The Scene: A Sweet Baby Seal is having a discussion with an Uber DomlyDom in some vauge form of preparation to play.
Uber DomlyDom (with a supremely soulful, burning, and Domly gaze): So, my sweet, nubile baby seal... If I were to claim you as my own, in a most Domly and Manly fashion, what would you be willing to do for me?
Baby Seal: O! My most revered Lord and Master! I would do ANYTHING for you, because I am just that submissive and the idea is just that HAWT!
Uber DomlyDom: (leers): Anything?
Baby Seal: (whimpers): Well, anything but poop and kids and you can't kill me I guess. But other than that, yes, anything! Please, take me now! (swoons and twitterpates)
Uber DomlyDom: Muah-hahahahahaha!
Sigh.
"I'll do anything" is a great plot devise for fantasy wank-fodder, isn't it? It one neat stroke it gets rid of the learning curve that most rational, sane folks might require before that jump into the deep end of kink. It gets us right to the "good stuff" in the story without making us wait through the less interesting (and less titillating) real life crap like education, negotiation, limits, blah, blah, blah... It's always Zero to "Anything" in the stories and it's like that for a reason- Because it's a STORY. It's NOT REAL.
Why? Because nobody is willing to do absolutely anything. Nobody. Everybody has a limit, every single person has at least one thing they will never do or that they'll never be willing to try- Most people have quite a few things on their No-Go list. Some of those thing might not even be thought of as a limit- Like someone with a nut allergy might not say, "Eating pecans is a hard limit" but you can bet if their Dom told them to eat a great big slice of pecan pie they'd probably tap out right quick.
"ANYTHING" covers a whole lot of territory, it's not just the common fun sexy-times games that a newbie is most likely to have heard or read about, it's also the really obscure niche stuff that perhaps 1 in 1,000 people would actually be willing to do. It's the stuff in the list that will not be cool with everybody out there, and may only be cool with a few people out there.
"Anything" could mean spending the rest of your life naked in a bare basement in Idaho fed nothing but potatoes and rutabagas, allowed to bathe once a month in cold water, and used in a most disagreeable sexual fashion whenever the mood strikes who ever you told that "Anything" was cool (and maybe his unbathed, unattractive buddies might get in on the action too).
It's the more vanilla parts of a dynamic, like being required to hand over your bank account information and social security card number- It's the stuff that can have a really horrible impact on your life if you're not absolutely certain that your D-type is 100% trust-worthy. It's things that can effect your future employment opportunities. It's being told who you're allowed to socialize with and when- Your friends, your family, your kids? Are you cool with that?
It's your health decisions and your future health... Like, say he wants to have an open relationship and he's not willing to wear condoms with any of his partners including you- Is that part of "anything"? Are you willing to get pregnant when he says so or have an abortion on his say-so? Is he allowed to make your medical decisions for you? Decide what doctor you go to or when you're allowed to see the doctor?
"Anything" can include choices about your housing, where you'll live, what pets you can keep, and taking care of pets you might not want. It can mean handing over your driver's license, passport, or other forms of identification, maybe handing over any ways you would have to access your money.
So are you really willing to do "Anything" or is this concept perhaps something that could require a bit more thought and learning so that you can clearly define the things you will do and the things you won't do?
Because I can garentee you, you will not do "Anything."
And here's a great place to start:
http://www.cepemo.com/checklist.html
This is a handy-dandy list of the more common forms of play people engage it. It's not all of them, but it's a good start. Google is a helpful too for looking up things you're unsure of, and there is also an excellent glossary of terms on fet (just type "glossary" into the groups' search box).
*********************
As an aside: What does that phrase "I'll do anything" mean to you when you hear it? I have a few ideas, but I'd like to see what other folks think to compare.
And another quick Q: Why do you think people say it?
Friday, August 30, 2013
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
The Problem With Priviledge.
In a discussion on That Other Site I stumbled across a discussion about the word "Cisgender" the other day. I'd seen the word before but didn't really know what it meant (a person who identifies with the gender they were born with: I was born a girl and I identify as a girl) so it was kind of interesting. And I can see how the word can be useful in a "Is Seeking" way- It readily identifies the type of person you might be looking for (I'm a girl who is looking for a Cisgendered guy), it's just a form of shorthand in my view.
So that's cool, I learned something new.
But then someone brought up "Cisgender Privilege." Basically the idea that because of the person you are you have these privileges that someone who isn't like you won't have.
And I get that, I know that because of my race, gender, and sexual orientation I might have options available to me that are not available to someone who isn't like me- I'm white, a girl who identifies as a girl, and straight. It sucks, but until enough people are willing to work on changing those issues it's not going to change... And like I said, that sucks.
But here's the problem with that whole concept of "Because you were born the way you are you have these privileges that I don't have"... On a one-on-one basis, they're not always true, or the thing someone sees as a "privilege" comes with its own set of problems. There's also the issue that by calling these things that someone like me gets by default a "privilege" it sends a "You get this and I don't so feel guilty and bad about the person you were born as" message instead of a, "Hey, this isn't right and it needs to be fixed" message. One message might inspire people to want to help resolve what's wrong- The other... It can make people feel defensive, guilty, or like you're dismissing whatever problems they face in their life because, well, they're just not as special or put-upon as you.
Not something that exactly inspires helpfulness, you know? So yeah. Instead of telling me how privileged I am when you have no idea what my life is like? Just tell me what I can do to help solve these issues that you face. If I can help, I will. For me, it's that simple.
So that's cool, I learned something new.
But then someone brought up "Cisgender Privilege." Basically the idea that because of the person you are you have these privileges that someone who isn't like you won't have.
And I get that, I know that because of my race, gender, and sexual orientation I might have options available to me that are not available to someone who isn't like me- I'm white, a girl who identifies as a girl, and straight. It sucks, but until enough people are willing to work on changing those issues it's not going to change... And like I said, that sucks.
But here's the problem with that whole concept of "Because you were born the way you are you have these privileges that I don't have"... On a one-on-one basis, they're not always true, or the thing someone sees as a "privilege" comes with its own set of problems. There's also the issue that by calling these things that someone like me gets by default a "privilege" it sends a "You get this and I don't so feel guilty and bad about the person you were born as" message instead of a, "Hey, this isn't right and it needs to be fixed" message. One message might inspire people to want to help resolve what's wrong- The other... It can make people feel defensive, guilty, or like you're dismissing whatever problems they face in their life because, well, they're just not as special or put-upon as you.
Not something that exactly inspires helpfulness, you know? So yeah. Instead of telling me how privileged I am when you have no idea what my life is like? Just tell me what I can do to help solve these issues that you face. If I can help, I will. For me, it's that simple.
Respect or Courtesy?
There are very few people whom I genuinely respect in my life:
Cookie- Because he's awesome. He's everything that I think a really great person ought to be. Honest, hard-working, loyal, trust-worthy, kind to small children and animals... You get the picture, I'm sure.
My Brother- Because no matter how hard life knees him in the nuts he keeps moving on without becoming bitter or cynical. He always has a smile on his face. He's another good guy.
My Bestie- Because no matter what she's always had my back, and she's another awesomely great person.
There might be a handful more, but I don't care to list them all because I think most people will get the point- That respect is something I reserve for people I hold in high esteem. For me, it's not something I hand out to just anybody, it's something that those folks got after years of being really good people, people I could depend on, people I wanted to respect because of their words and actions.
So when I see people talking about respect, my mind always does this annoying "Huh What?" thing because they're generally talking about affording what I think of as a "High Esteem" honor to strangers. Mostly strangers who think they deserve the honor just because they've slapped a title in front of their names.
And then I think, "Are they actually talking about courtesy?"
To me, courtesy and respect are not interchangeable ideas. I see courtesy as the stuff that greases the wheels of pleasant society: Saying please and thank you, holding doors, using honorifics to address strangers (something that gets tricky in the kinkyverse), you know- generally acting like a decent human being and being pleasant towards others. Courtesy is something that everybody deserves.
To me they're different concepts, respect and courtesy.
And I only mention it because it might help newbies who hear "All D-types deserve respect!" to think about it in a different way- That perhaps nobody deserves your respect until you find them deserving of your respect... But until then, they definitely deserve common courtesy (as do you). And when you think about this sort of thing as just a courtesy issue, or a "good manners" thing, it's a lot easier to get a handle on how folks, especially strangers, deserve to be treated.
Disclaimer: YMMV. My opinion and it only applies to me. If you have different views that's cool, I'm not right and you're not wrong (and vice versa). Our opinions just differ. Rock on.
Cookie- Because he's awesome. He's everything that I think a really great person ought to be. Honest, hard-working, loyal, trust-worthy, kind to small children and animals... You get the picture, I'm sure.
My Brother- Because no matter how hard life knees him in the nuts he keeps moving on without becoming bitter or cynical. He always has a smile on his face. He's another good guy.
My Bestie- Because no matter what she's always had my back, and she's another awesomely great person.
There might be a handful more, but I don't care to list them all because I think most people will get the point- That respect is something I reserve for people I hold in high esteem. For me, it's not something I hand out to just anybody, it's something that those folks got after years of being really good people, people I could depend on, people I wanted to respect because of their words and actions.
So when I see people talking about respect, my mind always does this annoying "Huh What?" thing because they're generally talking about affording what I think of as a "High Esteem" honor to strangers. Mostly strangers who think they deserve the honor just because they've slapped a title in front of their names.
And then I think, "Are they actually talking about courtesy?"
To me, courtesy and respect are not interchangeable ideas. I see courtesy as the stuff that greases the wheels of pleasant society: Saying please and thank you, holding doors, using honorifics to address strangers (something that gets tricky in the kinkyverse), you know- generally acting like a decent human being and being pleasant towards others. Courtesy is something that everybody deserves.
To me they're different concepts, respect and courtesy.
And I only mention it because it might help newbies who hear "All D-types deserve respect!" to think about it in a different way- That perhaps nobody deserves your respect until you find them deserving of your respect... But until then, they definitely deserve common courtesy (as do you). And when you think about this sort of thing as just a courtesy issue, or a "good manners" thing, it's a lot easier to get a handle on how folks, especially strangers, deserve to be treated.
Disclaimer: YMMV. My opinion and it only applies to me. If you have different views that's cool, I'm not right and you're not wrong (and vice versa). Our opinions just differ. Rock on.
He Might be a Dom but he's not YOUR Dom.
Reading through the blogs today I came across these lines in another lady's writings:
I watch lots of submissives and slaves on here call a lot of Doms/Masters they don't know Sir or Master. And I see nothing wrong with that it is very respectful.
And though I agreed with a lot of what she said in her post, that last sentence there just rubbed me the wrong way- Not because there's anything wrong with being polite or courteous or what-have-you, but because of the response I have when some random chick uses a D-typey label on Cookie or how he feels when it happens... Suffice to say, it feels less respectful and more presumptuous.
I mean, I have right to call Cookie by whatever label he wants (which is usually Dear or Darling, he's not big on titles) because, yanno, I'm actually in a relationship with him. He's MY Domly One, MY husband, and to anybody but me... He's NOT a Master, Sir, Lord High Dolmy Pants because he's NOT in a relationship with you. I AM submissive to him, YOU are not. So don't go acting all uber subly at my spouse. It's offensive.
And for him? He HATES it when random chicks pull that shit on him because, again, he's not in a relationship with you. He has not consented to any sort of authority exchange that a title like that infers, and he finds it really rather creepy and DISRESPECTFUL. Disrespectful to his desires, disrespectful to his relationship, and disrespectful to him as a person.
So, yeah... No. Calling some random D-type by a title isn't always "very respectful" especially if being called by that title by someone they're not in a relationship with isn't something they want to have happen.
Food for thought.
I watch lots of submissives and slaves on here call a lot of Doms/Masters they don't know Sir or Master. And I see nothing wrong with that it is very respectful.
And though I agreed with a lot of what she said in her post, that last sentence there just rubbed me the wrong way- Not because there's anything wrong with being polite or courteous or what-have-you, but because of the response I have when some random chick uses a D-typey label on Cookie or how he feels when it happens... Suffice to say, it feels less respectful and more presumptuous.
I mean, I have right to call Cookie by whatever label he wants (which is usually Dear or Darling, he's not big on titles) because, yanno, I'm actually in a relationship with him. He's MY Domly One, MY husband, and to anybody but me... He's NOT a Master, Sir, Lord High Dolmy Pants because he's NOT in a relationship with you. I AM submissive to him, YOU are not. So don't go acting all uber subly at my spouse. It's offensive.
And for him? He HATES it when random chicks pull that shit on him because, again, he's not in a relationship with you. He has not consented to any sort of authority exchange that a title like that infers, and he finds it really rather creepy and DISRESPECTFUL. Disrespectful to his desires, disrespectful to his relationship, and disrespectful to him as a person.
So, yeah... No. Calling some random D-type by a title isn't always "very respectful" especially if being called by that title by someone they're not in a relationship with isn't something they want to have happen.
Food for thought.
What Does It Mean To You?
There's a poll posted that asks what sort of s-type people identify as and what that label means to them. Because I was getting ready to run the roads with my mom (our belated mother's day trip, we spent mom's day in the ER) I just gave the easy answer- That being a submissive means that my partner is the person with more authority in our relationship. It's a pretty generic answer though, and there's nothing very personal about it because of how generic it is. I mean, it's one of those answers that can apply to pretty much any D/s relationship; That the D is the one with more authority.
So I'm not satisfied with it. I don't like easy answers. They don't require much thought. They're very bland.
So today whilst wandering around the HUGE antique store I pondered. I pondered while eating really great Chinese. I pondered while driving and then stopped when some hooplehead did something stupid and tried to kill me. Now I'm home and pondering some more... What does submission mean to me? Hmm...
I suppose it means that I trust him, not only with my safety when we play but with the decisions that effect our life together. I trust him to use his authority wisely. It means that he trusts me to speak up when his judgment fails and he wants to do something silly- Which adds to my ability to trust him because he recognizes that he's fallible.
It means that I get to play the role that feels most comfortable to me. I'm perfectly able to take the lead on things, it's sort of something one needs to be able to do on occasion to function well I think, but if I'm honest- I do better in a supporting role. I'm an executive assistant, 2nd in Command, the Riker to his Picard. I take care of the little shit (and sometimes the big shit) so he doesn't have to. I can call the shots, I will call them when it's necessary, but being his submissive- That means I don't have to call ALL the shots.
Another thing it means is that in this relationship I can orient in the way that most fulfills me- As a submissive. In all of my other relationships I've been the partner with more authority- Maybe because I picked guys who didn't want to be in charge or maybe because they thought that I wanted to be in charge- I don't know. But I know that those relationships were never right for me. They were all great guys, just not great guys for me. And then Cookie came along and I don't know how he saw it, but he understood that my personality and my relationship orientation were different things (he's a smart guy, my Cookie).
And speaking of personality and orientations- Submission, to me, means that one does not have to be the same as the other. I can be a snarktastic, out-going, karaoke rocking, ass-kicking, type A control freak and also submit in a relationship. I have a dominant personality and a submissive orientation.
What else does it mean? Hmmm... For me it means I get the wild kinky monkey sex. That's pretty awesome. It means I get to be his warrior princess (yeah, that's kinda cheesy, but it gives him a tickle in his potty knowing that someone who could kill him whist hog-tied and blindfolded will submit to his man whims).
And there's probably more, but the food coma is kicking in and I think I'm going to lump and digest and play some farm saga game on FB.
Also- I blame any disjointedness on the impending food coma. I should not write and digest at the same time.
So I'm not satisfied with it. I don't like easy answers. They don't require much thought. They're very bland.
So today whilst wandering around the HUGE antique store I pondered. I pondered while eating really great Chinese. I pondered while driving and then stopped when some hooplehead did something stupid and tried to kill me. Now I'm home and pondering some more... What does submission mean to me? Hmm...
I suppose it means that I trust him, not only with my safety when we play but with the decisions that effect our life together. I trust him to use his authority wisely. It means that he trusts me to speak up when his judgment fails and he wants to do something silly- Which adds to my ability to trust him because he recognizes that he's fallible.
It means that I get to play the role that feels most comfortable to me. I'm perfectly able to take the lead on things, it's sort of something one needs to be able to do on occasion to function well I think, but if I'm honest- I do better in a supporting role. I'm an executive assistant, 2nd in Command, the Riker to his Picard. I take care of the little shit (and sometimes the big shit) so he doesn't have to. I can call the shots, I will call them when it's necessary, but being his submissive- That means I don't have to call ALL the shots.
Another thing it means is that in this relationship I can orient in the way that most fulfills me- As a submissive. In all of my other relationships I've been the partner with more authority- Maybe because I picked guys who didn't want to be in charge or maybe because they thought that I wanted to be in charge- I don't know. But I know that those relationships were never right for me. They were all great guys, just not great guys for me. And then Cookie came along and I don't know how he saw it, but he understood that my personality and my relationship orientation were different things (he's a smart guy, my Cookie).
And speaking of personality and orientations- Submission, to me, means that one does not have to be the same as the other. I can be a snarktastic, out-going, karaoke rocking, ass-kicking, type A control freak and also submit in a relationship. I have a dominant personality and a submissive orientation.
What else does it mean? Hmmm... For me it means I get the wild kinky monkey sex. That's pretty awesome. It means I get to be his warrior princess (yeah, that's kinda cheesy, but it gives him a tickle in his potty knowing that someone who could kill him whist hog-tied and blindfolded will submit to his man whims).
And there's probably more, but the food coma is kicking in and I think I'm going to lump and digest and play some farm saga game on FB.
Also- I blame any disjointedness on the impending food coma. I should not write and digest at the same time.
The English Language & "Breaking"
I like words. When I was little my dad and I used to read through the thesaurus, looking for obscure words, in an attempt to stump each other. I have actually read the dictionary ( a few times, even). Words are important to me because they are used to express ideas. The right words can make people have an "Ah-Ha!" moment of understanding and engender clarity, the wrong words can leave them befuddled, unenlightened, or with an idea that you didn't mean to impart.
So there's that. I'm an anal retentive word Nazi (not a word I like to use, but the one that conveys the idea the best). I'm a very literal person.
Now, I wrote all of that to set the stage for this next bit: My visceral, negative reaction to the word "break" as it's often applied to submissives here in the Kinkyverse. It seems that there's three main usages for the word (and I'm going to borrow from ShatteredandShining's poll because that's where the idea for this blog cam from)-
Break their defenses, walls, help them be open
Break them down so they surrender
Break their will so they submit completely
All of those, even the one example that's being framed in a fairly positive context, make me shudder. "Break" is a word that implies harm, damage, force. It's synonyms are crack, fracture, burst, split, splinter, shatter, smash. There are about eleventy-billion usages for the word and any of those usages with a positive connotation are few and far between (If you're curious, feel free to follow this link to The Free Dictionary: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/break ).
So it makes me wonder; Why is such a negative word so popular when it comes to how a person wants to be treated or how submissives are treated especially when there are so many other words that can convey a positive, healthy experience?
Build me up so I can begin to dismantle my own wall...
Inspire me to surrender because you're someone I can trust and rely on...
Give me a reason to bend my will to your own...
I know there has to be some Hot fantasy Factor playing into it. There's loads of poorly written (and well written) erotica where the Domly fixes the poor little subbie's problems, forces them to surrender, tortures them until their will breaks... But that's fantasy. It doesn't have to be healthy or leave the person capable to deal with life on their own after the Domly exits stage right. Fantasy and fiction- They don't have to take into account that once something has been broken it will need to be repaired.
Is it a failure of the English language that there's not another, better, word available to express those ideas?
I don't know. I suspect there is, but whatever those reasons are they elude me because the idea of being "broken" is so utterly repugnant and feels so harmful. Perhaps someone else will have another view that might bring clarity or another word that might serve better in the place of "breaking."
If they do, I'd love to hear it.
So there's that. I'm an anal retentive word Nazi (not a word I like to use, but the one that conveys the idea the best). I'm a very literal person.
Now, I wrote all of that to set the stage for this next bit: My visceral, negative reaction to the word "break" as it's often applied to submissives here in the Kinkyverse. It seems that there's three main usages for the word (and I'm going to borrow from ShatteredandShining's poll because that's where the idea for this blog cam from)-
Break their defenses, walls, help them be open
Break them down so they surrender
Break their will so they submit completely
All of those, even the one example that's being framed in a fairly positive context, make me shudder. "Break" is a word that implies harm, damage, force. It's synonyms are crack, fracture, burst, split, splinter, shatter, smash. There are about eleventy-billion usages for the word and any of those usages with a positive connotation are few and far between (If you're curious, feel free to follow this link to The Free Dictionary: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/break ).
So it makes me wonder; Why is such a negative word so popular when it comes to how a person wants to be treated or how submissives are treated especially when there are so many other words that can convey a positive, healthy experience?
Build me up so I can begin to dismantle my own wall...
Inspire me to surrender because you're someone I can trust and rely on...
Give me a reason to bend my will to your own...
I know there has to be some Hot fantasy Factor playing into it. There's loads of poorly written (and well written) erotica where the Domly fixes the poor little subbie's problems, forces them to surrender, tortures them until their will breaks... But that's fantasy. It doesn't have to be healthy or leave the person capable to deal with life on their own after the Domly exits stage right. Fantasy and fiction- They don't have to take into account that once something has been broken it will need to be repaired.
Is it a failure of the English language that there's not another, better, word available to express those ideas?
I don't know. I suspect there is, but whatever those reasons are they elude me because the idea of being "broken" is so utterly repugnant and feels so harmful. Perhaps someone else will have another view that might bring clarity or another word that might serve better in the place of "breaking."
If they do, I'd love to hear it.
How Do You Quantify Equality?
There's a poll lurking about somewhere on here that asks the question- "Do you believe that it is possible for both people in a D/s relationship to be truly equal?"
Says I, "Yes. Our worth as people is equal, we are equally invested in our relationship, we are equally responsible for the health of our relationship. What isn't equal is the amount of authority we have (he has more than I do)." And that's pretty much all I thought about it until Rhiannon responded to the poll with:
"I don't believe in 100% equality in any relationship, either kinky or vanilla. Someone is always going to be more dependent on the other person, whether financially or emotionally."
That's her opinion and more power to her, but it got me thinking about the areas where Cookie and I are not equals and if those inequalities made one of us "less than" the other.
Cookie > Squeaky
Cookie < Squeaky
It made me wonder how, exactly, do you quantify an idea or concept? Because really, that's all equality is- It's just a notion that people have about value.
If I were a math whiz I could probably make up some fancy equation where every aspect of our selves and our relationship could be assigned a numerical value and figure it out from there. I could give things like emotions letters, and assign pi to cooking abilities (because it's pi, yo). If I were any good at math, what-so-ever, I could figure that stuff out and decide, once and for all, which one of us had more value than the other.
But I'm not sure what the purpose of that would be other than to say, "I'm worth more than you, I'm better than you, my value is more than yours." And that sort of thing, although I know it gets a lot of people's rocks off, just isn't a healthy concept for me to embrace.
And then I was wondering; Does earning less than your partner decrease your worth as a person or your worth in the relationship? Is being more emotionally dependent decrease your value as a person? Does being a D-type mean you're more important than your s-type partner? Really effing tricky questions to answer, if they are even answerable.
After all that I wondered- Does it even matter? Or should it even matter?
For me, I don't think it should. I mean, what's the point of it other than being able to say "I'm better than you"? It won't make my relationship healthier or happier, it wouldn't make me feel better about myself as person. I prefer to think of it as an "averaging out" kind of deal-
He may contribute more financially, but I contribute more around the home- Our contributions to our home evens out.
I may have a wider knowledge base, but he thinks in ways that connect things I miss- Our intellectual contributions even out.
I'm more logical and he's a dreamer- Our contributions to our future plans evens out.
One of us may be better at something than the other is, but taken as a whole- I'd say we're pretty even except on the whole authority thing- but I don't see that as something that effects our worth to each other or our relationship. So on a whole I'd say we're equals... As much as an unquantifiable concept can be quantified, that is.
A quick side-note: Please keep in mind that by using a quote from someone I am not attacking them, I'm providing source material for my thought process. There's a difference between attacking a person and having a difference of opinions.
Says I, "Yes. Our worth as people is equal, we are equally invested in our relationship, we are equally responsible for the health of our relationship. What isn't equal is the amount of authority we have (he has more than I do)." And that's pretty much all I thought about it until Rhiannon responded to the poll with:
"I don't believe in 100% equality in any relationship, either kinky or vanilla. Someone is always going to be more dependent on the other person, whether financially or emotionally."
That's her opinion and more power to her, but it got me thinking about the areas where Cookie and I are not equals and if those inequalities made one of us "less than" the other.
Cookie > Squeaky
Cookie < Squeaky
It made me wonder how, exactly, do you quantify an idea or concept? Because really, that's all equality is- It's just a notion that people have about value.
If I were a math whiz I could probably make up some fancy equation where every aspect of our selves and our relationship could be assigned a numerical value and figure it out from there. I could give things like emotions letters, and assign pi to cooking abilities (because it's pi, yo). If I were any good at math, what-so-ever, I could figure that stuff out and decide, once and for all, which one of us had more value than the other.
But I'm not sure what the purpose of that would be other than to say, "I'm worth more than you, I'm better than you, my value is more than yours." And that sort of thing, although I know it gets a lot of people's rocks off, just isn't a healthy concept for me to embrace.
And then I was wondering; Does earning less than your partner decrease your worth as a person or your worth in the relationship? Is being more emotionally dependent decrease your value as a person? Does being a D-type mean you're more important than your s-type partner? Really effing tricky questions to answer, if they are even answerable.
After all that I wondered- Does it even matter? Or should it even matter?
For me, I don't think it should. I mean, what's the point of it other than being able to say "I'm better than you"? It won't make my relationship healthier or happier, it wouldn't make me feel better about myself as person. I prefer to think of it as an "averaging out" kind of deal-
He may contribute more financially, but I contribute more around the home- Our contributions to our home evens out.
I may have a wider knowledge base, but he thinks in ways that connect things I miss- Our intellectual contributions even out.
I'm more logical and he's a dreamer- Our contributions to our future plans evens out.
One of us may be better at something than the other is, but taken as a whole- I'd say we're pretty even except on the whole authority thing- but I don't see that as something that effects our worth to each other or our relationship. So on a whole I'd say we're equals... As much as an unquantifiable concept can be quantified, that is.
A quick side-note: Please keep in mind that by using a quote from someone I am not attacking them, I'm providing source material for my thought process. There's a difference between attacking a person and having a difference of opinions.
What It Means...
"They just don't understand what the lifestyle means..."
That's a statement that I see used quite often in the Kinkyverse in reference to the Default World's view of kink, BDSM, and other assorted forms of Alternative Living (which for some reason makes me want to publish a magazine... No idea why). I guess the implied idea is that if They just understood, everything would be copasetic and we'd all coexist in harmony and there would be fluffy bunny huggles all around. In a field of wildflowers full of puppy dogs. And there's be rainbow shitting unicorns. Awesome!
Um. Anyways...
Every time I see that sentiment expressed I kind of scratch my noggin and think, Dood. I have no idea what IT means. How can they ever hope to?
Seriously. I know what it means to me (I think). But to you? Or that guy over there? Or that chick with the kickass Louboutins... No idea.
Someone's probably thinking that it means that they get wild kinky monkey sex.
That girl over there? She's probably thinking that it means something hella squishy and lovey and stars-in-her-eyes-rose-tinted-glasses and OMG! SQUEEEEE!!!eleven!!
Someone else is thinking that it means they get to be in charge.
That guy? The one with the computer in his mom's basement? it means that he's suddenly a playboy millionaire with 27 online submissives fawning all over his internet persona.
For someone it's just play, or it's a committed relationship, or it's NSA sex, or it's fun with friends...
It's monogamous and poly, it's open, swinging, or not.
It's sadistic, masochistic, sensation play, edge play, or at the very fringes of those things or none of those things(maybe).
It's slaves, subs, bottoms, pets, babygirls, little ones, brats, pests, playful ones, the super serious and the irreverent.
It's masters, doms, tops, owners, trainers, and Lord High Awesomepants (how do you pluralize that?).
It's a million different things to a million different people.
So how is it possible to explain to someone not kinky what "it" mans when nobody involved in the Kinkyverse can even agree? There's no consensus, no governing body, no Uber Secret Stealth Cabal of Kink and BDSM and Shit...
Other than saying "It means that I'm happy, healthy, and fulfilled" and leaving "it" at that?
What does it mean to you?
That's a statement that I see used quite often in the Kinkyverse in reference to the Default World's view of kink, BDSM, and other assorted forms of Alternative Living (which for some reason makes me want to publish a magazine... No idea why). I guess the implied idea is that if They just understood, everything would be copasetic and we'd all coexist in harmony and there would be fluffy bunny huggles all around. In a field of wildflowers full of puppy dogs. And there's be rainbow shitting unicorns. Awesome!
Um. Anyways...
Every time I see that sentiment expressed I kind of scratch my noggin and think, Dood. I have no idea what IT means. How can they ever hope to?
Seriously. I know what it means to me (I think). But to you? Or that guy over there? Or that chick with the kickass Louboutins... No idea.
Someone's probably thinking that it means that they get wild kinky monkey sex.
That girl over there? She's probably thinking that it means something hella squishy and lovey and stars-in-her-eyes-rose-tinted-glasses and OMG! SQUEEEEE!!!eleven!!
Someone else is thinking that it means they get to be in charge.
That guy? The one with the computer in his mom's basement? it means that he's suddenly a playboy millionaire with 27 online submissives fawning all over his internet persona.
For someone it's just play, or it's a committed relationship, or it's NSA sex, or it's fun with friends...
It's monogamous and poly, it's open, swinging, or not.
It's sadistic, masochistic, sensation play, edge play, or at the very fringes of those things or none of those things(maybe).
It's slaves, subs, bottoms, pets, babygirls, little ones, brats, pests, playful ones, the super serious and the irreverent.
It's masters, doms, tops, owners, trainers, and Lord High Awesomepants (how do you pluralize that?).
It's a million different things to a million different people.
So how is it possible to explain to someone not kinky what "it" mans when nobody involved in the Kinkyverse can even agree? There's no consensus, no governing body, no Uber Secret Stealth Cabal of Kink and BDSM and Shit...
Other than saying "It means that I'm happy, healthy, and fulfilled" and leaving "it" at that?
What does it mean to you?
Pushing Limits
I see the sentiment "People should push their limit" often in the Kinkyverse.
To some extent I can understand that- If someone never goes outside of their comfort zone how can they discover what they're capable of? I think it's a good thing to want to expand one's horizons and try to become the best person they can be. I think it's a laudable endeavor to want to stretch one's boundaries in a quest for self-improvement, fulfillment, or whatever other positive outcome can result from a foray beyond what is known and comfy. If you don't try, you'll never know- Right?
So I had to do a bit of thinking about what it is about the sentiment expressed above that sometimes makes me cringe.
After some reflection (and a ciggy and a can of Diet Dew or two) I came to this conclusion: When I see folks talking about pushing limits I rarely, if ever, see them discuss things like mental health, physical safety, the motivations for wanting to push limits, or the distinctions between soft and hard limits.
The statement is usually just expressed as "You should push your limits" and stops there, which I think creates the potential for a bit of a train wreck- Especially for Baby Seals or Domlies who are new to being a Dominant; the folks who might not be aware of the fact that not all limits need to be pushed, prodded, poked at, or otherwise tampered with.
I feel that the statement can also foster an atmosphere of unhealthy competition- Think about it for a second... If you're fairly new and still learning about BDSM, if you've got some limits in place, but you're still in that place that makes you question your worth because of your newness and you see someone say that you should push your limits, how might that make you feel?
Like you're not quite "good enough"? Like you ought to be doing more so you can keep up with more experienced submissives or s-types who have less (or different) limits than you do? There's an underlying message that if you're not pushing your limits or allowing someone else to jab at them with a stick, that you're doing it wrong- But without experience, self-awareness, and knowledge base to know why a limit is a limit, or if pushing it is even a good idea... Add to that the fact that the idea is often used by unscrupulous D-types to manipulate a newbie into doing things they don't want to do or are not ready for.... Train wreck.
Honestly, I don't think "You need to push your limits" is a statement anybody needs to be making to another person, about any aspect of that person's life. If someone wants to push their own limits, if they want to try more new things that they're maybe not comfortable with, I feel that they're perfectly capable of figuring out that some limit pushing might be in order- But it needs to be their idea, their desire, and done at their pace so it can be a safe, healthy, and fulfilling experience.
But that's just me and I'm a big fan of having a healthy respect for other people's limits because they're not my limits to screw around with. I sure as shit would not want to say "You should push your limits" and then have someone get harmed because they didn't know how to do it safely, or that they didn't need to do it at all. I wouldn't want that responsibility on my shoulders... Do you?
To some extent I can understand that- If someone never goes outside of their comfort zone how can they discover what they're capable of? I think it's a good thing to want to expand one's horizons and try to become the best person they can be. I think it's a laudable endeavor to want to stretch one's boundaries in a quest for self-improvement, fulfillment, or whatever other positive outcome can result from a foray beyond what is known and comfy. If you don't try, you'll never know- Right?
So I had to do a bit of thinking about what it is about the sentiment expressed above that sometimes makes me cringe.
After some reflection (and a ciggy and a can of Diet Dew or two) I came to this conclusion: When I see folks talking about pushing limits I rarely, if ever, see them discuss things like mental health, physical safety, the motivations for wanting to push limits, or the distinctions between soft and hard limits.
The statement is usually just expressed as "You should push your limits" and stops there, which I think creates the potential for a bit of a train wreck- Especially for Baby Seals or Domlies who are new to being a Dominant; the folks who might not be aware of the fact that not all limits need to be pushed, prodded, poked at, or otherwise tampered with.
I feel that the statement can also foster an atmosphere of unhealthy competition- Think about it for a second... If you're fairly new and still learning about BDSM, if you've got some limits in place, but you're still in that place that makes you question your worth because of your newness and you see someone say that you should push your limits, how might that make you feel?
Like you're not quite "good enough"? Like you ought to be doing more so you can keep up with more experienced submissives or s-types who have less (or different) limits than you do? There's an underlying message that if you're not pushing your limits or allowing someone else to jab at them with a stick, that you're doing it wrong- But without experience, self-awareness, and knowledge base to know why a limit is a limit, or if pushing it is even a good idea... Add to that the fact that the idea is often used by unscrupulous D-types to manipulate a newbie into doing things they don't want to do or are not ready for.... Train wreck.
Honestly, I don't think "You need to push your limits" is a statement anybody needs to be making to another person, about any aspect of that person's life. If someone wants to push their own limits, if they want to try more new things that they're maybe not comfortable with, I feel that they're perfectly capable of figuring out that some limit pushing might be in order- But it needs to be their idea, their desire, and done at their pace so it can be a safe, healthy, and fulfilling experience.
But that's just me and I'm a big fan of having a healthy respect for other people's limits because they're not my limits to screw around with. I sure as shit would not want to say "You should push your limits" and then have someone get harmed because they didn't know how to do it safely, or that they didn't need to do it at all. I wouldn't want that responsibility on my shoulders... Do you?
I can has Cheeseburger?
I adore cheeseburgers.
I like how simple they are but how much complexity you can add to them- From the way you cook them, to the buns you put them on, to the toppings you give them. There's eleventy-bajillion ways to make a cheeseburger (at least). And like most Americans (the cheeseburger-loving sort anyways) I've had my quest to find the epic burger. I've developed my cheeseburger preferences.
What makes my perfect cheeseburger?
It has to start with Confer's meat (Their business slogan is "Home killed meats"), they're a local mom and pop operation and I've yet to find better burger meat anywhere.
Then, I fire up the Webber. One of the old school black ones that uses charcoal briquettes (Match Light being my briquette of choice here). It can't be a gas grill and it can't be a pan, a charcoal fire is the way to go. I cook my burgers medium, I like a bit of pink in the center.
I get my buns from Kroger's Deli. I like the oniony ones for their flavor, and they're big so you can slap a ton of shit on them without having a dreaded burger blow-out.
Some real Mayo, a dab of French's Mustard. A honking huge slice of beefsteak tomato, some portabella mushroom, swiss cheese, bacon, and fried onions... Om Nom Nom!
That is the way to happy burger heaven. That's my One True Cheeseburger.
And now I bet someone out there is reading this and screaming at their computer screen, "Squeaky! What are you thinking!? A true burger has raw Vidalia onions on it! It has American cheese! A whole wheat bun is the way to go! And charcoal *GASP!* True burgers are cooked over a gas flame!"
Yep. Someone out there is having palpitations. There may even be some tachycardia involved and a bit of mouth frothing.
Why? Because my cheeseburger truth, for some illogical reason, threatens their cheeseburger truth. There mere idea that someone out there doesn't find their True Cheeseburger Way to be the Only Right Way makes them feel insecure, unsettled, and all mouth frothy. Personally, I don't get it, and I think it's silly, but that's the way it is.
That's the way BDSM is too. BDSM is like those eleventy-bajillion cheeseburgers. Simple and complex all at the same time, and like the cheeseburger there's no One True Way to do it (even if some frothy mouthed folks think there is). It's all about preference. You might like olives on your cheeseburger while I think olives are a salty tool of the devil designed to disgust me and ruin other-wise tasty food stuffs. I might like being a mouthy, difficult submissive while you think subs like me are a tool of the devil sent to thwart your Dominess.
neither of us are right, and neither of us are wrong- Not in a general sense anyways. We're right for ourselves even if we're wrong for each other, but that each other bit doesn't matter unless we're actually wanting to play. Then we'd find ourselves incompatible, but still not wrong. Just... Incompatible.
So, you know, maybe it would be helpful for folks to think about BDSM the same way we think abut cheeseburgers. None of us really expect everybody in the universe to enjoy their cheeseburgers the same way we do, right? And we're pretty unlikely to get all frothy mouthed at the idea that someone else enjoys their cheeseburger in a different way, yeah? I mean, that would just be beyond silly to get worked up over something so inconsequential.
My BDSMburger is way different from yours, and that's A-OK. It's just a burger, after all.
(Today I ate a bag of coconut M&Ms and had 5 cans of Diet Dew. Writing while hopped up on that much sugar and caffeine might not have been the best idea I've ever had, yo)
I like how simple they are but how much complexity you can add to them- From the way you cook them, to the buns you put them on, to the toppings you give them. There's eleventy-bajillion ways to make a cheeseburger (at least). And like most Americans (the cheeseburger-loving sort anyways) I've had my quest to find the epic burger. I've developed my cheeseburger preferences.
What makes my perfect cheeseburger?
It has to start with Confer's meat (Their business slogan is "Home killed meats"), they're a local mom and pop operation and I've yet to find better burger meat anywhere.
Then, I fire up the Webber. One of the old school black ones that uses charcoal briquettes (Match Light being my briquette of choice here). It can't be a gas grill and it can't be a pan, a charcoal fire is the way to go. I cook my burgers medium, I like a bit of pink in the center.
I get my buns from Kroger's Deli. I like the oniony ones for their flavor, and they're big so you can slap a ton of shit on them without having a dreaded burger blow-out.
Some real Mayo, a dab of French's Mustard. A honking huge slice of beefsteak tomato, some portabella mushroom, swiss cheese, bacon, and fried onions... Om Nom Nom!
That is the way to happy burger heaven. That's my One True Cheeseburger.
And now I bet someone out there is reading this and screaming at their computer screen, "Squeaky! What are you thinking!? A true burger has raw Vidalia onions on it! It has American cheese! A whole wheat bun is the way to go! And charcoal *GASP!* True burgers are cooked over a gas flame!"
Yep. Someone out there is having palpitations. There may even be some tachycardia involved and a bit of mouth frothing.
Why? Because my cheeseburger truth, for some illogical reason, threatens their cheeseburger truth. There mere idea that someone out there doesn't find their True Cheeseburger Way to be the Only Right Way makes them feel insecure, unsettled, and all mouth frothy. Personally, I don't get it, and I think it's silly, but that's the way it is.
That's the way BDSM is too. BDSM is like those eleventy-bajillion cheeseburgers. Simple and complex all at the same time, and like the cheeseburger there's no One True Way to do it (even if some frothy mouthed folks think there is). It's all about preference. You might like olives on your cheeseburger while I think olives are a salty tool of the devil designed to disgust me and ruin other-wise tasty food stuffs. I might like being a mouthy, difficult submissive while you think subs like me are a tool of the devil sent to thwart your Dominess.
neither of us are right, and neither of us are wrong- Not in a general sense anyways. We're right for ourselves even if we're wrong for each other, but that each other bit doesn't matter unless we're actually wanting to play. Then we'd find ourselves incompatible, but still not wrong. Just... Incompatible.
So, you know, maybe it would be helpful for folks to think about BDSM the same way we think abut cheeseburgers. None of us really expect everybody in the universe to enjoy their cheeseburgers the same way we do, right? And we're pretty unlikely to get all frothy mouthed at the idea that someone else enjoys their cheeseburger in a different way, yeah? I mean, that would just be beyond silly to get worked up over something so inconsequential.
My BDSMburger is way different from yours, and that's A-OK. It's just a burger, after all.
(Today I ate a bag of coconut M&Ms and had 5 cans of Diet Dew. Writing while hopped up on that much sugar and caffeine might not have been the best idea I've ever had, yo)
Your Lifestyle is not my Lifestyle.
When I was a wee young Squeaky, back in the 80's, I remember hearing the word "lifestyle" all over the place- Though mostly in relation to selling people shit they didn't need because the shit was geared towards their "Lifestyle." I also remember thinking, "Well THAT'S a stupid word. Who needs a stupid word just to feel special about having a life? Sheesh."
So, you know, by the time I discovered the Kinkyverse and started meandering my way around it I already had an issue with one of the words that it seems folks like to whip out the most often.
Lifestyle.
Bleh.
Here in the Kinkyverse that word just annoys me even more than out there in Vanilla Marketing Land. Out there it's just a buzz-word, here though it gets turned into some sort of Twue, Holier-Than-Thou, You're-Doing-It-Wrong, indictment. I mean think about it: When do you ever hear it except when someone is passing judgment on someone else or trying to set themselves up on some Super Special Snowflake pedestal?
"Well so-and-so doesn't know what it means to be in The Lifestyle."
"They don't understand how beautiful The Lifestyle is."
"That's not what The Lifestyle is about."
"I'm part of The Lifestyle."
It's always said like that too- "The Lifestyle," as if there's just one way to do it and if you're not doing it that way then you're not a "Lifestyler."
(There's another word that gets my dander up).
Hey, I get that people like to feel like they belong to something which is why sites like this (This was written on BDSM friendbook.com) that are geared towards "The Community" thrive. People like knowing that they're not alone, that other people understand them, it's a very human thing this belonging business. So I'll give them the community thing- Because what is a community but a group of people who interact with each other? But the lifestyle thing? No.
Here's why:
A lifestyle typically reflects an individual's attitudes, values or world view. Therefore, a lifestyle is a means of forging a sense of self and to create cultural symbols that resonate with personal identity. Not all aspects of a lifestyle are voluntary. Surrounding social and technical systems can constrain the lifestyle choices available to the individual and the symbols she/he is able to project to others and the self.
A "lifestyle" is about the individual and their personal identity, and that makes sense. It is, after all, the style you live your life in- YOU and YOUR. It is YOUR way of life, and there's a whole hell of a lot more to that than just your Dynamic or your kink. It also includes your cultural influences, your religious beliefs, how you raise your kids and pets, your job, your income, vanilla play, your education, intellectual pursuits, the tech you use, your home... The list goes on and on, but the gist is- Your lifestyle is about you.
"We" do not have a lifestyle. We my have similar lifestyles depending on a lot of factors, but they're not going to be the same, and "similar" is not enough to be able to lump everybody who practices BDSM into one cohesive group. It's not enough to be able to make a definitive statement like "You don't understand The Lifestyle" because, quite frankly, there is no "lifestyle" that applies to us all. Especially when you consider that the one similarity we all have in common, that we practice some form of the BDSM acronym, isn't even all that similar- We all do BDSM differently.
So hey, don't be so eager to throw away your individuality on some silly word that makes it sound like you belong to something but actually means diddly-squat after you give it some thought. Your lifestyle is not my lifestyle; And personally, I think that's great because it give us a greater freedom to be whoever we want to be in whatever way makes us happy.
So, you know, by the time I discovered the Kinkyverse and started meandering my way around it I already had an issue with one of the words that it seems folks like to whip out the most often.
Lifestyle.
Bleh.
Here in the Kinkyverse that word just annoys me even more than out there in Vanilla Marketing Land. Out there it's just a buzz-word, here though it gets turned into some sort of Twue, Holier-Than-Thou, You're-Doing-It-Wrong, indictment. I mean think about it: When do you ever hear it except when someone is passing judgment on someone else or trying to set themselves up on some Super Special Snowflake pedestal?
"Well so-and-so doesn't know what it means to be in The Lifestyle."
"They don't understand how beautiful The Lifestyle is."
"That's not what The Lifestyle is about."
"I'm part of The Lifestyle."
It's always said like that too- "The Lifestyle," as if there's just one way to do it and if you're not doing it that way then you're not a "Lifestyler."
(There's another word that gets my dander up).
Hey, I get that people like to feel like they belong to something which is why sites like this (This was written on BDSM friendbook.com) that are geared towards "The Community" thrive. People like knowing that they're not alone, that other people understand them, it's a very human thing this belonging business. So I'll give them the community thing- Because what is a community but a group of people who interact with each other? But the lifestyle thing? No.
Here's why:
A lifestyle typically reflects an individual's attitudes, values or world view. Therefore, a lifestyle is a means of forging a sense of self and to create cultural symbols that resonate with personal identity. Not all aspects of a lifestyle are voluntary. Surrounding social and technical systems can constrain the lifestyle choices available to the individual and the symbols she/he is able to project to others and the self.
A "lifestyle" is about the individual and their personal identity, and that makes sense. It is, after all, the style you live your life in- YOU and YOUR. It is YOUR way of life, and there's a whole hell of a lot more to that than just your Dynamic or your kink. It also includes your cultural influences, your religious beliefs, how you raise your kids and pets, your job, your income, vanilla play, your education, intellectual pursuits, the tech you use, your home... The list goes on and on, but the gist is- Your lifestyle is about you.
"We" do not have a lifestyle. We my have similar lifestyles depending on a lot of factors, but they're not going to be the same, and "similar" is not enough to be able to lump everybody who practices BDSM into one cohesive group. It's not enough to be able to make a definitive statement like "You don't understand The Lifestyle" because, quite frankly, there is no "lifestyle" that applies to us all. Especially when you consider that the one similarity we all have in common, that we practice some form of the BDSM acronym, isn't even all that similar- We all do BDSM differently.
So hey, don't be so eager to throw away your individuality on some silly word that makes it sound like you belong to something but actually means diddly-squat after you give it some thought. Your lifestyle is not my lifestyle; And personally, I think that's great because it give us a greater freedom to be whoever we want to be in whatever way makes us happy.
The Dirty "L" Word.
Who do you love?
I bet you love somebody. Your parents or siblings, maybe your grandfolks, cousins, aunts and uncles. Odds are good if you have kids you love them. Maybe you have a friend you love, maybe you're really lucky and you have more than one friend who's worth loving. How about your dog or cat or other not-human companions? And your spouse, significant other, boyfriend/girlfriend... Are they loved?
The vast majority of us love somebody or something. It's just something that we're designed to do, this nifty chemical reaction that helps us form the close bonds that benefit the species and can contribute an awful lot of happiness (or the occasional heart-break) to our lives; Which helps explain why we often go looking for love, even after we know how much losing it can hurt.
When we're in VanillaVille (population: Lots), love is a common-place topic. We're either looking for it, mourning its loss, or clinging onto it. Nobody looks at you askance if you say that you want to find someone to love (well, perhaps the bitter and cynical might, but even then they still understand even if they pretend they don't), and a great deal of people take it for granted that somewhere along the line they'll find it. Loving someone, especially the someone you're with, is just something quite a few people expect to have happen eventually.
Then there's the Kinkyverse where love can turn into the dirtiest word in the cosmos and you hear things like this with distressing frequency: "...been told to forget about finding love, be who I am (a slave) and be happy with that, don't worry about anything else.."
Forget about finding love?
Train yourself to not want or need it?
Settle for less than what it'll take to give you a happy and fulfilling relationship?
Honestly, I don't know what the blue blazes is going on here, but it's really rather sad.
Oh, I'm not talking about folks who are not interested in having love be part of their relationship. It's their relationship, if they don't want it they don't have to include it. I'm talking about the folks who claim that love has no place, anywhere, in a BDSM dynamic. The ones who spout off about how "True" D-types don't fall in love with their s-types. The ones who tell s-types that they have no right to expect or even want love from their D-type. The ones who make it sound as if wanting to love or be loved is a dirty, bad, wrong thing.
You know what? Fuck that noise. Fuck it sideways with an un-lubed cinderblock.
If you want love, or just the possibility of it somewhere down the road, you have every right to go looking for it. You also have the right to laugh at anybody who says you don't have a right to expect that your dynamic will meet your emotional needs (and, IMHO, you have the right to tell them what they can do with an un-lubed cinderblock). You have the right to have your emotional needs met in your relationship. You have the right to love and be loved in return if that's what floats your boat.
So- If you want love, if you need it to make you feel whole and happy- Don't settle for less because someone isn't willing to offer it to you or because of some seriously effed-up notion about what "True" PYLs can and cannot feel for each other. Keep looking until you find that person who will let you light up their life as much as they light up yours.
Let your love-light shine, yo.
I bet you love somebody. Your parents or siblings, maybe your grandfolks, cousins, aunts and uncles. Odds are good if you have kids you love them. Maybe you have a friend you love, maybe you're really lucky and you have more than one friend who's worth loving. How about your dog or cat or other not-human companions? And your spouse, significant other, boyfriend/girlfriend... Are they loved?
The vast majority of us love somebody or something. It's just something that we're designed to do, this nifty chemical reaction that helps us form the close bonds that benefit the species and can contribute an awful lot of happiness (or the occasional heart-break) to our lives; Which helps explain why we often go looking for love, even after we know how much losing it can hurt.
When we're in VanillaVille (population: Lots), love is a common-place topic. We're either looking for it, mourning its loss, or clinging onto it. Nobody looks at you askance if you say that you want to find someone to love (well, perhaps the bitter and cynical might, but even then they still understand even if they pretend they don't), and a great deal of people take it for granted that somewhere along the line they'll find it. Loving someone, especially the someone you're with, is just something quite a few people expect to have happen eventually.
Then there's the Kinkyverse where love can turn into the dirtiest word in the cosmos and you hear things like this with distressing frequency: "...been told to forget about finding love, be who I am (a slave) and be happy with that, don't worry about anything else.."
Forget about finding love?
Train yourself to not want or need it?
Settle for less than what it'll take to give you a happy and fulfilling relationship?
Honestly, I don't know what the blue blazes is going on here, but it's really rather sad.
Oh, I'm not talking about folks who are not interested in having love be part of their relationship. It's their relationship, if they don't want it they don't have to include it. I'm talking about the folks who claim that love has no place, anywhere, in a BDSM dynamic. The ones who spout off about how "True" D-types don't fall in love with their s-types. The ones who tell s-types that they have no right to expect or even want love from their D-type. The ones who make it sound as if wanting to love or be loved is a dirty, bad, wrong thing.
You know what? Fuck that noise. Fuck it sideways with an un-lubed cinderblock.
If you want love, or just the possibility of it somewhere down the road, you have every right to go looking for it. You also have the right to laugh at anybody who says you don't have a right to expect that your dynamic will meet your emotional needs (and, IMHO, you have the right to tell them what they can do with an un-lubed cinderblock). You have the right to have your emotional needs met in your relationship. You have the right to love and be loved in return if that's what floats your boat.
So- If you want love, if you need it to make you feel whole and happy- Don't settle for less because someone isn't willing to offer it to you or because of some seriously effed-up notion about what "True" PYLs can and cannot feel for each other. Keep looking until you find that person who will let you light up their life as much as they light up yours.
Let your love-light shine, yo.
Dominance is NOT abuse. EVER.
In replying to a thread in the forums I followed a link to some Holier-Than-Thou Manifesto on the "levels" of Dominance and Masters- A piece of inane tripe, but that's not why I'm writing this bloggy thinger. The reason I'm cluttering up your feed and the Wall-O-Blogs is this paragraph in the article:
There is a second group of light Dominants or persons with a desire to control without the adequate understanding or tools to do so. I sometimes call these persons low level Dominants. Their range or sphere (their world) is small, they can be poorly educated, relatively low paying jobs, somewhat narrow minded and may be subject to 'dominant bursts', or short term barely or uncontrolled violent outbursts. These low level Dominants are OFTEN abusive and were generally bully's or victims of abuse as children. They may be full of justifications for their 'actions' often assigning 'blame' or directing by means of fear, intimidation or threat of pain. They are often without honor, courage and veracity as individuals and when encountered in the BDSM world should be avoided or not sought out to be in a relationship with.
For those of you not in the know, it is generally considered common knowledge that Dominants are NOT abusers- An abuser might try to excuse their behavior by claiming to be some sort of D-type, but they are not a Dom. Ever. They're an abuser, plain and simple.
Dominance is not abuse. Dominance is based on consent, agreed upon boundaries, safety, and hopefully helps the person involved in the relationship feels secure, healthy, fulfilled, and happy. It is a GOOD thing.
Abuse is not dominance, it cares nothing for consent, boundaries, or safety. It comes from a place of insecurity and violence and generally makes the person experiencing it feel insecure, unfulfilled, fearful, and unhappy. It is a BAD thing.
There are a lot of us out here in the Kinkyverse who spend a great deal of time trying to pound home the fact that Abusers ARE NOT Dominants. We write until our fingers are worn to nubbins in the hopes that the new, the uninformed, and the innocent (also the silly) will be able to recognize the difference between the two and avoid the abusers...
So for this person, who is claiming to have experience in the BDSM word to actually give these predators a title that includes the word "Dominant" in it- It boggles my mind. It also dismays me and pisses me off all at once. that the new and uninformed will see and think, "Oh, he's a D-type. I'd better listen to them..." It's irresponsible and a huge safety issue and a kick in the teeth to everybody who works so hard to help others see the difference between dominance and abuse.
Ugh. I could go on and on, but I think I've belabored the point enough. Awful tripe is awful, ignorant writer person is ignorant.
There is a second group of light Dominants or persons with a desire to control without the adequate understanding or tools to do so. I sometimes call these persons low level Dominants. Their range or sphere (their world) is small, they can be poorly educated, relatively low paying jobs, somewhat narrow minded and may be subject to 'dominant bursts', or short term barely or uncontrolled violent outbursts. These low level Dominants are OFTEN abusive and were generally bully's or victims of abuse as children. They may be full of justifications for their 'actions' often assigning 'blame' or directing by means of fear, intimidation or threat of pain. They are often without honor, courage and veracity as individuals and when encountered in the BDSM world should be avoided or not sought out to be in a relationship with.
For those of you not in the know, it is generally considered common knowledge that Dominants are NOT abusers- An abuser might try to excuse their behavior by claiming to be some sort of D-type, but they are not a Dom. Ever. They're an abuser, plain and simple.
Dominance is not abuse. Dominance is based on consent, agreed upon boundaries, safety, and hopefully helps the person involved in the relationship feels secure, healthy, fulfilled, and happy. It is a GOOD thing.
Abuse is not dominance, it cares nothing for consent, boundaries, or safety. It comes from a place of insecurity and violence and generally makes the person experiencing it feel insecure, unfulfilled, fearful, and unhappy. It is a BAD thing.
There are a lot of us out here in the Kinkyverse who spend a great deal of time trying to pound home the fact that Abusers ARE NOT Dominants. We write until our fingers are worn to nubbins in the hopes that the new, the uninformed, and the innocent (also the silly) will be able to recognize the difference between the two and avoid the abusers...
So for this person, who is claiming to have experience in the BDSM word to actually give these predators a title that includes the word "Dominant" in it- It boggles my mind. It also dismays me and pisses me off all at once. that the new and uninformed will see and think, "Oh, he's a D-type. I'd better listen to them..." It's irresponsible and a huge safety issue and a kick in the teeth to everybody who works so hard to help others see the difference between dominance and abuse.
Ugh. I could go on and on, but I think I've belabored the point enough. Awful tripe is awful, ignorant writer person is ignorant.
Training (Fantasy Vs Reality)
Who hasn't had a really, really (and I mean REALLY) hot fantasy about being trained? Honestly, if I had to guess I would bet that it was one of the more popular wank fodder fantasies out there- The Uber Domly Dom doing all sorts of awful (and titillating) things to your poor, helpless sub-self in order to turn you into the bestest, most perfect, submissive creature to ever crawl the face of the planet.
And you know why it's hot? Because even though this Awseomely Domly Dom is doing all these things to you- You're the one directing the action. Even though the fantasy is about you not being in control- You are. You decide what happens, you create the scene, the punishments, the dialog- It's all you.
So it's no wonder that the newbies join the BDSM world and hear things like "You need to be trained" and they're all about it- It's such a hot fantasy what could possibly go wrong in real life?
So, your your edification and information: A reality check.
Sometimes, fantasies are best left as fantasies.
Now, do yourself a favor and ask yourself these two simple questions:
What is it, exactly, that you think a "trainer" can teach you that the Dom o' Your Dreams can't?
Trust me on this one- If it's important to the Domly you eventually meet and submit to- He'll teach you what he thinks you need to know.
He'll tell you how he expects you to submit, what titles he prefers, what play he likes... If he thinks that it's important, you'll eventually know and earn about it. If you're both compatible, odds are good your lack of "training" won't be a deal-breaker.
How can a "trainer" be able to predict what the Dom o' Your Dreams will want you to know?
Simple answer- he can't.
No trainer on the face of the earth will be able to accurately predict what your eventual Dominant will require from you.
An example: Pretend you've gone through months of extensive training. You've learned all the slave positions, you've mastered the art of anal sex (with and without lube), you never look a D-type in the eye, and you've become extremely skilled at giving your trainer BJs on command. Also, pretend you were not thrilled about any of these things in real life. They're not what you thought you'd have to do in your eventual relationship, but you learned them because the trainer said you needed to.
Now, envision that you've finally met the Dom o' Your Dreams. he's everything you ever wanted. He's a great guy, has the same kinks as you do, and is kind to small children and animals... There's just one problem- All those things that you "needed" to learn- Your Dream Dom hates them (except the BJ thing, he's totally cool with that). What Dream Dom wants you to know is how to make him his idea of a perfect coffee in the morning, he wants you to be a witty and charming companion who cuddles on the couch with him, he hates anal with a passion.
What about that training? You just gave away BJs and anal sex to some guy because he said you needed to learn that stuff. You learned a lot of crap that's useless in your relationship.
So here's a word to the wise- When someone tells you that you need to be trained, or some Trainer offers you his services (purely out of the goodness of his heart), ask them this before you agree- Ask them, "How can you predict what my future Dominant will require from me?"
If they give you some BS answer about how all Doms like the same thing- Run fast and far.
If they cannot answer, run fast and far.
Then, train yourself by reading everything you can get your hands on. Keep what you think will work for you and discard what won't.
And you know why it's hot? Because even though this Awseomely Domly Dom is doing all these things to you- You're the one directing the action. Even though the fantasy is about you not being in control- You are. You decide what happens, you create the scene, the punishments, the dialog- It's all you.
So it's no wonder that the newbies join the BDSM world and hear things like "You need to be trained" and they're all about it- It's such a hot fantasy what could possibly go wrong in real life?
So, your your edification and information: A reality check.
Sometimes, fantasies are best left as fantasies.
Now, do yourself a favor and ask yourself these two simple questions:
What is it, exactly, that you think a "trainer" can teach you that the Dom o' Your Dreams can't?
Trust me on this one- If it's important to the Domly you eventually meet and submit to- He'll teach you what he thinks you need to know.
He'll tell you how he expects you to submit, what titles he prefers, what play he likes... If he thinks that it's important, you'll eventually know and earn about it. If you're both compatible, odds are good your lack of "training" won't be a deal-breaker.
How can a "trainer" be able to predict what the Dom o' Your Dreams will want you to know?
Simple answer- he can't.
No trainer on the face of the earth will be able to accurately predict what your eventual Dominant will require from you.
An example: Pretend you've gone through months of extensive training. You've learned all the slave positions, you've mastered the art of anal sex (with and without lube), you never look a D-type in the eye, and you've become extremely skilled at giving your trainer BJs on command. Also, pretend you were not thrilled about any of these things in real life. They're not what you thought you'd have to do in your eventual relationship, but you learned them because the trainer said you needed to.
Now, envision that you've finally met the Dom o' Your Dreams. he's everything you ever wanted. He's a great guy, has the same kinks as you do, and is kind to small children and animals... There's just one problem- All those things that you "needed" to learn- Your Dream Dom hates them (except the BJ thing, he's totally cool with that). What Dream Dom wants you to know is how to make him his idea of a perfect coffee in the morning, he wants you to be a witty and charming companion who cuddles on the couch with him, he hates anal with a passion.
What about that training? You just gave away BJs and anal sex to some guy because he said you needed to learn that stuff. You learned a lot of crap that's useless in your relationship.
So here's a word to the wise- When someone tells you that you need to be trained, or some Trainer offers you his services (purely out of the goodness of his heart), ask them this before you agree- Ask them, "How can you predict what my future Dominant will require from me?"
If they give you some BS answer about how all Doms like the same thing- Run fast and far.
If they cannot answer, run fast and far.
Then, train yourself by reading everything you can get your hands on. Keep what you think will work for you and discard what won't.
Passive Ignoring (aka "The Silent Treatment")
"So... I think I did something wrong. But I'm not sure? My Uber Domly Dom has stopped talking to me- I think he's giving me the silent treatment but I don't know why. Help?"
I you've spent any significant amount of time on a message board geared towards s-types you've probably seen a post (or eleventy-billion) like that. Some submissive is getting the silent treatment for some unknown infraction and it's having a rather negative effect on her well-being. It seems to happen often enough that one would think quite a few D-types keep this particular trick in their bag and I cannot help but wonder "why?"
What's the purpose of leaving someone in the dark about what they've done wrong?
How effective is a consequence that doesn't do anything to solve a problem or correct future behavior?
What's the point of it?
Seriously. Most folks (rational, mature sorts of folks) see a problem in their relationship and they want to resolve it. They want to talk about it and try to prevent it from happening again, and if they have a punishment dynamic they impart some consequence to try to deter the problem from happening again.
But this passive ignoring business, how can any of that happen when A) The problem is not addressed so the s-type seldom knows what they've done wrong, B) There's no attempt to resolve the problem before inflicting the silent treatment, and C) The only lesson taught is "If you fuck up in some unnamed way I'm going to ignore you and make you feel unsure, insecure, and uncertain."
It just doesn't seem all that healthy to the individual experiencing it or conducive to the health of the relationship. So again I ask "Why?"
My personal opinion is that D-types (and vanillas too) use this because it's the lazy option. Instead of communicating they're just going to absent themselves in some way from the relationship and their partner for some unspecified amount of time until they feel that their partner has "Learned their lesson."
The problem with that being- How can someone learn a lesson when you won't tell them what they're supposed to be learning in the first place? It just seems so immature, illogical, and silly. The sort of thing you'd expect from a high school girl who is overly fond of drama, not an adult. Certainly not from an adult who has claimed responsibility for the well-being of another person, a responsibility they're abdicating by causing their partner mental turmoil.
Meh. This is all just something I thought of when reading a post today by yet another Baby Seal- The stupidity of it and the pointlessness of it all. My logical brain boggles at how illogical it is to use not talking about a problem to solve a problem.
I you've spent any significant amount of time on a message board geared towards s-types you've probably seen a post (or eleventy-billion) like that. Some submissive is getting the silent treatment for some unknown infraction and it's having a rather negative effect on her well-being. It seems to happen often enough that one would think quite a few D-types keep this particular trick in their bag and I cannot help but wonder "why?"
What's the purpose of leaving someone in the dark about what they've done wrong?
How effective is a consequence that doesn't do anything to solve a problem or correct future behavior?
What's the point of it?
Seriously. Most folks (rational, mature sorts of folks) see a problem in their relationship and they want to resolve it. They want to talk about it and try to prevent it from happening again, and if they have a punishment dynamic they impart some consequence to try to deter the problem from happening again.
But this passive ignoring business, how can any of that happen when A) The problem is not addressed so the s-type seldom knows what they've done wrong, B) There's no attempt to resolve the problem before inflicting the silent treatment, and C) The only lesson taught is "If you fuck up in some unnamed way I'm going to ignore you and make you feel unsure, insecure, and uncertain."
It just doesn't seem all that healthy to the individual experiencing it or conducive to the health of the relationship. So again I ask "Why?"
My personal opinion is that D-types (and vanillas too) use this because it's the lazy option. Instead of communicating they're just going to absent themselves in some way from the relationship and their partner for some unspecified amount of time until they feel that their partner has "Learned their lesson."
The problem with that being- How can someone learn a lesson when you won't tell them what they're supposed to be learning in the first place? It just seems so immature, illogical, and silly. The sort of thing you'd expect from a high school girl who is overly fond of drama, not an adult. Certainly not from an adult who has claimed responsibility for the well-being of another person, a responsibility they're abdicating by causing their partner mental turmoil.
Meh. This is all just something I thought of when reading a post today by yet another Baby Seal- The stupidity of it and the pointlessness of it all. My logical brain boggles at how illogical it is to use not talking about a problem to solve a problem.
Wedding rings, collars, and silliness.
So here's a random thought- Why is it that I often see people bemoaning the fact that other people don't view collars with the proper reverence/respect/gravity/whatever as they do... But you never see them bitching about folks disrespecting the "True meaning" of the wedding ring or engagement ring?
Really- They're kinda the same thing. They're both symbols of a relationship between two people and those peoples' commitment to their relationship, but nobody says, "OMG! Did you see her? She's wearing left hand bling and she's not even married! The gall of that woman!" or "Rawr! They've only known each other 2 months and she's already wearing an engagement ring! That totally cheapens the meaning of my engagement ring that I had to wait three years for!"
Why so serious for one but not the other? Plenty of kinksters are married and they don't all view their wedding bands the same exact way, and that's OK.
But wear a collar in a way someone doesn't approve of and it's the end of the entire world as we know it (it may also rend the very fabric of the universe, cause climate change, and kill off entire populations of adorable endangered species).
My view is that you collar means as much as you want it to mean for your relationship and that's none of my damn business- I'm not all up in your relationship so I have absolutely no right to tell you what the symbols of your relationship should mean. You want a "velco" collar? Cool. You want a play-time only collar? Awesome. You want a Ermahgawd we're so super serious about this BDSM thing collar? Rock on with your super serious self.
But why does it matter to you what my collar does or doesn't mean to me?
Eh. Just more random thoughts about random shit from the Squeakyverse. It's been a random sort of thoughtful day.
Really- They're kinda the same thing. They're both symbols of a relationship between two people and those peoples' commitment to their relationship, but nobody says, "OMG! Did you see her? She's wearing left hand bling and she's not even married! The gall of that woman!" or "Rawr! They've only known each other 2 months and she's already wearing an engagement ring! That totally cheapens the meaning of my engagement ring that I had to wait three years for!"
Why so serious for one but not the other? Plenty of kinksters are married and they don't all view their wedding bands the same exact way, and that's OK.
But wear a collar in a way someone doesn't approve of and it's the end of the entire world as we know it (it may also rend the very fabric of the universe, cause climate change, and kill off entire populations of adorable endangered species).
My view is that you collar means as much as you want it to mean for your relationship and that's none of my damn business- I'm not all up in your relationship so I have absolutely no right to tell you what the symbols of your relationship should mean. You want a "velco" collar? Cool. You want a play-time only collar? Awesome. You want a Ermahgawd we're so super serious about this BDSM thing collar? Rock on with your super serious self.
But why does it matter to you what my collar does or doesn't mean to me?
Eh. Just more random thoughts about random shit from the Squeakyverse. It's been a random sort of thoughtful day.
If you're a submissive you're opressed. And stuff.
I found this article the other day when I was trolling Google after the Facebook/BDSM fiasco first started making the rounds in here (most of it is quoted in this blog)-
http://bitchmagazine.org/post/thinking-kink-female...
My first thought was, "Well fuck. No wonder female submissives have issue with submission if that's the shit they're being told."
My second thought- Or, OK, maybe it was like my 30th thought after a bunch of stuff that required a lot of cuss-words, eye-rolling, and general disdain- Was, "There is something seriously wrong with a ideaology that's supposed to be about empowering women to live a life that fulfills them when it says what fulfills you is 'WRONG'."
Seriously, wrong. Here's a quote from the article-
But is the reactionary media's tendency to seize on any excuse to dismiss female empowerment reason enough for women to avoid sexually submissive behavior, or at least fantasies of it? Norma Ramos thinks so: "I'm getting sexual pleasure from [submission], so what do I do about this? You work to change that. You have to challenge it," she says. For some feminists, the only answer to a pervasive culture of sexual violence is for women who enjoy playing the sub to rewrite their fantasies.
If you're having hot, sexy, submissive thoughts you need to stop it.
Now granted, I'm not always that firmly in touch with reality, but even I can grasp that there is a significant amount of difference between a bit of consensual play and "Violence against women." Pretty much that whole consent thing...
But wait, the article has an answer for that as well!
What of choice though, the concept simultaneously heralded and cursed by feminists? For some, choice is meaningless if it occurs in a system of oppression. Diana Russell dismissed the "consent defense" when she wrote about BDSM pornography: “Boiling candle wax was dripped onto a bound woman’s breasts. Had she consented beforehand? Even if she had, this is a violent act.” For anti-BDSM feminists, there can be no true choice in “responding to a model of sexual interaction that has been drummed into us throughout our lives.” Furthermore, by agreeing to play a sexually submissive role, a woman is actively damaging feminism by "reinforcing the legitimacy of power imbalances outside the bedroom.” (Nichols, Pagano & Rosoff as quoted by Margot Weiss.)
See? You can't consent to a violent act because you've been oppressed. Yeeeeeah... Basically you're too stupid and unenlightened to realize what's good for you. Good thing these folks have no problem telling you what that is.
Oh, and furthermore, if you do consent (which you can't really do, what with the oppression and all), you're "actively damaging feminism."
Yeah. They said it, "Damaging Feminism." How the actual fuck does someone damage another person's ideology? Do they get a Shrink-o-Matic, make themselves really tiny, crawl into another person's brain and chip away at it with an equally tiny pick axe? Or are these folk's personal convictions just so weak that by challenging them with another set of behaviors those convictions will crumble like a saltine hit by a sledge hammer? I do not get it. At all. But that might just be because I'm stupid and unenlightened and oppressed and shit.
Man, I guess that's what I get for joking about "setting the cause back 100 years..." someone took my snark seriously.
And OK, maybe I'm all oppressed and crap because I like guys. What about chicks who like chicks? That's got to be cool, right? They've thrown off the yoke of male sexual oppression because well, they're chicks. If a chick wants to play sexy games or have a D/s dynamic with another chick and there's no dudes in the picture, that's got to be cool.
(BTW, if you think I'm oppressing you by using "chick" feel free to replace it with whatever female adjective floats your boat. I just like the way the word sounds, plus, whenever I write it I get to go "peep" in my head which amuses me)
Not so much it would seem:
Lesbians who practiced BDSM didn’t escape condemnation either. As Jocelyn Borycszka puts it in her forthcoming book Suspect Citizens, they were accused of simply replicating “the very masculine power dynamics used to perpetuate women’s oppression.”
I guess if you're a girl who digs other girls but you like being the one in charge you're still oppressing your partner because you're acting like an Evil Man. Eeeeeeeeevil. Because dudes oppress chicks (peep), it's what they do. ALL OF THEM. Down with the male regime! Viva la vulva! Err... Anyways, you can't like being the D-type if you're a girl because then you're acting like a guy, even though you're a girl... So wait. Are you oppressed, or oppressing?
Ok, now to try and make this out-pouring of snark into a cohesive piece of writing-
I have no doubt that there is still a word of issues that need to be addressed concerning violence against whoever experiences it no matter what their gender, creed, color, belief-system, etc. And I have no doubt that there is still a lot of education necessary within the BDSM community so that the people within it can play safely and experience healthy relationships no matter what side of the slash they fall on...
But here's the kicker Uber-Feminist Crazy Ladies- By attempting to dictate what another woman is or is not allowed to do with her body or her life, you have become no better than the people and social constructs our Fore-Mothers battled against when they got us the right to vote, access to birth control, jobs in male dominated work places, so on and so forth. You have become the very thing you claim to despise, The Oppressor.
News Flash: Oppression is Oppression no matter what gender is doing the oppressing.
It's not women in consensual relationships that are "damaging Feminism" it's you. When you argue against our right to live the life that brings us fulfillment and joy you are no better than the society that would have kept us barefoot and in the kitchen, unfulfilled and longing for something more. I find it a crying shame that you are so set against anything but your notions of what is right *for you* that you refuse to see that your path is not the only one a woman should chose to walk.
http://bitchmagazine.org/post/thinking-kink-female...
My first thought was, "Well fuck. No wonder female submissives have issue with submission if that's the shit they're being told."
My second thought- Or, OK, maybe it was like my 30th thought after a bunch of stuff that required a lot of cuss-words, eye-rolling, and general disdain- Was, "There is something seriously wrong with a ideaology that's supposed to be about empowering women to live a life that fulfills them when it says what fulfills you is 'WRONG'."
Seriously, wrong. Here's a quote from the article-
But is the reactionary media's tendency to seize on any excuse to dismiss female empowerment reason enough for women to avoid sexually submissive behavior, or at least fantasies of it? Norma Ramos thinks so: "I'm getting sexual pleasure from [submission], so what do I do about this? You work to change that. You have to challenge it," she says. For some feminists, the only answer to a pervasive culture of sexual violence is for women who enjoy playing the sub to rewrite their fantasies.
If you're having hot, sexy, submissive thoughts you need to stop it.
Now granted, I'm not always that firmly in touch with reality, but even I can grasp that there is a significant amount of difference between a bit of consensual play and "Violence against women." Pretty much that whole consent thing...
But wait, the article has an answer for that as well!
What of choice though, the concept simultaneously heralded and cursed by feminists? For some, choice is meaningless if it occurs in a system of oppression. Diana Russell dismissed the "consent defense" when she wrote about BDSM pornography: “Boiling candle wax was dripped onto a bound woman’s breasts. Had she consented beforehand? Even if she had, this is a violent act.” For anti-BDSM feminists, there can be no true choice in “responding to a model of sexual interaction that has been drummed into us throughout our lives.” Furthermore, by agreeing to play a sexually submissive role, a woman is actively damaging feminism by "reinforcing the legitimacy of power imbalances outside the bedroom.” (Nichols, Pagano & Rosoff as quoted by Margot Weiss.)
See? You can't consent to a violent act because you've been oppressed. Yeeeeeah... Basically you're too stupid and unenlightened to realize what's good for you. Good thing these folks have no problem telling you what that is.
Oh, and furthermore, if you do consent (which you can't really do, what with the oppression and all), you're "actively damaging feminism."
Yeah. They said it, "Damaging Feminism." How the actual fuck does someone damage another person's ideology? Do they get a Shrink-o-Matic, make themselves really tiny, crawl into another person's brain and chip away at it with an equally tiny pick axe? Or are these folk's personal convictions just so weak that by challenging them with another set of behaviors those convictions will crumble like a saltine hit by a sledge hammer? I do not get it. At all. But that might just be because I'm stupid and unenlightened and oppressed and shit.
Man, I guess that's what I get for joking about "setting the cause back 100 years..." someone took my snark seriously.
And OK, maybe I'm all oppressed and crap because I like guys. What about chicks who like chicks? That's got to be cool, right? They've thrown off the yoke of male sexual oppression because well, they're chicks. If a chick wants to play sexy games or have a D/s dynamic with another chick and there's no dudes in the picture, that's got to be cool.
(BTW, if you think I'm oppressing you by using "chick" feel free to replace it with whatever female adjective floats your boat. I just like the way the word sounds, plus, whenever I write it I get to go "peep" in my head which amuses me)
Not so much it would seem:
Lesbians who practiced BDSM didn’t escape condemnation either. As Jocelyn Borycszka puts it in her forthcoming book Suspect Citizens, they were accused of simply replicating “the very masculine power dynamics used to perpetuate women’s oppression.”
I guess if you're a girl who digs other girls but you like being the one in charge you're still oppressing your partner because you're acting like an Evil Man. Eeeeeeeeevil. Because dudes oppress chicks (peep), it's what they do. ALL OF THEM. Down with the male regime! Viva la vulva! Err... Anyways, you can't like being the D-type if you're a girl because then you're acting like a guy, even though you're a girl... So wait. Are you oppressed, or oppressing?
Ok, now to try and make this out-pouring of snark into a cohesive piece of writing-
I have no doubt that there is still a word of issues that need to be addressed concerning violence against whoever experiences it no matter what their gender, creed, color, belief-system, etc. And I have no doubt that there is still a lot of education necessary within the BDSM community so that the people within it can play safely and experience healthy relationships no matter what side of the slash they fall on...
But here's the kicker Uber-Feminist Crazy Ladies- By attempting to dictate what another woman is or is not allowed to do with her body or her life, you have become no better than the people and social constructs our Fore-Mothers battled against when they got us the right to vote, access to birth control, jobs in male dominated work places, so on and so forth. You have become the very thing you claim to despise, The Oppressor.
News Flash: Oppression is Oppression no matter what gender is doing the oppressing.
It's not women in consensual relationships that are "damaging Feminism" it's you. When you argue against our right to live the life that brings us fulfillment and joy you are no better than the society that would have kept us barefoot and in the kitchen, unfulfilled and longing for something more. I find it a crying shame that you are so set against anything but your notions of what is right *for you* that you refuse to see that your path is not the only one a woman should chose to walk.
It's bad form to harass submissives that are not yours
Dear Uber Domly Dom, yeah... You.
The guy who thinks that he gets to boss around any female (or male) who identifies as a submissive because you're just so Domly and shit-
Guess what?
You don't.
Until that s-type person CONSENTS to being involved in a dynamic with you- (and in case that's too complex an idea for you, I'll simplify it. It means "Agrees to be yours"). They don't owe you shit because they're not yours.
They don't have to show you their naughty bits, call you whatever silly title you've given yourself, or agree to do any of the vile garbage you're spewing at them.
And all that nastiness that issues forth from your immature and imbicillic mind- Care to take a guess what that is without CONSENT (there's that word again!)?
It's harassment.
It's abuse.
It's bullying.
And do you know what else?
There are folks like me who will gleefully tear you apart. Yeah. Do you know how tickled I would be if folks decided to forward your nasty little missives to me so I could eviscerate them in a blog that EVERYBODY on the site could see? Oh, I'd be thrilled! It would be such fun! I already do it for the dimdoms who try to pull that shit on me... Though lately I haven't gotten any of those. I wonder why?
So here's an idea- Before someone actually thinks that sending someone like me your pathetic drivel is a good idea, try acting like you were not raised in a barn. Pretend those submissive's you're being a totally inept loser towards are people you're meeting at the grocery store, or better yet, church. Quit being a dickwad because it's not earning you any Dom Points, it's just making you look like an inept fool.
The guy who thinks that he gets to boss around any female (or male) who identifies as a submissive because you're just so Domly and shit-
Guess what?
You don't.
Until that s-type person CONSENTS to being involved in a dynamic with you- (and in case that's too complex an idea for you, I'll simplify it. It means "Agrees to be yours"). They don't owe you shit because they're not yours.
They don't have to show you their naughty bits, call you whatever silly title you've given yourself, or agree to do any of the vile garbage you're spewing at them.
And all that nastiness that issues forth from your immature and imbicillic mind- Care to take a guess what that is without CONSENT (there's that word again!)?
It's harassment.
It's abuse.
It's bullying.
And do you know what else?
There are folks like me who will gleefully tear you apart. Yeah. Do you know how tickled I would be if folks decided to forward your nasty little missives to me so I could eviscerate them in a blog that EVERYBODY on the site could see? Oh, I'd be thrilled! It would be such fun! I already do it for the dimdoms who try to pull that shit on me... Though lately I haven't gotten any of those. I wonder why?
So here's an idea- Before someone actually thinks that sending someone like me your pathetic drivel is a good idea, try acting like you were not raised in a barn. Pretend those submissive's you're being a totally inept loser towards are people you're meeting at the grocery store, or better yet, church. Quit being a dickwad because it's not earning you any Dom Points, it's just making you look like an inept fool.
Responsibility
Last night in my epic fit of continuing boredom I was skulking the web and I ran across this kid who's "Master" wanted her to find a female fuck buddy. She wasn't comfortable with the idea, and she wasn't sure how to go about this task, so she asked the community for advice.
And then a few responses into the thread she said:
"I guess what I was trying to get at, is that, I'm allowed to say no to him, right?"
This is what she got in return:
"Umm if you call him "master" and you mean it, then no you don't get a say in the matter.
If you are just playing at him being "master" then sure. Take away the power you gave him and say no any time the mood strikes you."
This is where responsibility comes in.
When I reply to a post, especially something that might be cause for concern (like someone asking if they can say "no.") I mine their profile for information. I want to give accurate advice. I don't want to say something that might inadvertently cause harm.
So I looked at the OP's profile.
She's 18.
She joined that site 11 days ago.
She was single and looking then.
Now she has a "Master"?
She doesn't know if she's allowed to say "no" to something she's not comfortable with?
And the "advice" she got... That unless she's just "playing" at M/s she cannot say no? Something inside me just went a little nuts.
It wasn't until later that I figured it out- Somewhere out there I could have a kid who's 18. A daughter. Maybe she's on a site like this, maybe she's uncertain, insecure, confused. And the idea that someone could be giving her a guilt trip and telling he that unless she's faking (and not a Real & True s-type) she's obligated to do whatever this "Master" wants... Irresponsible drivel!
That's what got me thinking about responsibility. I feel like I have a responsibility to provide sound advice, not only because it might help the person who's asking, but because it might help the community be a better place... And the person I'm advising- That's someone's kid. That could be my kid. And even though I don't know her I don't want anything bad to happen to her.
I don't want someone's irresponsible, bad advice to hurt her or anybody else's child.
So, to the question:
What responsibility do we have to the community, especially the young and vulnerable members, to help keep them safe?
This has been stewing in my brain or little while now and it finally came to a head, like a bloated zit that's been percolating painfully just under the skin for entirely too long until it erupts. The sort that you don't realize how much it hurts until it really really hurts.
Meh.
And then a few responses into the thread she said:
"I guess what I was trying to get at, is that, I'm allowed to say no to him, right?"
This is what she got in return:
"Umm if you call him "master" and you mean it, then no you don't get a say in the matter.
If you are just playing at him being "master" then sure. Take away the power you gave him and say no any time the mood strikes you."
This is where responsibility comes in.
When I reply to a post, especially something that might be cause for concern (like someone asking if they can say "no.") I mine their profile for information. I want to give accurate advice. I don't want to say something that might inadvertently cause harm.
So I looked at the OP's profile.
She's 18.
She joined that site 11 days ago.
She was single and looking then.
Now she has a "Master"?
She doesn't know if she's allowed to say "no" to something she's not comfortable with?
And the "advice" she got... That unless she's just "playing" at M/s she cannot say no? Something inside me just went a little nuts.
It wasn't until later that I figured it out- Somewhere out there I could have a kid who's 18. A daughter. Maybe she's on a site like this, maybe she's uncertain, insecure, confused. And the idea that someone could be giving her a guilt trip and telling he that unless she's faking (and not a Real & True s-type) she's obligated to do whatever this "Master" wants... Irresponsible drivel!
That's what got me thinking about responsibility. I feel like I have a responsibility to provide sound advice, not only because it might help the person who's asking, but because it might help the community be a better place... And the person I'm advising- That's someone's kid. That could be my kid. And even though I don't know her I don't want anything bad to happen to her.
I don't want someone's irresponsible, bad advice to hurt her or anybody else's child.
So, to the question:
What responsibility do we have to the community, especially the young and vulnerable members, to help keep them safe?
This has been stewing in my brain or little while now and it finally came to a head, like a bloated zit that's been percolating painfully just under the skin for entirely too long until it erupts. The sort that you don't realize how much it hurts until it really really hurts.
Meh.
Domly Knows Best
Like that? I thought it was a clever (ok, not-so-clever) play on that old US sitcom, Daddy Knows Best. Sometimes I really amuse myself.
Anyways- So my friend sent me a somewhat alarming message on Fet to get hold of her via FB pronto. She needed some advice. I, not being the shittiest friend ever (though I suspect I'm in the running), messaged her back as soon as I got up. Stupid third shift.
She told me that she was freaking out and riled up because the new Domly she was seeing had wanted her to print something and write "I'm Xxx's sub, he knows what's best" on it. One of her other sub buddies gave her the incredibly deep advice that she was having issues with this because it was an affirmation of her submission and friend just wasn't ready to surrender.
Hearing that she'd resolved the issue to her satisfaction was nice (I like my friends to be happy), but it got the gears in my little Squeaky noggin spinning...
What is it with the whole "Domly Knows Best" notion?
Because you know that it's highly improbable that one person will actually know best all the time. It's incredibly unlikely that someone will be able to accurately predict what is right for another person at all, unless they know them extremely well (and even then it's hit or miss). Even as well as I know Cookie (and I know him like I know the back of my hand) I wouldn't even begin to think that I would know what was best for him. Hell- Even being my kids mom I doubt I know what's really best (I just try to do my best for them. And there's a difference between the two).
Personally I can't help but feel it's that ugly "Poor Wittle Submissive" stereotype rearing it's vile head. You know, the one that makes all of us submissives sound like lost little lambs that have no clue how to take care of ourselves or make even the simplest decision about our lives without a Big, Strong, All-Knowing Domly to guide our poor wittle clueless selves.
*Snort, scoff*
What over-weaning drivel. And hubris. Though I suppose it would make the insecure sort feel all super-duper powerful. And it would help the sleazy sort avoid doing the communication thing...
"Um. Why do you want me to put you on my saving's account?"
"Don't question me! I know best! Now do it!"
*Sigh.*
Long story short- I told my friend that I'd take it as a serious affront to my intelligence and capabilities if Cookie pulled that shit with me. Because really, that's what it is in my mind. It's one adult telling another one that because they gave themselves a title they magically know what's best and I find that insulting. It's insulting to think that just because a guy is a Domly that he's this infallible font of knowledge and wisdom who knows what's "best" for a grown woman who's been taking care of herself just fine for YEARS before he came along. Like I said, hubris.
It's stupid and it annoys me.
And so I ranted.
Anyways- So my friend sent me a somewhat alarming message on Fet to get hold of her via FB pronto. She needed some advice. I, not being the shittiest friend ever (though I suspect I'm in the running), messaged her back as soon as I got up. Stupid third shift.
She told me that she was freaking out and riled up because the new Domly she was seeing had wanted her to print something and write "I'm Xxx's sub, he knows what's best" on it. One of her other sub buddies gave her the incredibly deep advice that she was having issues with this because it was an affirmation of her submission and friend just wasn't ready to surrender.
Hearing that she'd resolved the issue to her satisfaction was nice (I like my friends to be happy), but it got the gears in my little Squeaky noggin spinning...
What is it with the whole "Domly Knows Best" notion?
Because you know that it's highly improbable that one person will actually know best all the time. It's incredibly unlikely that someone will be able to accurately predict what is right for another person at all, unless they know them extremely well (and even then it's hit or miss). Even as well as I know Cookie (and I know him like I know the back of my hand) I wouldn't even begin to think that I would know what was best for him. Hell- Even being my kids mom I doubt I know what's really best (I just try to do my best for them. And there's a difference between the two).
Personally I can't help but feel it's that ugly "Poor Wittle Submissive" stereotype rearing it's vile head. You know, the one that makes all of us submissives sound like lost little lambs that have no clue how to take care of ourselves or make even the simplest decision about our lives without a Big, Strong, All-Knowing Domly to guide our poor wittle clueless selves.
*Snort, scoff*
What over-weaning drivel. And hubris. Though I suppose it would make the insecure sort feel all super-duper powerful. And it would help the sleazy sort avoid doing the communication thing...
"Um. Why do you want me to put you on my saving's account?"
"Don't question me! I know best! Now do it!"
*Sigh.*
Long story short- I told my friend that I'd take it as a serious affront to my intelligence and capabilities if Cookie pulled that shit with me. Because really, that's what it is in my mind. It's one adult telling another one that because they gave themselves a title they magically know what's best and I find that insulting. It's insulting to think that just because a guy is a Domly that he's this infallible font of knowledge and wisdom who knows what's "best" for a grown woman who's been taking care of herself just fine for YEARS before he came along. Like I said, hubris.
It's stupid and it annoys me.
And so I ranted.
Protector Man! (Now with laser-beam eyeballs)
I was reading through some old stuff on my profile and I saw something that riled me up at the time I responded to it, and then riled me up again when I re-read it, so I figured that because I have a few more hours to burn till Cookie gets home I'd go on a bit of a rant.
Today's rant is brought to you by the letter P (for Protector).
Personally, I don't see the need to have some person with a really meaningless label (which is saying something because of the inherent lack of meaning that accompanies most labels in the BDSM world) watching one's back. Especially as most of this supposed "back watching" goes on in The Realm of The Interwebs.
Seriously? What's there to be protected from online?
Some asshole sends you a shitty message?
That's what buttons like "delete", "block" and "report as spam" exist for. If you really cannot manage to move your mouse to where those buttons are located on your screen, maybe you shouldn't be on the internet at all.
Some guy decided to be all Domly and declare that you belong to him now?
Again with those handy clickable buttons. Or my favorite response- Verbally humiliate them in a blog so the entire world can see what inept twats they are.
There's A LOT of stupid online, but last time I checked nobody can jump through your computer screen and *BAM!* suddenly be all up in your house bossing you around. So really, what is so scary about the online world that you need to be protected from it?
And in real life? Ok, maybe I can see where someone having your back is a wise choice (who hasn't hauled a buddy along on a blind date?), but the whole "So and so is protecting me" thing... Know what? That doesn't make you sound like someone who shouldn't be fucked with, it makes you sound like prey. It makes you sound like an inept boob who can't take care of business on your own. It makes you sound weak and vulnerable.
It sends a very clear message: "I cannot protect myself, I need someone else to do that for me."
So here's a thought- Instead of abdicating personal responsibility for your own safety and looking like a chunk of Grade A Black Angus Grass-Fed Sirloin to a herd of hungry men who've just lighted up their Webbers for the first time since winter set in- Go take a few (or a lot, preferably taught by someone who's ex military special forces)classes in self defense. Learn to handle yourself and others who might try to put you in a compromising situation, because guess what? That "Protector" isn't going to be there when you're alone in a hotel room with some creep who's conned you into thinking he's a good guy. Protector's not going to have your back when you're not at his (or her) side.
This "Protector" business? When push comes to shove it's about as useful as warding off a Doberman with a Nerf gun.
Protect your own damn self.
Sheesh.
Today's rant is brought to you by the letter P (for Protector).
Personally, I don't see the need to have some person with a really meaningless label (which is saying something because of the inherent lack of meaning that accompanies most labels in the BDSM world) watching one's back. Especially as most of this supposed "back watching" goes on in The Realm of The Interwebs.
Seriously? What's there to be protected from online?
Some asshole sends you a shitty message?
That's what buttons like "delete", "block" and "report as spam" exist for. If you really cannot manage to move your mouse to where those buttons are located on your screen, maybe you shouldn't be on the internet at all.
Some guy decided to be all Domly and declare that you belong to him now?
Again with those handy clickable buttons. Or my favorite response- Verbally humiliate them in a blog so the entire world can see what inept twats they are.
There's A LOT of stupid online, but last time I checked nobody can jump through your computer screen and *BAM!* suddenly be all up in your house bossing you around. So really, what is so scary about the online world that you need to be protected from it?
And in real life? Ok, maybe I can see where someone having your back is a wise choice (who hasn't hauled a buddy along on a blind date?), but the whole "So and so is protecting me" thing... Know what? That doesn't make you sound like someone who shouldn't be fucked with, it makes you sound like prey. It makes you sound like an inept boob who can't take care of business on your own. It makes you sound weak and vulnerable.
It sends a very clear message: "I cannot protect myself, I need someone else to do that for me."
So here's a thought- Instead of abdicating personal responsibility for your own safety and looking like a chunk of Grade A Black Angus Grass-Fed Sirloin to a herd of hungry men who've just lighted up their Webbers for the first time since winter set in- Go take a few (or a lot, preferably taught by someone who's ex military special forces)classes in self defense. Learn to handle yourself and others who might try to put you in a compromising situation, because guess what? That "Protector" isn't going to be there when you're alone in a hotel room with some creep who's conned you into thinking he's a good guy. Protector's not going to have your back when you're not at his (or her) side.
This "Protector" business? When push comes to shove it's about as useful as warding off a Doberman with a Nerf gun.
Protect your own damn self.
Sheesh.
How To Train Your Dominant
There's so much bunk floating around on how s-types "need" training so, you know, we can be "good" s-types. But the thing I never see is the fact that Domlies don't spring fully formed and perfect into the BDSM world and perhaps they could benefit from some training as well. Cause the way it stands now, any Twit can go buy himself a flogger and proclaim "I Am DOMLY!" and the submissive trolls (thanks for that sweetcheeks) will fall over themselves to reinforce that idea. So, without further ado I give you:
1. Buying a flogger and a set of furry handcuffs does not make you a Dominant. It makes you a guy with a flogger and a set of furry cuffs who doesn't have a clue.
In order to get a clue you need to learn about stuff, like this: Handcuffs, even furry ones, suck balls. They're made for the police to restrain criminals, not for Domlies to use as a bondage implement. Why? Because they cause damage. They hurt (and not in a good way). They're more likely to cause nerve damage than leather cuffs or rope. So put them back in your toy box and buy a nice set of leather cuffs (preferably with rolled edges) or go out and buy one of The Knotty Boy's Books- They're EXCELLENT.
In fact, there are a bunch of decent books about Dominance out there. Go pick up a few (the folks at Barnes & Noble don't give a damn about what you're buying, so don't even try to use that as an excuse), join a few groups geared towards novices and D-types. LEARN SOMETHING.
2. Giving yourself a title does not make you a Dominant.
Well, I suppose it does in a way, but not in the way you're thinking it does. It doesn't make you God's gift to the s-types, it doesn't give you any rights over them, and it doesn't give you an excuse to act like a prick. It sure as hell doesn't mean that you can get in our s-typey pants just because you want to.
All it does is make you A dominant, which means jack to everybody except the submissive trolls and they're not who you should be taking pointers from. And while you're A dominant, you don't have any authority over anybody but yourself. You want some real authority, find yourself a nice s-type that you get along with well and then you can be her Dominant.
3. Dominant does not equal Jerk, Misogynist, Asshole, etc.
Acting like you were raised in a barn is a sure way to NOT impress the ladies. And yeah, some of us s-types might like our Dominants to be bossier than what we'd put up with from a vanilla guy- But they're not bossy to the point of being complete social rejects. D-types DO say thank you on occasion. They have been known to hold coats, doors, and pull out chairs. They express appreciation and acknowledge a job well done. In short: Dominants can, and often do, have nice manners and display courtesy.
Quite a few people LIKE a person who can do the pretty. Some don't- Some really get off on the misogynistic asshole vibe... But until you know who's who it's a good bet that you'll catch more flies with honey than vinegar.
4. Being a Dominant doesn't guarantee you shit.
If you think it does you've been hanging around the submissive trolls for too long.
You are not entitled to any of these things from any s-type other than the one(s) who consent to be yours:
* Obedience
* Sexy Time Play
* Any Play
* Being referred to with your preferred title
* Sexy pics and/or videos
* ANYTHING someone doesn't feel like giving you.
(Do you see a pattern there?)
5. TRUE and REAL are BS terms.
There is not "real" and there is no "true." Those are terms used by people who want to manipulate someone by playing on their insecurity, or who are insecure themselves.
There is compatible and there is incompatible.
When you encounter some s-type who doesn't express a great deal of joy at doing whatever you want her to do because she has no interest in that or you, that's not the time for you to throw a hissy fit and say "You're not a true sub!" That's the time for you to be an adult and say, "OK, well I guess we're incompatible."
6. Learn to control yourself.
D/s, M/s, whatever- It's not ALL about controlling someone else, it's also about self control. And if you can't control yourself, how can you expect to control someone else?
-The same applies for s-types: If you can't control yourself, what makes you think someone else will be able to?
7. Real Life seldom resembles Porn.
Pron is written or produced with one goal in mind- To get your rocks off. That s-type who just loves being gang-banged by 50 linebackers? The s-type who can turn herself into a human pretzel and stay that way for hours? The one who likes a fist in every orifice? The ones who do the really freaky-deaky shit without batting an eyelid and even seem to be enjoying it?
Yeah... They're getting paid for that.
The rest of us? You might be able to find someone into all that, I'm sure she exists some where out there, but expecting all of us s-types to do the stuff you watched on Super Slutty Submissive Skankbots last night, or expecting it from a baby seal? Dude, you need to get a better grip on reality.
We don't all like the same stuff, we won't all do the same things, and expecting that we will is about as logical as thinking Spock would enjoy watching The Bachelor. And that's why it pays to actually TALK to us s-types before going all Dom-Fu on our asses. Figure out if we like the same things you like (compatibility), figure out if we're interested in the same kind of dynamic you are (more compatibility), figure out if our dream is a kinky 50's Leave It To Beaver episode with 2.5 kids and a house in the 'burbs or a Fully Equipped Dungeon complete with Uber Dungeony Over-Lord where talking isn't allowed and slithering like a snake is the only approved form of locomotion...
8. I'm so full of shit.
If a megalomaniac like me can say that, then so can you.
But seriously, a lot of that stuff up there^^^ Doesn't impress the s-types, it pisses them off. And if you piss them off they're not going to want anything to do with you. So pay attention. Oh, and that cock-shot avatar you're rocking? Ditch that. We've all seen weenies before, yours isn't anything special unless we're fond of it's owner.
Squeaky's Handy Dandy Guide to Dominant Training
(In no specific order what-so-ever)
(In no specific order what-so-ever)
1. Buying a flogger and a set of furry handcuffs does not make you a Dominant. It makes you a guy with a flogger and a set of furry cuffs who doesn't have a clue.
In order to get a clue you need to learn about stuff, like this: Handcuffs, even furry ones, suck balls. They're made for the police to restrain criminals, not for Domlies to use as a bondage implement. Why? Because they cause damage. They hurt (and not in a good way). They're more likely to cause nerve damage than leather cuffs or rope. So put them back in your toy box and buy a nice set of leather cuffs (preferably with rolled edges) or go out and buy one of The Knotty Boy's Books- They're EXCELLENT.
In fact, there are a bunch of decent books about Dominance out there. Go pick up a few (the folks at Barnes & Noble don't give a damn about what you're buying, so don't even try to use that as an excuse), join a few groups geared towards novices and D-types. LEARN SOMETHING.
2. Giving yourself a title does not make you a Dominant.
Well, I suppose it does in a way, but not in the way you're thinking it does. It doesn't make you God's gift to the s-types, it doesn't give you any rights over them, and it doesn't give you an excuse to act like a prick. It sure as hell doesn't mean that you can get in our s-typey pants just because you want to.
All it does is make you A dominant, which means jack to everybody except the submissive trolls and they're not who you should be taking pointers from. And while you're A dominant, you don't have any authority over anybody but yourself. You want some real authority, find yourself a nice s-type that you get along with well and then you can be her Dominant.
3. Dominant does not equal Jerk, Misogynist, Asshole, etc.
Acting like you were raised in a barn is a sure way to NOT impress the ladies. And yeah, some of us s-types might like our Dominants to be bossier than what we'd put up with from a vanilla guy- But they're not bossy to the point of being complete social rejects. D-types DO say thank you on occasion. They have been known to hold coats, doors, and pull out chairs. They express appreciation and acknowledge a job well done. In short: Dominants can, and often do, have nice manners and display courtesy.
Quite a few people LIKE a person who can do the pretty. Some don't- Some really get off on the misogynistic asshole vibe... But until you know who's who it's a good bet that you'll catch more flies with honey than vinegar.
4. Being a Dominant doesn't guarantee you shit.
If you think it does you've been hanging around the submissive trolls for too long.
You are not entitled to any of these things from any s-type other than the one(s) who consent to be yours:
* Obedience
* Sexy Time Play
* Any Play
* Being referred to with your preferred title
* Sexy pics and/or videos
* ANYTHING someone doesn't feel like giving you.
(Do you see a pattern there?)
5. TRUE and REAL are BS terms.
There is not "real" and there is no "true." Those are terms used by people who want to manipulate someone by playing on their insecurity, or who are insecure themselves.
There is compatible and there is incompatible.
When you encounter some s-type who doesn't express a great deal of joy at doing whatever you want her to do because she has no interest in that or you, that's not the time for you to throw a hissy fit and say "You're not a true sub!" That's the time for you to be an adult and say, "OK, well I guess we're incompatible."
6. Learn to control yourself.
D/s, M/s, whatever- It's not ALL about controlling someone else, it's also about self control. And if you can't control yourself, how can you expect to control someone else?
-The same applies for s-types: If you can't control yourself, what makes you think someone else will be able to?
7. Real Life seldom resembles Porn.
Pron is written or produced with one goal in mind- To get your rocks off. That s-type who just loves being gang-banged by 50 linebackers? The s-type who can turn herself into a human pretzel and stay that way for hours? The one who likes a fist in every orifice? The ones who do the really freaky-deaky shit without batting an eyelid and even seem to be enjoying it?
Yeah... They're getting paid for that.
The rest of us? You might be able to find someone into all that, I'm sure she exists some where out there, but expecting all of us s-types to do the stuff you watched on Super Slutty Submissive Skankbots last night, or expecting it from a baby seal? Dude, you need to get a better grip on reality.
We don't all like the same stuff, we won't all do the same things, and expecting that we will is about as logical as thinking Spock would enjoy watching The Bachelor. And that's why it pays to actually TALK to us s-types before going all Dom-Fu on our asses. Figure out if we like the same things you like (compatibility), figure out if we're interested in the same kind of dynamic you are (more compatibility), figure out if our dream is a kinky 50's Leave It To Beaver episode with 2.5 kids and a house in the 'burbs or a Fully Equipped Dungeon complete with Uber Dungeony Over-Lord where talking isn't allowed and slithering like a snake is the only approved form of locomotion...
8. I'm so full of shit.
If a megalomaniac like me can say that, then so can you.
But seriously, a lot of that stuff up there^^^ Doesn't impress the s-types, it pisses them off. And if you piss them off they're not going to want anything to do with you. So pay attention. Oh, and that cock-shot avatar you're rocking? Ditch that. We've all seen weenies before, yours isn't anything special unless we're fond of it's owner.
T is for Titles
I identify as a submissive for ease of reference in social networks like this one. It gives folks an idea of who I am and frames a good deal of the things I write about with a clearly understandable context. It lets them know that in my dynamic that's the side of the slash I fall on.
DISCLAIMER: This is aimed at nobody in particular though it was triggered by someone's writing. I just used that as a jumping off point to express views that only apply to me and my dynamic.
Beyond that? It's meaningless. The only person I am submissive to is Cookie. He is the ONLY person I have consented to submit to and the only person who has any authority over me. I am a submissive, I am not your submissive, and I will not use any sort of title in reference to you because it implies an authority transfer dynamic I have not consented to.
And I've heard all the arguments, I've been around the block a time or two. I've heard the "respect" argument, and the "your place in the lifestyle" argument. I've heard about the proper (read: "Right") way to do things because well, you're acknowledging your place argument. I've seen the "Domlies like it" school of thought... And I call shenanigans.
The "respect" argument?
To me there is a world of difference between courtesy and respect. I do not "respect" people for the sole reason that they have given themselves a title that is as meaningless to me as mine should be to them. I will be courteous or civil but that's all anybody has the right to expect from me- A display of pretty manners that grease the wheels of pleasant society. "Sir" or "Ma'am" in a vanilla context? I will do that gladly, it's just good manners. "Sir" or "Ma'am" in a BDSM context- Implies consent to some authority exchange and I'm not cool with that.
Respect is something I reserve for people I hold in high esteem, and it's something that is granted because they've shown me that they a person who I can respect. There are a handful of people for whom I would use a title because I hold them in such high regard. They're the sort of folks for whom I think the phrase "Pillar of The Community" applies.
Odds are good that you are not them.
The "Your Place In The Lifestyle" argument?
My place is at Cookie's side and that's it. The thought that because I identify as a submissive means that I should, for some unfathomable reason, grant someone any consideration beyond that which I would give to any other stranger on the street- it boggles my mind.
Honestly, whenever I hear that argument and try to apply any logic to it- I can hear gears grinding; A paradigm shifting without a clutch.
I identify as a wife. That doesn't mean that I should give men who identify as "husband" the same consideration I afford to Cookie. He is my husband, They are not. I live a married lifestyle with him, I do not live a married lifestyle with them.
See the parallel?
The "Domlies like it" school of thought?
It's about as silly as saying all Dominants are Sadists. SOME D-types love being called by a title by anything that crosses their path. SOME D-types get a kick out of that sort of thing... SOME D-types cannot stand it.
My Dominant hates it. He says it feels as pointless as some random girl calling him her boyfriend. Without the relationship dynamic behind the word to give it meaning it's meaningless. Dominant is just a label he uses to relate to other D-types and he really prefers it if other s-types don't use it in reference to him because he has no authority over them and he feels that the word implies there is some sort of authority transfer dynamic happening. He does not like it, it makes him uncomfortable, it squicks him.
But his most compelling argument- HE DOESN'T CONSENT TO IT.
And he's not alone.
Finally, there's the "Right, Correct, Proper, True, Real, etc. Way To Do Things..."
(And this is my favorite)
No.
No, no, no, and no.
There is how you do things, there is how I do things, there is how everybody else does things. Their way is right for them. Your way is right for you. My way is right for me. None of us are any more right than the other, none of us are wrong (unless it's not BDSM but abuse of some type).
I don't give a fig about what you do in your relationship. I do not care how your dynamic works or even IF it works. That's on you. If it gives you fulfillment that's great, more power to you, blah blah blah.
But just because your dynamic works for you, that doesn't mean that it has to work for anybody else or that anybody else has to play by your rules. And even if your dynamic is the most commonly practiced form of D/s, M/s, BDSM/whatever- That still doesn't mean that you've got the monopoly on "right". It just means that your dynamic is common.
The rest of us? We might not (and probably will not) consent to being involved in your dynamic.
If your D-type thinks all D-types should be addressed by a title?
You can do that as it's part of your dynamic- But it's foolish to expect anybody else to do that as nobody else has consented to play by those rules but you. In fact, others may have a rule that they are NOT allowed to use titles on D-types that they're not in a relationship with.
And you might think that it's the right thing to do to use a title for any D-type whose path you cross-
But that doesn't mean the random D-type actually wants or consents to you using his title. It just means that the fact that consent in BDSM is a two-way street that is often over-looked.
THIS is what's right for me. It doesn't have to work for you and I'm not pretentious or foolish enough to think it should work for you. So grant me the same consideration and courtesy when the roles are reversed.
DISCLAIMER: This is aimed at nobody in particular though it was triggered by someone's writing. I just used that as a jumping off point to express views that only apply to me and my dynamic.
Beyond that? It's meaningless. The only person I am submissive to is Cookie. He is the ONLY person I have consented to submit to and the only person who has any authority over me. I am a submissive, I am not your submissive, and I will not use any sort of title in reference to you because it implies an authority transfer dynamic I have not consented to.
And I've heard all the arguments, I've been around the block a time or two. I've heard the "respect" argument, and the "your place in the lifestyle" argument. I've heard about the proper (read: "Right") way to do things because well, you're acknowledging your place argument. I've seen the "Domlies like it" school of thought... And I call shenanigans.
The "respect" argument?
To me there is a world of difference between courtesy and respect. I do not "respect" people for the sole reason that they have given themselves a title that is as meaningless to me as mine should be to them. I will be courteous or civil but that's all anybody has the right to expect from me- A display of pretty manners that grease the wheels of pleasant society. "Sir" or "Ma'am" in a vanilla context? I will do that gladly, it's just good manners. "Sir" or "Ma'am" in a BDSM context- Implies consent to some authority exchange and I'm not cool with that.
Respect is something I reserve for people I hold in high esteem, and it's something that is granted because they've shown me that they a person who I can respect. There are a handful of people for whom I would use a title because I hold them in such high regard. They're the sort of folks for whom I think the phrase "Pillar of The Community" applies.
Odds are good that you are not them.
The "Your Place In The Lifestyle" argument?
My place is at Cookie's side and that's it. The thought that because I identify as a submissive means that I should, for some unfathomable reason, grant someone any consideration beyond that which I would give to any other stranger on the street- it boggles my mind.
Honestly, whenever I hear that argument and try to apply any logic to it- I can hear gears grinding; A paradigm shifting without a clutch.
I identify as a wife. That doesn't mean that I should give men who identify as "husband" the same consideration I afford to Cookie. He is my husband, They are not. I live a married lifestyle with him, I do not live a married lifestyle with them.
See the parallel?
The "Domlies like it" school of thought?
It's about as silly as saying all Dominants are Sadists. SOME D-types love being called by a title by anything that crosses their path. SOME D-types get a kick out of that sort of thing... SOME D-types cannot stand it.
My Dominant hates it. He says it feels as pointless as some random girl calling him her boyfriend. Without the relationship dynamic behind the word to give it meaning it's meaningless. Dominant is just a label he uses to relate to other D-types and he really prefers it if other s-types don't use it in reference to him because he has no authority over them and he feels that the word implies there is some sort of authority transfer dynamic happening. He does not like it, it makes him uncomfortable, it squicks him.
But his most compelling argument- HE DOESN'T CONSENT TO IT.
And he's not alone.
Finally, there's the "Right, Correct, Proper, True, Real, etc. Way To Do Things..."
(And this is my favorite)
No.
No, no, no, and no.
There is how you do things, there is how I do things, there is how everybody else does things. Their way is right for them. Your way is right for you. My way is right for me. None of us are any more right than the other, none of us are wrong (unless it's not BDSM but abuse of some type).
I don't give a fig about what you do in your relationship. I do not care how your dynamic works or even IF it works. That's on you. If it gives you fulfillment that's great, more power to you, blah blah blah.
But just because your dynamic works for you, that doesn't mean that it has to work for anybody else or that anybody else has to play by your rules. And even if your dynamic is the most commonly practiced form of D/s, M/s, BDSM/whatever- That still doesn't mean that you've got the monopoly on "right". It just means that your dynamic is common.
The rest of us? We might not (and probably will not) consent to being involved in your dynamic.
If your D-type thinks all D-types should be addressed by a title?
You can do that as it's part of your dynamic- But it's foolish to expect anybody else to do that as nobody else has consented to play by those rules but you. In fact, others may have a rule that they are NOT allowed to use titles on D-types that they're not in a relationship with.
And you might think that it's the right thing to do to use a title for any D-type whose path you cross-
But that doesn't mean the random D-type actually wants or consents to you using his title. It just means that the fact that consent in BDSM is a two-way street that is often over-looked.
THIS is what's right for me. It doesn't have to work for you and I'm not pretentious or foolish enough to think it should work for you. So grant me the same consideration and courtesy when the roles are reversed.
Death To The 128 Slave Rules
Seriously. Few things need to die a more painful and absolute death than The 128 (and I say absolute because I have no doubt that if not completely annihilated The 128 would resurrect themselves like a zombie or vampire and continue to pester decent folk in a most annoying fashion).
They are a scourge upon the face of the kink world. The bane of many an s-type's existence. A plague of rampant stupidity foisted off as "The Right Way To Do M/s."
If I scoffed any harder at that I think I might cause a rift in the space-time continuum and we'd all die.
Listen, The 128 was written to govern ONE SPECIFIC RELATIONSHIP.
It applies only to that relationship because that's what the people who are in that relationship find fulfilling and rewarding. Those are the rules they created and agreed upon, and to get to 128 they probably spent a great deal of time talking about them along with other important things.
I don't get it and it really kinda squicks me a lot, but in that context it makes sense and it's OK because it's not my relationship and it's not telling me how my relationship should run.
The 128 is not meant to be the end-all, be-all, One True Absolute Way To Do WIITWD and I wish folks would quit treating it like it is because everything in it? It's not going to work for every D/s or M/s dynamic out there.
Sure some folks might like some of the stuff in it, they might say, "Well, I think 1,4,36,77,84,85,90, ect would work well for us, so let's incorporate those and discard what doesn't work." That's swell, it's cool they're finding things that work for them- But saying "1 through 128 MUST work for EVERYBODY..." Come on, that's a steaming pile of tripe because it WON'T work for everybody. Most importantly, it doesn't have to work for everybody.
Thank dog.
I'd rather be vanilla than adhere to someone else's relationship rules, especially some of the rules in the 128... Ugh.
Though it might be fun to punch someone in their "cunt" if they ever referred to my mouth in that fashion.
They are a scourge upon the face of the kink world. The bane of many an s-type's existence. A plague of rampant stupidity foisted off as "The Right Way To Do M/s."
If I scoffed any harder at that I think I might cause a rift in the space-time continuum and we'd all die.
Listen, The 128 was written to govern ONE SPECIFIC RELATIONSHIP.
It applies only to that relationship because that's what the people who are in that relationship find fulfilling and rewarding. Those are the rules they created and agreed upon, and to get to 128 they probably spent a great deal of time talking about them along with other important things.
I don't get it and it really kinda squicks me a lot, but in that context it makes sense and it's OK because it's not my relationship and it's not telling me how my relationship should run.
The 128 is not meant to be the end-all, be-all, One True Absolute Way To Do WIITWD and I wish folks would quit treating it like it is because everything in it? It's not going to work for every D/s or M/s dynamic out there.
Sure some folks might like some of the stuff in it, they might say, "Well, I think 1,4,36,77,84,85,90, ect would work well for us, so let's incorporate those and discard what doesn't work." That's swell, it's cool they're finding things that work for them- But saying "1 through 128 MUST work for EVERYBODY..." Come on, that's a steaming pile of tripe because it WON'T work for everybody. Most importantly, it doesn't have to work for everybody.
Thank dog.
I'd rather be vanilla than adhere to someone else's relationship rules, especially some of the rules in the 128... Ugh.
Though it might be fun to punch someone in their "cunt" if they ever referred to my mouth in that fashion.
A "OTW" Manifesto
Seriously, few things rile me up as much as One True Wayism does...
Something that is very important to me is the relationship. I will be posting this around the site please share it!
Actually, I don't think I will...
Except here and that's just because I'm going to have fun tearing it apart because it's a steaming pile of "I'm doing it right and you're not".
Most people who worry about the Dom / Sub relationship not only do they not understand but they miss the most important part.
And I suppose that you're now going to enlighten me with what the "most important" part of MY relationship should be? Please, carry on then because although I *thought* I knew what that was I bet you're about to tell me how wrong I am.
The Dom is charged with the well being and care of the Sub.
No, that's not part of our dynamic at all. You see, the funny thing is, he expects me to take care of those things on my own- Because I'm a grown-up and I can do that.
The sub will want to serve not only out of fear of punishment but also the want and desire for the protection, love and care of the Dom.
A) We do not have a punishment dynamic.
B) I do not fear him because fear is an unhealthy emotion in a relationship as it implies a lack of trust.
C) I do not want/desire his protection. Uncle Sam gave me the tools I need to see to that on my own.
Domination is not just giving random orders.
Crap! And here Cookie gives random orders all the time! He thinks it's *fun*! Oh, the gall of that man!
A good Dom will find a way to cause the sub to desire pleasing the Dom.
The fuck...? I please my Domly One because I want to. If I didn't want to then there wouldn't be much of anything he could do to make me. But I suppose this is where threat of punishment and fear come in, right?
A Dom, or Dominant, is the protector, teacher, and lover to the sub.
Seriously guy? You really need to stop making these generalizations because they DO NOT apply to all relationships, because (GASP!) In my dynamic I'm the one who is likely to be teaching Cookie something, not the other way around. AND, (oh, the horror!) I don't need protecting. The last time we were in a rukus I wasn't cowering behind him, I was at his side ready to inflict damage.
The Dom is there to care for the subs needs as well as to set her Free.
Some folks buy into that. Some think it's romantic twaddle. I think it's romantic twaddle. I'm as free as the laws of the land allow me to be, a relationship doesn't change that.
By taking control of the Subs Decisions the Dom frees the Sub from the paralytic free will
"Paralytic free will" OMFD. I am laughing so hard at that. Like submissives are some helpless species of deer who just become so overwhelmed by the choices in life that out poor, puny little brains freeze up when we have to make a choice... FFS.
A Dom must be the protector, the Dom must be stronger than the sub, and stronger than other people in the life of the sub.
*coughcoughcough*bullshit*coughcough*
As the teacher, the Dom must be wise and, above all, right.
Oh please. A dominant is not some infallible god and anybody with half a brain can figure that out. A dom is just a guy that someone submits to- Nothing more, nothing less. Setting him up on a pedestal like that just means he has further to fall when he fails- And it'll happen, what with being human and all.
The second a Dom falls short of this he they loose everything in Dom status.
Oh Noes! They'll revoke his Official Dom Card!? Oh, The humanity!!!
The Dom should not arbitrarily punish the sub on a whim. There must be a reason.
Unless, you know, that's what works for their dynamic. Some people LIKE that sort of thing... But I guess that doesn't matter, if they like it then they're doing it wrong because you say so.
To do otherwise will break down the trust and security of the sub.
Or it'll get her hot and bothered, which is also "wrong."
The Dom has to be respected by the sub. Respect is a quality that is earned by the Dom being right, and issuing swift, correct justice and reward to the sub.
Respect is a quality that is earned by being a person someone wants to respect. Personally, I could give a fuck if Cookie's "right", I'd much rather him be kind to small animals and children, a man of his word, a hard worker, honest and loyal... You know, the normal sorts of things that I respect people for.
The Dom is not there to inflict pain and degradation on the sub, but to give the sub a goal and a direction on how to love and please.
Unless he is. Some people LIKE that sort of dynamic. It gets their pink parts moist, it makes them happy.
Besides taking care of a Sub the another big responsibility is to LOVE. As the lover, the Dom is loving and, when appropriate, stern or rough.
You do realize than plenty of happy, healthy dynamics have nothing to do with love, right?
He must recognize that he is the only source of pleasure for the sub.
Yes, because for some unfathomable reason submissives are incapable of finding joy in anything they might have liked before Uber Domly Dom came along. Shoes, food, family, job, hobbies... Those things just stop being pleasurable.
He must see to it that this area is not neglected nor sub par.
That's a tall order given that nothing in the whole world but him can give her pleasure.
The Dom should, when appropriate, be gentle, supportive, and tender to the sub. A Dom/sub relationship is not just about overpowering. It is about the Dom caring for the well-being of the sub. If punishment is required to stop a destructive action by the sub, then it comes from the Dom. On the other hand, when correct action has been noted by the Dom, love and caring should come from him to the sub.
And hey guy, if you read this and take offence because I'm not all impressed by your ONE TRUE WAY manifesto- Think about this: If you hadn't written some bit of tripe that basically said that the only "right" way to do D/s was your way, if you had just kept this writing about your relationships and what worked for you- I wouldn't have ripped it apart. I would have ignored it because your relationship is none of my business. But sadly, you made my relationship your business when it's not and I don't appreciate that.
Something that is very important to me is the relationship. I will be posting this around the site please share it!
Actually, I don't think I will...
Except here and that's just because I'm going to have fun tearing it apart because it's a steaming pile of "I'm doing it right and you're not".
Most people who worry about the Dom / Sub relationship not only do they not understand but they miss the most important part.
And I suppose that you're now going to enlighten me with what the "most important" part of MY relationship should be? Please, carry on then because although I *thought* I knew what that was I bet you're about to tell me how wrong I am.
The Dom is charged with the well being and care of the Sub.
No, that's not part of our dynamic at all. You see, the funny thing is, he expects me to take care of those things on my own- Because I'm a grown-up and I can do that.
The sub will want to serve not only out of fear of punishment but also the want and desire for the protection, love and care of the Dom.
A) We do not have a punishment dynamic.
B) I do not fear him because fear is an unhealthy emotion in a relationship as it implies a lack of trust.
C) I do not want/desire his protection. Uncle Sam gave me the tools I need to see to that on my own.
Domination is not just giving random orders.
Crap! And here Cookie gives random orders all the time! He thinks it's *fun*! Oh, the gall of that man!
A good Dom will find a way to cause the sub to desire pleasing the Dom.
The fuck...? I please my Domly One because I want to. If I didn't want to then there wouldn't be much of anything he could do to make me. But I suppose this is where threat of punishment and fear come in, right?
A Dom, or Dominant, is the protector, teacher, and lover to the sub.
Seriously guy? You really need to stop making these generalizations because they DO NOT apply to all relationships, because (GASP!) In my dynamic I'm the one who is likely to be teaching Cookie something, not the other way around. AND, (oh, the horror!) I don't need protecting. The last time we were in a rukus I wasn't cowering behind him, I was at his side ready to inflict damage.
The Dom is there to care for the subs needs as well as to set her Free.
Some folks buy into that. Some think it's romantic twaddle. I think it's romantic twaddle. I'm as free as the laws of the land allow me to be, a relationship doesn't change that.
By taking control of the Subs Decisions the Dom frees the Sub from the paralytic free will
"Paralytic free will" OMFD. I am laughing so hard at that. Like submissives are some helpless species of deer who just become so overwhelmed by the choices in life that out poor, puny little brains freeze up when we have to make a choice... FFS.
A Dom must be the protector, the Dom must be stronger than the sub, and stronger than other people in the life of the sub.
*coughcoughcough*bullshit*coughcough*
As the teacher, the Dom must be wise and, above all, right.
Oh please. A dominant is not some infallible god and anybody with half a brain can figure that out. A dom is just a guy that someone submits to- Nothing more, nothing less. Setting him up on a pedestal like that just means he has further to fall when he fails- And it'll happen, what with being human and all.
The second a Dom falls short of this he they loose everything in Dom status.
Oh Noes! They'll revoke his Official Dom Card!? Oh, The humanity!!!
The Dom should not arbitrarily punish the sub on a whim. There must be a reason.
Unless, you know, that's what works for their dynamic. Some people LIKE that sort of thing... But I guess that doesn't matter, if they like it then they're doing it wrong because you say so.
To do otherwise will break down the trust and security of the sub.
Or it'll get her hot and bothered, which is also "wrong."
The Dom has to be respected by the sub. Respect is a quality that is earned by the Dom being right, and issuing swift, correct justice and reward to the sub.
Respect is a quality that is earned by being a person someone wants to respect. Personally, I could give a fuck if Cookie's "right", I'd much rather him be kind to small animals and children, a man of his word, a hard worker, honest and loyal... You know, the normal sorts of things that I respect people for.
The Dom is not there to inflict pain and degradation on the sub, but to give the sub a goal and a direction on how to love and please.
Unless he is. Some people LIKE that sort of dynamic. It gets their pink parts moist, it makes them happy.
Besides taking care of a Sub the another big responsibility is to LOVE. As the lover, the Dom is loving and, when appropriate, stern or rough.
You do realize than plenty of happy, healthy dynamics have nothing to do with love, right?
He must recognize that he is the only source of pleasure for the sub.
Yes, because for some unfathomable reason submissives are incapable of finding joy in anything they might have liked before Uber Domly Dom came along. Shoes, food, family, job, hobbies... Those things just stop being pleasurable.
He must see to it that this area is not neglected nor sub par.
That's a tall order given that nothing in the whole world but him can give her pleasure.
The Dom should, when appropriate, be gentle, supportive, and tender to the sub. A Dom/sub relationship is not just about overpowering. It is about the Dom caring for the well-being of the sub. If punishment is required to stop a destructive action by the sub, then it comes from the Dom. On the other hand, when correct action has been noted by the Dom, love and caring should come from him to the sub.
And hey guy, if you read this and take offence because I'm not all impressed by your ONE TRUE WAY manifesto- Think about this: If you hadn't written some bit of tripe that basically said that the only "right" way to do D/s was your way, if you had just kept this writing about your relationships and what worked for you- I wouldn't have ripped it apart. I would have ignored it because your relationship is none of my business. But sadly, you made my relationship your business when it's not and I don't appreciate that.
How To Be Real.
Have you ever read the Velveteen Rabbit?
It's a story about a toy bunny who thinks he's real until some "real" bunnies come along and blow that notion out of the water. They tell him that he's not real like they are because he's different from them, and suddenly he's just not good enough any more.
The same thing happens here.
There are people who are perfectly happy in their idea of what a BDSM relationship looks like. They think they're a "real" whatever (Submissive, Domly, Master, Slave, etc) and then they get around other kinksters, and they hear those kinksters espousing the idea that in order to be "real" and "true" you have to do things this way, or you have to do things that way, and their way- Well, it's just not good enough any more.
They're not good enough any more.
Even I, badass snarktastic bitch extraordinaire, went through that. So you know, I know what it feels like to feel like you're less than because you don't measure up to someone else's idea of what a "Real" and "True" Whatever looks like. But here's the thing- I can also tell you that it doesn't matter.
Do you want to know why?
It's because there is no Real and/or True.
Honestly, there's not. There isn't one individual who is in charge of deciding what has to work for ALL BDSM relationships. There's not some hidden cabal of crusty Old School/Old Guard/ Old Whatthefuckever kinksters deciding what is wrong and what is right in BDSM relationships. There is absolutely NONDBY who gets to dictate what your relationship or my relationship or any of the other thousands of kinksters who belong to this site SHOULD look like.
And anybody who uses "Real" and "True" (or its other similarly dirty cousins "Must, should, have to, natural, genuine" or a plethora of other terms designed to make someone not doing it their way feel "Less Than")- You can feel free to ignore them. They're speaking or writing from a place of insecurity or ignorance and don't have a blessed clue about how harmful their words can be to the Velveteen Rabbits of this world.
You can ignore them because the person you are, however you chose to be, YOU ARE ALREADY REAL- And they cannot take that from you unless you let them.
So don't let them.
It's a story about a toy bunny who thinks he's real until some "real" bunnies come along and blow that notion out of the water. They tell him that he's not real like they are because he's different from them, and suddenly he's just not good enough any more.
The same thing happens here.
There are people who are perfectly happy in their idea of what a BDSM relationship looks like. They think they're a "real" whatever (Submissive, Domly, Master, Slave, etc) and then they get around other kinksters, and they hear those kinksters espousing the idea that in order to be "real" and "true" you have to do things this way, or you have to do things that way, and their way- Well, it's just not good enough any more.
They're not good enough any more.
Even I, badass snarktastic bitch extraordinaire, went through that. So you know, I know what it feels like to feel like you're less than because you don't measure up to someone else's idea of what a "Real" and "True" Whatever looks like. But here's the thing- I can also tell you that it doesn't matter.
Do you want to know why?
It's because there is no Real and/or True.
Honestly, there's not. There isn't one individual who is in charge of deciding what has to work for ALL BDSM relationships. There's not some hidden cabal of crusty Old School/Old Guard/ Old Whatthefuckever kinksters deciding what is wrong and what is right in BDSM relationships. There is absolutely NONDBY who gets to dictate what your relationship or my relationship or any of the other thousands of kinksters who belong to this site SHOULD look like.
And anybody who uses "Real" and "True" (or its other similarly dirty cousins "Must, should, have to, natural, genuine" or a plethora of other terms designed to make someone not doing it their way feel "Less Than")- You can feel free to ignore them. They're speaking or writing from a place of insecurity or ignorance and don't have a blessed clue about how harmful their words can be to the Velveteen Rabbits of this world.
You can ignore them because the person you are, however you chose to be, YOU ARE ALREADY REAL- And they cannot take that from you unless you let them.
So don't let them.
I Have the POWER!
Anyways, so my Bestie and I are sitting around last night shooting the shit (really, we were firing weapons at poo, we don't like poo at all and it deserves to be shot) after having a few tasty beverages at Kuhnhenn Brewery (which explains to poo shooting), and then having a few more tasty beverages on her couch. And we got to talking about 50 Shades of Grey (that steaming pile of tripe) and that newer Crossfire series (also tripe, but not so inane), and Bestie- Who is vanilla as far as I know goes: "Ya know, I'm curious about the whole submission thing cause submissives have all the power."
And I, all sotto vocce go "Oh great 50 SoG strikes again." Aloud, I say to my misguided Bestie, "Erm, well... If you think about it nobody has more power than anybody else. You might be able to stop play with a safe-word, but the Dom can stop at any time too." And then I guzzled some more meade because it was tasty and stuff and my vanilla Bestie just brought up kink which was a little disconcerting and required alcohol to process.
Back on track- The topic was dropped and conversation moved on and eventually I battled an epic windstorm in my itty-bitty go-kart of a car to arrive home where I promptly passed out and forgot about it until now.
The power thing? More of an in depth conversation than I wanted to get into with vanilla Bestie after copious amounts of mircobewery beer. And really, how do you explain that nobody gives up their power and nobody has more power than anybody else? A submissive always has power- She can say no, she can have limits, she can walk; but on the flip side a d-type has all of that too... It's not really power we're giving up or exchanging, but authority.
I have power, Cookie has power, but he has more authority than I do in our relationship. He calls the shots, not because I'm lacking power but because I agreed to let him have the authority to call the shots and he was willing to assume that authority. Our power is equal, our authority is not.
Meh. I'm just babbling about happenings from the Squakyverse because I don't want to do dishes.
And I, all sotto vocce go "Oh great 50 SoG strikes again." Aloud, I say to my misguided Bestie, "Erm, well... If you think about it nobody has more power than anybody else. You might be able to stop play with a safe-word, but the Dom can stop at any time too." And then I guzzled some more meade because it was tasty and stuff and my vanilla Bestie just brought up kink which was a little disconcerting and required alcohol to process.
Back on track- The topic was dropped and conversation moved on and eventually I battled an epic windstorm in my itty-bitty go-kart of a car to arrive home where I promptly passed out and forgot about it until now.
The power thing? More of an in depth conversation than I wanted to get into with vanilla Bestie after copious amounts of mircobewery beer. And really, how do you explain that nobody gives up their power and nobody has more power than anybody else? A submissive always has power- She can say no, she can have limits, she can walk; but on the flip side a d-type has all of that too... It's not really power we're giving up or exchanging, but authority.
I have power, Cookie has power, but he has more authority than I do in our relationship. He calls the shots, not because I'm lacking power but because I agreed to let him have the authority to call the shots and he was willing to assume that authority. Our power is equal, our authority is not.
Meh. I'm just babbling about happenings from the Squakyverse because I don't want to do dishes.
PSA- A Clue For The Clueless
Because there seems to be clueless individuals who need a good wallop upside the head with a clue by four I present you with
Squeaky's Handy Dandy A Number One Guide to Not Being a BDSM Internet Doucheweasel
1. Nobody likes a Doucheweasel.
If you act like an ass nobody will like you, unless you're me, but you're not so cut it out. Word gets around on sites like these, we know who is a decent person and who is a douchenozzel to avoid.
2. You're the only person who gives a damn about your self-appointed title.
So you call yourself Lord Master Domly McSadistic pants? Newsflash pal, you're not impressing anybody. Titles are a dime a dozen (or cheaper at Wal*Mart) and don't mean shit until you're in a relationship with someone who gives a crap.
3. Nobody is obligated to play with you.
You cannot saunter in, pick out a random submissive, and "own" her. You don't get to demand anything from anybody- And if you do, that just points out to all the submissives what a moron you are and we all laugh at you.
4. Profiles exist for a reason.
Try reading them, and then try to wrap your head around the idea that there will be people who have absolutely no interest in you:
Submissives do not want to be your Dom.
Folks in a Monogamous relationship do not want to play with you.
Folks in a Poly or Open relationship pick their partners, you don't get to insert yourself where you're not wanted.
People only looking for friends are not interested in you, period.
5. Sumissive is not synonymous with "easy lay" so stop acting like it is.
Most submissives are picky about who we choose to be our partner and if you act like we owe you something because you have yourself a meaningless title we won't choose you. Try acting like a decent human being who is interested in us as people and you might get somewhere, unless we're not interested (this is where profile reading comes in handy).
6. Not everybody speaks English, but for the love of dog, "NO" is a really simple concept to grasp.
So if someone says it, move on. They don't want to have anything to do with what you're suggesting.
7. Stop writing stupid messages.
Spam is a turn-off. If we get the idea that you're sending the same message to everybody on this site in a fishing expedition to hopefully hook some naive baby seal, we'll laugh at you. Take the time to write something that's not spammy and inane and you might make friends.
8. We don't care about your weenie, vag, etc.
Most of us have seen one, or have one of those. They're not special, they're not impressive, and they scream "Desperate for attention" and "This is the only interesting thing about me" and I'm not sorry to say, desperation is not attractive nor is your fixation with your own genitallia. Get over yourself and your parts.
9. I really like calling out the stupid and inept, so if you give me a reason I will post about you.
And it won't be flattering. So save yourself the potential public humiliation and get a clue already. Stop acting like a tard and start treating people like you'd treat any stranger you met out at the grocery store, or gas station, or mall. Be polite, be courteous, be kind. Be a decent human being- It's not that hard.
Squeaky's Handy Dandy A Number One Guide to Not Being a BDSM Internet Doucheweasel
1. Nobody likes a Doucheweasel.
If you act like an ass nobody will like you, unless you're me, but you're not so cut it out. Word gets around on sites like these, we know who is a decent person and who is a douchenozzel to avoid.
2. You're the only person who gives a damn about your self-appointed title.
So you call yourself Lord Master Domly McSadistic pants? Newsflash pal, you're not impressing anybody. Titles are a dime a dozen (or cheaper at Wal*Mart) and don't mean shit until you're in a relationship with someone who gives a crap.
3. Nobody is obligated to play with you.
You cannot saunter in, pick out a random submissive, and "own" her. You don't get to demand anything from anybody- And if you do, that just points out to all the submissives what a moron you are and we all laugh at you.
4. Profiles exist for a reason.
Try reading them, and then try to wrap your head around the idea that there will be people who have absolutely no interest in you:
Submissives do not want to be your Dom.
Folks in a Monogamous relationship do not want to play with you.
Folks in a Poly or Open relationship pick their partners, you don't get to insert yourself where you're not wanted.
People only looking for friends are not interested in you, period.
5. Sumissive is not synonymous with "easy lay" so stop acting like it is.
Most submissives are picky about who we choose to be our partner and if you act like we owe you something because you have yourself a meaningless title we won't choose you. Try acting like a decent human being who is interested in us as people and you might get somewhere, unless we're not interested (this is where profile reading comes in handy).
6. Not everybody speaks English, but for the love of dog, "NO" is a really simple concept to grasp.
So if someone says it, move on. They don't want to have anything to do with what you're suggesting.
7. Stop writing stupid messages.
Spam is a turn-off. If we get the idea that you're sending the same message to everybody on this site in a fishing expedition to hopefully hook some naive baby seal, we'll laugh at you. Take the time to write something that's not spammy and inane and you might make friends.
8. We don't care about your weenie, vag, etc.
Most of us have seen one, or have one of those. They're not special, they're not impressive, and they scream "Desperate for attention" and "This is the only interesting thing about me" and I'm not sorry to say, desperation is not attractive nor is your fixation with your own genitallia. Get over yourself and your parts.
9. I really like calling out the stupid and inept, so if you give me a reason I will post about you.
And it won't be flattering. So save yourself the potential public humiliation and get a clue already. Stop acting like a tard and start treating people like you'd treat any stranger you met out at the grocery store, or gas station, or mall. Be polite, be courteous, be kind. Be a decent human being- It's not that hard.
The Most Massive Missve Fail Ever.
I'm jumping up and down with snarky glee. I'm pretty sure someone CTRL+C'd this because I saw it on Fet the other day, but it landed in my inbox this evening and the potential for a verbal reaming is so high that I had to share the joy. So now, for your edification and amusement, I present you with The Most Massive Missive Fail EVAR.
Your Master loves you, and is proud to have you as a Slave.
Well, he does love me and he is proud of me but you got our titles wrong- I'm a submissive and he's my Domly One. But if you'd read my profile you'd have known that. You'd also have known that I thrive on snarking about crap like this, it just makes my day. But hey, thanks for deciding that I looked like a likely recipient for this inane twaddle, I guess it's sort-of-but-not-really-flattering.
Swearing service to your Master carries with it the following rules which MUST be adhered to. Any deviation from, or violation of, these rules will be dealt with strictly and without question or discussion.
Without question or discussion? Lemme guess, you're not a real life player, right? You like the interweb fantasy thing? Cause guess what pal? That right there is a honking huge red flag. Some douche who'd rather inflict punishment than talk and try to fix the issue isn't worth the electricity it takes to power his computer so he can pass along this drivel.
=====
Your behavior reflects on your Master's reputation, therefore you are to conduct yourself appropriately both in AND out of his presence.
Good thing my Domly thinks that my snark, cussing, and other various forms of unpleasantry are appropriate then, otherwise he'd be SOL. I am who I am and nobody gets to dictate otherwise to me.
Any bracelet or necklace you may be presented with must be worn AT ALL TIMES. If you MUST remove it in special circumstances (such as in the shower, around kids, etc) the moment you are done with that activity, you MUST return it to your wrist/neck.
Which one is it? AT ALL TIMES or not, cause you can't have it both ways, or are you purposefully being wishy-washy so you can have some trumped-up excuse to execute one of those discussion-free punishments you seem so fond of?
You are only to address your Master as “Master”. Your title has been chosen as Lovebug.
Ah-hahahahahahahahahaha *gasp* Hahahahahahahahaha.
Sorry guy, but unlike you, a person who obviously lives in his own little wank fueled fantasy land, I exist in the real world. Even if Cookie did have some desire to be called "Master" it would be a cold day in hell before I used that title in front of my kids, family, friends, or the general public. And "lovebug?" Seriously? You don't even care about the submissive you're looking for if you think that she's going to want some random, generic term of endearment with no connection to her applied to her.
Orders from your Master are to be carried out immediately. If you do not obey the order you will be punished for such neglect.
And you'd be on the receiving end of all that neat-o self defense stuff Uncle Sam taught me if you tried to pull that shit. Again, this is real life, D/s sometimes isn't the priority. Kids come before kink, work comes before kink, LOTS of things come before kink- And unless you want to pay for a nanny, pay to keep me in a lifestyle I am accustomed to, and somehow magically disappear anything that might bump you from my to do list (or any submissive's to do list) good luck with that.
At times you will be charged with a “task” which will be accompanied by terms of completion. (for example a time frame or set of terms required for completion) These are also to be carried out respectfully.
Again with the absence of reality business... Honestly, get off the internet and work on getting a clue. This isn't some online fantasy roleplaying game. We have lives and priorities that come before kink. Even those of us who are 24/7 have shit that sometimes gets in the way of kink- But you wouldn't know that, would you? Kinda hard to have a clue about real life when you spend all your time in your mom's basement tugging on yourself in front of the computer.
Orders and tasks are to be verbally responded to with “Yes Master”.
Not likely. I'm much more inclined to roll my eyes, sigh in a long-suffering manner, or laugh.
Upon waking each day, you will contact your Master by any means possible... the acceptable methods are Text, IM, or Phone Call. If you have a camera phone you are to send a picture of yourself each morning after getting dressed for the day. This is to make sure that your Master approves of what you have chosen to wear. You may only choose which method to use unless otherwise ordered the night before.
Upon waking I will pee, have a ciggy, wake up the kids and get them off to school. AFTER all of that, if I think about it, I might (and I stress might) feel like texting. If I don't, you're once again SOL. And no, I will not make sure my clothes are approved, I'm a big girl, I've been dressing myself for 30 years, I know how to put together an outfit appropriate to an occasion.
Masturbation is not a restriction. You are to inform me of it's start and climax. (text or IM me when you start, and when you cum). If you forget one of the messages, you will be discplined. Exceptions to the 2nd message are interruption, or inability to cum. In those cases you are to text and explain which one happened.
Well don't you just know how to kill a mood? Nothing's sexier than destroying the spontaneity of a good wank or the after-glow with a report about it.
Punishments are at your Master's discretion. Suggested punishments are always taken into consideration, but once the punishment has been set, there shall be no further discussion. Resisting a punishment will only be answered by more stern discipline. So... It's uncool to try and discuss the root of a problem, but cool to "suggest" punishments? Boy oh boy, you're going to make some chick on second life feel very lucky one day. *scoff*
And yeah, that's it. Some unrealistic drivel that some unrealistic prat probably thought was EPIC and AWESOME because this is what all submissives like because we're interchangeable and totally not individuals.
*SNORT*
Your Master loves you, and is proud to have you as a Slave.
Well, he does love me and he is proud of me but you got our titles wrong- I'm a submissive and he's my Domly One. But if you'd read my profile you'd have known that. You'd also have known that I thrive on snarking about crap like this, it just makes my day. But hey, thanks for deciding that I looked like a likely recipient for this inane twaddle, I guess it's sort-of-but-not-really-flattering.
Swearing service to your Master carries with it the following rules which MUST be adhered to. Any deviation from, or violation of, these rules will be dealt with strictly and without question or discussion.
Without question or discussion? Lemme guess, you're not a real life player, right? You like the interweb fantasy thing? Cause guess what pal? That right there is a honking huge red flag. Some douche who'd rather inflict punishment than talk and try to fix the issue isn't worth the electricity it takes to power his computer so he can pass along this drivel.
=====
Your behavior reflects on your Master's reputation, therefore you are to conduct yourself appropriately both in AND out of his presence.
Good thing my Domly thinks that my snark, cussing, and other various forms of unpleasantry are appropriate then, otherwise he'd be SOL. I am who I am and nobody gets to dictate otherwise to me.
Any bracelet or necklace you may be presented with must be worn AT ALL TIMES. If you MUST remove it in special circumstances (such as in the shower, around kids, etc) the moment you are done with that activity, you MUST return it to your wrist/neck.
Which one is it? AT ALL TIMES or not, cause you can't have it both ways, or are you purposefully being wishy-washy so you can have some trumped-up excuse to execute one of those discussion-free punishments you seem so fond of?
You are only to address your Master as “Master”. Your title has been chosen as Lovebug.
Ah-hahahahahahahahahaha *gasp* Hahahahahahahahaha.
Sorry guy, but unlike you, a person who obviously lives in his own little wank fueled fantasy land, I exist in the real world. Even if Cookie did have some desire to be called "Master" it would be a cold day in hell before I used that title in front of my kids, family, friends, or the general public. And "lovebug?" Seriously? You don't even care about the submissive you're looking for if you think that she's going to want some random, generic term of endearment with no connection to her applied to her.
Orders from your Master are to be carried out immediately. If you do not obey the order you will be punished for such neglect.
And you'd be on the receiving end of all that neat-o self defense stuff Uncle Sam taught me if you tried to pull that shit. Again, this is real life, D/s sometimes isn't the priority. Kids come before kink, work comes before kink, LOTS of things come before kink- And unless you want to pay for a nanny, pay to keep me in a lifestyle I am accustomed to, and somehow magically disappear anything that might bump you from my to do list (or any submissive's to do list) good luck with that.
At times you will be charged with a “task” which will be accompanied by terms of completion. (for example a time frame or set of terms required for completion) These are also to be carried out respectfully.
Again with the absence of reality business... Honestly, get off the internet and work on getting a clue. This isn't some online fantasy roleplaying game. We have lives and priorities that come before kink. Even those of us who are 24/7 have shit that sometimes gets in the way of kink- But you wouldn't know that, would you? Kinda hard to have a clue about real life when you spend all your time in your mom's basement tugging on yourself in front of the computer.
Orders and tasks are to be verbally responded to with “Yes Master”.
Not likely. I'm much more inclined to roll my eyes, sigh in a long-suffering manner, or laugh.
Upon waking each day, you will contact your Master by any means possible... the acceptable methods are Text, IM, or Phone Call. If you have a camera phone you are to send a picture of yourself each morning after getting dressed for the day. This is to make sure that your Master approves of what you have chosen to wear. You may only choose which method to use unless otherwise ordered the night before.
Upon waking I will pee, have a ciggy, wake up the kids and get them off to school. AFTER all of that, if I think about it, I might (and I stress might) feel like texting. If I don't, you're once again SOL. And no, I will not make sure my clothes are approved, I'm a big girl, I've been dressing myself for 30 years, I know how to put together an outfit appropriate to an occasion.
Masturbation is not a restriction. You are to inform me of it's start and climax. (text or IM me when you start, and when you cum). If you forget one of the messages, you will be discplined. Exceptions to the 2nd message are interruption, or inability to cum. In those cases you are to text and explain which one happened.
Well don't you just know how to kill a mood? Nothing's sexier than destroying the spontaneity of a good wank or the after-glow with a report about it.
Punishments are at your Master's discretion. Suggested punishments are always taken into consideration, but once the punishment has been set, there shall be no further discussion. Resisting a punishment will only be answered by more stern discipline. So... It's uncool to try and discuss the root of a problem, but cool to "suggest" punishments? Boy oh boy, you're going to make some chick on second life feel very lucky one day. *scoff*
And yeah, that's it. Some unrealistic drivel that some unrealistic prat probably thought was EPIC and AWESOME because this is what all submissives like because we're interchangeable and totally not individuals.
*SNORT*
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)