Friday, September 4, 2015

Gay rally snafu proves eye-opening for Wichita couple

(Originally posted under a different name on stampworthy.com)

In a scheduling mix-up that is being described by some as divine irony, Wichita couple Thomas and Thelma Bagger, who had traveled to our nation’s capitol for Saturday’s Tea Party rally, instead found themselves in the center of the National Equality March for gay and lesbian rights which took place a day later.

The confusion was apparently caused when Mrs. Bagger received an e-mail from her sister that contained the incorrect date for the Tea Party rally. Unfortunately Thelma, who only turns on her computer once a week for fear of allowing in the Devil, missed the follow-up e-mail which corrected the mistake.

The Baggers joined the protest at the intersection of 15th and K Street and were immediately impressed by both the turnout and the spirited, and colorful, marchers. The couple was thrilled when young men sprinkled them with what they called “fairy dust,” and they delighted in the many religiously themed signs in the crowd, but their initial approval soon turned to confusion. Though they could find nothing technically wrong with slogans such as “Jesus had Two Daddies,” the blatantly false “God Loves Fags” left them scratching their heads.

The full horror of their situation, however, did not become apparent until Rosie O’Donnell introduced herself to Thelma, and Thomas realized that she wanted to have “unnatural relations” with his wife: “I could tell she wasn’t gonna take no for an answer, so I told Thelma it was okay. God don’t call it a sin if you go gay in self-defense.”

When asked how he failed to notice what was going on around him until the march was well under way, Mr. Bagger admitted that he had noticed some “mighty odd things,” but he believed his ignorance was the result of a deeply held faith in human decency: “I thought I was surrounded by straight, God-fearing, Obama hating capitalists, so I said to myself ‘who am I to judge?’


http://stampworthy.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/stamp2b.jpg

Thursday, August 27, 2015

Polyamory deal breakers

Because I am actively on the non-monogamy play partner hunt, here are my poly relationship deal breakers both in terms of possible new relationships and what might kill an existing relationship:
1. Monogamy. I know this may sound silly considering the topic, but I was asked more than once before I got married if I would become monogamous now that I found the right man. The answer is no, because non-monogamy has nothing to do with whether or not I have found the “right” person. I feel that Danny is very right for me, but he and I will never be monogamous. I understand that different relationships have different guidelines of what is acceptable, but non-monogamy in some form will always be on the table.
2. Absolute veto power. The relationship before Danny ended because one of the three involved had that absolute power, and when the emotional connection between the other two became more than she wanted, she used it. I understand a need for some kind of veto power, but it must be a last resort. Once everyone is emotionally involved, using that power without intense discussion simply cannot be an option. I will not put myself in that position again.
3. I cannot be a secret. If you can't tell your other partner/s about me, then we simply should not be considering a relationship. This means that if you state that your relationship is, "don't ask don't tell" I will probably just walk away rather than risk being a part of someone's lie.
4. The cover-up. I do not know if my partner having sex with someone outside of our boundaries would end the relationship, that would require discussion—but I do know that covering up that act, or covering up anything that would have an impact on our relationship, would. Mistakes happen, dishonesty is deliberate.
5. Putting my health at risk. I don’t care if you don’t like wearing condoms—if we are fluid bonded there can’t be any other fluid bonding with anyone else unless I agree. I offer the same in return.
I think that just about covers it.

Wednesday, August 19, 2015

Feeding the beast

Up until three years ago, all of my adult relationships had power-exchange as their defining characteristic. I have written much about my submissive nature, and that nature has not really changed, but I no longer feel the need for power-exchange in my relationships on more than a scene-by-scene basis. I am still somewhat surprised by this.

I do, however, have beasts that need to be fed. I have found, for example, that I cannot live without the ability to feed my masochism on a somewhat regular basis--which gets only slightly complicated by the fact that my husband is not a sadist. Thank goodness for non-monogamy.

For quite a long time, I have bought into the De Sade philosophy of "sex without pain is like food without taste." I am finding now, however, that sex without pain can be incredible, and erotic, satisfying, and hot, and in no way lacking. Still, I find that every once in awhile I just have to get out and feel pain--to be beaten, and tortured, and pushed, and made to orgasm from pure painful sensation.

I miss going deeply into my masochism. I always worry with this particular beast that I will bite off more than I can chew--the whole "be careful what you wish for" thing definitely applies--but I am eager to give myself over to it and just get the hell out of my own way and let it happen. When I do, it is awesome.

I like the head space I get into when I bottom to a hot sadist. I like the soreness the next day--the tenderness in the nipples, the pain in my wrists where they pulled against the restraints, even the stiffness in my neck and shoulders brought on by gripping and tensing as I process the sensations.

I don't need this every day, and, thanks to my lover, I now know that I do not need it to have an amazing sexual experience--but I do need it.

Saturday, August 8, 2015

On hunting unicorns

In poly circles, a unicorn is generally known as a bisexual female who wants to be in a non-monogamous relationship with both members of the couple and not really disrupt their lives all that much. They are called unicorns because it seems everyone wants to find one, but they are rarely, if ever, seen. I have been a potential unicorn, and I have been part of a couple in search of a unicorn, and here is what I have learned—the term is kind of bullshit.
Many people spend their lives in search of the “one,” (a creature who, to me, is equally as mythical because he or she simply does not exist), and most of the time, they fail. There is no way that failure is not magnified when the “one” you want is to become part of a triad.
Basically, what you are hoping to find is a woman who attracts you, who is attracted to both you and your partner, who is open to polyamory (and, often, to kink), whose life fits in with yours, whose personality and energy meshes well with yours and your partners’, who is willing to abide by all existing relationship rules and not seek other relationships of her own, and who is available to complete your triad at that particular time. That is an awful lot for one person to be, so yes, that “perfect” person is, not surprisingly, rare.
Now—I get that someone may write that they found their unicorn and it is wonderful—to that I say, hooray! Feel free to share your story :-) But, if that were the norm, the term would not exist and neither would this writing, so unless we want to rip a hole in the space/time continuum, it is probably safest to move on.
It is difficult to make two people work out long term because of the personalities and emotions and life goals and, and, and… That gets exponentially harder when you try it with three, or four, or a googol people. And every person you want to add with very specific attributes becomes more rare, of course, because the search parameters have been narrowed and the pool of available candidates has gotten smaller.
I have known quite a few couples over the years who are on the hunt for a unicorn, and every one of them failed because when you are chasing a myth, reality will just never do. The woman you seek is not a unicorn—she is not mythical, and she is not magical—she is human, and, chances are, she is not perfect.
The problem with ascribing any kind of mythical status to her is that you take away her status as a mere mortal. When you are so busy looking for the unicorn, you may easily miss opportunities and relationships with real potential, and when you are trying so hard to turn someone into a unicorn, you may interfere with her ability to be her most authentic self.