Started to respond to an email but realized it would be better as a post. The question was if my asexuality was a positive choice.
I read once on Fetlife, a comment where someone stated that rape makes women find more enjoyment in rough sex afterwards. This opinion was stated as fact. FACT! Someone had a hidden agenda there, to destroy women's enjoyment of sex completely all over the world. But many take this as true, when the opposite is true. Rape, real rape, makes people find less enjoyment in sex.
As for me, I started off not needing or wanting sex to be happy, and to have fun with it was a huge effort not really worth my time for such a temporary enjoyment, that I made as a concession to my vanilla partners, as an attempt to seem normal. Yes I had fun, but it was still messy and uncomfortable and I'd rather just play videogames together, or beat him. After the constant pressures to be sexual for other people but not for myself, I find sex disgusting and non-sexy. Don't get me wrong, I have had great sex. I just find it non-important. Now I have health issues where I can't have intercourse, and they still press for it! Pathetic.
I despise those who can't control themselves. If I don't respect someone for their character and morals I find them less and less attractive. That I control my desires much more easily is perhaps unfair but this control should be a goal for everyone. A big sexual drive should never be something used as an excuse to ignore and dehumanize others' needs. So you have a big drive? Go tire yourself out to the point you are capable to behave well with others.
Sexual dominance in animals is often born of the amount of sex drive they have. So then, too, people claim that I can't possibly be Dominant while being asexual. I am quiet, soft-spoken, sensual not hard, so of course, I must be submissive, no? They then try to dominate me into sex! Again a turnoff, not only ignoring my sexual needs but my emotional ones as well. Then puzzled that I could possibly turn down all that man! Pathetic, again. I am always clear about what I want and what I need, people ignore that and don't understand why I'm not happy to jump into bed with them? How stupid.
How unsexy is stupidity.
Then the despair that all men are stupid and half of women also. The always feeling very alone, but happier alone than with others because of the lack of pressure to be something I'm not.
So I was not quite asexual to start off with - capable of feeling attraction, capable of orgasm, but my drive was close to nonexistent.
Even looking at celebrities other women want, I get no response, no buzz. These are celebrities - men with looks, money, talent, power - and I don't want them. Some regular guy wants me, what does he bring to me, when I don't even want a man for looks, money, talent, and power all together?
Now so many things are a turnoff that I choose to identify as asexual, in order to avoid constant explanations of where the boundaries are, and exactly how meaningless sex is for me: Look, but don't touch. It was not a positive choice at all. I would have preferred a considerate, sexy, smart, moral, capable man with the self-control to wait for me to have that moment of actually wanting sex, months, even years. Now I don't want it at all because after being attacked and pressured over and over, my needs and desires ignored, has made it all sour. There is no sweetness in the world to fix this.
You can't unpressure. You can't unrape. You can't undominate someone who hated every second of your clumsy attempt and you can't make them undespise you for trying. So have self control in the first place and listen to what the person tells you they need.
Showing posts with label crime. Show all posts
Showing posts with label crime. Show all posts
Saturday, November 5, 2011
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Why Consent is the Keystone
Lately I've been seeing an explosion of posts on the subject of abuse within BDSM. Women who've been groped at their first public play party. Men or women submissives who've had their limits pushed in ways that left them wrecked and then angry.
But isn't BDSM about abuse? Isn't what we do abusive?
NO.
How can that be?
We beat people, torture people, use people for household services and yes, sometimes money. We make them lick our feet, treat them as dogs or servants or even ashtrays for those that smoke...
And none of this is abuse, because of consent.
Clearly communicated, negotiated consent is the most beautiful thing in the world. Consent is what makes us NOT merely criminals, NOT victims, NOT predators.
It's also the most rare, even within the BDSM community.
The unfortunate truth is that predators of the criminal kind DO hide out in our communities. It's the nice, obedient sub who makes everyone brownies, and is publicly the perfect sub, but who rapes any woman who falls for the lie and takes him home. It's the male "dumbinant" who treats every woman as if she should be his slave, including Dominant women.
Consent is about restraint. It's about being in charge of yourself as the Dominant, and being honest as the submissive. It's about care and consideration for the other person in a scene and out. It's about making it good for everyone involved even as you do things that are nasty and depraved and seemingly abusive. It's about obeying a rule of law greater than the laws of the land - do unto others with the same care for their needs as they would have you do unto them. Just, their needs are to be spanked like a naughty boy and used by a beautiful, powerful woman. I think we're discovering now just how normal that really is, because of the proliferation of communication in this century.
Some people just don't find personal restraint to be sexy. I do.
Think about it. What's most hot - someone who has the power to overcome you through raw force, or someone who has that power but uses it lightly.
Consent lifts us up from the criminal into something almost spiritual. Where the sub is on a shamanic journey of pain-into-bliss, and the Dominant is steering the broomstick with paddlewhacks. Where the sub is doing seva (self-enlightenment through service, work offered to God,) through their devotion to a person.
Not having consent, robs BOTH participants of the beauty and power available in a truly consensually "abusive" relationship. Lack of consent gives a lack of transcendence.
I want transcendence. The power to turn this horrible, negative thing into something spiritually beautiful. The ability to restrain from acting on kinky desires until full, informed, communicated consent is given, is a sign of greater power and greater self-confidence. Once the scene begins, it's a controlled, beautiful, ever-shifting journey, where I feed off the enjoyment created by what I'm making him do. And that's hot.
But isn't BDSM about abuse? Isn't what we do abusive?
NO.
How can that be?
We beat people, torture people, use people for household services and yes, sometimes money. We make them lick our feet, treat them as dogs or servants or even ashtrays for those that smoke...
And none of this is abuse, because of consent.
Clearly communicated, negotiated consent is the most beautiful thing in the world. Consent is what makes us NOT merely criminals, NOT victims, NOT predators.
It's also the most rare, even within the BDSM community.
The unfortunate truth is that predators of the criminal kind DO hide out in our communities. It's the nice, obedient sub who makes everyone brownies, and is publicly the perfect sub, but who rapes any woman who falls for the lie and takes him home. It's the male "dumbinant" who treats every woman as if she should be his slave, including Dominant women.
Consent is about restraint. It's about being in charge of yourself as the Dominant, and being honest as the submissive. It's about care and consideration for the other person in a scene and out. It's about making it good for everyone involved even as you do things that are nasty and depraved and seemingly abusive. It's about obeying a rule of law greater than the laws of the land - do unto others with the same care for their needs as they would have you do unto them. Just, their needs are to be spanked like a naughty boy and used by a beautiful, powerful woman. I think we're discovering now just how normal that really is, because of the proliferation of communication in this century.
Some people just don't find personal restraint to be sexy. I do.
Think about it. What's most hot - someone who has the power to overcome you through raw force, or someone who has that power but uses it lightly.
Consent lifts us up from the criminal into something almost spiritual. Where the sub is on a shamanic journey of pain-into-bliss, and the Dominant is steering the broomstick with paddlewhacks. Where the sub is doing seva (self-enlightenment through service, work offered to God,) through their devotion to a person.
Not having consent, robs BOTH participants of the beauty and power available in a truly consensually "abusive" relationship. Lack of consent gives a lack of transcendence.
I want transcendence. The power to turn this horrible, negative thing into something spiritually beautiful. The ability to restrain from acting on kinky desires until full, informed, communicated consent is given, is a sign of greater power and greater self-confidence. Once the scene begins, it's a controlled, beautiful, ever-shifting journey, where I feed off the enjoyment created by what I'm making him do. And that's hot.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
Rape is a Hate Crime
http://rapeisnotajoke.tumblr.com/post/10194808643/things-not-to-say-to-a-rape-survivor
The one thing here that I object to is this:
A stranger selecting a victim to be raped might choose a physically weaker person. A sociopath would choose anyone, then drug them to weakness. Trust is a weakness. Kindness is a weakness. Wanting to think well of other human beings is a weakness.
Trust is also completely necessary for adult human relationships, all of them.
It's not about weakness, it's about criminal betrayal of trust.
If you have been raped, or know someone who has, you know it's not about what the person did or could have done or that they shouldn't have trusted the nice gentleman/lady. It's about someone choosing to do a criminally abusive act towards another human being.
These criminals have a completely different values system - when it comes to the target. It doesn't make them insane. It makes them unable to empathize - with their target. (They empathize fine with the people included in their personal circles.) It makes them capable of acts that their target is most likely NOT capable of even comprehending based on a different system of values, and therefore makes the target have incredible difficulty defending against said actions.
When guns are regulated, only law-abiding citizens who take the steps needed for self-defense or hunting, will have regulated guns. Criminals will still have guns for killing people. Regular people who think that the police will defend them, will not have guns. The criminals with black market guns will kill the unprotected target equally easily.
Normal human society allows this lack of empathy towards "the other" no matter what that other is. If you're perceived as being "different" from someone, you can be a target of dis-empathetic hate crime.
Without the ability to dehumanize others, we would be unable to find soldiers for armies. Without the ability to close off empathy to people outside "our" circles, whether those be family, religion, culture... we would be unable to defend ourselves from those who have placed US in the outsider's circle and wish to do US harm.
So the scary part is, these criminals are completely normal. They are NOT insane. Turning off empathy is a NORMAL human response. What's abnormal is people like me who prefer to treat others with respect and obtain real consent, even when doing activities that most would not think of much less consent to having done to them.
Rape is a hate crime. It has nothing to do with the person being raped. Just like the citizens and children of a country being invaded did nothing to deserve the crimes against them by invading armies based on political power games. It's the same thing.
The criminal acts outside of the rules of society towards the target victim. The victim is not weak for being unprotected against a criminal. We are ALL unprotected against criminals, because our society does not place a great value on self-defense.
That women in particular have less options for learning safety and self-defense is not their (our) fault. But we can do something about that. Lets encourage our daughters to take martial arts in addition to figure skating or ballet or sports. If you can't afford it? At least get a dvd and get their hunger for knowledge started. LET THEM FIGHT OTHER KIDS, instead of neutering their ability to defend. Lets have early dialogue on personal safety that's not just about distrusting strangers but about how to evaluate how much trust someone you KNOW is worthy of receiving from you.
It's that important.
Making yourself a harder target to hit, doesn't make you not a target. You can't eliminate all your weaknesses, especially not to criminals. You can just make some fights not worth it for them.
What a thing to be thinking about on a Sunday morning huh.
The one thing here that I object to is this:
Rape is a crime of power, control, and extreme violence where sex is usedIt's not about how strong you are or how weak you are. Everyone has a weakness that can be exploited. None of us are safe. Why? Because the people who do these things study how to get past normal defenses. You are more likely to be raped by someone you know than by a stranger. Afterwards, there are always people who say "but they were so NICE!"
as a weapon against someone weaker. It is not sex. (Emphasis mine.)
A stranger selecting a victim to be raped might choose a physically weaker person. A sociopath would choose anyone, then drug them to weakness. Trust is a weakness. Kindness is a weakness. Wanting to think well of other human beings is a weakness.
Trust is also completely necessary for adult human relationships, all of them.
It's not about weakness, it's about criminal betrayal of trust.
If you have been raped, or know someone who has, you know it's not about what the person did or could have done or that they shouldn't have trusted the nice gentleman/lady. It's about someone choosing to do a criminally abusive act towards another human being.
These criminals have a completely different values system - when it comes to the target. It doesn't make them insane. It makes them unable to empathize - with their target. (They empathize fine with the people included in their personal circles.) It makes them capable of acts that their target is most likely NOT capable of even comprehending based on a different system of values, and therefore makes the target have incredible difficulty defending against said actions.
When guns are regulated, only law-abiding citizens who take the steps needed for self-defense or hunting, will have regulated guns. Criminals will still have guns for killing people. Regular people who think that the police will defend them, will not have guns. The criminals with black market guns will kill the unprotected target equally easily.
Normal human society allows this lack of empathy towards "the other" no matter what that other is. If you're perceived as being "different" from someone, you can be a target of dis-empathetic hate crime.
Without the ability to dehumanize others, we would be unable to find soldiers for armies. Without the ability to close off empathy to people outside "our" circles, whether those be family, religion, culture... we would be unable to defend ourselves from those who have placed US in the outsider's circle and wish to do US harm.
So the scary part is, these criminals are completely normal. They are NOT insane. Turning off empathy is a NORMAL human response. What's abnormal is people like me who prefer to treat others with respect and obtain real consent, even when doing activities that most would not think of much less consent to having done to them.
Rape is a hate crime. It has nothing to do with the person being raped. Just like the citizens and children of a country being invaded did nothing to deserve the crimes against them by invading armies based on political power games. It's the same thing.
The criminal acts outside of the rules of society towards the target victim. The victim is not weak for being unprotected against a criminal. We are ALL unprotected against criminals, because our society does not place a great value on self-defense.
That women in particular have less options for learning safety and self-defense is not their (our) fault. But we can do something about that. Lets encourage our daughters to take martial arts in addition to figure skating or ballet or sports. If you can't afford it? At least get a dvd and get their hunger for knowledge started. LET THEM FIGHT OTHER KIDS, instead of neutering their ability to defend. Lets have early dialogue on personal safety that's not just about distrusting strangers but about how to evaluate how much trust someone you KNOW is worthy of receiving from you.
It's that important.
Making yourself a harder target to hit, doesn't make you not a target. You can't eliminate all your weaknesses, especially not to criminals. You can just make some fights not worth it for them.
What a thing to be thinking about on a Sunday morning huh.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)