The question is pretty simple: do you consider breath play, in any amount or for any duration, to always be edge play? A lot of "extreme," longer duration breath play is obviously edging, so put the clear cases aside and consider a more complicated case in which one partner cuts off the other partner's oxygen supply for a matter of, say, 10 seconds or less. The chances of this resulting in brain damage or any other harm are, to the best of my knowledge, extraordinarily low. Despite that, breath play is often categorically labeled as edge play. What do you think? less

Edge play is the purpose of coming close to orgasm but stopping just short, correct? Is that the definition we're using here?

If so, then no, not all breath play is edging because I do (or prefer to have it done) to kick start an orgasm and carry through with it. I might be the only one, but that's as far as we go with it. I kind of like my current rate of oxygen intake and we don't even do it that often. Maybe four or five times a year. less

No, edge play is usually defined as play that is inherently very risky. Breath play, electricity, fire, breaking the skin, etc. tend to get defined as edge play. What you are thinking of is "edging."

To answer the OP, I think that breath play is always edge play unless it is done with commands. Telling someone to hold their breath for reasonable amounts of time is pretty unlikely to cause harm. However, restraining someone's breath yourself is always edge play because while you may *intend* to stop after 10 seconds, that can go wrong.

I don't think defining it as edge play makes it off limits, but it means that the people involved have to have a higher level of knowledge for consent to be valid. less

The question is pretty simple: do you consider breath play, in any amount or for any duration, to always be edge play? A lot of "extreme," longer duration breath play is obviously edging, so put the clear cases aside and consider a more complicated case in which one partner cuts off the other partner's oxygen supply for a matter of, say, 10 seconds or less. The chances of this resulting in brain damage or any other harm are, to the best of my knowledge, extraordinarily low. Despite that, breath play is often categorically labeled as edge play. What do you think? less

The word PLAY here is all wrong. This is DANGEROUS. Pure and simple. Sorry kids, but the brain dead and dead among us who didn't PLAN to be that way...because they were just seeking a "sexual thrill", found out the hard way that accidents happen. Cutting off oxygen for ANY amount of time is DANGEROUS, and yes, let me get controversial here, since no one is supposed to "offend", but it is STUPID TO THE MAX. You risk EVERYTHING....and believe me, DEAD is not the worst it can get. This is an activity I really wish would NOT be on anyone's radar...it is THAT bad. I have SEEN, with my own eyes, a couple of young people who THOUGHT they were doing a little "harmless" sexual play. The few years they have left...with a trach and a vent and an IQ of 10, strapped to a chair, fed through a tube, and having their diaper cleaned twice a day....that isn't worth that moment "thrill" they were expecting.

Mr. Bignuf just had to chime in....he says that BREATH PLAY is not "edge play", but "WAY OVER THE EDGE and falling into the chasm" play. It is not an IF something bad will happen activity, but a WHEN, and how quick. less

The word PLAY here is all wrong. This is DANGEROUS. Pure and simple. Sorry kids, but the brain dead and dead among us who didn't PLAN to be that way...because they were just seeking a "sexual thrill", found out the hard way that accidents happen. Cutting off oxygen for ANY amount of time is DANGEROUS, and yes, let me get controversial here, since no one is supposed to "offend", but it is STUPID TO THE MAX. You risk EVERYTHING....and believe me, DEAD is not the worst it can get. This is an activity I really wish would NOT be on anyone's radar...it is THAT bad. I have SEEN, with my own eyes, a couple of young people who THOUGHT they were doing a little "harmless" sexual play. The few years they have left...with a trach and a vent and an IQ of 10, strapped to a chair, fed through a tube, and having their diaper cleaned twice a day....that isn't worth that moment "thrill" they were expecting.

Mr. Bignuf just had to chime in....he says that BREATH PLAY is not "edge play", but "WAY OVER THE EDGE and falling into the chasm" play. It is not an IF something bad will happen activity, but a WHEN, and how quick. less

While I disagree with you on several of these points (I'll explain below and you're more than welcome to argue about it), I want to thank you for going the "controversial" route and speaking your mind. I'd much rather hear what people ACTUALLY think than the sugar-coated, unoffensive version especially when we're talking about safety.

You say that: "Cutting off oxygen for ANY amount of time is DANGEROUS." As a matter of fact, this is simply incorrect. If this were the case, then activities like SWIMMING would be inconceivably dangerous. But it's not. The brain can be completely deprived of oxygen for anywhere between 2-4 MINUTES before lasting brain damage occurs. If you've seen other information that supports your claim--namely, that even something as short as 10 seconds of oxygen deprivation will cause lasting brain damage--then by all means, share it. (That's not sarcastic either; I would genuinely like to know if there's some important piece of information I'm missing here)

Your point about potential accidents, however, is something I take to be far more serious. I'm sure you're saying, "sure, someone cutting off your oxygen for a couple seconds MIGHT not cause any damage, but if something goes wrong and they don't get oxygen for a few minutes, you're screwed." (I hope I'm not putting words in your mouth; this just seems like a paraphrase of what you were saying to begin with) And on that point, I essentially agree; in the worst case scenario, the consequences are massive. But potentially disastrous ALONE doesn't make an activity unbearably dangerous; after all, the worst case scenario for a swimmer is that he or she drowns, which is effectively the same worst case scenario for breath play. In order to actually assess the risk, you have to weigh the potential consequences (drowning, permanent brain damage) against the LIKELIHOOD that these things will actually happen. And I'll argue that, while the risk of serious consequences in breath play is never 0%, there ARE steps one can take to dramatically reduce that risk to an acceptable level. Solo breath play, breath play using things other than hands (or things held and applied directly by hands) like nooses, and oxygen deprivation that lasts more than a few seconds (even if most sources report brain damage only after 2-4 minutes) are all places I would never consider going precisely because of the high risk of disastrous consequences.

But I ask you, if someone plays with a partner who uses their hands to cut off their oxygen supply for, let's say, 5-10 seconds, what's the risk here? What's going to go wrong? Something COULD go wrong, certainly; I don't want to be cavalier when it comes to safety. But seriously, is the choker going to fall asleep suddenly with his/her hands still clenched around their partner's neck? Or are you supposing that the choker is going to forget to keep track of the time and that 5-10 seconds is going to turn into 5-10 minutes? Or is light pressure on the partner's throat is going to collapse their windpipe somehow, resulting in continued oxygen deprivation even after the choker has released their grip? While theoretically POSSIBLE, none of these risks strike me as being likely enough to classify this scenario as being unacceptably risky. If you disagree, give me a risk with a substantial probability. less

They asked for a definition. They didn't ask for a dissertation on the safety implications.

In my book, until you are otherwise proven incapable of making basic decisions in life, one should be regarded as intelligent and capable of deciding when enough is enough.

Accidents happen. Babies fall out of windows or drown in the bath because mom looked away for two seconds. Men and women do things that can irreparably damage themselves - from having unprotected sex to a little hanging themselves from meat hooks...to judge someone and say that they are stupid because they involve themselves in risky behavior is taking the easy way out. There is an argument here, but that isn't it.

The argument is between being ignorant of how the body works and having an accident versus knowing how it works then disregarding that information to satisfy the thrill. less

While I disagree with you on several of these points (I'll explain below and you're more than welcome to argue about it), I want to thank you for going the "controversial" route and speaking your mind. I'd much rather hear what people ACTUALLY think than the sugar-coated, unoffensive version especially when we're talking about safety.

You say that: "Cutting off oxygen for ANY amount of time is DANGEROUS." As a matter of fact, this is simply incorrect. If this were the case, then activities like SWIMMING would be inconceivably dangerous. But it's not. The brain can be completely deprived of oxygen for anywhere between 2-4 MINUTES before lasting brain damage occurs. If you've seen other information that supports your claim--namely, that even something as short as 10 seconds of oxygen deprivation will cause lasting brain damage--then by all means, share it. (That's not sarcastic either; I would genuinely like to know if there's some important piece of information I'm missing here)

Your point about potential accidents, however, is something I take to be far more serious. I'm sure you're saying, "sure, someone cutting off your oxygen for a couple seconds MIGHT not cause any damage, but if something goes wrong and they don't get oxygen for a few minutes, you're screwed." (I hope I'm not putting words in your mouth; this just seems like a paraphrase of what you were saying to begin with) And on that point, I essentially agree; in the worst case scenario, the consequences are massive. But potentially disastrous ALONE doesn't make an activity unbearably dangerous; after all, the worst case scenario for a swimmer is that he or she drowns, which is effectively the same worst case scenario for breath play. In order to actually assess the risk, you have to weigh the potential consequences (drowning, permanent brain damage) against the LIKELIHOOD that these things will actually happen. And I'll argue that, while the risk of serious consequences in breath play is never 0%, there ARE steps one can take to dramatically reduce that risk to an acceptable level. Solo breath play, breath play using things other than hands (or things held and applied directly by hands) like nooses, and oxygen deprivation that lasts more than a few seconds (even if most sources report brain damage only after 2-4 minutes) are all places I would never consider going precisely because of the high risk of disastrous consequences.

But I ask you, if someone plays with a partner who uses their hands to cut off their oxygen supply for, let's say, 5-10 seconds, what's the risk here? What's going to go wrong? Something COULD go wrong, certainly; I don't want to be cavalier when it comes to safety. But seriously, is the choker going to fall asleep suddenly with his/her hands still clenched around their partner's neck? Or are you supposing that the choker is going to forget to keep track of the time and that 5-10 seconds is going to turn into 5-10 minutes? Or is light pressure on the partner's throat is going to collapse their windpipe somehow, resulting in continued oxygen deprivation even after the choker has released their grip? While theoretically POSSIBLE, none of these risks strike me as being likely enough to classify this scenario as being unacceptably risky. If you disagree, give me a risk with a substantial probability. less