I tend to hang out with, and be friends with, more gentlemen than ladies. I've stopped trying to rationalize it or excuse it to myself or anybody else. It just happens that way.
In any case, being friends with gentleman inevitably means that I am introduced to friends-of-friends (this happens with lady friends also - where you start to have mutual friends just through your little singular friendship).
Something interesting I've noticed in regards to the mutual gentleman friends, though, is how they excuse themselves if I know a particularly juicy tidbit about something stupid that they've done. (Or, to be more specific, a juicy tidbit about someone they've done. Hey-o.) Usually it just breaks down to the standard sticking your dick in crazy story - some lady that the guy intrinsically knew it was going to be a bad idea to fuck, but then fucked anyway. Variants abound, so I won't go into specifics. Although it seems like a rather human error, I tend to see gentlemen making the mistake far more often than ladies (which, on the flip side, you can argue that's just because women are crazier. Whatever. I'm all for equal opportunity sexual stereotyping).
When I meet these particular gentlemen mutuals, it always seems very important for them to make it clear to me that's, "not really who they are." I don't know where this comes from. If it's that I'm a woman, or they're afraid somehow that one hilariously stupid sexual experience is going to tarnish my esteem for them (even though, in most cases of mutuals, I meet them very rarely and don't spend too much time obsessing about their ridiculous sexual exploits).
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Wednesday, August 8, 2012
Submissive speak
When I do my little online dominatrix thing, I invariably get posts from submissives where the entire context is, "lol I dunno what I like. Isn't that your job to tell me?"
Short answer? No.
Back in the day when I walked uphill both ways to school and was first getting involved in the BDSM community, I really didn't know much about "the scene." I didn't call myself a "submissive" - part of this was my undying hatred for relationship terminology. Sort of like how I've never really felt comfortable being anybody's "girlfriend" or "partner" or what have you. In an equitable sense, I've never been comfortable using terms like "husband," either. Not in a conversational sense. I mean, I can ask somebody else about their husband. "How was your weekend with your husband?" But in order to classify somebody that is spending time with me so specifically just sort of makes my skin itch.
In any case. Regardless of whether I used the proper term or not, I didn't know much about myself as a submissive. The woman I was with and I took things slowly, and started with things like light bondage and impact. Turns out I liked those, and we moved on to other things. If I thought I didn't like something, I spoke up about it and we crossed it off the list as a possibility. I did some more research (books, mainly, but also a fair amount of porn. Which, I know, is not the best learning material out there, but it isn't unhelpful, either).
I did a few sessions with these shoulder shruggers, and they're never any good. I don't want a submissive who has no idea what they like and can't give me some form of direction. Now, the submissives who get very quiet and all sub-spacey in a session and then I sort of have free reign...those are a different and altogether more enjoyable story.
Short answer? No.
Back in the day when I walked uphill both ways to school and was first getting involved in the BDSM community, I really didn't know much about "the scene." I didn't call myself a "submissive" - part of this was my undying hatred for relationship terminology. Sort of like how I've never really felt comfortable being anybody's "girlfriend" or "partner" or what have you. In an equitable sense, I've never been comfortable using terms like "husband," either. Not in a conversational sense. I mean, I can ask somebody else about their husband. "How was your weekend with your husband?" But in order to classify somebody that is spending time with me so specifically just sort of makes my skin itch.
In any case. Regardless of whether I used the proper term or not, I didn't know much about myself as a submissive. The woman I was with and I took things slowly, and started with things like light bondage and impact. Turns out I liked those, and we moved on to other things. If I thought I didn't like something, I spoke up about it and we crossed it off the list as a possibility. I did some more research (books, mainly, but also a fair amount of porn. Which, I know, is not the best learning material out there, but it isn't unhelpful, either).
I did a few sessions with these shoulder shruggers, and they're never any good. I don't want a submissive who has no idea what they like and can't give me some form of direction. Now, the submissives who get very quiet and all sub-spacey in a session and then I sort of have free reign...those are a different and altogether more enjoyable story.
Sunday, August 5, 2012
That feels
After a thorough discussion of whether or not cats are perpetually on shrooms (Now-hubby's stance: no, my stance: yes, in case you were curious), we got into a discussion about lovey feelings.
It mostly started because I was recounting experiences from the gang bang this weekend, and telling some stories about one of the men there who I hadn't seen in awhile and had a really good time reconnecting with. (Read into that what you will, pervos. It's probably a little bit if not actually more than you're imagining.)
In any case, the resulting discussion was about what exactly constitutes "love" for somebody like me who doesn't necessarily put a lot of stock in the whole thing. Why, for example, my feelings for Now-hubby and Frisbee are completely different and intense than they are for the guy at the gang bang. Who I have a fantastic time with, connect with on a humor level (which is very big for me), and I'd like to think are fairly compatible in the intercourse sense.
There's a wide variety of people I get involved with. When I say "involved" in this sense I mean "have genital contact with." Well, more like 4 distinct varieties.
1: The "grenade." I had to ask Now-hubby for this term, because I couldn't come up with something that was appropriately lower than the obligations in a distinctly negative sense. For those of you who don't know the terminology, a grenade is somebody that your wingman takes on because you're going to have genital relations with the more attractive person. It's not necessarily about physical attractiveness in this instance, it's sort of more like this.
Or this. (I couldn't choose - both reaction gifs are quite accurate.)
It's that moment when I'm out with somebody or even messaging somebody online and there's that clarifying instance where I know it's not going to work, and I sort of shrug my shoulders and go for genital contact anyway. I've been trying to get away from this type of involvement, as it's generally not healthy and ultimately not pleasurable in any sense.
2: The obligations. Not necessarily people who I dislike being with, but the type of people who I'm not really thinking about on a daily basis if I'm not spending time with them. If they contact me and it happens to work out with my schedule, it's fun to be with them. But I'm not usually actively trying to be with them.
3: The friends with benefits. i.e. the guy from the gang bang. People that I have a lot in common with, and generally have a really good time with (both genitally and non-genitally). There's always a sort of plateau to these relationships, where things are awesome but not, you know, totally excellent.
4: "Loves" The way I describe it to Now-hubby. Friends with benefits are nice and all. They're fun to call up and be with. The way I distinguish this level...if I'm not physically around this person for a few days, I get actually physically depressed. It sounds cliche, but it hurts my heart.
Also, because it's semi-related to this post and Marshie is one of the better things in life:
It mostly started because I was recounting experiences from the gang bang this weekend, and telling some stories about one of the men there who I hadn't seen in awhile and had a really good time reconnecting with. (Read into that what you will, pervos. It's probably a little bit if not actually more than you're imagining.)
In any case, the resulting discussion was about what exactly constitutes "love" for somebody like me who doesn't necessarily put a lot of stock in the whole thing. Why, for example, my feelings for Now-hubby and Frisbee are completely different and intense than they are for the guy at the gang bang. Who I have a fantastic time with, connect with on a humor level (which is very big for me), and I'd like to think are fairly compatible in the intercourse sense.
There's a wide variety of people I get involved with. When I say "involved" in this sense I mean "have genital contact with." Well, more like 4 distinct varieties.
1: The "grenade." I had to ask Now-hubby for this term, because I couldn't come up with something that was appropriately lower than the obligations in a distinctly negative sense. For those of you who don't know the terminology, a grenade is somebody that your wingman takes on because you're going to have genital relations with the more attractive person. It's not necessarily about physical attractiveness in this instance, it's sort of more like this.
Or this. (I couldn't choose - both reaction gifs are quite accurate.)
It's that moment when I'm out with somebody or even messaging somebody online and there's that clarifying instance where I know it's not going to work, and I sort of shrug my shoulders and go for genital contact anyway. I've been trying to get away from this type of involvement, as it's generally not healthy and ultimately not pleasurable in any sense.
2: The obligations. Not necessarily people who I dislike being with, but the type of people who I'm not really thinking about on a daily basis if I'm not spending time with them. If they contact me and it happens to work out with my schedule, it's fun to be with them. But I'm not usually actively trying to be with them.
3: The friends with benefits. i.e. the guy from the gang bang. People that I have a lot in common with, and generally have a really good time with (both genitally and non-genitally). There's always a sort of plateau to these relationships, where things are awesome but not, you know, totally excellent.
4: "Loves" The way I describe it to Now-hubby. Friends with benefits are nice and all. They're fun to call up and be with. The way I distinguish this level...if I'm not physically around this person for a few days, I get actually physically depressed. It sounds cliche, but it hurts my heart.
Also, because it's semi-related to this post and Marshie is one of the better things in life:
Friday, August 3, 2012
Superficial
Despite what social niceties would have me believe, I tend to find certain physical attributes attractive. Of course, this is not by any means an exhaustive list. And, of course, yes, there are other personality things that matter quite a great deal when I'm considering getting together with somebody (for example: can you make me genuinely laugh?) But just given optical input? Here's what I look for. (Since I like to be all equal opportunistic about things, I tend to be attracted to these things in either gents or ladies.)
1. Hands
Hands can do a lot of things. This also parlays into a thing about fingers. Which are attached to hands (in most cases). When I see hands/fingers, my mind automatically goes to the way they would look/feel holding onto my hips, wrapped around my neck, or possibly covered in spit and slowly rubbing against my vulva. (For women especially, fake and/or overly long nails are a deal breaker. I know it's a cliche, but seriously. Anybody who has experienced the sharp knifey stabs of long fingernails in a vagina or tried to clean their own fingernails after finger fucking somebody...it's just not a good idea.)
2. Jawline
Specifically that little area where the jawbone meets the earlobe. I tried to Google it. If there's an anatomical name for it, I don't know it. It's just...an awesome place to put kisses. So if it's a clearly defined area, I can more vividly imagine said kisses. Which is fun.
3. Hips
Semi-connected to the first point. The hips are a good place to put hands, so it's sort of a secondary interest point for me. Also, before men get all bent out of shape about things, men do have hips. Not in the same voluptuous awesome way that ladies do. But in a way that I can definitely hold onto while giving head or having sex in the missionary.
4. Tats
Not a given. It depends on the ink in question. But...it's definitely an interest for me. Also, good talking point.
1. Hands
Hands can do a lot of things. This also parlays into a thing about fingers. Which are attached to hands (in most cases). When I see hands/fingers, my mind automatically goes to the way they would look/feel holding onto my hips, wrapped around my neck, or possibly covered in spit and slowly rubbing against my vulva. (For women especially, fake and/or overly long nails are a deal breaker. I know it's a cliche, but seriously. Anybody who has experienced the sharp knifey stabs of long fingernails in a vagina or tried to clean their own fingernails after finger fucking somebody...it's just not a good idea.)
2. Jawline
Specifically that little area where the jawbone meets the earlobe. I tried to Google it. If there's an anatomical name for it, I don't know it. It's just...an awesome place to put kisses. So if it's a clearly defined area, I can more vividly imagine said kisses. Which is fun.
3. Hips
Semi-connected to the first point. The hips are a good place to put hands, so it's sort of a secondary interest point for me. Also, before men get all bent out of shape about things, men do have hips. Not in the same voluptuous awesome way that ladies do. But in a way that I can definitely hold onto while giving head or having sex in the missionary.
4. Tats
Not a given. It depends on the ink in question. But...it's definitely an interest for me. Also, good talking point.
Wednesday, August 1, 2012
Fetish
Patton Oswalt has a decent bit called "Piss Drinkers." (If you feel like it, you can find it here.) In a nutshell, the idea is if you can think of something, it's a fetish.
Like most things related to the way humans interact with each other (I swear, I am not a secret cyborg), kink/BDSM/fetish is neat to learn and know about. I knew going into the whole awkward hormonal teenage stage that I didn't really like monogamy and what it represented. I also knew (although denied and tried to explain away for a few more years) that there was something particularly about other ladies that was completely fascinating in a tingly sort of way.
I've come across people sometimes in the kink lifestyle who can describe their interest in BDSM the same way - they just sort of knew. It wasn't like that for me. When I was busy making out with some select other drama crew members (yes, I was that kid in high school - marching band was bereft of ladyboner material, also weirdly full of couples - go figure), I wasn't ever thinking how awesome it would be if we could also tie each other up, or if one of them would just slap me around a little bit.
I had a girlfriend for awhile in college who was also a Domme. I didn't know this going in, but I did know that I liked having sex with her. So when she brought up the idea of handcuffing me to a ring hooked in the ceiling while she fucked me, I was game. I want to really clarify that it wasn't anything where I thought I had to in order to make her happy, or that I did something I was fundamentally uncomfortable with just to somehow keep the relationship going. It was more of an, "okay, we can do that" shoulder shrug and then I wound up really liking it.
Like most things related to the way humans interact with each other (I swear, I am not a secret cyborg), kink/BDSM/fetish is neat to learn and know about. I knew going into the whole awkward hormonal teenage stage that I didn't really like monogamy and what it represented. I also knew (although denied and tried to explain away for a few more years) that there was something particularly about other ladies that was completely fascinating in a tingly sort of way.
I've come across people sometimes in the kink lifestyle who can describe their interest in BDSM the same way - they just sort of knew. It wasn't like that for me. When I was busy making out with some select other drama crew members (yes, I was that kid in high school - marching band was bereft of ladyboner material, also weirdly full of couples - go figure), I wasn't ever thinking how awesome it would be if we could also tie each other up, or if one of them would just slap me around a little bit.
I had a girlfriend for awhile in college who was also a Domme. I didn't know this going in, but I did know that I liked having sex with her. So when she brought up the idea of handcuffing me to a ring hooked in the ceiling while she fucked me, I was game. I want to really clarify that it wasn't anything where I thought I had to in order to make her happy, or that I did something I was fundamentally uncomfortable with just to somehow keep the relationship going. It was more of an, "okay, we can do that" shoulder shrug and then I wound up really liking it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)