Consensual --- In a Master/slave relationship of the kind to which i am accustomed, consent is unconditionally given at the time of submission for acts from that time forward. Consensuality is in fact firmly there, more than in any other style of D/s. Consent need not be repeatedly given; it isn't accidentally overlooked, or miscommunicated, or the lack of it ignored. The slave submits (formally, by the ways to which i am accustomed), and Consensuality is there, period. 

Safe--- Safety carries with it the implication of behavior such that the risk of harm to either partner is acceptably small. It is my belief that an absolute Master/slave relationship such as those i have experienced is much, much safer than a casual play session. A Master that i serve knows me, and from His discussions with me and His explorations of me knows very well where the line between hurt and harm lies for me in general, and even as that line moves and fluctuates from day to day He will be able to "read" me and sense very well where it is. The communication, that connection that we all seek is extremely strong in this type of M/s. Those Masters that i have served have been very protective of me when it comes to my genuine safety and keeping me from harm. In contrast, a casual play partner really doesn't know much about me specifically, or what might harm me in particular; He has to limit Himself to those activities that are safe for a wide spectrum of submissives until He learns more about me. He can't go very far with edge play and remain certain that He is playing safely, because He doesn't really know where my edges are as opposed to most slaves' edges. 

Sane--- Sanity is the weakest of the SSC requirements, i believe, because what is sane by one person's standards is not by another. Some vanillas are quite vehement in their assertations that masochists such as myself are not sane, because sane people do not want to be beaten and whipped. i disagree. If a Dominant is insane and wishes to engage in insane play, to me this implies that the play is not safe. An old and somewhat overused example is the fictional Master who, while conducting an absolute relationship, suddenly flips out and decides to re-enact the Texas Chain saw Massacre. According to my training, a slave whose Master is insane, drunk, stoned, or otherwise mentally incompetent, has the solemn responsibility of protecting her Master's property (including herself) if He does not, and in the absence of His sane direction, of making "the best right decision" that she can. In contrast, i have played casually with Those that are drunk and probably legally experiencing temporary insanity. Although these experiences were not bad for me, this is risky; it is not something that i would recommend nor would i consider it to be SSC. However, prior to casual play it is not always easy to assess the level of impairment that a Top is experiencing when one does not know Him well. Therefore once again i feel that in the full sense of SSC, an absolute M/s can and in my experience genuinely is more SSC than a casual play session can be. 

The opinions expressed in this article are mine alone, and i do not expect everyone (or even anyone) to agree with them. This has been simply an explanation of why i am offended when in the past someone has from time to time accused One that i have served of not being SSC.