA (International School of Temple Arts), with additions. It stands for:

• R — Relationships
• B — Boundaries
• D — Desires
• S — Sexual Health
• M — Meaning and Mistakes
• T — Trauma

Before playing with someone—especially someone new—talk through each of these. It takes 10-20 minutes. It can save hours of pain, confusion, and repair.

R — Relationships

What to discuss: What are your current relationship structures? Who else is involved? What agreements do you have with others?

Why it matters: Playing with someone who has a partner you don’t know about, or violating agreements they have with someone else, can create HIGH severity harm—not just to them, but to third parties.

Examples of What Can Go Wrong

• They’re monogamous with a partner at home. You don’t know. Their partner finds out, the relationship ends, and suddenly the partner is crying victim and coming after YOU—trying to cause you harm for “destroying their relationship.”

• You’re at a festival. You’ve been flirting with someone. They see you kiss someone else. They’re polyamorous and know you are too—but they feel jealous. If you have sex with this person, the other one might judge you, act weird toward you, or create drama. Maybe you’re okay with that, but you should know about it upfront.

• They have a partner who’s at the same event. You don’t know. You make a mistake during play—something minor, an accident. The person you’re playing with is reasonable and handles it well. But their partner finds out, freaks out, and witch hunts you with HIGH severity. You didn’t even know that was a possibility because you didn’t know who was partnered with whom.

The Broader Question

The standard question is some version of “are you in a relationship?” — but that only catches committed, monogamous partnerships. A better question:

“Are there any relationships that would be affected by us doing what we’re about to do — that I should know about?”

That’s broader. It covers committed partners, non-committed connections, someone at the same event who has feelings for them, anything. It lets them think through the full landscape instead of just the obvious box.

This is a higher standard than most people play at. You’re not obligated to ask it. But if you want to play responsibly and avoid surprises — for yourself and for the people around you — it’s worth keeping in your toolkit.

The Couples Warning

Couples are double the risk.

If you play with someone who has an active romantic partner, you don’t just need THEM to be reasonable about mistakes. You need their partner to be reasonable too.

Maybe the person you’re playing with assumes the best about mistakes—but their partner does not. Maybe the person you’re playing with would handle an accident with grace—but their partner would attack you with HIGH severity.

Before playing with anyone with significant intimacy, figure out:

• Do they have a partner?
• Is that partner here?
• If yes, get to know the partner. Figure out what they’re comfortable with. Assess how THEY handle mistakes.

If you’re playing with someone who has a partner and you didn’t know, you may be in for a surprise when a mistake occurs and suddenly you’re dealing with someone you’ve never met who’s explosively angry.

Assessing Couple Stability

Not all couples are equally safe to play with. Ask yourself—and ask THEM:

• Are they emotionally stable? Have you seen them fighting in the container? What were those disagreements about?
• Have they been non-monogamous for a while? Or have they been monogamous their whole lives and this is completely new? Someone with years of non-monogamy experience handles things differently than someone trying it for the first time.
• Do they have precedent? If they’ve played with others before and it went well, they have a track record. If this is new territory, there’s higher risk of jealousy, upset, or unexpected reactions.
• Is one of them more ready than the other? Sometimes one partner says they’re good with it, but they’re not really. Or one partner feels pressured into “being open” because they’re afraid of losing the relationship.
• How do they interpret mistakes? Does either partner lean toward assuming the worst? If one of them carries trauma around sexuality—fear of men, fear of predators, past experiences that make them see threats where there aren’t any—a one-second accident could be interpreted as intentional malice. And their response may be disproportionate. This doesn’t mean you can’t play with them. It means you should know what you’re walking into.
• Would both partners give you the benefit of the doubt? It’s not just the person you’re playing with who matters. If their partner would cry predator over an honest mistake, you need to know that before you’re in it.

Ask explicitly: “Have you been open and playing with others for a while? Or is non-monogamy new to you?”

The Misaligned Couple

Watch out for this dynamic:

One partner wants to be monogamous. They don’t really want to be at this retreat. They’re only here because they’re afraid of losing their partner—who IS excited about non-monogamy.

The enthusiastic partner is eager to explore. But they may not actually be “open” in practice, because their reluctant partner is stressed, jealous, or on the verge of a meltdown.

This is a relationship under significant stress. That doesn’t mean you CAN’T play with them—it just takes a lot of care.

If You Choose to Engage

Playing with someone in a misaligned couple is possible. But consider:

• The level of play should probably be lower. Not sex. Lesser intimacy. Something that won’t create massive waves.
• Communicate with BOTH partners. If you’re playing with the one who wants non-monogamy, be in deep communication with the one who wants monogamy. What are they actually comfortable with? What would hurt them?
• Only play in ways that make everyone happy. The goal is a good thing—where everyone feels good during AND after. Including the partner who’s not directly involved.
• They’re responsible for their relationship. You’re not responsible for their dynamic. But you might not want to be the person who’s there when it all falls apart.

Personal Considerations

Ask yourself honestly:

• Do I want to be tied up in this drama?
• If their relationship has stress because of what we did, do I want that on my conscience—even if they’re ultimately responsible for their own choices?
• Do I like BOTH of them as people? If he’s hurting because of what I did with her, will I hurt too?
• Even if it’s “not my fault,” will I feel good about this afterward?

Maybe the enthusiastic partner would find someone to play with regardless. Maybe their relationship would reach this point anyway. But you get to decide whether you’re the person in that story.

Some people are fine with it. Others want to stay clear of the drama entirely. Know yourself.

Once you recognize the situation, ask yourself: Am I comfortable engaging with someone in this relationship state? And at what level of intimacy?

A Note on Couples at Retreats

In my experience at sex-positive retreats: couples often have more drama than single people.

Whatever crack exists in a relationship—whatever imperfection, whatever point of stress—it will surface at a retreat where people can flirt and have sex with others. One partner talks to someone attractive. The other feels jealous. Old wounds get triggered. Arguments happen.

Some couples are robust. They’ve been in these spaces for years. They love each other deeply. They play with others regularly and it brings them closer together. That’s awesome.

Other couples are newer, or shaky, or came to the retreat hoping it would “fix” something. Those couples are riskier to engage with.

On average, couples bring more potential drama than single people. That’s not a reason to avoid them entirely—just something to be aware of when you’re deciding who to play with.

Example questions:

• “Are you in any relationships right now?”
• “Do you have any agreements with partners that affect what we can do?”
• “Is your partner here? Should I meet them first?”
• “How does your partner feel about you playing with others?”
• “Is there anyone who would be hurt or surprised by this?”
• “Is there anyone I should know about?”

B — Boundaries

What to discuss: What’s okay? What’s not okay? What are your hard limits? What are your soft limits?

Why it matters: When you don’t know someone’s limits, respecting them becomes difficult. You’re constantly second-guessing: “Can I do this? Can I do this?” That uncertainty creates anxiety for you and risk for them.

When you DO know their boundaries upfront:

• You know what’s safe. You can play freely within the agreed space without constant questioning.
• They’re protected. Clear limits are easier to respect than unstated ones.
• You have ease. You’re not anxious about accidentally crossing a line you didn’t know existed.
• You’re protected too. If you were emotionally invested in something happening that wasn’t actually available, knowing upfront prevents that hurt.

When someone hasn’t thought through their boundaries beforehand, they’re more likely to fawn in the moment—saying yes when they mean no because they haven’t practiced saying no to that specific thing. Then they feel violated afterward, even though they said yes.

How Do You Know If a Boundary Is Being Violated?

Many people think boundaries are only things they’ve explicitly, cognitively decided and stated out loud. “I never said that was a boundary, so it’s not a boundary.”

This is wrong.

Here’s a more accurate frame:

If something ongoing is causing you to feel a sustained negative emotion—and if it continued, you’d feel worse—you likely have a boundary being crossed or a need going unmet.

Not a single flash of upset (you can have unreasonable reactions to single moments). But if something is happening continuously and it’s making you feel uncomfortable, resistant, or distressed—and you sense that if it keeps going you’ll feel even worse or eventually need to act to stop it—that’s your body telling you: this isn’t okay for me right now.

Why this matters for newcomers:

If you’re new to play spaces, you don’t yet know all your boundaries. How could you? You’ve never been in these situations before.

You might enter a scenario excited and happy—then realize something is happening that you didn’t know you wouldn’t like. You didn’t know you had a boundary here. But the discomfort you’re feeling is telling you: I need this to stop.

That’s a real boundary. Even if you never articulated it. Even if you didn’t know it existed until this moment.

What to do:

When you notice the negative feeling:

1. Recognize it as a signal. Something is crossing a line you have—even if you just discovered the line exists.
2. Speak up. “Hey, I’m noticing I’m not comfortable with this. Can we pause/stop/change what we’re doing?”
3. Don’t blame the other person for not knowing. If you didn’t know you had this boundary, they couldn’t have known either. This isn’t about punishment—it’s about discovery and communication.

Part of learning in these spaces is discovering your own limits. Each new boundary you find is information. It makes you safer and more skilled for next time.

Hard Boundaries Stay Hard

This is extremely important:

If someone sets a hard boundary, it does not get undone mid-scene.

Even if things are getting hot and heavy. Even if they say “okay, you can do it.” Even if they beg you to do it.

There was a reason they told you beforehand that they weren’t okay with that thing. In the heat of the moment, arousal and pressure can override their actual limits. If you cross that line because they “gave permission” mid-scene, they may feel violated afterward, get hurt, or even cry victim.

Think of it this way: mid-scene, you can subtract — stop something, pull back, end the scene entirely. You can’t add. You can’t expand into new territory that was off-limits ten minutes ago, because the person saying “yes” now is not the same person who said “no” earlier. Arousal, subspace, and the heat of the moment change your judgment. The boundary they set in a calm, grounded state is more trustworthy than the one they’re revising in a heightened one.

Your responsibility: If they stated a hard boundary before play, respect it until the scene is over and you’re both thinking clearly. Then — and only then — you can have a conversation about whether they actually want to change that boundary for next time.

I learned this the direct way. A woman told me she didn’t want to have sex that night. I asked: “Is that a hard boundary?” She wasn’t sure what I meant. I said: “If you tell me it’s a hard boundary, I will hold it. Even if you change your mind later. Even if you beg, cry, and scream — I won’t cross it. So: is it a hard boundary, or are you open to the possibility?”

She paused. She actually had to think about it — because she wasn’t used to a man making her be that clear about her own consent. She was used to saying “no” as a soft shield she could lower later if she wanted to, and men were used to treating it that way. Nobody had ever said: your word is final, and I will enforce it for you, even against you.

It shocked her. And — she told me later — it turned her on. Because that level of commitment to her boundaries meant she could actually trust me. She didn’t have to manage my behavior. She could relax.

Sometimes people need to know you can handle their no before they’ll give you their yes.

This protects them from themselves. It protects you from accusations. It’s what responsible play looks like.

Example questions:

• “What’s off-limits for you?”
• “What are your hard no’s?”
• “Is there anything you’d want me to check in about before doing?”
• “How do you like to communicate if something isn’t working?”
• “What’s your safeword, if you use one?”

D — Desires

What to discuss: What do you actually want from this experience? What are you hoping for? What would make this great for you?

Why it matters: If you don’t know what each other wants, you’re guessing. Guessing leads to mismatches. Mismatches lead to disappointment or harm.

Hidden benefits:

• Discovery: They might mention something you didn’t realize you wanted until they said it. “Oh—I want that too!”
• Creative alternatives: Instead of just “no,” they can practice “no, but…” If you ask for something they’re not available for, they might offer something similar that works for both of you. This expands possibilities instead of closing them down.

Some People Struggle to Ask

Many people have a hard time asking for what they really want.

Our culture often teaches us to serve others, suppress our desires, and not be “too demanding.” Some people will list everything they want except the one thing they REALLY want—because that one feels too vulnerable to say.

Asking for what you want is a skill. It’s one of the most important skills for getting what you want out of life. And in this conversation, you can support each other in developing it.

How to help:

• After they share their desires, ask: “Is there anything else? Anything you want but haven’t said yet?”
• Be emotionally supportive as they try to articulate it. They might struggle. Give them space.
• Normalize it: “It’s okay to ask for what you really want. I want to know.”

Sometimes the thing they’re hesitant to say is the thing that would make the experience actually great for them.

Example questions:

• “What are you hoping for from this?”
• “What would make this really good for you?”
• “Is there anything specific you’d love to experience?”
• “What are you curious about?”
• “Is there anything you want that you haven’t said yet?”

S — Sexual Health

What to discuss: STI status, testing history, safer sex practices, barriers, birth control, pregnancy.

Why it matters: This is about physical safety and informed consent. You can’t consent to a risk you don’t know about.

Important: If they have other partners or have had sex recently, ask what protection methods they used. A negative test from a month ago doesn’t account for unprotected sex they had last week. You need the full picture.

Example questions:

• “When were you last tested? For what?”
• “Is there anything I should know about your sexual health?”
• “Have you had other partners since your last test? What protection did you use?”
• “What safer sex practices do you want to use?”
• “What are your preferences around barriers?”
• “What’s your birth control situation?”
• “What would happen if pregnancy occurred? What would you want to do?”

M — Meaning and Mistakes

What to discuss: What does this mean to you? What are your expectations afterward? And critically: How do you respond when mistakes happen?

Meaning

Mismatched meaning creates hurt. If one person thinks this is the start of a relationship and the other thinks it’s a one-time thing, someone’s getting hurt—and it’s preventable.

Example questions:

• “What does this mean to you?”
• “What are your expectations for after?”
• “Is this casual for you, or something more?”
• “Does having sex with someone change your relationship with them? How?”
• “How do you usually feel after intimacy? Is there anything you need?”

Some people’s meaning-making is extreme. For a few people, sex means “we’re basically married now.” You want to know if that’s in their head before you engage.

Mistakes

This is one of the most important questions you can ask:

“When mistakes happen—when a boundary gets accidentally crossed—do you tend to assume the best in people, or the worst?”

Why this matters:

If you accidentally cross a boundary for a moment—your hand goes somewhere it shouldn’t, you misread a cue—what happens?

• Charitable interpretation: “Hey, I think you forgot, but I have a boundary about that.” You say “Oh, thank you for telling me,” and appreciate their respectful response.
• Uncharitable interpretation: You’re a rapist. Character assassination. Reputation destruction. Witch hunt.

If you know someone responds to mistakes with HIGH severity—treating accidents like malice—you might choose not to play with them. You might choose someone whose interpretation of mistakes is charitable, who understands the difference between accident and malice.

Example questions:

• “When someone makes a mistake with you, how do you usually respond?”
• “If I accidentally crossed a boundary, what would you want me to do? What would you do?”
• “Do you tend to assume good intent when things go wrong?”
• “Have you ever had an experience where someone made an innocent mistake and you responded strongly? What happened?”

This isn’t about finding someone who will let you get away with things. It’s about knowing what you’re signing up for. If they can’t tolerate accidents, and you’re human (meaning you WILL make mistakes eventually), you’re playing with fire.

The paradise with one rule: There’s a Star Trek: The Next Generation episode called “Justice” that shows this perfectly. The crew visits a paradise pleasure planet for some rest. They meet the locals—hospitable, warm, genuinely delightful. Everyone’s having a wonderful time together.

Then they discover the system: the punishment for breaking any rule on this planet is death. Nothing else. No exceptions.

The crew who were just enjoying new friendships suddenly become horrified. Everything around them is immensely dangerous in a way they didn’t see before. Before they can warn the others, one of the kids—Wesley—breaks a rule by jumping a fence. The locals immediately demand justice: he must be put to death.

Different people have different ideas about justice. Find out how the person you’re playing with—and their partners—handle mistakes before you discover you were playing with a gun to your head.

This is exactly why your touch is a privilege. When you touch someone, you become vulnerable—to their interpretation, their response, their idea of justice. You don’t have to offer that vulnerability to someone who won’t treat you with dignity if you make a simple mistake.

Know Your Own Filter

It’s not just about them—it’s about you too.

Before you enter this space, ask yourself honestly:

• What is my attention primed for? Am I expecting connection and fun? Or am I scanning for threats and danger?
• What do I tend to see? When someone makes a mistake, do I see an accident or an attack?
• What’s my default interpretation? Do I assume people are on my side until proven otherwise? Or do I assume they’re threats until proven safe?

If you’re entering with your attention primed to see predators, you’re likely to find them—even when they don’t exist. Every ambiguous touch becomes suspicious. Every awkward moment becomes evidence. You’re more likely to over-respond to something that isn’t actually a threat.

This doesn’t mean your fears aren’t valid. But if you know you’re primed for danger, Notice, Feel, Story becomes critical for you. Your first interpretation will almost certainly be “threat”—and you need a way to check whether that’s actually true.

For more on how attention filters work, see: The Brown/Red Exercise and Before You Enter a Space.

T — Trauma

What to discuss: Do you have any trauma that might get activated? What does activation look like for you? What should I do if it happens?

Why it matters: Trauma can turn a consensual experience into a dissociative nightmare. If you know their triggers and warning signs, you can navigate around them—or at least respond appropriately if something comes up.

Example questions:

• “Is there anything from your past that might get activated during play?”
• “Are there any touches, words, or situations I should avoid?”
• “What does it look like when you’re activated or triggered?”
• “What would you want me to do if that happens?”
• “Do you have any fawning patterns I should watch for?”

That last question is powerful. If they tell you upfront that they tend to fawn, you can watch for it and check in when their “yes” doesn’t feel like a yes.

Your Trauma Matters Too

This isn’t just about their trauma—it’s about yours.

Personal example: I had exclusion trauma—I spent years feeling left out—and I had trauma around not being touched. I was playing with someone who had the opposite—trauma about being touched too much. They were hesitant to touch me because they were projecting their own experience onto me: they remembered how bad it felt to be touched when they didn’t want it, and they never wanted me to experience that pain. So they held back.

That made complete sense for them. But I forgot to tell them about MY trauma—which gets activated when I’m not touched. A poor combination.

Now I have a request I make upfront:

“You don’t have to decide anything—I invite not knowing, feeling into what’s natural without obligation. But if you confidently decide you’re not available for sex, I’d like to know as soon as you’re aware. I have trauma around expecting something and being let down at the last moment. Early clarity helps me adjust.”

That’s me taking responsibility for my own trauma. Not expecting them to read my mind—but communicating what I need so we can both have a good experience.

The Friction Check: Interpretive Compatibility

RBDSMT screens for the sex. It aligns you on logistics, safety, and expectations.

It does not screen for what happens when reality gets ambiguous.

The most dangerous mismatch is not sexual. It is interpretive.

Two people can align perfectly on relationships, boundaries, desires, health, meaning, and trauma — and still create a disaster. Because the disaster doesn’t come from the sex. It comes from the stories they build when something unexpected happens.

Why This Matters

You have a great RBDSMT conversation. Everything aligns. You’re both poly. They say “this is casual for me.” They mean it when they say it. You play together. It’s wonderful.

The next day, you flirt with someone else. They see it. Jealousy hits — and suddenly “this is casual” isn’t running the show anymore. They didn’t know they would feel jealous. When they told you they were poly, they meant it. But the emotional reality of watching you with someone else — after the intimacy you shared — activated something they didn’t predict. Instead of saying “hey, I’m feeling jealous and I didn’t expect that, can we talk?”, the jealousy turns into accusations. Suddenly you’re just a pleasure-seeking, selfish asshole, who should have known not to see other women after what you shared. The story rewrites the agreement you both made — and now you’re defending yourself against charges that didn’t exist 24 hours ago, for doing exactly what you both agreed was fine.

Later — sometimes much later — they might admit what actually happened: they got jealous, and the jealousy needed somewhere to go, so it became a story about your character. But by then, three friends already heard you’re “that kind of guy.”

RBDSMT asked the right questions. They gave honest answers. But self-description breaks down under emotional activation. Their story style only appeared when reality stopped matching their expectations — and no checklist question would have predicted it.

The Question RBDSMT Doesn’t Ask

RBDSMT asks: Are we aligned for sex?

The missing question: Are we aligned for friction?

Because friction is inevitable in intimacy. Moments will be awkward. Signals will be misread. Expectations will mismatch in ways neither of you predicted. The question isn’t whether friction will happen — it’s what they do when it does.

Three dimensions matter:

Story Style — When something ambiguous happens, do they get curious or assign blame? Do they ask what you meant, or decide what you meant? Do they come to you directly, or build a narrative and recruit allies?

Repair Style — After friction, do they seek conversation or create distance? Do they state clearly what they need, or go silent and fester? Do they offer a path forward, or close the door permanently?

Communication Clarity — Can they state a boundary plainly, or do they say something ambiguous and punish you when you interpret it wrong? “I’m needing a few days to disconnect. I’ll get back to you when I have more capacity” could mean three days or seven months. If you check in after two weeks and they call it a violation — that’s not a boundary problem, it’s a communication problem. A boundary that requires mind-reading is not a clean boundary.

Don’t Trust Self-Description

Almost everyone describes themselves as reasonable, direct, and emotionally mature. That tells you almost nothing.

The person who will destroy your reputation over a misunderstanding genuinely believes they handle conflict well. The most dangerous people don’t announce themselves as dangerous — they announce themselves as righteous.

People show you who they really are when things stop going their way.

So don’t ask “are you a good communicator?” Ask for stories.

Ask for past examples, not self-ratings:

• “Tell me about a time someone misunderstood you in an intimate space. What happened next?”
• “When you feel hurt or jealous, what do you usually do first?”
• “Have you ever had an awkward experience that got repaired well? What made it work?”

Listen for curiosity vs. blame. Ownership vs. indictment. Directness vs. festering.

Watch how they talk about past partners and conflicts. You’re hearing their story style live. Two people can describe similar experiences and reveal completely different orientations:

“My ex was emotionally abusive. They manipulated me for years. I was a victim of their behavior.”

“I had a really painful relationship. In hindsight, I stayed way too long and didn’t set the boundaries I needed to. I’ve learned a lot about what I’ll accept now.”

Same type of experience. But the first person is telling you: when things go wrong, someone else is the cause and I am acted upon. The second is telling you: I see my part, I’ve grown, and I handle things differently now.

The first person is more likely to go silent when hurt, build stories about your intentions, and treat their discomfort as your fault. The second is more likely to speak up, check their assumptions, and engage in repair.

This isn’t about judging someone for having been hurt. It’s about detecting whether they’ve moved from this happened to me to here’s what I’ve learned about myself. That shift predicts almost everything about how they’ll handle friction with you.

Watch for asymmetry. The killer pattern: they want lots of attunement from you and very little responsibility from themselves. They expect you to track their feelings, infer their unspoken boundaries, and correctly interpret every ambiguous thing they say — while they don’t have to state clearly, own their meaning, or name their needs. When you misunderstand something they communicated poorly, they treat it as your failure of character rather than their failure of clarity. That asymmetry is a landmine.

But My RBDSMT Conversation Already Asks About Mistakes

Yes — and keep it.

The M in RBDSMT asks a pointed question: if my hand goes somewhere wrong during sex, will you politely remind me of your boundary and tell me to adjust, or call me a predator? That’s concrete safety screening for the play itself.

The Friction Check is broader. It covers the entire relational dynamic beyond the sex act — jealousy, unspoken expectations, post-play meaning, communication gaps, and the stories they build when you’re not in the room.

One screens for safety during play. The other screens for whether the connection itself is safe.

The Trust Baseline

This check runs both directions.

Them → You: If you don’t know whether this person would give you the benefit of the doubt for a simple mistake — if they might assume malice over a one-second boundary cross — don’t play with them yet. Get to know them first.

You → Them: If you don’t trust this person enough that a one-second mistake would make you assume they intended harm — if your filter would turn an accident into an attack — don’t play with them yet either. You’re setting yourself up for a bad time, not because they’ll hurt you, but because your own story will.

Both directions require a baseline of trust: if something goes wrong, we’ll both treat it as a mistake first and work from there. If either side can’t offer that, the play is premature. Build the trust first. Play after.

Quick Reference: The Friction Check

BEFORE INTIMACY, ASSESS:

Story Style            How do they interpret ambiguity? Curiosity or blame?
Repair Style           After friction: conversation, silence, or accusation?
Communication Clarity  Can they state needs plainly, or do they expect mind-reading?
Trust Baseline         Can you BOTH extend the trust that a mistake is a mistake?

How This Prevents the Mistakes in This Book

This Is Taking Responsibility

Having this conversation is taking responsibility proactively — shaping the outcome before it happens.

For facilitators: Teaching participants to have this conversation before play is part of preparing them for temple nights and open play. If you skip this education, you’re setting people up for the mistakes this book is about.

See: Before You Facilitate — the responsible vs. irresponsible approach.

A Personal Note from the Author

When I first learned RBDSMT, I thought: “This is great.”

Then, a few months later, things are getting hot with someone. We’re about to have sex. And I think: “Do I really need to slow things down and have the full conversation right now? It’s inconvenient. It delays pleasure. It might even kill the mood—or the conversation might reveal something that means we don’t have sex at all. We’re both adults. It’ll probably be fine.”

I skipped it. We had sex. And afterward, it wasn’t a good thing. There was pain. Mismatched meaning. Hurt feelings. Drama.

I did that two or three more times. Each time, I skipped the conversation because it felt awkward or unnecessary in the moment. Each time, something went wrong.

Now? I have the full RBDSMT conversation every time before sex. No compromises. No exceptions. No “it’s probably fine.”

Because I’m tired of having sex and feeling like shit afterward. I’m tired of creating bad things when I could create good things. And the only difference is 15 minutes of conversation that I was too lazy or awkward to have.

Learn from my mistakes. Have the conversation.

It Doesn’t Have to Be Awkward

Some people resist these conversations because they seem mood-killing or like they delay pleasure.

But:

1. It can be sexy. Talking about desires is foreplay. Knowing what someone wants makes it better.

2. It builds trust. Someone who’s willing to have this conversation is someone who cares about your experience.

3. It prevents way more awkwardness than it creates. A 15-minute conversation now prevents hours of processing, repair, and drama later.

4. It’s a filter. Someone who won’t have this conversation is telling you something about how they’ll handle things when they go wrong.

Quick Reference

BEFORE PLAY, DISCUSS:

R — Relationships      Who else is involved? Any agreements?
B — Boundaries         What's off-limits? Hard/soft limits?
D — Desires            What do you want? What would be great?
S — Sexual Health      Testing? STIs? Protection with others? Pregnancy?
M — Meaning & Mistakes What does this mean? How do you handle mistakes?
T — Trauma             Triggers? Warning signs? What to do?

Related

• Fawning — Discussing trauma patterns prevents fawning surprises
• Responsibility — Prevention is proactive responsibility
• Types of Mistakes — Know the difference between accident and malice
• Before You Judge — What happens when mistakes get judged harshly
• Before You Facilitate — Teaching this before temple nights
• Gun Test — Another pre-play self-check