Enjoying it when Rowdy ties my wrists and ankles together and punches me? Good clean fun, clearly. I don’t feel weird at all about that.
Enjoying it when he sits on my face while tying me? Makes me feel like such a pervert.
If you have a fetish, by all means feel free to mention it in your OkCupid profile, but may I make a suggestion? Please let people know you are a person too.
Like, if your username is “step_on_my_face” and all of your pictures are of feet on faces and your profile is nothing but gushing about how much you like your face stepped on… that makes me uncomfortable. And not because I have a problem with your fetish or because I wouldn’t consider stepping on your face to make you happy. Because I don’t know anything else about you.
What is it like to spend time with you? What kind of social circle do you have? What do you do for a living? (I can understand not giving the exact company or position, but vaguely naming the industry is still helpful in creating an image of you-as-whole-person.) Where are you from? What things besides feet-on-face do you enjoy? WHO ARE YOU?
It tends to create the impression that you’re going to show up, demand I step on your face a bunch, then if I do, say “thanks babe, that was great, the door’s over there.” At which point I don’t think you should be pursuing this through a dating site, and you should probably be offering to pay for it.
So last week, Fetlife (a BDSM website that I’ve recommended several times to budding feederists) got “hacked”—that is, a long-time sex blogger named Maymay created a mirror site which made everything on Fetlife not set to “friends only” visible and searchable on Google.
The…
I’m really sad to see maymay pulling this shit. It’s putting people’s jobs and privacy at risk for the sake of a demonstration. If you want to point out a security hole, point it out; don’t slap it up on Google for funsies. If you have a problem with how a community’s led, go after the leaders; don’t do something that puts every ordinary member in danger.
I’m also, frankly, super sick of him and Clarisse Thorn, and their ongoing “If I use big words and lots of pseudofeminist jargon, I can say whatever I want!” approach to defending PUAs and MRAs and other misogynist or outright rapist scumbags. I tried really hard for a really long time to see this on a “they’re serious feminist thinkers with unusual opinions” level, and you know what, fuck that. They’re misogynist apologists who’ve learned how to play with language until you almost don’t notice they’re defending people who think women are those annoying noises coming from above a vagina.
And while I’m angry and burning bridges, I’ll just add that allowing underage kids in a kink event is a really fucking stupid idea. Yes, in theory kids should have access to information about all kinds of sexuality, but the kink community doesn’t need more opportunities for predators right about now, okay?
sex positive feminism refuses to acknowledge how the patriarchy shapes our desire, normalizes female pain/submission.
and here’s where I get into TMI - I like being held down during sex and rough sex. I grew up in a world where that was okay, where advertisements showed that as sexy.
I don’t feel guilty about what I like in bed. But I refuse to consider my sexual desires as the one thing that escapes influence from societal pressures.
As a dirty sex-pozzie, I agree with the last paragraph, except:
I refuse to consider my sexual desires as the only thing influenced by societal pressures. What I wear, who I’m friends with, how I talk, what I buy, how I move—these are all socially influenced too, often in really nasty messy ways. So it annoys me, and honestly makes me a little suspicious, when this argument keeps coming up specifically over sexuality.
Everything I do is shaped by society, y’know? Let’s not single out the things I do with my crotch.
(Speaking of “everything”—asking women to scrutinize and doubt their own sexual desires has some hefty patriarchal taint itself.)
(Last paragraph bolding mine.)
This is something I’ve been thinking about for a while. As an asexual woman, it’s not uncommon for me to be told “You’re asexual because of patriarchy,” or things along those lines. So hearing someone else talk about why explaining a woman’s sexual desires to her is icky, is valuable to me.
It’s a no-win situation, isn’t it?
If you have “too much” or “too kinky” sex, it must be the patriarchy telling you to please men. But if you have “too little” or “too vanilla” sex, it must be the patriarchy telling you to suppress your desires!
I’m not saying this to ridicule the idea that patriarchy influences sexual desires. But I would like to ridicule the idea that patriarchy only influences certain sexual desires.
No sexual desires are developed in a vacuum, so singling out the non-normative ones for extra hand-wringing is definitely problematic.
sex positive feminism refuses to acknowledge how the patriarchy shapes our desire, normalizes female pain/submission.
and here’s where I get into TMI - I like being held down during sex and rough sex. I grew up in a world where that was okay, where advertisements showed that as sexy.
I don’t feel guilty about what I like in bed. But I refuse to consider my sexual desires as the one thing that escapes influence from societal pressures.
As a dirty sex-pozzie, I agree with the last paragraph, except:
I refuse to consider my sexual desires as the only thing influenced by societal pressures. What I wear, who I’m friends with, how I talk, what I buy, how I move—these are all socially influenced too, often in really nasty messy ways. So it annoys me, and honestly makes me a little suspicious, when this argument keeps coming up specifically over sexuality.
Everything I do is shaped by society, y’know? Let’s not single out the things I do with my crotch.
(Speaking of “everything”—asking women to scrutinize and doubt their own sexual desires has some hefty patriarchal taint itself.)
