Saturday, December 25, 2010
It's really weird though - I mean, I didn't just make a profile to find friends. I also kinda want to find dates. I don't see Master or Tapeti nearly enough to satiate my desire for romancing, and since I'm already in a nonmonogamous relationship I might as well do something about it!
But I still feel almost guilty about it. I think it's because up until now, none of us has actively gone looking for dates on our own. (At least, not that I'm aware of.) So it feels like I'm crossing a new threshold, and I'm not sure I'm "allowed" to. Of course, I know that Master and Tapeti are okay with it, but I still can't shake that self-policing aspect of myself. I guess I haven't fully discarded that mono-normative socialization yet. Maybe this will help me.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
But now we've both settled down, at least for the medium-term, and so it's time to start once again. It's a little bit trickier since we're still in separate cities (albeit only 3 hours apart), but it was an obstacle easily overcome with TECHNOLOGY! I.e. silicone.
I found an awesome feminist sex shop in town and went to them for guidance. It was there I learned that anal training isn't about "stretching" anything - it's not even about getting used to something of that size up your butt. Instead, the goal is simply to become more aware of your muscles and to learn how to consciously relax them. I was glad to learn this, since the Master's-penis-sized toys they had available were a lot scarier (and pricier) than the smaller ones. I ended up purchasing one that's somewhat larger than an average man's middle finger, and in a very pleasant purple that matches the very first dildo I ever bought.
I wasn't expecting to accommodate the entire toy on my first try, but I did it with much greater ease than I ever managed when Master played with my ass. I think it's a combination of being more relaxed on my own - no performance anxiety! - and I was already somewhat used to the sensations. When I was with Master this past weekend, however, I started tensing up again, and it wasn't as easy. I'm also not able to handle any in-and-out motion yet. But I'll keep working on it!
Anal wouldn't be nearly as pleasurable if I weren't a masochist, I think. That isn't to say it hurts - I'm so paranoid about damaging something sensitive and important that the slightest hint of pain signals game over for me. However, it definitely isn't pleasurable in the same way that vaginal sex is. It's intense. I kind of want to compare it to a deep-tissue massage. And as a masochist I think I tend to interpret more kinds of stimulation as "pleasurable" than the average Jane, and I'm more open to incorporating them in sexual contexts.
Nevertheless, I'm glad that Master doesn't fixate on anal as some sort of sexual "holy grail" in the way that some guys seem to. He describes it as "Dominant icing on the cake of sex," which I think is a great way of looking at it. It's a lovely treat, but it's not the be-all-end-all, which means he doesn't get frustrated when I can't take him in my ass - something that happens quite often, since I still need to work on getting over that performance anxiety.
He mentioned he might get me a butt plug with a kitty tail on it. That would be awesome. :3
Friday, December 3, 2010
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Secondly, Master is having me watch an instructional video about FMF threesomes by Nina Hartley. I'm recording my reactions to the video here as I watch it:
- When Nina says that porn is a reflection of people's actual fantasies, I think that's only partly true. I mean, obviously real people are making the porno, and they're probably basing it off their own fantasies (and the fantasies of people they know), but I'd argue that porno influences people's fantasies as much as the other way around. For example, there are positions that are used in porn because they allow good camera angles that are rather uncomfortable (or just meh) in terms of actual pleasure. I would also point to the prevalence of shaved pussies and money shots as trends that originated in porn and have since influenced real people's behavior.
- However, Nina is spot-on when she says that bringing a third person into the bedroom only to please your partner is a recipe for disaster, regardless of the genders involved. That's one of the reasons why we haven't had a MFM threesome yet; Master's straight (or at least he hasn't found a guy he'd like to have sex with yet), and so he wouldn't really enjoy having another guy there. And if he isn't enjoying himself, I'm not enjoying myself, so it would be bad news all around.
- Nina is also very insightful when she says that, in a perfect world, women wouldn't need the reassuring presence of a man to explore her same-sex attraction, but, because we live in the society that we do, a three-way is often the only way an otherwise-straight woman will be with a woman.
- Oh wow! She brought up the fact that female bisexuality is more prevalent/more accepted than male bisexuality because of the male gaze! And she advocates mutual enthusiastic consent! I like this lady!
- I feel kind of weird when she brings up that you should get to know the third partner before doing anything because Master and I kind of... didn't with Tapeti. We knew her for less than 24 hours before we had sex for the first time, and it's become a relationship that's lasted for over a year now. I suppose we're the exception to the rule.
- The demonstration with Nicole and Voodoo is very silly and goofy, like actual sex. You can tell they're not just following a script.
- Yay spanking! :D
- Master, Tapeti, and I tried the oral sex triangle (I don't know that position's "official" name), and it didn't really work out. Our proportions were too different for it to be comfortable. Though now that I'm watching them do it, maybe we should try again. With some better positioning maybe we'll be able to pull it off.
- Dammit, cameraman, I've seen heterosexual fellatio before! Zoom out so I can see what the third person is doing!
- I've seen other porn actors lightly tap the woman's pussy before, but I don't think I've ever had it done on me. I don't imagine it'd feel awesome, but I suppose I should give it a try first.
-I like that they ask/tell each other what they enjoy. Their conversation in general is really fun.
- OH GOD DON'T SLAP HIM THERE! (Though he apparently likes it, so... carry on, then.)
- Hahaha, I like how the guy randomly espouses the advantages of being uncut while he's got two ladies going down on him - and you'd never tell from his tone of voice, it's so calm and conversational.
- Hmm, one ball per lady while the guy jerks himself off. Might lead to some bumped noses, but it looks intriguing. I do greatly enjoy playing with balls.
- I'm also glad they don't completely edit out them putting on a condom and applying lube. Since porn is many people's first exposure to what sex is, it's good to establish that, yes, safety/comfort measures are a normal part of sex, too.
-The first position they fuck in is great for access to the lady's clit (by all parties) and good for voyeurism. However, I'll be the involved lady's legs would get tired really fast.
- God, I LOVE guiding Master's cock into Tapeti. LOVE IT LOVE IT LOVE IT.
- Oh man, spanking in time to fucking? GENIUS!
- Damn, Nina's in really good shape! I don't think I'd be able to hold that pose for as long as she does.
- Ah, the good ol' Napoleon's Hat. Always a good choice! Though I'm always afraid that my butthole will be all smelly when I'm the one receiving oral.
- Wow, Nicole gets a real rip-roaring orgasm when Nina uses the vibrator. I can sympathize - it's one of those "my clit is being so stimulated that I need to pull away/shield myself even though it's good stimulation" orgasms.
I stopped watching after the first demo - Master said the second one wasn't as good, and it's a looooong video. Overall, though, I was really pleased and impressed with it. It felt much more genuine than you usually find in porn; the fact that Nicole and Voodoo are actually wife and husband probably helped. They seemed pleasure-centered and spontaneous instead of scripted, and it was educational to boot. I'll have to look up more of Nina Hartley's work.
(PS, Is it bad if I automatically want to type "Nina Harker," as in the character from Dracula?)
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
My bisexuality probably won't be an issue - there are some very out gays and lesbians on staff, and sexual orientation is explicitly written into the company's anti-discrimination policies - but my non-monogamy and my kinkiness might be. Those generally don't count as "sexual orientation" (something I don't mind too much, since I personally don't conceive my poly-ness or kinkiness as orientational, at least not in the same way as bisexuality), which means theoretically I could get fired for them and not have a case.
I've been testing the waters, so to speak. I casually mentioned "my girlfriend" in a conversation with fellow new hires who I'm pretty sure had already heard me talk about "my boyfriend." They didn't seem to notice. Today I wore one of my "casual" collars to work; we have no dress code to speak of, except when we're meeting with customers, and I've felt out the general atmosphere enough that I think that I'll be okay as long as I'm not wearing anything with leather and/or spikes. Low key all the way. Even though I hate being in the closet, I hate being unemployed even more.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Also, I don't have internet in my apartment yet. And for obvious reasons I'm loath to post from my office computer. Right now I'm at the local pub.
In any case, I haven't even had the time yet to get to know my new city's kink scene. I know for a fact it exists - I just need to find it. But I've been too busy with moving, then with my new job, and now I've got all sorts of issues that still need sorting out.
I did go to a newbie munch in Master's hometown last weekend, which was nice. The crowd was much older than I'm used to, though. Hopefully there's an under-35 or somesuch group in my town. No offense to older kinksters - I just tend to be more comfortable and have more in common with young'ns like me.
Lately it seems I've been hearing more and more public derision and condemnation and plain ol' bigotry against kink and poly folk. Not just in conversations around me, either - I'm talking on TV, on the radio, in print. A recent example would be a DJ, when talking about rumors that some celebrity couple or another has an open marriage, saying, "That's not marriage; that's gross." It hurts every time. It's not like when I hear homophobic bullshit; then I just roll my eyes and write the spewer off as an ass, and I know that the majority of America would agree with me - they're just a lot quieter than the very loud, very bigoted minority. But I don't know that about kink and poly. So I still feel very small and alone and unwanted when it comes to that.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Pretty much everything about the newspaper article pissed me right the fuck off. The breathless, "isn't this naughty?" tone, the suspiciously detailed description of what the cops confiscated from her property, and - most of all - a quote from a woman who lived nearby: "I worry about what kind of people she was bringing into the neighborhood."
FUCK YOU, LADY.
She was "bringing in" people JUST LIKE YOU - parents, suburbanites, people who have normal jobs and normal homes and normal families. Yet somehow having sex in a different way makes them "dangerous." Fuck. There are few times when I want to just clock someone; this is one of those times.
Normally when I read something in the paper that pisses me off, I bust out my English Major skillz and channel my rage into an eloquent letter to the editor. It normally works - I've even been published in the paper a couple times. But I can't do that this time; I'd be effectively outing myself to the entire metro area. And, as this recent incident has proven, there are definite negative repercussions to being outed as a kinkster.
Fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck.
And don't even get me started on how stupid anti-sex work laws are in the first place!
I hate society.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
I acquired a set of nipple clamps on my most recent trip to visit Master. I haven't tried them yet - we didn't get the opportunity to before I left. I'm tempted to take them out and try them on, perhaps take a few pics and send them to Master and Tapeti, but it just feels weird to do kinky stuff to myself. It's like tickling oneself; it just doesn't work.
Logically, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense - I mean, I have no issues whatsoever with having sex by myself. Hell, I go stir-crazy without it! Yet even though I go similarly stir-crazy when deprived of kink, I can't do the kink equivalent of masturbation. It just does nothing for me. Woe!
Anyway, back to the visit with Master. He did a great predicament bondage - he ran a line of clothespins down either side of my tits and tied the line off at my collar, so if I thrashed my head around too much while he was smacking me (which I am wont to do), I'd accidentally unzip myself. That was genius. However, he accidentally hit my pussy while flogging me (I was in a position where it was pretty exposed), and that really hurt. :( Pussy torture is not something I like. It definitely crosses into "OH GOD SOMETHING IS SERIOUSLY WRONG" hurting.
I get to see both Master and Tapeti in just a few weeks. Joy!
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
I wonder if that is related to the "women don't actually masturbate!" thing. (Because trans guys don't exist, amirite. -_-)
Saturday, August 21, 2010
On the one hand, kink is very important to me. I don't think I could ever have a long-term romantic relationship/sexual relationship without it, and I greatly enjoy and appreciate having like-minded people to talk to about it - and possibly indulge in some play with. I like their support, and I like having that outlet for my desires.
On the other hand, this is a pretty good job. It doesn't pay well, but it'll look good on my resume and it's good experience for future endeavors. And there's at least a kinky person, and s/he and I get along quite well.
I don't know. I don't have to make a decision just yet. I think I'll return to my home city first, to put things in perspective. Also to discuss things with my partners in person. It's a little hard over the phone in such a spotty reception area.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Shame on me for assuming.
Though the edition I'm reading is twenty years old (and the original publication even older), I have found an emotional and intellectual resonance with Starhawk's writing that is unlike anything else I've encountered. I knew, as a queer woman and a feminist, that I did not like the heterosexist, cissexist bent of a lot of pagan ideology, with its focus on the Divine Polarity/Union of the Goddess and the God. However, I did not know how to adequately conceive of an alternative; Starhawk has eloquently provided one for me, one that made me grin with joy when I read it.
In fact, that seems to have been my reaction to a lot of what I've read so far. This is the first time I've seen religion and feminism thoroughly and intrinsically integrated, which is something that I've wanted for a long time.
And then I read this:
In Witchcraft, love is never associated with actual physical violence, and nothing could be more antithetical to the spirit of the Craft than the current rash of violent pornography. The God does not perpetrate acts of sadomasochism on the Goddess or preach to Her the "power of sexual surrender." (114)...Oh.
I had thought that finally - finally! - I had found the key that would unite my spirituality, my sexuality, and my politics into one cohesive whole - a unifying theory, as it were. And Starhawk's book came so close, so so close, to doing that for me.
But apparently the most fulfilling form of sexual expression for me is not right - is "antithetical to the spirit of the Craft." Just like I've been told that it is antithetical to feminism, to being a healthy member of society, to just about everything I'm supposed to be and think and am.
This isn't going to make me give up on the Craft - in the same way that reading anti-kink screeds from certain feminists isn't going to make me give up feminism. I'm cutting Starhawk some slack, since I like most of the rest of her writing and this was written during the height of the polarizing Sex Wars anyway. Hopefully her views have changed since then; I find it hard to believe that she could maintain the views she espouses in the book and still be against kink without a decent amount of cognitive dissonance.
Now, it's true that I don't need to find validation in the writings of others for my sexuality/spirituality/politics. Obviously I'm going to continue being kinky, a witch, and a feminist all at once regardless of what Starhawk or Dworkin or anyone else says. But it is nice to read the thoughts and theories of like-minded people, as it helps me develop a cognizant framework to describe my own life experiences and my own feelings, which are often chaotic and half-formed even to me; I know what feels right, but I can't explain why or how without help.
Fortunately, I've already seen hints of kink-friendly paganism. I just finished reading Craft of the Wise: A Practical Guide to Paganism and Witchcraft by Llyn Annwn, and she briefly mentions the traditional use of the scourge in rituals. Though she doesn't go into detail - only saying that, in the proper circumstances and for the right people, it can be a powerful experience - it provides a hint that, yes, I can incorporate every aspect of my sexuality into my religious practice. However, I don't know where to look to find more material about this. Any suggestions would be much appreciated.
(x-posted to my witchy blog)
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Lo and behold, on my first day I find out one of my co-editors is a dominant sadist. And s/he makes regular trips to the nearest large city for munches and workshops! Oh, happy day.
I suppose I should have learned from my time at college that hippie-types and kinky-types are not mutually exclusive. But for some reason I still held that misconception. Perhaps because hippies also have the stereotype of anti-hierarchical anarchism? (Which also doesn't preclude kink, so even THAT assumption is faulty.)
In any case, it'll be nice to have even just one person who I can talk to about kinky stuff when Master isn't around to visit.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
It's a common enough occurrence that I've seen multiple self-referential jokes about "bi poly pagan kinky geek chicks" or some permutation thereof. So obviously it's not just me.
I mentioned this to Master once, and he hypothesized that it was because marginalized groups felt a kinship for each other, so naturally there'd be cross-pollination. This makes sense to me, as it seems like almost all "minority" groups - whether minorities in the sociological sense or just niche cultures - have a high occurrence of other minority groups. The exception to this, however, is POC, which most subcultures seem to have a dearth of.
(Naturally, this doesn't mean there aren't any queers of color, geeks of color, what have you; however, they're often absent (or under-represented) in public discourse/gatherings.)
Which is unfortunate, of course. And I hope we can fix that.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Also, I need to either find someone in my home city who'll flog me, or I need to pester Master more about it. Because I haven't gotten nearly enough.
Sunday, July 11, 2010
It was actually a lot of fun. Everyone was very friendly and welcoming. And I got spanked and paddled. And I got nipple clamped for the first time, which was awesome. ^_^ And there was lots of food!
Trying to snap out of sub-space was weird, though. After the scene I kept wanting to go "sub sub sub sub sub!" to the person who topped me, but I didn't want to commit any social faux pas either. What is the post-scene etiquette, I wonder?
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Thursday, June 10, 2010
And, okay, there definitely is a lot to critique. The female characters (all two... well, 1.5 of them) seem pretty shallow and sexist in their portrayal. And apparently there's a lot of really ableist connotations in how the hybrid is treated. (Keep in mind I haven't actually seen it yet.) But as for the rest... um. A gender/sex-shifting human/animal hybrid that sexually assaults people with his/her tentacle-tail-penis-thing? With hints of incest thrown in? That's like, five of my fetishes all combined into one right there.
So now I feel like a Bad Feminist because the things that make others miffed make me go, "Oooh. Hot." I know that the "Examine your desires!" thing is generally considered bunk, and I've never really felt in conflict before, but... yeah. I dunno. I know why others are upset by this movie, but I just can't get myself to feel the same way. :/
This is so weird. Even though I'm a submissive-oriented woman, I've never really felt that was at odds with my feminism. But with this I actually feel kind of guilty. :( Bleh. Then I feel bad for feeling guilty because YOU SHOULD NEVER FEEL GUILTY FOR YOUR SEXUALITY and so on.
I dunno what to do.
Friday, June 4, 2010
On the plus side, I'm much closer to Master's city, and the city I'm in actually has something of a kink scene.
On the minus side, living with one's parents does put a kink (hurr hurr hurr) in one's sex life.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
I know that I get to see both of them in a week, but still. They're off having fun while I'm stuck in the boonies.
I don't know how much longer I can handle this whole long-distance thing.
Not to mention that they get some together time for a whole week, while I only get a weekend that's mostly going to be taken up with moving out, travel, and the graduation ceremony. Fuck.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Saturday, May 15, 2010
While checking out a post with some very sexy, very well-drawn fanart of male Disney characters in underwear (Hello there, Tarzan!), I also happened upon a few Disney-based fanfics that I thought I'd share.
My, What a Guy! depicts a foursome between Gaston and the three blonde triplets in Beauty and the Beast. I enjoyed the use of French vocabulary, which was a nice change from the usual "manhood," "quivering center," and such. The tone was playful, in keeping with Gaston and the triplets' generally comedic role in the movie. However, the entrance of LeFou halfway through was just disturbing and a total turn-off.
A Matter of Pride (Trigger warning: attempted rape) is less an "erotic" fanfic and more an "adult" fanfic - that is, it's a re-interpretation of the middle portion of The Lion King with more adult themes, but not with any specific focus on titillation. Still, it was very well-written, and did a good job of balancing the human personalities of the characters with the reality of their animal nature.
A Cold Night in Agrabah is my least favorite, mostly because the author seems hell-bent on making sure we know that, despite the fact that Jasmine is being sexual with her tiger Rajah, she's still FAITHFUL to her ONE TRUE LOVE Aladdin and her HEART will ALWAYS BE WITH HIM. Yeah yeah yeah, just fuck your pet cat already, Jesus.
This untitled Little Mermaid fanfic (Trigger warning: explicit description of rape) is kind of like "A Matter of Pride" in that it's not really erotic - just a fanfic with explicitly adult themes. It explores an issue that the original movie didn't cover: that Ariel probably didn't know anything about human sex, and Prince Eric - given the time period this is set in - probably didn't give a shit. It's darkly humorous, or at least as humorous as a story about rape can be.
Monday, May 10, 2010
But Iron Man is more than just a silly romp (though it is very much that, and it revels in it). It's tech porn. I'd heard the term used before in reviews of the movie, and I understood what it meant, but I'd forgotten just how appropriate the term is. As I watched the camera lovingly and sensuously pan over the metallic body of Iron Man in the same way Michael Bay panned over Meagan Fox's body, I realized I wasn't just drooling over how cool and awesome the technology was (or would be, if it actually existed); I was actually getting turned on.
Well, that wouldn't be too unheard of, for me. I already knew I liked fantasies about robots and such. I half-jokingly mentioned my arousal to my friends (we don't hide much from each other), I was mildly surprised to learn that they all were similarly affected, even those not generally attracted to male figures.
I realized this should have been expected - that the creators of this movie had wanted to elicit this reaction (hence "tech porn"). After all, Iron Man is undeniably a phallic figure; not only is he literally hard as steel, but he represents (Tony Stark's/the US's) masculinity via physical and economic strength, as well as superior intellect. As most of society is taught to be attracted to masculinity, whether subjectively ("I want to be like that") or objectively ("I want that in my partner"), it makes sense that most would respond sexually to that.
Given this, I decided to look for Iron Man porn. As in actual porn. Given that Rule 34 has applied to some of the most bizarre and obscure things one can think of (a dragon fucking a sports car? turkey sandwiches? what?), I figured it wouldn't be too difficult to find. After all, all one would need to do is add a red-and-yellow cock to the suit and stick it in whomever one chose.
And yet I found nothing.
Not a single metal cock in sight.
I found a few pics of Pepper Pots and Tony Stark, but nothing that blatantly sexualized the actual suit, which I found odd. The Autobots and Decepticons have plenty of dicks and pussies to go around; couldn't they spare one for Iron Man?
So why aren't there any porno pics of the suit? I doubt complexity of the suit's design is a deterrent to any would-be artists, as many of the beautiful renditions on DeviantArt prove. Perhaps it's because sexual objectification is antithetical to the phallic symbol of Iron Man? Indeed, many of the fan art I found made a point of de-emphasizing the would-be genital area on the suit as much as possible; even a Ken doll has more of a bulge than some of these depictions (when the bulge is even visible and not hidden by a posed leg or arm, that is). But I don't think that male sexuality is mutually exclusive with the phallus - and Tony Stark's hyper-active sexuality would seem to make such a connection even more plausible.
Maybe Tony Stark/Iron Man represent a dichotomous version of masculinity: the explicitly sexual Stark, who exerts his power over women (Pepper Potts and his various "conquests") vs. the apparently asexual Iron Man, who exerts his power over men (the bad guys). Thus, the simultaneous sexualization/de-sexualization of Tony Stark/Iron Man may be an attempt to remove any homoeroticism, which seems to run rampant among super heroes in general. And we all know how "dangerous" homosexuality is to traditional masculinity.
Conversely, perhaps Iron Man was so explicitly "pornified" in the movie that to make Rule 34 of him was redundant, like making pornographic fan art of... porn. Why not just use the original material?
Or, perhaps, I just fail at searching for it.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Abuse is not S/M and S/M is not abuseSo yeah. Spread this around, if you like. Awareness is the first (and arguably most important) tool in fighting and stopping abuse, no matter what community it occurs in.
Whether you are topping, bottoming, or both, these are some questions to ask yourself:
S/M play is consensual; abuse is not consensual.
- Is your partner turned on by violating your limits or terms?
- Does your partner not use a safeword, and then later say you violated their limits?
- Does your partner claim to know more about your s/m "energy" than you do?
- Does your partner try to extend a dynamic outside of a scene without your consent?
- Does your partner expect you to read their mind about what they want?
- Does your partner refuse to talk about what felt wrong or confusing to you about a scene?
- Does your partner negotiate while in role when you haven't agreed to do that?
- Do you feel like you're playing because you have to?
- Does your partner involve others in your scenes without asking?
- Does your partner say you pushed them too far even though you stayed within the limits you negotiated?
- Does your partner humiliate you by talking about your play in public without your consent?
- Does your partner use arousal or orgasm as evidence of consent?
- Do you feel fear or dread about ending a scene or setting a limit?
- Does your partner say you're not "real" for wanting to switch, or do they pressure you into switching?
- Are you confused about when a scene begins and ends?
- Do you feel that if you could just play better, be hotter or give/take more, everything would be okay?
- Does your partner use scenes to suppress or cover up anger and frustration?
S/M play is negotiated and agreed upon ahead of time; abuse is not negotiated.
S/M has responsible limits and safety rules; abuse has no rules or limits and there are no safewords.
S/M is fun, erotic and loving; abuse is manipulative, selfish, and hurtful.
S/M play is enjoyable by both; victims do not enjoy abuse.
S/M play can be stopped by either partner at any time; abuse cannot be stopped by the victim.
Players exchange power in agreed-upon roles with negotiated boundaries; abusers force control using non-consensual manipulation and violence.
S/M creates a bond of trust; abuse destroys trust.
Adapted from the Northwest Network, 2001
Monday, May 3, 2010
The mistress was so sweet; she asked me how much experience I had, whether I was wearing underwear and whether it would be okay to expose said underwear, whether she could use a paddle, how I was doing, if she could hit harder, and so on. And she gave me a hug afterwards. :) AND SHE WAS SO PRETTY. My goodness.
But she also hit really hard. After she shackled my wrists up by my head and tilted me forward (she had a dentist chair-like thing; riding it was very trippy), she warmed up my bottom with a lot of quick, gentle slaps. That actually felt really nice - almost like a massage. But then she really went to town. She used her hand, mostly, and a leather paddle with hearts cut out of it. She took a couple thwacks with a wooden paddle, too, but she went easy with that. Even so, she definitely pushed me; maybe I'm just out of practice, but I don't think I've taken that severe of a paddling in a while, if ever. My bum was still red the next day! But it wasn't especially sore, remarkably enough.
The public aspect was... almost a non-issue. Like, even though it was the first time I'd scened in front of strangers, I was very comfortable and enjoyed myself too much to be embarrassed. And I was able to be as loud as I wanted! That was very nice.
I also met up with a guy I've been chatting with on FetLife. He's a fellow photo buff, though he does digital instead of darkroom. It's the first time in a while I've talked to someone from that site who didn't seem like a total creeper! Though I'm glad that I've met someone who I'd actually like to be friends with, I'm kind of sad that I have to wade through so many, "Hey baby I like ur profile hurr hurr hurr," comments. *sigh*
Also got to see Master, albeit briefly, and we had lunch with my folks. Pretty sure we've successfully maintained the illusion to all three of our families that we each only have one partner. Heh. I'm sad Master and I only had time for sex once, though. :( Of course, he's been teasing me mercilessly about my sex drive, even though his is just as high. I'm sorry, but once a month is not going to cut it! I'm fairly certain most would agree, too.
But I'm going to go visit him in just a few weeks, and then he'll be up for my college graduation. So the dry spell won't be quite as long this time.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
For now, we've decided it's best for everyone that we stay in the closet about being poly except to our close peers. Up until now it's been pretty easy... except now sometimes Master comes to my city to visit someone that isn't me. How do I explain that to my parents? I'm pretty sure they're just waiting for us to get married at this point (good luck with that, guys), so for him to travel hundreds of miles and spend more time with someone else than with me is rather odd.
Of course, the real reason why is perfectly understandable - he's being introduced to Tapeti's parents as The Boyfriend, so of course he's going to spend more time with her/them than with me. But I can't tell my parents that, otherwise I'd out all three of us. So instead I'm just left stammering awkwardly. :S
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
I know it's just a preview for a full-length porno, but it was enough that I found it arousing (which I'm sure was their intention). I liked that it was silly and self-parodic, since sex does tend to be pretty funny (especially when doing such a time-honored scenario as a rebellious student being "punished" by her teacher), but it wasn't so silly that it was no longer sexy, like some (okay, a lot) of porn that I've seen. The spanking was great - not wimpy spanking, like some other videos I watched, and the woman actually had enough butt on her that I wasn't worried about the man hitting bone every time he smacked her. I was glad that both the man and the woman were pretty attractive (though I wish neither of them had shaved all their pubic hair), and I was really impressed by the woman's flexibility. That lady's in shape!
As a side note, that's also the first time I've seen a labial piercing.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
This was interesting because, while I've seen other documentaries about Realdolls before, this was the first time I'd seen Realdolls used in the context of a couple. The company founder mused that some of his customers were couples that wanted to try threesomes but were to afraid to find an actual third person, so shelled out $6000 for a doll instead. That seemed to be what was going on with the couple featured.
That logic... kinda made sense to me? I mean, I get that people can be very nervous about nonmonogamy, but six grand? The potential emotional costs seem much more affordable than that! I suppose I'm kind of biased in my views, being 1) already practiced in nonmonogamy, and 2) not in a position to spend $6000 on anything, but I mean, come on. You could hire a sex worker for less than that, and you get the added bonus of being with a human being who can respond to you.
Still, this clip actually made me feel less creeped out about Realdolls than I normally am. I think it's because they were pretty firm on keeping the line between the dolls and real people; the guy they interviewed didn't have sex with his doll - he masturbated using his doll, and only had sex with his long-distance girlfriend. The creator mentions that many of his customers order the dolls because they specifically have a fetish for silicone and/or dolls; it is the fact that they are not human that is appealing. This I can also understand; I have my own kinks, such as for (non-anthropomorphic) fucking machines, and the whole point is, indeed, that it's not a human giving me pleasure.
And yet... I read the testimonials on the web site:
They have a "presence"; they are soft, sweet, cuddly, endearing, sexy, and more. I have several faces and several wigs for mine. That in combination with a wide variety of wardrobes allows me to be with any fantasy girl I desire!!!! So very liberating!! I can have a HOT dominatrix, a sweet innocent girl next door, a cute shopoholic who loves the clubs at night! A sweet fairy. A rich girl who only wants the best. A hot business woman, hot Bikini babe!!... the list is endless!!!!
Abyss gave me this doll, the closest thing to my ideal female beauty I have. This one will even allow me to kiss and hug her, to even have sex with her.
I read some of the feedback and I get a decidedly icky vibe. Like, these guys aren't pleased that real women won't cater to their desires, so they'll get an inanimate woman-object that they can have complete control over. Oh hey, feminist alarms going off there. The lines between woman and object are blurred more on the site, too; the clothing, which is ostensibly for the dolls, is modeled by real women, and they make Realdolls that are replicas of adult film stars. Inanimate objects become human being with personalities, and living, breathing humans are reduced to sex toys. And when I say "humans," I of course mean women; they do offer male Realdolls, but they are obviously not the focus of either the company or the clientele. Color me surprised. Except not.
However, while browsing the site, I noticed you could get a Realdoll with elf ears and/or unnaturally colored skin (e.g. bright blue or green). I actually thought that was cool. I even thought it might be fun to play with a doll like that; I do enjoy mixing sci-fi and fantasy with sex.
I suppose, beyond the feminist critique, my reaction boils down to my viscerally negative reaction to too-humanlike sex toys of any kind, which is probably because they fall right into the uncanny valley. Flesh-colored, veiny dongs freak me out just as much as the disembodied women's torsos that one can buy, and while blue pointy-eared Realdolls are kind of awesome, a realistic one is just gross. Why would I want to have sex with a severed limb? Or a corpse? Not to mention that, for me, there is a strict dichotomy between sex (involving other people) and masturbation (not involving other people), and realistic sex toys like Realdolls blur that distinction too much for me.
I guess I'll just keep my fire-engine-red-with-sculpted-flames-on-the-tip dildo, thanks!
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
When I actually did go, however, I felt completely at ease. This was probably because I was there with several of my friends already, so I wasn't "alone." The drinks I imbibed also probably helped. But I think the biggest thing is that "the community" isn't actually scary. I mean, no scarier than me and my friends - 'cause we're actually already part of the community anyway! You'd think I would have figured this out before, but apparently not.
Anyway, on to the actual demo. The suspension guy was awesome; his knotwork was incredible, and he exuded such competence that I would totally have him hang me upside-down. It made me want to try more suspension; Master and I have never really done much other than tying my arms to a water pipe to slightly take the weight off my feet - nothing much at all. We were constrained by a lack of resources as much as a lack of experience. But one day I'd like to try a full-body suspension like what the guy at the club demonstrated. It looked so comfortable! Considering how much I love swings and hammocks and high places, I imagine I'd love it.
There were two dommes there who did more standard kinky stuff - impact play, wax play, cuffs and spreader bars, clamps, and the occasional judicious application of a vibrator (outside the panties, natch). I've never seen such proficient use of a flogger before; watching them and listening to the SMACK! that resounded with each strike made me weak in the knees. Lupa had to hold me up! (And then she proceeded to NOT HELP AT ALL by whispering about all the nasty mean things she wanted to do to me in my ear.)
Tapeti got her birthday spankings, and her bottom was a beautiful kaleidoscope of colors by the time they were done. The poor dear - I made her jump each time I unconsciously patted her bottom. >:3
Alas, I wasn't able to be on the receiving end of either the dommes or the suspension guy. Maybe next time I'll get the chance. 'Cause I'm definitely going there again; I haven't had that much fun at a bar or a club since... probably ever!
Thursday, March 11, 2010
I pulled back to meet his gaze, my eyes wide and serious. "No! I can't. Not right now."
"Why not?" he asked.
"'Cause... people will see." I slouched forward in my seat, bashful.
Master was not impressed. "Who will see?" He flicked his eyes towards the other couple, who were gazing straight ahead, oblivious to us behind them.
"The bus driver," I said, gazing fearfully at the rounded mirror at the front of the bus.
"The bus driver is watching the road. Now do it. Here I'll even put my hand in the way so they can't see," he said, crossing his leg and resting one arm on it.
I put my hand on his thigh, then hesitated.
"Do it. Do it or I won't fuck you."
Faced with that ultimatum, I reached out with my pinkie to stroke the hard shape beneath his pants, then pulled my hand away. Master smiled.
"You know," Master said, "I've been thinking about your subbiness, and I think you don't actually want a boss - you want a bad guy to fight against. You want the conflict."
"Yeah," I said. "But... it's not that I want a bad guy; I want an antagonist. An antagonist isn't necessarily a bad guy; he's like a rival or a foil."
"The Gary to your Ash Ketchum."
I giggled. "Yeah, like that."
Sunday, February 28, 2010
I can't quite shake my nervousness regarding turning this in. Will my professor suspect my motivations for writing about kink, I wonder? Then I ask myself, why does it matter? I don't get worked up when I speak about bisexuality in class. (Well, I do a little bit; heterosexism is hard to shake entirely.)
I also hope that I do the kink community justice in my writing. I mean, it's not like I'm gonna get kicked out of kink forever if I get a bad grade, but still. I don't want to misrepresent it either.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
When I was in my teens – particularly my early teens – there was one fantasy in particular that I enjoyed. Not only did it persist longer than most of my fantasies, but it also changed subtly over time as my sexual tastes evolved and (theoretically) matured.
This fantasy is very much a fantasy – that is, it fits into the sci-fi or fantasy genres. In it, the world is not run by humans; instead, large cat-like creatures are the dominant species. Sometimes this was the result of an alien invasion, and sometimes it just always has been that way in this world – it doesn’t really matter which. Either way, the end result is that humans are the pets, while cats (or cat-like aliens, anyway) are the owners.
Naturally, the aliens want to breed their pets. In the fantasy, I am owned by a human breeder, along with several other females. Part of the fantasy is simply living the pet life – we sleep in cat beds on the floor, eat out of dishes, run around in outdoor pens, receive pats from our “masters,” and play on human-sized cat structures. Interestingly, I don’t recall any explicitly sexual fantasies involving the other females. Also, even when our ownership is the result of an alien invasion, there is never any talk or attempt of escape.
The other part of the fantasy is, of course, the actual breeding. The decision of whom I breed with is made without my input or consent; all I’m aware of is being leashed by my owner and led into a room, where I’m locked in with a strange male. He usually looks striking similar to my now-boyfriend, sans facial hair: about my height or a bit taller, wiry, with a small amount of body hair. He is usually white, though not always.
At first he and I are incredibly awkward; we have never even seen each other, except perhaps in passing, but we know that our owners are expecting us to have sex, and we will probably get rewarded if we do (and possibly punished if we don’t). We start talking, and eventually bond because of our shared awkward situation. That inevitably leads to sex.
When I first started having this fantasy, I imagined sex almost exclusively in man-on-top missionary position. However, as I got older, I started getting more imaginative and started incorporating more variety of positions, particularly “doggie-style” and other “from-behind” positions. The furnishings of the room that we were in also changed as I aged. At first, the room had very stereotypical decorations – a large four-poster bed with a canopy, candles, and tapestries on the walls. I was often “forced” to wear sexy lingerie that was inspired by the Victoria’s Secret catalogues I looked at. This was presumably because the alien breeders wanted to replicate humans’ “natural” mating environment as closely as possible. There was also no obvious sign that they were watching the man and I. As I got older, however, I largely dispensed of such trappings until it was just the man and I, completely naked except for collars around our necks, in a bare enclosure with our owners blatantly watching us the entire time.
From a feminist perspective, I think the reason that I conjured up this fantasy was because it gave me an excuse to be sexual. Hegemonic gender roles say that good women – particularly young teens, like I was when I first started having this fantasy – are not supposed to be sexual. I was very invested in being a “good girl.” I didn’t rebel against adults, I got good grades in school, and I did not outwardly express my sexuality. By setting up a situation in which I was forced to be sexual, I therefore was alleviated of any responsibility or guilt and was able to enjoy my fantasy worry-free. Conversely, as I was able to free myself from the dichotomy of “good girl = asexual/evil girl = sexual,” I no longer needed to come up with excuses for myself, and hence this fantasy eventually fell by the wayside, for the most part.
Similarly, the furnishings of my early versions of this fantasy were informed by the dominant social script regarding what is “sexy.” This script, which I learned from TV shows, movies, and aforementioned Victoria’s Secret catalogues, told me that to set the scene for enjoyable, “ideal” sex there needed to be 1) candles, 2) a large bed with plush pillows and silk sheets, preferably a four-poster bed with a canopy and curtains, 3) lacy, feminine lingerie on the woman – the man could just wear normal clothes, and 4) only man-on-top missionary position. As I got older, however, I realized this script didn’t really appeal to me, and I wasn’t actually beholden to it, either. So I discarded the environment and actions that I didn’t like and replaced it with an environment and actions that I did like, namely one that was very minimalist, even harsh, with elements of voyeurism/exhibitionism.
But I didn’t completely buck my socialization. This is evidenced first in that I never moved beyond heterosexual encounters, even though I can be attracted to women and, as mentioned before, there was certainly a possibility to incorporate a lesbian encounter into my fantasy. Secondly, the fact that I am a pet in this fantasy still fits into the dominant (i.e. sexist) romantic script in an odd way. The ideal woman in this paradigm is ultimately reduced to an object of adoration; she receives gifts, attention, and a comfortable way of life from a man in return for expressing unequivocal adoration of him. In other words, she becomes his human pet. My fantasy takes this implicit idea and made it incredibly explicit.
However, in the fantasy I have sex with another pet – a fellow object – who just happens to be male. My actual owner is an asexual presence, and is female as often as male (when their gender is specified at all). In this way my fantasy deviates from the dominant script. A feminist analysis might say this is because I want to meet someone (a man) who understands and empathizes with my experiences of discrimination and sexism; that I want to be intimate with someone on equal terms even in the face of patriarchal oppression. If we follow this line of interpretation, however, this raises the question of why I never try to escape this oppressive state. Is it because I know/think I can’t, or is it because I don’t want to?
This brings us back to the idea that this fantasy absolves me of responsibility for my sexuality. In a way, I’ve got it made in this fantasy – I get to lounge around all day, have all my food prepared for me, and get to have hot sex with various hot men. True, the point of said hot sex is to get me pregnant, which would be very unpleasant for me, but my fantasy never actually addresses that part. Thus I’m essentially having consequence-free casual sex with a stranger, which is the opposite kind of sex women are supposed to have.
I think that is why I later on included an audience in my fantasy. Despite being apparently oppressed, I’m actually flaunting many of the strictures placed on my sexuality by hegemonic society, and I want to show it off – to rub it in society’s face, as it were. My fantasy allows me to safely be deviant, using elements of the fantastical to make the scenario less intimidating in the same way “fantasy violence” is usually less frightening than depictions of actual violence. I am able to take my reality – I am a woman living in a patriarchal society, with a sexist social script thrust upon me – and twist it upon itself until I create something manageable, even empowering.
As for the cat thing… well, I’ve lived with cats since the day I was born. I just really like cats.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
However, I got the impression that Lupa was a little sad that she did not get a collar. She has known Master and me longer than Tapeti has, but it's harder for us to feel... relationship-y towards her. I think it's for a couple reasons.
While Tapeti is a hardcore sub/bottom, Lupa is a super-switch, and neither Master nor I know quite what to make of that. Though sometimes I can be a little bit of a brat towards Master, and though I do like to assert myself over other people, switching roles frequently - sometimes multiple times in the same scene, as Lupa does - just confuses me. It's hard for me to completely reorient my headspace at the drop of a hat; it reminds me of one time when I was asked to play two of my characters - mother and son - at the same time in a tabletop game. Trying to hop between two mindsets was too much for me, and eventually I needed the GM to take over one of them. (As an aside, I think that's why I'm not a very successful GM, too.)
So I don't know where I stand with Lupa - is she dominant over me? She often co-tops with Master, and finds great glee in tormenting me. I'm more sexually experienced than her, though, and that leads to me often taking the initiative with her and "leading" the encounter - not to mention that she is incredibly physically sensitive, so it's pretty easy for me to subdue her with a few bites and caresses. But, on the other hand, she gets cranky if she doesn't get the opportunity to tie someone up! I can only imagine how difficult it is for Master to get a bead on her.
Tapeti, by comparison, is pretty straightforward. She is submissive. Very, very submissive. Much more so than I am, so by default I'm above her in the "pecking order" of our little kinky menagerie. The chain of command is clear: Master > Me > Tapeti. With everything so clear-cut, it's easier for us to integrate her into our relationship.
I'd feel worse for Lupa, except that she's explicitly told me that she prefers being able to act as she pleases, without the ties of an official "relationship." She definitely values her independence; I don't think she's been in a monogamous relationship her entire life.
It's funny - for a wolf, Lupa sure resists clear-cut hierarchies. She sure is an odd one. But I love her anyways.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Only problem: I've yet found a satisfying way to wear both a collar and a necktie. Currently, when I want to butch/queer it up, I just wear a very small, unobtrusive collar (more a choker or necklace) and then hide it under my shirt and tie. But I always feel a little bit dishonest doing that - like hiding your wedding ring or something, even though it obviously isn't on quite the same level. Does this mean I must resign myself to a necktie-less life? Woe!
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
On the one hand, I think it would be very fun. Tapeti could be a "sister" of sorts - someone who could relate with my subby experiences, particularly as a fellow sub to Master. We could provide each other support and love and understanding - not that Master doesn't provide all those things, but his is of a qualitatively different nature than what a fellow lady-sub would provide. Also, she could be someone for me to practice topping on! :D
On the other hand, I don't know how our relationships would actually pan out. We'd be in entirely new territory, working out new protocol for interacting with someone who's not a girlfriend, not just a FWB, and not a Master (well, Mistress). We'd have to work out where our boundaries are, how we actually feel for each other, and so on. And we have no social script to work from. Would there be a "pecking order" between me and Tapeti? How would we resolve conflicts between any of us? What happens when Master and I are in a much different city from her, which is probably what's going to happen?
It's mostly the unknowns that I'm afraid of. But I'm also kind of excited by the prospect. Master hasn't made any firm decisions yet, and both he and Tapeti are coming to visit me soon. Maybe we'll hammer out something more solid then.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
I distinctly remember the first time I learned what sex was. I was young – probably second grade – and was at my friend’s house. We were playing with a girl a year or two older than us; I can’t recall what led up to the conversation, but at some point she felt she needed to enlighten us younger girls. “This is the man’s penis,” she said, holding up her index finger. “And this is the woman’s vagina,” she added, touching the thumb and fingertips of her other hand together to make a circle. Wordlessly, she poked her finger into the circle.
“EEEW!” my friend and I shrieked, covering our faces with our hands in disgust. At that point, all I knew was that penises and vaginas were for peeing, and peeing was gross. Why would grown-ups want to touch things that pee came out of?
My concept of sex stayed about the same through the beginning of high school. Though I’d discovered masturbation by sixth grade, that wasn’t sex – there wasn’t anyone else involved. I’d heard of fellatio, but that sounded disgusting; I still couldn’t get over the fact that guys peed with their dicks. Cunnilingus never even entered my sphere of awareness. Anal sex was something gay guys did because they didn’t have vaginas to stick their penises in.
Then, during tenth grade, I came to the realization that I was bisexual. Suddenly, sex with another woman became a viable option. Awesome! But… how does that work? Obviously I’d need to do some research. Since I was a total anime nerd, I turned not to live-action lesbian porn but to yuri, its anime equivalent. There I discovered cunnilingus, which seemed pretty neat, but the two dominant acts depicted were frottage and using a dildo.
These made sense, given my current definition of sex. If “normal” sex is putting two genitals – i.e. the penis and the vagina – together, then lesbian sex is either a) rubbing two female genitals together, or b) bringing in a synthetic penis to do the penetration. Since I never actually had sex with anyone – male or female – during my high school years, this rough definition was good enough to satisfy me.
When I came to college, though, several things happened that influenced my definition of sex. First, I became sexually active with both men and women – sometimes simultaneously. As I explored my sexuality, I discovered that I liked being tied up, ordered around, and beaten. This conflicted with my liberal, quasi-feminist upbringing, which said that women needed to be strong and confident and not let men boss them around. Perturbed, I began researching feminism in earnest for the first time in my life, and I discovered not only were my sexual preferences totally okay, but maybe I should rethink what I mean by “sex” in the first place.
Why, feminism asked, does society think a penis needs to be involved for something to be “sex”? Why is male orgasm the definitive ending point of sex, while a woman doesn’t necessarily have to orgasm at all? And what’s with our culture’s obsession with virginity, anyway? We can’t even agree on what a “virgin” is!
These questions blew my mind. The mainstream definition of sex was sexist! And heterosexist! And generally not very good! I’d need to change this.
I decided to leave masturbation as something separate from sex. While it was certainly sexual, my emotional and physical relationship with masturbation was distinctly different from sexual situations involving other people. It’s like having a good relationship with yourself vs. having good friends; both are important, and they are related, but they’re not the same.
So, sex involved at least two people. Looking back on my sexual experiences, I noticed there was a distinct difference in intimacy/emotional intensity between encounters involving genitals (meaning the penis, testicles, vulva, and anus) and those that were restricted to kissing and caressing other parts of the body. This is no doubt because of the societal importance placed on genitals; they must be covered at all times in public, and even most of the time in private, and they generally shouldn’t be touched, either, except by people whom you were very emotionally attached to and trusted a lot.
However, I didn’t see anything particularly wrong with this cultural importance attached to them, so I decided to include it in my new definition of sex: touching of someone’s bare genitals must be involved. But, taking a lesson from feminist critique, a penis does not have to be involved. Indeed, only one set of genitals is required – the other person might use their hand or their mouth or some other implement, but it’d still be sex. Also, it has to be consensual for all parties; otherwise it is rape and an act of violence. And, finally, gynecological examinations are excepted because they don’t bring pleasure to either the doctor or the patient, and pleasure is the biggest reason why we have sex – now that we have effective contraception, that is.
Thus I came to my current definition of sex: consensual, pleasurable activity between two or more people that involves touching of at least one set of bare genitals, whether with another set of genitals, a different part of the body, or with an implement like a dildo. This definition is considerably broader than many people’s, as it includes oral sex, anal sex, hand jobs/finger banging, rimming, and frottage. However, I prefer this definition because it doesn’t erase homosexual partners and it elevates everyone involved to equal importance. I also hope that more people come to a similar definition of sex as the queer and women’s rights movements gain momentum.
 I didn’t learn that the vagina and urethra were separate things until fourth grade. Suddenly tampons made a lot more sense!
 Thanks, patriarchy!
 That’s a whole ‘nother paper.
 Or many, many dildos. All at once.
 Well, depending on which feminists you ask. I prefer the ones who say I’m not a sick freak and/or a brainwashed tool of the patriarchy, which is admittedly a very biased opinion on my part.
 I stipulate bare genitals because having a layer of clothing between them and whatever is doing the touching is not as intimate. Also, despite not technically being “bare,” I still consider it sex when someone is wearing a condom or dental dam because the latex is so thin it doesn’t impede sensation anyway, and the emotional level of intimacy is about the same.