Keeping Promises - completed

Okay (breathing hard), it's done.  Chapter 3 was submitted to my ASSTR web site, last night, and to SOL this morning. Hopefully it'll show up when those sites refresh, today. I also posted the story in its entirety to my ASSTR FTP site, as a PDF document.  I hope you enjoy it.

I'm going to take a vacation from the Swarmiverse, and try once again to finish some of my ongoing, stalled-out stories, notably Schroedinger's Cat and Homecoming?.  They'll be slow going though, because I have to re-familiarize myself with the story lines - it has been that long.  IF I ever get them finished, I'll probably take a long vacation from writing.

Yah, yah, I know.  Some of you think I've already taken too much time off.  Let me remind you once agina, that this is a hobby for me.  I only do it when I can't find enough quality reading to occupy my time, and the only currency in which I get paid for it, is your gratitude.  Not that I don't appreciate that, but it doesn't help squeeze blood out of the turnip!  

Another author that I follow said it best: "Why don't you try it for a while, and see how long it takes for you to burn out?"

It isn't easy to create entertaining, believeable, logically consistent fiction, populated with sympathetic, and hopefully, well-developed characters, out of nothing but your imagination.

Anyway, for those who like the story, thanks for your appreciation. For those who offer constructive criticism, thanks for trying to make me a better author. For those who can only engage in name-calling, or bitch about characters, situations, and outcomes that they find disturbing... well, you get what you paid for.

QM

Keeping Promises

... is the title of the new story that I posted tonight.  It is set in the Swarmiverse, and further investigates the coping mechanisms of the cosca, as it adapts to life away from the familiar trappings of Earth.  The blurbs read:  "Heroes die young.  Life goes on.  The rest of us have to stand up and be counted.  Sometimes keeping promises costs more than you think it will."

I'm pretty sure the final edits will be completed sooner than I expected.  If it happens that way, I may post a chapter each day for the rest of the weekend.

QM

New Swarm Story coming this weekend

I just finished a new story set in the Swarmiverse. This one deals with the aftermath of the death of one of the cosca's pilots. It's about 15K words in 3 chapters, and is now under editorial review.

I don't like the working title, so I'm not going to use it here, but I hope to choose a final title and post the first chapter by this weekend. I know, I said I won't post unfinished stories anymore, but this one is finished. I'm just not going to post it all at once. I will post the chapters as I get them out of final edits.

Galen Rides again...

For those of you who like him, our wandering technical support Dom, Galen Cuvier, is the news today. I just posted Chapter 2 of Homecoming? I know it's been a long time, but I really am trying to finish this tale. When it is done, I promise to never, never, never post any part of a story until the whole thing is finished. I'm kind of stuck with this one, and a couple of others, though. Not much action or sex in this chapter. Think of it as a bridge between the more exciting parts.

The Priests' Wedding

Waltzing Melissa honours me by setting her latest effort in my own little corner of the Swarmiverse. Her new story is called The Priests' wedding, and picks up the future history of the cosca somewhat after the events described in Changing Priorities.

As you might surmise from the title, it describes the toils and tribulations of the priests sent to minister to the cosca, as they try to implement the Pope's directives concerning marriage and the priesthood. Melissa has assembled a wonderful, sexy tale full of humor, angst, love and purpose. Please enjoy it as much as I did!

Changing Priorities

I've posted a new Swarm story. It's called Changing Priorities, and it develops on the concept of "the Godfather in Outer Space," that was exposed in Family Values. It's on both ASSTR and SOL.

I'm going to take a vacation from the Swarm for awhile. My other writing projects have fallen 'way behind, and I need to move them along a little faster, so no more new Swarm stories from me for awhile. There are lots of great writers doing stories for the Swarm universe, though, so if you haven't checked them out, this would be a great time to do so!

New Galen Story!

I've finally finished the first chapter of the long-awaited sequel to Breakdown - a new Galen Cuvier story, titled Homecoming? I posted the new chapter today.

The addition of the new story caused a need to reorganize several parts of my ASSTR website (naturally), so today's updates are more massive than just posting a story. Galen has gone from being the main character in a single story (Breakdown), to being the central figure in a universe of stories (The Life and Times of Galen Cuvier). And yes, it's likely that there will be more Galen stories after Homecoming? is finished.

Clarification: Bondage and Discipline

Both of these words have multiple meanings, and some more than others are relevant to the "lifestyle." Let's start with discipline. The definition that comes most readily to mind, for most people, goes something like this:

"To punish or chastise in order to gain control of another, or to enforce obedience."

Others have more to do with a learning experience:

"A specific, usually named, set of rules of behavior";

"To train for the purpose of achieving behavior that complies with a set of rules";

"Behavior that is in accord with an established set of rules";

and there are more. Note the recurring theme in most of the definitions: rules of behavior. The aim of real discipline is to elicit and reinforce a particular kind of behavior. To be sure, disciplinary activity that happens in the lifestyle is often attributed to the motives specified in these definitions, but in fact, that is sometimes, perhaps even mostly, pure posturing. In that case, the so-called "discipline" is merely choreographed abuse.

What about bondage? The definition most applicable in the "lifestyle." is as follows:

"A state of being physically restrained for purposes of sexual gratification."

Other definitions which may at times be used are:

The state of being under the control of another person;

Being a slave or serf;

Indenture, slavery, or serfdom;

and many variants on the theme. The mental states that describe being in bondage aside, in "lifestyle" terms, it usually refers to the physical restraint of a person, using ropes, chains or a variety of other devices that limit or prohibit movement.

When bondage and/or discipline is used for purposes of behavior modification, it can be considered a true disciplinary regime. This is a normal, but not necessarily frequent or required, part of a Dominant/submissive relationship.

The use of bondage and discipline to achieve immediate sexual gratification depends on the potential of the practises to cause or experience pain, discomfort, humiliation, or helplessness, as an outcome. When used in this way, these practises lay more in the domain of Sadism and masochism.

Whether or not the target is bound, physical punishment as part of discipline may be delivered in a wide variety of methods. If you want a catalog of tools, go to your favorite fetish shop and you will no doubt find a huge array of items designed to inflict any level of pain to any body part desired. Novice disciplinarians though, should proceed with extreme caution. It would be altogether too easy to cause permanent damage or disfigurement, through ignorance.

The idea of an apprenticeship for disciplinarians has great appeal, but there is the problem of finding a credible instructor. One way might be to ask for recommendations from a submissive who has participated in multiple scenes. Before you accept such recommendations, however, be sure to perform a full-body inspection of the submissive - remember, it takes all kinds, and your advisor may think nothing of the fact that his/her body is covered with lesions and scars.

Punishment using humiliation requires more thoughtfulness, and a much more intimate knowledge of the abusee's state of mind..

Given the potential for these practises to result in injury, disfigurement and in extreme cases, even death, one seldom comes upon anyone who engages in them on a permanent, full time basis. Most often, participants in the activities engage in what is knowns as scenes. Before we get into a discussion of what scenes are, lets first deal with another concept: that of the Safe, Sane, and Consensual (SSC) credo.

It should be obvious even to the most casual observer, that these practises can result in great harm to some participants, and put others at risk for jail terms. To mitigate these risks, and hopefully eliminate them, ethical practitioners only engage in activities that are:

Safe - To the extent humanly possible, risks of physical and psychological damage to each participant are identified and eliminated.

Sane - All parties to the activities are nominally sane, and in control of their decisions. It should be obvious that any use of drugs or alcohol would automatically violate this condition.

Consensual - All parties are fully informed of intended and potential outcomes of the activities, and agree to participate voluntarily. It should be noted that, even if written consent is obtained, it will probably NOT provide legal protection for anyone in the event of a death, or significant physical or psychological injury to one or more participants. Let me repeat this in clearer terms: CONSENSUAL OR NOT, IF YOU KILL OR INJURE SOMEONE DURING THE ACTIVITY, EVEN ACCIDENTLY, YOU WILL IN ALL PROBABILITY BE PROSECUTED!

Sometimes participants will use another term for it, but a scene is a somewhat choreographed session, occurring over a defined period of time, with specific and clearly understood rules which establish limits governing the type and intensity of activities to be undertaken.

One implication of the SSC credo, is that consent is dynamic. Consent may be withdrawn or modified (reduced) unilaterally, at any time by either party, and such withdrawls or reductions are binding! For this reason scene rules also usually define the safewords: i.e., words that the receiver of abuse holds in reserve, to be used only as signals that things are going too fast or too far. It is most common to have only one safeword, which stops activity altogether, but sometimes a second safeword is used to indicate a need to reduce the intensity of the activity.

Obviously, if a scene includes having the abusee gagged or otherwise silenced, some alternative means of signalling an end to the activity must be agreed upon, up front. Since most means of silencing the abusee have a significant concurrent risk of asphyxiation, such practises are generally discouraged for any level of activity beyond erotic photography.

About safewords and safesignals: It would be extremely easy to get so involved in an activity that the disciplinarian fails to notice or heed such signals. It is good practise to pause action at regular intervals for a reality check. During these pauses, both the giver and receiver of discipline should clearly and distinctly reaffirm the specific signals to be used and honored. The reaffrmation should be clear, distinct, and unambiguous - redundancy is NOT a bad thing! The conversation might go something like this:

M: "Slave! What is your STOP safeword?"
S: "Sir! My STOP safeword is DUTCH!"
M: "Slave! Your STOP safeword is DUTCH! Is that correct?"
S: "Yes Sir!"
M: "Slave! What is your SLOW safeword?"
S: "SIr! My SLOW safeword is AGAR!"
M: "Slave! Your SLOW safeword is AGAR! Is that correct?"
S: "Yes Sir!"

As I said, clear, distinct, and unambiguous - and redundant. This exchange brings up a few other things about safewords. The words should be short and intelligible even if issued during a scream - for obvious reasons. They should be completely out of place for the action that occurs during the scene - so that if used, they are guarranteed to stand out from the action and get attention. If used the word should be shouted, not mumbled, and MUST BE HONORED AT ONCE! A disciplinarian who fails to heed a safeword runs not just the risks associated with the activity, but may find him/herself unable to find any willing playmates - ever again.

Inasmuch as this is a blog, and not a textbook, this is about as far as I intend to go in discussing bondage and discipline. There are a lot of web-base resources for learning about them, as well as about the practises of sadism and masochism, and dominant/submissive relationships. Unfortunately sometimes those resources are erroneous or are deliberately misleading. Your best resource in dealing with these subjects is common sense.

The next, and last blog in the Clarifications set will be a cursory discussion of personalities and motivations, and how they relate to D/s relationships and BDSM practises.

QM

Clarification: Sadism and masochism

Instead of jumping into a full-scale discussion of all the parts of BDSM practises, I thought it might be useful to break it down into manageable bites, so for this blog, I'm just going to talk about Sadism and masochism, and their practitioners, Sadists and masochists.

Let's get one thing clear, right now. This is probably going to twist some tails, but there is no such thing as a Sadomasochistic relationship. If you will follow my arguments for just a little while, you'll see why. Let's look at some history and definitions.

Sadism

The term Sadism derives from certain sexual practises, described in novels written by le Comte Donatien Alphonse François de Sade, often appellated as Marquis de Sade. During his lifetime, de Sade frequently attempted and sometimes succeeded in creating real-life situations, similar to those in his novels, in which he inflicted pain on others for his own gratification.

Most dictionaries will give a definition of Sadism similar to the following:

"behavior characterized by inflicting pain (physical or emotional) on others, for the purpose of sexual gratification."

A Sadist then, is simply:

"an individual who practices Sadism."

Note that these definitions do not require the presence of a masochist. This fact, and his (often poor) choice of victims, is the reason that de Sade ended his days in an asylum for the criminally insane.

Masochism

In 1870, an Austrian novelist named Leopold von Sacher-Masoch published a novella titled Venus in Furs, in which, through the characters he described, he codified his obsession to be used and abused by the object of his desire. He had somewhat less success at achieving any long-term happiness in this way, in real life - I suspect a case of conflicting goals. At any rate Masoch achieved a kind of immortality, when psychiatrist Richard Freiherr von Krafft-Ebing coined the term "masochist," in 1886, to describe such obsessions.

The dictionary definitions of masochism can be summed up as follows:

"achieving pleasure or sexual gratification from being humiliated, or from being physically or emotionally abused, either by oneself or another person."

In other words, if you get off on being hurt or embarrassed, you're probably a masochist, at least to some degree.

Complain all you want, but then look at the facts.

There may be a D/s relationship which includes Sadomasochistic overtones. There may be a love relationship, or even just a friendship with such overtones. A pair of total strangers, with no relationship at all, or only the temporary relationship of perpetrator and victim, can engage in a Sadomasochistic behavior.

Clearly a "pure" Sadist (one who has no specific relationship with his victim) does not require a masochist in order to get his/her jollies. He/she can gain pleasure from hurting anybody, whether they enjoy it or not. In fact their enjoyment of the process might actually detract from his own.

Conversely, a "pure" masochist doesn't require a Sadist, in order to have fun. Anybody will do, even someone who detests treating people harshly. Oddly enough, even another masochist will do. If no one else can be found, a masochist is often perfectly capable of becoming the source of his/her own pain. No relationship there, because nobody else is involved.

Here's the thing about relationships: for a relationship to exist, there have to be two personalities involved. For both the Sadist and the masochist, the other person involved in their activities is so completely objectified, that for all intents and puposes there is no other personality involved. Furthermore, if you want to establish that some fact or condition characterizes a relationship, you have to show that it is both a necessary and a sufficient condition for the relationship to exist. There's no way to do this with Sadism and masochism: all of the relationships you might point to are either driven by something else, or they don't qualify as relationships. Ergo, there is no such thing as a Sadomasochistic relationship.

So where does that leave us? Not quite in the dark. Sadism and masochism cannot themselves define a relationship, even in part; but they are personality traits, and there is some evidence to the effect that everyone possesses them to one degree or another. As a society, we tend to ingore these traits, unless the form of expression is extreme.

The terms have also been co-opted to refer to certain behaviors or practises (remember my previous blog?) involving the delivery or experiencing of pain or humiliation. By mainstream standards, these practises are considered to be deviant behavior, and the personalities that actively seek to engage in them are usually considered borderline, or completely, insane.

Hold on, now! I know you don't consider your harmless little bit of fun to be evidence of insanity. I'm just telling you what you already know. If you got caught doing it, by anybody with a badge, you would be taken into custody, for your safety and that of society at large. Maybe for a very long time! Of course, if you're a masochist, the idea of confinement might not be unpalatable...

As an aside, it should be noted that Sadism and masochism are not mutually exclusive personality traits. The term "switch," as used in the "lifestyle," ultimately derives from the fact that, early on, the mental health community recognized that some individuals can derive their pleasure from being on either side of the abuse process.

Most people involved in Sadism and masochism today, do not try to engage in those practises as a total lifestyle (24/7). I said most. There are always exceptions, and that's why we have asylums. If that pisses you off, too bad. By my personal standards, trying to live 24/7 either giving or receiving pain with any enthusiasm, is conclusive evidence of insanity. They're my standards, and you're not going to change them.

People who just want to a have a little fun now and then, practising Sadomasochism, usually engage in scenes. I can't say much about scenes, without bleeding over into Bondage and Discipline. I want to deal with that in a separate blog, so I'm going to end this one here.

Ta Ta For Now.

QM

Clarification - Dominance and submission

I sometimes take verbal flak about my self-described Dom personality. It seems that the external face of my lifestyle doesn't fit the preconceptions the complainers hold about D/s; and they persist in pointing out that I don't own a dungeon, don't make a regular practise of hurting anyone, and rarely even tie anyone up. They are obviously confused and/or ignorant about the meaning of terms used in the lifestyle.

Even given the unlikely chance that they will ever read it, I'm going to try and correct that here, to the extent that it is feasible.

D/s and BDSM are not the same thing. Sometimes it is convenient to lump them all together though, and that creates a lot of the confusion.

D/s is shorthand for Dominance and submission, which phrase describes a kind of relationship between people. BDSM is shorthand for Bondage, Discipline, Sadism and Masochism, which is a collection of practises, in which some people may engage at times (some will also insist that the "DS" in the middle is for Dominance and Submission). For example, one is much more likely to know people involved in a 24/7 D/s relationship (even though you are probably unaware of it) than one is to know anyone who regularly practises Sadism by flogging someone. Let's put this one to bed.

Dominance and Submission

As I said, D/s describes a kind of relationship. A relationship exists only between members of a pair of individuals; and is usually, but not necessarily, different from any relationship that exists between either member of the pair, and another individual, outside the pair. A D/s relationship may be only one of several kinds of relationships that exist between members of the same pair.

Like any relationship, a D/s relationship is driven by the roles played by the participants in the relationship. In this type of relationship, only two roles are of any real importance: the Dominant (or Top, or Dom/me or sometimes, Master/Mistress) role, and the submissive (or bottom, or sub, or sometimes, slave) role.

A dictionary is often useful in understanding terms. The Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary (2002) lists one definition of the noun dominant as follows:

"a dominant individual in a social hierarchy."

Since this is a recursive definition, using the same word as an adjective to define the noun, we need to look a little further. The American Heritage Stedman's Medical Dictionary (2002) lists a definition of the adjective dominant as:

"exercising the most influence or control."

So, to expand and clarify the first definition, we can define a Dominant as:

"the individual who excercises the most influence or control in a social hierarchy."

There isn't as much dictionary support to define the noun submissive, the way we use it,so our efforts will require a little more of a stretch. Experience with the lifestyle would support another recursive definition: i.e.:

"a submissive individual in a social hierarchy."

Again, we use a term as an adjective, to define the same term as a noun. There is no shortage of definitions for the adjective, submissive, however, and the one which seems to fit best, comes from the Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary (2002):

"characterized by tendencies to yield to the will or authority of others."

Expanding and clarifying then, we define a submissive as:

"an individual who tends to yield to the will or authority of others in a social hierarchy."

These definitions fit into social hierarchies of any size, even one that contains only two people - a relationship! More specifically, a D/s relationship.

Any specific relationship, and thus any D/s relationship, may be said to exist in a continuum of such relationships of the same kind, and the location of the relationship between any two particular people within the continuum, may be described by expressing the amplitude (intensity) of one or more characteristics of the relationship.

In his stories, one of my favorite online authors (MWTB) describes Dominance and submission as aspects of a single quantity: a number line, if you will, with submission at one end of the scale and dominance at the other. In his view, then, where you fall on the line determines which role you normally play.

I actually believe that Dominance and submission are two separate characteristics, and that everyone has both characteristics, in different quantities. As separate characteristics, Dominance and submission can be described in a Cartesion two-space (plane). In this view, the D/s relationship between any two people can be described by where they fall on the plane.

The so called vanilla relationship, for instance, is not a different kind of relationship at all. It is just a situation that happens when two people assume that they are at more or less the same place on the plane. When a person's entire lifestyle is characterized as vanilla, it simply means that he/she habitually treats the people around him/her as social equals. It usually signals a lack of awareness on his/her part, about where on the D/s plane the people surrounding him/her are, leading to the (sometimes) erroneous assumption that everyone is about where he/she is on the plane.

As you can see, being a Dominant doesn't necessarily require that you tie anyone up, or flog them, or in any way be cruel or rude to them, and being submissive doesn't have to mean that you have any of these things done to you. Bottom line: being a Dominant requires that you make most of the important decisions about the relationship, and being submissive requires that you accept, and when expected to, implement, those decisions.

Well, I've rambled on and avoided my other responsibilities long enough, for now, so I'm going to close this blog. Sometime soon, I'll probably add a post with some opinions about the practises of BDSM, and maybe another comparing the characteristics of Dominants, submissives, sadists, and masochists.

Sayonara

QM

Dominance and submission

It seems all the easy words have been written, and inspiration is in short supply. Time between chapters grows, and this bores me. When this happens, my mind wanders, and recently it has been wandering in perilous directions.

In my profile, I have alluded to the position that both my SO and I are tops, and that this frequently is the root of more tension in our household than is usually considered desirable. On the other hand, I am often given cause to wonder, however, if she might not be a switch. rather than a top.

Being the top in a relationship demands that one accept responsibility for both the making of, and the outcome of, important, often life-changing decisions. Acting on the presumption that she is an equal partner, rather than my sub, I always offer her the opportunity to participate in this process as often as is possible: however, I usually end up having the entire decision thrown back in my lap. Not credible behavior for a Domme, if you ask me.

It also seems to me that frequently, she is easily pushed into doing things that do not appear to be desirable from her perspective. Of course I don't mind this if I am the one doing the pushing, but it irritates me no end if someone else does it to her. This most often happens in connection with her work, and takes the form of psychological bullying. I have spoken with her frequently (to little avail) about the difficulty I have in accepting her acquiescence to this treatment. I can forsee a time when I may have to take some drastic action to bring this cycle to an end. She is mine, damn it!

The thing is, if she is going to act the part of a sub, then she is going to be a sub only to me, unless I specifically and personally authorize that kind behavior toward someone else. I guess that kind of puts my take on the situation out there for everyone to see, and if someone, anyone, doesn't like it, then tough shit!

All this internal grumbling has me thinking about what I would want in a sub, and I've come up with a few things. I know that they are going to offend some people. I don't care. We're talking about a dominant/submissive relationship here. If you can't understand that, get out of my face and out of my life. I'm not particularly into subjecting a sub to pain and/or humiliation, but I can provide it if needed. I do have a few basic rules, however.

First off, dedication. If I am going to be your Dom and all that that entails (making the major decisions for you, providing for you, protecting you, loving you), then I expect you to put me first. First before your children, your parents, your siblings, yourself, your career, or whatever. Not just in terms of meeting my basic physical and biological needs, but also in whatever I might want. It is not yours to judge whether I should want things, only to correctly anticipate and meet my desires and demands. As far as the anticipation part is concerned, if you are worrried about it, just pay attention!

Second, loyalty. Do not become my adversary, or an accomplice to my adversary. Life is a continuous struggle with antagonistic forces, and as the Dom, it is my duty to provide for and protect both of us, as well as our other dependents. It is enough to have to contend with attacks from outside the relationship, without having to worry about getting knives in the back, either real or figurative.

Third, honesty. When I act, I do so based on the information I have. If I am acting on bad information, the outcome of those actions is less likely to be positive for us. Do not knowingly tell me a falsehood. If you tell me something you believe to be true, and then later find out that it is not, tell me so, as quickly as feasible. Don't conceal vital information. That is the same as lying to me, whether the concealment is active or passive. Don't knowingly let me believe something you know to be false. That is the same as concealment, and lying. If you want something, tell me. Chances are, if it is in my power, I'll get/do it for you, or allow/assist you to obtain/do it for yourself. By the same token, if you are afraid of, hostile to, or feel in any way negatively toward something, tell me. To the extent that I both feel I can, and feel that it appropriate to do so, I will most likely accomodate you.

Fourth, obedience. Why the hell would a sub have problems with the concept of obedience? Follow instructions, or in the absence of instructions, do those things that you have a reasonable expectation would please me. If you have reason to believe that my instructions were given based on incomplete or erroneous information, then give me the correct information and ask for confirmation of the instructions. Don't be a bush lawyer, and try to interpret instructions differently from my intent, or accept such interpretations from others: that is just another form of disobedience. If you are truly unclear on what my wishes/instructions mean, ask. That's the only way I for me to know you need clarification. This should not happen very frequently, as I will make every reasonable effort to be certain that you understand what I want.

Fifth, and finally, love. If you don't love me, none of the rest matters, and if you truly do, the rest will come easily. I am reminded of many conversations with a close friend, who complains about her husband, who has similar rules. Paraphrased, she says, "He won't change for me! When I complain about the way he does things, he just says, 'This is the way I am!' and then he expects me to just live with it!" Since my friend isn't my sub, and I have no wish to alienate her by sticking my nose where it doesn't belong, I have made no attempt to educate her. The fact is, though, her complaint has no merit. He is telling the truth. She married him, and stays in the marriage relationship voluntarily. If she didn't love him enough to accept him for what he was, she shouldn't have entered into the relationship in the first place, and if he has changed in ways that she can't accept, she should end it. Two points need to be made: (1)People change as they grow older, and from the perspective of one partner or the other, the changes may not be good for the relationship. (2)It just takes some individuals longer than others to grow into and realize their role in life, whether as a top, a switch, a bottom, or a vanilla. In either case, the principles still hold, and if the love between two people isn't strong enough to accomodate the changes, it's probably time to end the relationship.

Applying the rules: If you break a rule, for whatever reason, and are contrite, tell me yourself and take the consequences. It'll be better. Don't let me find out another way. That would break my heart, and would forever prohibit further trust. If you break a rule and are self-righteous about it, go find a Dom who can live with that. I can't.

If you can't follow the rules, you aren't my sub. Hell, if you can't do this, can you even call yourself my lover? If you are a sub, you should end the relationship and wait for someone for whom you can follow the rules: otherwise you are just propagating unhappiness for both of us.

And yes, even though you are a sub, you still have the power to end a relationship, at least in this country.

QM

Observations

SO... Fly Away Home was cooking along pretty good, but it seems to have slowed to a crawl again. At least I know where it's going now. In the meantime...

I had a few minutes to kill, while waiting for inspiration to strike, so I started looking at some of the features MySpace offers. Did you know that the "Browse" menu is really a database search tool, that lets you find people based on a set of user-specified criteria? The criteria are limited, of course, to a subset that are included in the html form... you can't just create a query on your own.

Anyway, I decided to check it out, so I started looking for profiles of ladies (I'm a guy, right?) with different combinations of attributes. Since the available criteria don't include any kind of self-assessment of sex-slave potential, there's no way this excercise could be considered a serious effort, at least for me (SO DON'T GET YOUR PANTIES IN A WAD, BABY!).

One thing I did find, was that there are some seriously sick people out there.. and I don't just mean that they are kinky. Kinky isn't sick, it's just different. What I mean is that there are folks out there who are mentally or emotionally damaged.

Some think they're into BDSM, but they really just want to hurt, or be hurt by, people; physically or emotionally, and NOBODY gets any real pleasure out of it. And they don't seem to ascribe to the "safe, sane, and consensual" credo. That's just mean and/or stupid.

There are others who seem to think that people in general have nothing better to do than stalk them, and that every curious glance in their direction is some sort of threat. One in particular comes to mind. The profile is probably a fake, because the profile pic is of a beautiful model (just the kind of thing to make a guy like me look twice). On the other hand, even if the real outside is as pretty as the pic, it wouldn't matter, because the blogs exposed an inside that is seething with self-absorbed rot. I can't even see the exterior beauty now, it's been permanently obscured by the ugliness within.

Another thing I found is, that there are a lot of very unhappy people. Many, probably most, have a very poor self-image. Judging from the "About Me" blurbs and/or blogs, lot of these are wreckage from failed relationships. Some are "lost souls" who never developed a real relationship with another human being, and don't know how, or are afraid, to start.

Finally, I also noticed that a lot of women who have profiles stating that they are married, or in a relationship, also indicate that they are interested in dating! When I see something like that, it makes me want to know why... not to condemn, but to understand; so I look to see what they say about themselves and their reasons. Often there is no answer... so it's probably most often something that happens by accident, when a lady creates her profile, or maybe something forgotten when her relationship status changed.

BUT sometimes, it's pretty clear that is isn't an accident...

Often, someone isn't getting the attention she wants or needs, and has decided to do something about it. She has too much invested in her current life to just walk away, but dammit, she's tired of being ignored!

Sometimes, it's revenge-motivated. Her erstwhile partner has been getting a little on the side, himself. She figures why should he/she have all the fun?

Rarely, it's a couple, and they're seeking new, mutual playmates. Interesting, if dangerous, territory.

Even more rarely, the woman's partner is a willing cuckold. As a reader of erotic prose, I see the topic come up often, in print, but the context doesn't permit a real presentation or evaluation of any rationale.

The man who can't give his partner what she needs, for physiological reasons, seems undertandable enough. Under those circumstances, if he really cares for her, he might want her to be able to enjoy occasional penetration by something warm and living. At the other extreme are those men who are perfectly healthy, perfectly capable of engaging in full sexual intercourse, but who might need to see their own ladies in passionate embrace with another man, on a regular basis. It might seem farfetched, but if MySpace profiles are to be believed, both extremes, as well as some cases that fall in between them, actually occur.

Well, this blog has now taken longer to compose than my "research" did to execute, so, even though there's more that could be said, I'm going to close it for now, and hopefully get back to writing fiction. Maybe I'll post more later.

QM