Say, we are in a situation where expertise in deep sea drilling is crucial, and we are hiring. You are dammed right I would ask the applicant about his or her ability to handle the job such as the oil spill in the US gulf coast. As for his or her preference to say, the use of the male member or a dildo, well, with due disrespect to the thought police, it is irrelevant. Aside from the analogy, whether or not you use a condom while having sex has little to do with how you cap a spewing oil well. Of course, some people will think otherwise.
Don't ask, don't tell.
In the military I would prefer to have fighting men and women whose first thought about a situation is to kill the enemy as opposed to being nice and trying to make friends. The thing about sexual preference is never an issue here. I have no position for or against this shit of controversy about gays in the military. The reason is, “It does not matter!” Among our duly elected idiots, elected by idiots, in Congress, this thing comes up repeatedly, and they can’t get rid of it on account of having their heads up somebody's ass. Ok, they don't ask, and don't tell about it, and I just hope that while that is going in somebody will evacuate and then flush. Sometimes I think that we would all be better without a Congress. Yes, I know, that is the cry of an anarchist although I am not one. Still, considering the hundreds of thousands of congressional laws that are unconstitutional, destructive, and useless that we could do without, nobody would know the difference if we scrapped all and just stayed with the United States Constitution. The people who created this document did not have their heads up somebody's ass. We should trust their wisdom, and not mess with something that most of us are not intelligent enough even to read. When was the last time you read and understood the Constitution?
In a way, we should reboot our government, and get rid of the detritus accumulated because of misperceptions of what is right or wrong. I would begin with the current president-so-to-speak, With him gone, almost any idiot would do better on the job. Of course, the Senate and the House of Representatives would be next. One of my dogs would do as well as any current member of the Congress. At least, he would not be thinking of reelection, or “bringing home the bacon.” Damn, I am pissed!
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
The Ultimate Of Creation
I am not a fatalist.
I am not one who thinks that women are superior.
I am not one who thinks that men are inferior.
I am not promoting creationism versus evolution.
Yet, I feel that the female gender has the key to ultimate survival of the human, whatever the product would be at that point. My conclusion is biological.
Let’s face it, men inseminate, and then go away while women carry the subsequent burden to procreate. I get inversely claustrophobic thinking about having a parasite invade me for nine months and then punish me terribly to be done with me upon exit. And then for the next twenty years punish me more for my succumbing to the charm of the cock. I could learn to hate cocks.
In a weird pseudo-science-fiction we think of men as unnecessary and dying for lack of use and need. The reason is, women have all that they need to survive as species. The horny thing of insemination by a male could be arranged by some other means. As for the female’s yearning for a male’s cock, well it is somewhat like today’s shunning of homosexuality. The explicit need can be overcome by the use of artificial means. If it is not, there would be the female sex police to punish any woman who thinks of the real male member. You know, very much like today’s Sharia in the extreme as many women have already figured that out: “You will have your clitoris whacked off if you think of a male sporting a cock that is unencumbered with painfully restricting hardware, unless it is your husband, who can and will do anything to you.”
Don’t take me wrong. I value my position in life in relationship and in society. I am man, I am magnificent, I am to be feared and respected. Yes, I get old and frail, and then die. But I have made my positive contribution. There are some women who have appreciated knowing me, and would love to have me fill in for their dildoe from time to time. Well, maybe not all that, but still, I have done much good in life, and I want to be paid for it! About being superfluous forget that. Any self-respecting woman would love to have my cock to use as she pleases. Note that I did not say, “to fuck her with”, but just to use. I wish. Of course, there are some women who are not really self respecting, or have no respect for anyone. They go out of their way to demean and destroy themselves and anyone who has any use for men. It is a shame. Their viral thinking may take seed and germinate to produce virulent destruction of the sane members of the species.
On the long run, we don’t know how this will turn out. If I had to guess, sane females will survive. Males may end up kept as toys, but otherwise sterile and unnecessary. I will not be there to see it.
I am not one who thinks that women are superior.
I am not one who thinks that men are inferior.
I am not promoting creationism versus evolution.
Yet, I feel that the female gender has the key to ultimate survival of the human, whatever the product would be at that point. My conclusion is biological.
Let’s face it, men inseminate, and then go away while women carry the subsequent burden to procreate. I get inversely claustrophobic thinking about having a parasite invade me for nine months and then punish me terribly to be done with me upon exit. And then for the next twenty years punish me more for my succumbing to the charm of the cock. I could learn to hate cocks.
In a weird pseudo-science-fiction we think of men as unnecessary and dying for lack of use and need. The reason is, women have all that they need to survive as species. The horny thing of insemination by a male could be arranged by some other means. As for the female’s yearning for a male’s cock, well it is somewhat like today’s shunning of homosexuality. The explicit need can be overcome by the use of artificial means. If it is not, there would be the female sex police to punish any woman who thinks of the real male member. You know, very much like today’s Sharia in the extreme as many women have already figured that out: “You will have your clitoris whacked off if you think of a male sporting a cock that is unencumbered with painfully restricting hardware, unless it is your husband, who can and will do anything to you.”
Don’t take me wrong. I value my position in life in relationship and in society. I am man, I am magnificent, I am to be feared and respected. Yes, I get old and frail, and then die. But I have made my positive contribution. There are some women who have appreciated knowing me, and would love to have me fill in for their dildoe from time to time. Well, maybe not all that, but still, I have done much good in life, and I want to be paid for it! About being superfluous forget that. Any self-respecting woman would love to have my cock to use as she pleases. Note that I did not say, “to fuck her with”, but just to use. I wish. Of course, there are some women who are not really self respecting, or have no respect for anyone. They go out of their way to demean and destroy themselves and anyone who has any use for men. It is a shame. Their viral thinking may take seed and germinate to produce virulent destruction of the sane members of the species.
On the long run, we don’t know how this will turn out. If I had to guess, sane females will survive. Males may end up kept as toys, but otherwise sterile and unnecessary. I will not be there to see it.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Breakfast In Bed
I may be running out of ideas with which I can titillate your prurient mind. I know this is not a controversial issue. Breakfast in bed appears to be highly coveted by some. I make this comment based on what I have read, not what I have experienced. Typically in an FLR, the man would serve his object of love with breakfast in bed. The effort would be appreciated, even more, expected!
MW and I are different. Actually, we are more than different. We are odd. She, and I associate breakfast in bed with being bedridden. After all, if we are well enough to get out of bed, it is much more comfortable, more hygienic, more expedient to sit at a table, or even on the floor, to eat a meal. In bed you have to be concerned with not moving much to avoid spilling liquids from a cup or glass staged on a tray, which in turn is balanced on an unstable mushy platform. Then someone must come along and clean the mess anyway, for you can’t avoid crumbs and drips no matter how carefully you eat.
The other thing is, sitting in bed while eating off a tray is just damned uncomfortable. You are limited almost as if you were in bondage. Maybe that is the attraction to some. As much as we both appreciate some aspects of bondage, this is not it.
This is not to say that we don’t have snacks, coffee, and such, in bed. We do often, and it is enjoyable, but limited in scope. We find it great to sit in bed watching a movie while eating ice cream, drinking coffee, or munching on some fruit. Even an occasional slice of cake with tea is great, in spite of the crumbs that I would have to sweep off the sheet afterward.
As long as you are not too ill to eat at a table, I would like to know what you get out of eating a meal in bed. Is it some kind of rare treat? Is it something that satisfies a craving for service? Is it just decadence that your servant supports for you? Am I missing some pleasure here?
MW and I are different. Actually, we are more than different. We are odd. She, and I associate breakfast in bed with being bedridden. After all, if we are well enough to get out of bed, it is much more comfortable, more hygienic, more expedient to sit at a table, or even on the floor, to eat a meal. In bed you have to be concerned with not moving much to avoid spilling liquids from a cup or glass staged on a tray, which in turn is balanced on an unstable mushy platform. Then someone must come along and clean the mess anyway, for you can’t avoid crumbs and drips no matter how carefully you eat.
The other thing is, sitting in bed while eating off a tray is just damned uncomfortable. You are limited almost as if you were in bondage. Maybe that is the attraction to some. As much as we both appreciate some aspects of bondage, this is not it.
This is not to say that we don’t have snacks, coffee, and such, in bed. We do often, and it is enjoyable, but limited in scope. We find it great to sit in bed watching a movie while eating ice cream, drinking coffee, or munching on some fruit. Even an occasional slice of cake with tea is great, in spite of the crumbs that I would have to sweep off the sheet afterward.
As long as you are not too ill to eat at a table, I would like to know what you get out of eating a meal in bed. Is it some kind of rare treat? Is it something that satisfies a craving for service? Is it just decadence that your servant supports for you? Am I missing some pleasure here?
Thursday, May 20, 2010
What Is It With Strap-ons?
You can see them prominently on web sites that sell sex toys. You can read about them on blogs, forums, short stories, and books. They must have a value, or else people would not spend their money on them. I wonder, however, what the value is.
I maintain a few dozen blog addresses within the FLR genre that I visit from time to time. A strap-on device has come up in many. I have yet to do some research on how many blogs out of 100, how often, and whether a male or female brings it up. If any of you out there want to do that, or have done it, please let me know. In standard raunchy low-grade pornography a strap-on is essential. Jokes and cartoons deal with it as if it were standard issue to any adult relationship. Even my wife and I have one, although I don’t remember how or when we acquired it.
In view of my observation, I wonder who really uses it, and for what purpose. Sure, I know, it is supposed to simulate a male appendage. I can’t really go by the porno clips, because, with rare exceptions, they are only simulations of what could happen between two consenting or semi-consenting adults.
I can see two women using it on each other when no male member is available or desired. But most often in the FLR blogs it is the man who is obsessed with it and its potential usage regardless the circumstances, methods, or objectives. It is he who wants to be dominated by the wielder of this toy to simulate how a man would otherwise dominate another man or a woman. I can see the symbolic significance as a means of submission. He either does not desire another man to penetrate him such, or does not have a convenient man to do it for him. Next best, of course, is to have a woman strap it on, and then do it to him. I must be fair here. He may never want a real man to do that to him, all he wants is to submit to the woman. As a sign of conquest, she complies with his wishes.
I am not making light of this complex issue. In view of my not having intimate knowledge of the experience, I may not have a right to even mention it. I do it because I find it interesting. Male readers who are into the practice please do not think that I am being judgmental or making fun of you. I am merely curious.
I mentioned penetration without being specific. A woman has a definite advantage in offering three orifices to penetration, whereas a man has at most two. Worse even, the man’s offerings are stilted, unless the conqueror is turned on by the available options: the anus is not as pristine and attractive as the vagina. As for the mouth, well, read on.
Male to male oral penetration makes sense. I suppose it can be as thrilling as male to female oral penetration depending on the circumstances, and when we are talking real members, not simulated ones. However, when a woman dons a strap-on and forces her man to suck it, several thoughts occur to me, none explaining the situation adequately. These plastic or rubber devices have various shapes and sizes, but few look realistic. In addition, they exude an odor that is reminiscent of chemicals, not sex. I assume that the texture and the suppleness may come close to the real thing as long as the man is blindfolded. I just don’t see how he can overcome the smell or taste unless the dildo has been masked in some potent female juice prior to the oral attempt.
The other half of the questionable situation is this: “Why would a woman want to have her man suck a dildo?” Is she doing it because she gets some sexual or power exchange thrill out of it, or is it because her man indicated that it turns him on?
Then we come to anal penetration using a strap-on device. I suppose it could happen between a pair of homosexual men, one of whom can’t get it up, so he relies on a reasonable facsimile. In general, it would be a woman wearing the dildo, and penetrating a man. In this scenario we may disregard the look, smell, or flavor of the device, since the male anus is incapable of discerning any of that. Down there, it is the size that is perceived as the primary descriptor of the prosthetic member. I suppose it is a rare case when the woman is thrilled by this, and she is doing it against her man’s wishes, regardless of what cheap pornography or erotic novels say. So I ask, “What does a woman get out of this act?” It is unlikely to be sexually thrilling in most cases. Sure, her brain may be her greatest sex organ, but I doubt that many women will have their brains stimulated enough to orgasm in this manner, usually because of the loose and distant connection between the device and the brain.
There is one other scenario. I have read about this in supposed real cases. That is when the woman forces the man to put a hollow strap-on device over his penis, and then she uses him as an animated dildo. He is unable to get enough stimulation to orgasm even if she allowed him to achieve one. Yet she can orgasm as many times as she is capable, assuming the dildo feels like the real thing. This assumption may be wrong, because the artificial device does not have the feeling to feed back to the man, and it could irritate her most sensitive parts if staying with it long. Whereas, with the real thing, irritation is seldom an issue. The other thing is, my understanding of female orgasm is that she is less likely to achieve one through penetration by a device, as opposed to manual or oral stimulation with or without penetration by a device or the real thing.
Just to show that I am not entirely a virgin, here is what I have experienced. While having plain vanilla sex, my wife has used her finger to play with and once or twice penetrate me down there just as I was achieving a glorious orgasm. It was not necessary, but it helped, and I liked it. Once before, she tried to use a small dildo as she had me leaning on the edge of the bed face down. She missed her target, and pressed hard anyway. I tried everything to pull away, so she finally stopped. Later she asked me how it was. “You were trying to create another hole down there,” I explained. We have not tried it since then. I would not object if we tried again, but I would have to be convinced that we are doing it because she wants it, not because she thinks that I want it.
I have raised several issues above. I would like to hear from anyone with experience who can answer my questions, or can shed light on the details of the issues. What I especially would like to know, is, whether a woman gets anything out of penetrating a man with a strap-on device, and if so, what it is?
I maintain a few dozen blog addresses within the FLR genre that I visit from time to time. A strap-on device has come up in many. I have yet to do some research on how many blogs out of 100, how often, and whether a male or female brings it up. If any of you out there want to do that, or have done it, please let me know. In standard raunchy low-grade pornography a strap-on is essential. Jokes and cartoons deal with it as if it were standard issue to any adult relationship. Even my wife and I have one, although I don’t remember how or when we acquired it.
In view of my observation, I wonder who really uses it, and for what purpose. Sure, I know, it is supposed to simulate a male appendage. I can’t really go by the porno clips, because, with rare exceptions, they are only simulations of what could happen between two consenting or semi-consenting adults.
I can see two women using it on each other when no male member is available or desired. But most often in the FLR blogs it is the man who is obsessed with it and its potential usage regardless the circumstances, methods, or objectives. It is he who wants to be dominated by the wielder of this toy to simulate how a man would otherwise dominate another man or a woman. I can see the symbolic significance as a means of submission. He either does not desire another man to penetrate him such, or does not have a convenient man to do it for him. Next best, of course, is to have a woman strap it on, and then do it to him. I must be fair here. He may never want a real man to do that to him, all he wants is to submit to the woman. As a sign of conquest, she complies with his wishes.
I am not making light of this complex issue. In view of my not having intimate knowledge of the experience, I may not have a right to even mention it. I do it because I find it interesting. Male readers who are into the practice please do not think that I am being judgmental or making fun of you. I am merely curious.
I mentioned penetration without being specific. A woman has a definite advantage in offering three orifices to penetration, whereas a man has at most two. Worse even, the man’s offerings are stilted, unless the conqueror is turned on by the available options: the anus is not as pristine and attractive as the vagina. As for the mouth, well, read on.
Male to male oral penetration makes sense. I suppose it can be as thrilling as male to female oral penetration depending on the circumstances, and when we are talking real members, not simulated ones. However, when a woman dons a strap-on and forces her man to suck it, several thoughts occur to me, none explaining the situation adequately. These plastic or rubber devices have various shapes and sizes, but few look realistic. In addition, they exude an odor that is reminiscent of chemicals, not sex. I assume that the texture and the suppleness may come close to the real thing as long as the man is blindfolded. I just don’t see how he can overcome the smell or taste unless the dildo has been masked in some potent female juice prior to the oral attempt.
The other half of the questionable situation is this: “Why would a woman want to have her man suck a dildo?” Is she doing it because she gets some sexual or power exchange thrill out of it, or is it because her man indicated that it turns him on?
Then we come to anal penetration using a strap-on device. I suppose it could happen between a pair of homosexual men, one of whom can’t get it up, so he relies on a reasonable facsimile. In general, it would be a woman wearing the dildo, and penetrating a man. In this scenario we may disregard the look, smell, or flavor of the device, since the male anus is incapable of discerning any of that. Down there, it is the size that is perceived as the primary descriptor of the prosthetic member. I suppose it is a rare case when the woman is thrilled by this, and she is doing it against her man’s wishes, regardless of what cheap pornography or erotic novels say. So I ask, “What does a woman get out of this act?” It is unlikely to be sexually thrilling in most cases. Sure, her brain may be her greatest sex organ, but I doubt that many women will have their brains stimulated enough to orgasm in this manner, usually because of the loose and distant connection between the device and the brain.
There is one other scenario. I have read about this in supposed real cases. That is when the woman forces the man to put a hollow strap-on device over his penis, and then she uses him as an animated dildo. He is unable to get enough stimulation to orgasm even if she allowed him to achieve one. Yet she can orgasm as many times as she is capable, assuming the dildo feels like the real thing. This assumption may be wrong, because the artificial device does not have the feeling to feed back to the man, and it could irritate her most sensitive parts if staying with it long. Whereas, with the real thing, irritation is seldom an issue. The other thing is, my understanding of female orgasm is that she is less likely to achieve one through penetration by a device, as opposed to manual or oral stimulation with or without penetration by a device or the real thing.
Just to show that I am not entirely a virgin, here is what I have experienced. While having plain vanilla sex, my wife has used her finger to play with and once or twice penetrate me down there just as I was achieving a glorious orgasm. It was not necessary, but it helped, and I liked it. Once before, she tried to use a small dildo as she had me leaning on the edge of the bed face down. She missed her target, and pressed hard anyway. I tried everything to pull away, so she finally stopped. Later she asked me how it was. “You were trying to create another hole down there,” I explained. We have not tried it since then. I would not object if we tried again, but I would have to be convinced that we are doing it because she wants it, not because she thinks that I want it.
I have raised several issues above. I would like to hear from anyone with experience who can answer my questions, or can shed light on the details of the issues. What I especially would like to know, is, whether a woman gets anything out of penetrating a man with a strap-on device, and if so, what it is?
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Conflicting Goals
The Greatness of Some Women
I am sure that all of us who love, respect, and admire women could name some who are or were clearly superior to most of us: Eleanor Roosevelt, Margaret Thatcher, Mother Teresa, Indira Gandhi, Golda Meir, the list is long. Even within our acquaintances we could name many. In my work I greatly admired some women who were superior to me.
I know I have been trying to debunk the Female Supremacy Religion by citing examples where it is clearly not valid. I don’t want you to get the wrong idea and hear something I did not say. It is time I did at least lip service to show that some women are superior. I will say that emphatically here and now: “Some women are clearly superior to other women, and to some men.” I am not equivocating, neither am I trying to be vague or facetious. Of course, this does not dispute my previous analyses and anecdotal examples. I also want to be sure that we have our terms right.
First, define supremacy, which is based on supreme: Greatest or maximal in degree. To demonstrate how not to use the term we could get silly and say, “Mankind is supreme.” Uncle Joe while rocking on the porch would spit out the wheat stalk that he had been chewing, and note, “Bubba at the bait shop ain’t supreme. He dum as a brick.”
Next, define superior: Of higher rank, quality, or importance. This is the meaning that I like to assign to persons, as opposed to subgroups such as gender, race, etc.
Is She Fake or Stupid?
I have comments that I withheld lately when I read the blog at Yes, I'm a submissive man. I used to comment, but with the advent of some insane readers’ tirades I felt like I was wandering in the dark of a small yard where several large dogs have done food processing: from time to time I stepped in it. For this reason I don’t comment on that blog any more. However, I can write about it here. The blogger on his May 8, 2010 posting dredged the unsavory depths of Internet to come up with an advertisement on Craigslist by a supposed female. I will not quote the entire advertisement, except the parts that grabbed my attention for its conflicting statement of purpose:
Maybe, if she goes far enough with the feminization, he will become a she, and therefore superior. But, according to her advertisement, she did not want a suprerior female for a slave. She wanted a male whom she can turn into a female who is naturally superior, but still her slave. She then goes on to say,
Does anyone see where this is going? Sounds to me as if she is trying to find something good, and then destroy it.
I have some ideas of what this is about. My first guess is that this is, a man’s fantasy. He is masquerading as a dominant female and tries to have fun at the expense of some schmucks who will believe him.
The next possibility is that she is indeed a female who is trying to cash in on the gullible male whom she will ensnare with the grandiose presentation of her self-bestowed supremeness. If the man is less intelligent than she is, he will go with it, and pay dearly. Based on her mentioning “financial security” twice, this is likely.
A third possibility is that she is as stupid as any man who would take her up on her offer, and they will do each other harm, but there will be no intelligent life lost.
I am not excluding the possibility that she is intelligent, even superior to many, and that she really wants a male slave. I also grant the possibility that a male would or could be happy serving her until his money runs out. Alas, I think that is a very small chance. Her requirements and goals are contradictory, therefore, she is either fake or stupid.
You vulnerable men out there, you don’t want to serve a fake or a stupid person. At best it would be a waste of your time. But it would likely be worse.
I am sure that all of us who love, respect, and admire women could name some who are or were clearly superior to most of us: Eleanor Roosevelt, Margaret Thatcher, Mother Teresa, Indira Gandhi, Golda Meir, the list is long. Even within our acquaintances we could name many. In my work I greatly admired some women who were superior to me.
I know I have been trying to debunk the Female Supremacy Religion by citing examples where it is clearly not valid. I don’t want you to get the wrong idea and hear something I did not say. It is time I did at least lip service to show that some women are superior. I will say that emphatically here and now: “Some women are clearly superior to other women, and to some men.” I am not equivocating, neither am I trying to be vague or facetious. Of course, this does not dispute my previous analyses and anecdotal examples. I also want to be sure that we have our terms right.
First, define supremacy, which is based on supreme: Greatest or maximal in degree. To demonstrate how not to use the term we could get silly and say, “Mankind is supreme.” Uncle Joe while rocking on the porch would spit out the wheat stalk that he had been chewing, and note, “Bubba at the bait shop ain’t supreme. He dum as a brick.”
Next, define superior: Of higher rank, quality, or importance. This is the meaning that I like to assign to persons, as opposed to subgroups such as gender, race, etc.
Is She Fake or Stupid?
I have comments that I withheld lately when I read the blog at Yes, I'm a submissive man. I used to comment, but with the advent of some insane readers’ tirades I felt like I was wandering in the dark of a small yard where several large dogs have done food processing: from time to time I stepped in it. For this reason I don’t comment on that blog any more. However, I can write about it here. The blogger on his May 8, 2010 posting dredged the unsavory depths of Internet to come up with an advertisement on Craigslist by a supposed female. I will not quote the entire advertisement, except the parts that grabbed my attention for its conflicting statement of purpose:
“… Attractive, slender, naturally dominant 44 y.o. woman seeks genuine slave. I'm a vivacious, fun person to be with -- well educated, cultured, elegant [but she is not humble]. Love arts, theater, dance, trying new things, travel, enjoying life. I am looking for a true, naturally submissive gentleman who has a powerful craving to serve a powerfully dominant woman 24/7. I am a female supremacist. You should know what that entails. I enjoy feminization, spanking, paddling, chastity, and humiliation. I will rule you…”There is a lot more. The item that drew my attention is that she emphasizes being a female supremacist and that she enjoys feminization. Ok so far. However, she wants an inferior male for her slave whom she would try to turn into a pseudo female. Would not it be more simple to get a female slave, and skip the ill-fated attemp? At least she would be starting with another supreme being in this transformation. Now, if she is really supreme on account of having a vagina, then some other person without that crucial organ is inferior. Indeed, she wants a slave, and by definition a slave is inferior to the owner. Alas, a male slave, no matter how feminized, will never become as superior as she is on account of having the wrong organ down there.
Maybe, if she goes far enough with the feminization, he will become a she, and therefore superior. But, according to her advertisement, she did not want a suprerior female for a slave. She wanted a male whom she can turn into a female who is naturally superior, but still her slave. She then goes on to say,
“…You will be my obedient wife, completely monogamous and devoted….
“…You should have financial security and freedom to fulfill the role I require. Physically Fit. Energetic. Smart. Witty. Amusing.”
Does anyone see where this is going? Sounds to me as if she is trying to find something good, and then destroy it.
I have some ideas of what this is about. My first guess is that this is, a man’s fantasy. He is masquerading as a dominant female and tries to have fun at the expense of some schmucks who will believe him.
The next possibility is that she is indeed a female who is trying to cash in on the gullible male whom she will ensnare with the grandiose presentation of her self-bestowed supremeness. If the man is less intelligent than she is, he will go with it, and pay dearly. Based on her mentioning “financial security” twice, this is likely.
A third possibility is that she is as stupid as any man who would take her up on her offer, and they will do each other harm, but there will be no intelligent life lost.
I am not excluding the possibility that she is intelligent, even superior to many, and that she really wants a male slave. I also grant the possibility that a male would or could be happy serving her until his money runs out. Alas, I think that is a very small chance. Her requirements and goals are contradictory, therefore, she is either fake or stupid.
You vulnerable men out there, you don’t want to serve a fake or a stupid person. At best it would be a waste of your time. But it would likely be worse.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Some Women Are Not That Supreme
Repeat after me, “Female supremacy is not the same as women in charge!”
Every once in a while I read a comment or a blog posting by some starry-eyed schmuck who is all ready for becoming the subject of female supremacy. To him any female is superior, and any male is inferior.
Even in my fantasy, which is quite capable, I can’t imagine living with that. Somehow I cannot be so chauvinistic.
I am sure, that all of you have seen examples of women who exhibited less than superior attitude, capability, demeanor, intelligence, etc. Of course, the above-mentioned starry-eyed schmucks tend to overlook that and stay within their limited minds thinking, “When women take over, all will be well.”
In law enforcement I have been exposed to situations that most of the civilians could not and would not touch with a ten-foot pole. After all, they call us to take care of the emergency situation. Trust me, I have not seen a clear demonstration of female superiority over all these years except in very few individual cases.
I also worked as a professional in the civilian sector for years, and dealt with coworkers, bosses, customers, and CEOs of both genders. They were well educated, and capable. However, being female did not come with God’s endowment of superiority in that venue either. I encountered assholes of both genders in about the same proportion as their respective population in the work force.
A more recent experience I had was when I took my pound-puppy to the veterinarian for some tests and inoculations that were due. He is a sixty-pound bundle of joy who will lick my face at any opportunity, and would share my bed if I let him. He is also fierce with intruders and those who have not been introduced to him by me or my wife. When at the vet, I held him on a leash with a choke chain, which is the only semi-humane confinement that works with him due to the huge neck that he has and the force he can exert. In the waiting room, I had him at the end of his leash as he lounged on the floor. A woman came in and sat on one of the chairs about four feet from my dog. She had a small mutt in her lap. The mutt had a hyperactive attitude, and began to bark at my dog right away. My dog stood and studied the pair without getting closer. He showed some teeth, but I think he was just smiling, for there was no menacing growl accompanying.
The woman snarled, “Take care of your damned dog, he is bothering us!”
I assessed the situation, and reeled in my pup by about a foot, giving the woman five feet of space between us. The woman’s little dog continued to whine and bark irritating the staff, the humans, and the feline and canine patients. I figured that she would have enough after a while, and step outside to wait her turn with the vet. Not so. She continued, “Hold your damned dog. I’ve had about enough of him, dammit!” She went on making similar but increasingly more abrasive comments including profanity.
I gave her a meaningful look, but did nothing otherwise. My dog sat down and mostly ignored the situation. My turn came at the counter with the receptionist, so I stood, and interrupted the woman's bitching, “I heard you the first time,” with a voice that I use effectively as officer presence in law enforcement. I was hoping that she would realize how irritating she has been behaving and would stop. That really set her off, and she resumed with increased profanity, with her stupid little mutt supporting her attitude at high volume. One of the staff went to her and tried to talk her into going into one of the examination rooms. The woman was almost out of control, yelling, “So, now you’re putting me in timeout?” but she went with the staff after all. When the door closed, the half dozen people all looked relived and somewhat amused.
This long short story demonstrates that a person is not superior because of some magic that her chromosomes perform at conception. A person is superior only by what she or he does under some circumstances that the rest of us would be unable or unwilling to do.
If you think otherwise, I hope that you will not become disillusioned when you encounter a person like the one I just described, and you are the recipient of her ill-mannered stupidity. Then again, maybe you will orgasm at the verbal abuse she gives you. Of course, that does not make her superior; rather, it makes you inferior.
Every once in a while I read a comment or a blog posting by some starry-eyed schmuck who is all ready for becoming the subject of female supremacy. To him any female is superior, and any male is inferior.
Even in my fantasy, which is quite capable, I can’t imagine living with that. Somehow I cannot be so chauvinistic.
I am sure, that all of you have seen examples of women who exhibited less than superior attitude, capability, demeanor, intelligence, etc. Of course, the above-mentioned starry-eyed schmucks tend to overlook that and stay within their limited minds thinking, “When women take over, all will be well.”
In law enforcement I have been exposed to situations that most of the civilians could not and would not touch with a ten-foot pole. After all, they call us to take care of the emergency situation. Trust me, I have not seen a clear demonstration of female superiority over all these years except in very few individual cases.
I also worked as a professional in the civilian sector for years, and dealt with coworkers, bosses, customers, and CEOs of both genders. They were well educated, and capable. However, being female did not come with God’s endowment of superiority in that venue either. I encountered assholes of both genders in about the same proportion as their respective population in the work force.
A more recent experience I had was when I took my pound-puppy to the veterinarian for some tests and inoculations that were due. He is a sixty-pound bundle of joy who will lick my face at any opportunity, and would share my bed if I let him. He is also fierce with intruders and those who have not been introduced to him by me or my wife. When at the vet, I held him on a leash with a choke chain, which is the only semi-humane confinement that works with him due to the huge neck that he has and the force he can exert. In the waiting room, I had him at the end of his leash as he lounged on the floor. A woman came in and sat on one of the chairs about four feet from my dog. She had a small mutt in her lap. The mutt had a hyperactive attitude, and began to bark at my dog right away. My dog stood and studied the pair without getting closer. He showed some teeth, but I think he was just smiling, for there was no menacing growl accompanying.
The woman snarled, “Take care of your damned dog, he is bothering us!”
I assessed the situation, and reeled in my pup by about a foot, giving the woman five feet of space between us. The woman’s little dog continued to whine and bark irritating the staff, the humans, and the feline and canine patients. I figured that she would have enough after a while, and step outside to wait her turn with the vet. Not so. She continued, “Hold your damned dog. I’ve had about enough of him, dammit!” She went on making similar but increasingly more abrasive comments including profanity.
I gave her a meaningful look, but did nothing otherwise. My dog sat down and mostly ignored the situation. My turn came at the counter with the receptionist, so I stood, and interrupted the woman's bitching, “I heard you the first time,” with a voice that I use effectively as officer presence in law enforcement. I was hoping that she would realize how irritating she has been behaving and would stop. That really set her off, and she resumed with increased profanity, with her stupid little mutt supporting her attitude at high volume. One of the staff went to her and tried to talk her into going into one of the examination rooms. The woman was almost out of control, yelling, “So, now you’re putting me in timeout?” but she went with the staff after all. When the door closed, the half dozen people all looked relived and somewhat amused.
This long short story demonstrates that a person is not superior because of some magic that her chromosomes perform at conception. A person is superior only by what she or he does under some circumstances that the rest of us would be unable or unwilling to do.
If you think otherwise, I hope that you will not become disillusioned when you encounter a person like the one I just described, and you are the recipient of her ill-mannered stupidity. Then again, maybe you will orgasm at the verbal abuse she gives you. Of course, that does not make her superior; rather, it makes you inferior.
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Thoughts On Being Owned By A Woman …
The subject is obviously fascinating to many men, and I suppose, to some women who are on the submissive lesbian side. I was reading an older post whose writer brought up the subject at Things I Think Thursday :
I happen to like everything this man writes for the reason that I have many of the same feelings and desires. What I find odd, however, is that some men fully expect to find a woman who will own them in such way. It is a great fantasy. I have even written a book that deals with that. It is a common wish in real Female Led Relationships, and most common in fake blogs whose writers purport to be a woman’s slave or property.
The problem with the idea is too big to resolve simply by the woman saying, “I now own you.” The idea is understandable. The extent of it is difficult to define. The reality of it is entirely impractical.
Understanding the idea is easy, you can look up the meaning of words and phrases in legitimate reference material (I don’t mean sex forums and blogs). Trouble begins when one tries to define the ownership in the particular circumstance of this couple. She must go to some detail in defining the rules of ownership, and the rules of her owned object. It does not take long before the whole attempt is mired in contradictory, redundant, and ill-defined terminology and silly rules too difficult to remember by either party. Most of the rules would have to do with the man’s or woman’s sexual fantasy, for the reality of the rest of their everyday lives cannot be binding by these rules.
Take for instance an ideal scenario in which a man and a woman enter this relationship. They are young but experienced, married or committed to the relationship; neither has children, family obligations, major loans, etc. The owner/object relationship can kick in overnight, and could be some fun for a while. However, there will be clouds over the horizon soon. Who is earning the living for the both of them? Who is paying the rent? Who is paying the bills? Who has a stake in the household? Who is planning for investment for his or her later years? Who is paying the taxes? If the woman is completely in charge, she has a huge job to do. Does she want to give explicit directions to her object about everything trivial? Does she want to monitor his behavior and punish him if he deviates from the complex rules? When is she going to relax and just use her object as described in this fantasy? Yet, this is the ideal scenario, not some lesser version.
What if they are not in the ideal scenario?
What if there are children from various litters between them? What if one of them becomes ill or falls to an accidental injury? What if the provider loses his or her job? What if her object realizes that he is being screwed but not in a good way? If the owner dies, does the object become destitute?
Reality will soon smack her object in the lips, and he will want to change things. Then again, the owner (she) may tire of the constant responsibility that only she has, after all, her object is not allowed to do anything other than what she orders.
The ridiculousness of the scenario should be obvious by now. Being owned by a woman is a wonderfully satisfying game as long as they both are willing to play it. However, it is not going to be 24/7 for very long. Both parties will hit the road with their butts as they fall off the fast moving conveyance of this sexually charged fantasy. Unless the two of them remain eternally young, healthy, carefree, unattached, and willing to play the game, at some point the game will be over. That is when family, civic, and community responsibility will surface. Lawyers, realtors, employers, and bill and tax collectors will begin to interfere with the game. At some point thoughts of (gasp!) age, retirement, insurance, medical needs will become important. The ownership/object relationship cannot provide that. What it can provide is an occasional game that serves to release tension of everyday life from time to time. Meanwhile somebody needs to be in charge, but both will have real responsibilities not as owner/object but as man/woman who share a life. Without that, even the game will not last.
“For me, having a woman declaring ownership of me is one of the most exciting aspects of femdom. It thrills me for her to think of me as an object she owns to use whenever and wherever the hell she wants. Even in my countless vanilla relationships, when the woman sternly told me, “I don’t share. You belong to me.” I would instantly get a hard on. I’m surprised the femdom ritual of verbally declaring her ownership is not a larger part of the femdom discussion.”
I happen to like everything this man writes for the reason that I have many of the same feelings and desires. What I find odd, however, is that some men fully expect to find a woman who will own them in such way. It is a great fantasy. I have even written a book that deals with that. It is a common wish in real Female Led Relationships, and most common in fake blogs whose writers purport to be a woman’s slave or property.
The problem with the idea is too big to resolve simply by the woman saying, “I now own you.” The idea is understandable. The extent of it is difficult to define. The reality of it is entirely impractical.
Understanding the idea is easy, you can look up the meaning of words and phrases in legitimate reference material (I don’t mean sex forums and blogs). Trouble begins when one tries to define the ownership in the particular circumstance of this couple. She must go to some detail in defining the rules of ownership, and the rules of her owned object. It does not take long before the whole attempt is mired in contradictory, redundant, and ill-defined terminology and silly rules too difficult to remember by either party. Most of the rules would have to do with the man’s or woman’s sexual fantasy, for the reality of the rest of their everyday lives cannot be binding by these rules.
Take for instance an ideal scenario in which a man and a woman enter this relationship. They are young but experienced, married or committed to the relationship; neither has children, family obligations, major loans, etc. The owner/object relationship can kick in overnight, and could be some fun for a while. However, there will be clouds over the horizon soon. Who is earning the living for the both of them? Who is paying the rent? Who is paying the bills? Who has a stake in the household? Who is planning for investment for his or her later years? Who is paying the taxes? If the woman is completely in charge, she has a huge job to do. Does she want to give explicit directions to her object about everything trivial? Does she want to monitor his behavior and punish him if he deviates from the complex rules? When is she going to relax and just use her object as described in this fantasy? Yet, this is the ideal scenario, not some lesser version.
What if they are not in the ideal scenario?
What if there are children from various litters between them? What if one of them becomes ill or falls to an accidental injury? What if the provider loses his or her job? What if her object realizes that he is being screwed but not in a good way? If the owner dies, does the object become destitute?
Reality will soon smack her object in the lips, and he will want to change things. Then again, the owner (she) may tire of the constant responsibility that only she has, after all, her object is not allowed to do anything other than what she orders.
The ridiculousness of the scenario should be obvious by now. Being owned by a woman is a wonderfully satisfying game as long as they both are willing to play it. However, it is not going to be 24/7 for very long. Both parties will hit the road with their butts as they fall off the fast moving conveyance of this sexually charged fantasy. Unless the two of them remain eternally young, healthy, carefree, unattached, and willing to play the game, at some point the game will be over. That is when family, civic, and community responsibility will surface. Lawyers, realtors, employers, and bill and tax collectors will begin to interfere with the game. At some point thoughts of (gasp!) age, retirement, insurance, medical needs will become important. The ownership/object relationship cannot provide that. What it can provide is an occasional game that serves to release tension of everyday life from time to time. Meanwhile somebody needs to be in charge, but both will have real responsibilities not as owner/object but as man/woman who share a life. Without that, even the game will not last.
Saturday, May 1, 2010
What The Hell Is That?
I have been receiving comments that are undecipherable, consisting of unprintable characters. For example, "我喜歡........................................ ". It could be that my prophylactic software on my computer has an issue with it. The problem is, as long as I don't know what the hell this is, I will not let it pass. It could be that I am dismissing benign comments because of the unknown nature.
Does anyone have a clue to its nature?
Does anyone have a clue to its nature?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
