What stands behind these acronyms in BDSM – RACK, SSC, PRICK, and CCC?
As the BDSM scene grows in popularity (and in numbers, in terms of people being interested in it), the BDSM community ‘created’ these philosophies to ensure the safety and awareness of everyone included in it. Safety, awareness, and consent should be the prime concern of everyone doing any BDSM activities.
RACK or Risk-aware Consensual Kink
RACK describes a philosophical view that is generally permissive of certain risky sexual behaviors, as long as all of the people involved understand and are aware of the risks.
Let’s actually deconstruct the acronym:
- Risk-aware – All the people involved in the activity have to understand and be aware of all the risks
- Consensual – Having in mind those risks, all of the people involved must agree to participate in it
- Kink – Any, usually sexual, activity you are doing
In fact, many say that RACK was created because the SSC philosophy wasn’t good enough.
SSC or Safe, Sane and Consensual
According to SSC, both parties involved should be sane, should be aware if their actions are safe to do, and should consent to it.
The main argument, why RACK was created, is that SSC doesn’t take into account both parties equally. If I consider something safe, does it mean you consider it safe to? If that’s sane to me, is it for you too?
RACK is often considered as a contrasting philosophy to SSC because according to SSC, only activities that are considered thoroughly safe, sane, and consensual are permitted to be practiced. In short, SSC says that activities are either safe or not safe, while, according to RACK, there is no safe. Activities can be safer or less safe.
However, my opinion is that even the RACK is not objective enough. How much of aware is aware enough and how much safe is safe enough?
Trust is one of the key factors in a healthy BDSM relationship and/ or play.
PRICK or Personal Responsibility, Informed, Consensual Kink
This philosophy was created to ensure more safety on both (or more) sides included. Meaning that all of the participants should be fully informed about the activities they are going to be doing, should be the consent of them, and in the end, and should take personal responsibility for their actions (kinks).
More related reading
- Safe Is Sexy @ Slutty Girl Problems
- Safety In BDSM @ Ask Miss Annabelle
Which one is the right one?
The fact is that some BDSM plays really go to some extent.
In other words, bodies and minds of people involved often get close to breaking point. That is the reason why safety practices should always be the primary concern. All of the participants have to be well informed of all the possible risks.
Essentially, you can’t consent, if you are not aware of everything that may happen. With that being said, there is no right or wrong philosophy. In the end, all of them want to ensure safety for all people involved.
From our workshop
I respect your take on each type.of.play. being a SSC and RACK person myself I have a different opinion. RACK the way I practice it often pushes the boundaries of safety. I do not engage in anything that I haven’t fully explained and shared the possible risks involved. This would include but not limited to breath play, blade play, fear play and things of that sort.
PRICK is a rather new to me acronym and I’ve never used it before but it sounds interesting.
Thanks for sharing
Thanks for reading our content!
Lovely intro into this. Maybe you can also join my campaign to give more safety tips “BEFORE” someone is playing with someone as I have had/seen now so many subs who were raped, abused and that while dating, stalked because they didn’t know how it works online etc.
If you want you can also reuse information from here which I compiled and also the subs gave me as feedback: https://chooseyour.top/safety-guide-for-bdsm-beginners-from-an-experienced-dom/
I’ve recently was introduced to PRICK as a RACK upgrade. While I find the personal responsibility for any outcomes aspect of PRICK appealing, your argument (and others) concerning the weaknesses of RACK haven’t won me over yet. First, you ask “how safe is safe enough?: : RACK specifically does not put the bar at “safe” – all activities have some risk, hence the desire to be risk aware. You also ask “how aware is aware enough?, yet you also suggest PRICK-ers should be “fully informed’. Is there not the question how how informed is fully informed? I find the most compelling argument for PRICK to be that one is taking responsibility for the degree to which they are informed (of which risk aware is a part) and for the possible unexpected or undesirable outcomes which may occur. My concern with PRICK, then, is that it is not as specific about calling out the fact that there are risks which should be appropriately understood. Perhaps, then, RAPRICK would be better still?