Posts by Emma Hart
-
Well you confused this n00b by writing "Dom(me)". Still, I could have misread it worse..
oh, it wasn't just you, according to my off-site communication. I should probably have used 'Dom/me', which would just have given me problems with IRC users.
-
I shall be grateful to Tracy, too, because I didn't want to talk too much about Dom psychology, it not being mine. I can testify to never having being smacked as a child, but.
But is it too much to hope that the participants would keep the noise down so as to avoid disturbing their neighbors' peace and quiet (or find a location with few neighbors), even if they were not concerned about an over-zealous police force??
I'm quite a grateful person, y'know? And even engaged in the most vanilla pursuits (maybe with a little bit of sprinkles and a flake), we've had complaints/comments from flatmates and adjacent flats - like, through walls, not up the road. The thing is that nobody directly involved is really conscious of the volume of the gratitude.
-
The rainbow connection.
Indeed - where rainbows come from.
Surely what constitutes ones best behaviour is a matter of perspective.
I used to describe my behaviour as 'exemplary', which sounds like a good thing initially.
-
Its a voluntary coupling where no one has power over the other, either of them can walk away and end the thing. If the dom(me) is not having fun then that is the end, just as much as if the sub is unhappy.
I have this whole 'yeah but nah but yeah' thing going on here. It's different, I feel. It is very much a part of the culture that the sub's happiness is the Dom(me)'s responsibility. The reverse, not so much. I think there'd probably be some disagreement about whose fault it is if the Dom(me) isn't having fun: the sub's or the Dom(me)'s. Some people are very down on topping from the bottom or pushy subs, some not so much.
The only consolation is the prospect of introducing Hart and Dalziel over dinner later on
And I shall be hiding behind a ficus, recording a bootleg of the whole thing.
I shall be on my best behaviour, unfortunately. Well, at least initially.
-
"You're a fag, why does even thinking about sucking cock make me want to gag?" Thanks, hon', outed and grossed out all at once...
"And today on Ask a Fag, anal sex: why is it only inherently degrading for women?"...
Erotypical?
Not bad. I think it's Trinity on that comment thread who says, look okay, all you not-kinkies go away and work out what you want to be called, and then we'll call you that. In the meantime...
-
Sounds like someone needs a visit from the Big Gay Ice Cream Truck.
Awesome. Um. What do its chimes play?
And there's an interesting discussion about problems with the term 'vanilla in the comments here. Most of the contributors are not vanilla people, which obviously biases it a bit. Just ignore the trolly derailing.
-
Vanilla means boring - to refer to the metaphor it's based on, no-one's favourite flavour is vanilla; it's a base that needs something else on top to make it really good - it's inherently lacking.
I totally understand that point of view, and I know some people are really uncomfortable with the 'vanilla' label. The privilege of being in a dominant position is not having a label - see 'couple' and 'gay couple'. So, 'sex' and 'kinky sex'.
But I don't see 'vanilla' as boring. I love vanilla as a flavour. To me it means simply the most common, most pervasive, most broadly accepted. I don't mean that to sound negative at all, it's not intended as a value judgement. I'd just like for there to be a word for 'not kinky' that isn't 'normal'.
-
This hasn't been my experience. I know a few doms and subs who consider themselves radical feminists.
George, yeah, it's a generalisation, based on the repetitive "BDSM wars" in the blogosphere, which tend to be waged between people who identify as 'third-wave/sex-pos' feminists, and those who identify as 'radical' feminists. All those labels are problematic. Among the sites I read, male subs and female Dommes are both referred to as 'unicorns', due to the extent to which their existence is ignored.This shows a slice of the argument in action. (Strong language.)
But. I have noticed this tendency is MUCH more entrenched in US blogs than it is in Kiwi ones.
-
I sympathise with your argument but I have a problem with putting these things entirely off-limits. I also can't reconcile it with the very next paragraph which provides an explanation based on physiology. There's your cause right there, yes?
Yes, you're right, perhaps I was unclear. I'm fine with biological enquiry, it's the sociological ones that bug me. I mean, the research that's being done about the biological causes of sexual orientation are about was causes orientation, not what 'causes gay'. The 'you must have been abused' argument is about what made you deviant - there's no corresponding interest in what 'causes vanilla'.
But with both the 'causes' of homosexuality and kink, I do actually get kind of tired. I understand the importance of establishing the biological basis of sexuality, but should we actually HAVE to 'be born that way' to be accepted? Can't we just, y'know, get on? If it turned out that the 'cause' of homosexuality was actually social, would that make it something that needed to be cured?
The 'cause' argument around BDSM gets really, really ugly. It is 'why are you broken?'. The search for sociological answers seems to carry that judgementalism much more than the search for biological answers.
-
The delicious irony about BDSM is that it only works of both parties are specific -- and honest -- about their expectations and limits. That is a good thing, right?
Yeah, I mean, I'd hate to give the impression that there are no arseholes in the BDSM community, because of course there are. And some people have really terrible experiences - often because they think they'll enjoy something and it turns out they don't. Reactions tend to be really extreme, and quite unpredictable until you try. Something that's always seemed really fabulous in your head can turn out to be awful in reality.
But yeah, for something viewed as so sensationalist and pervy, BDSM involves an awful lot of not having sex - delay, ritual, negotiation. Some people simply get bored.