Going the Wrong Direction

I don't remember exactly where I found this, but I saw this article late last week:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30735673

This article upset me a great deal in several ways. The most obvious one is the way they just lump any non-mainstream social behaviour into "mental disorders" and then pile up laws against it. It's just so... Alien to me. I understand that one of my myriad problems are that sometimes I just have  a hard time relating to points of view that are too far alien to mine; and this is just one of those cases.  It amazes me that in this day and age so many countries are willing to impose their own morality in the form of laws outlawing any lifestyle too far different from your own.

Of course, my own country - by adoption if not by birth - is not much better some days. South Dakota's ban on gay marriage was ruled unconstitutional just a few short hours ago, making it the 36th state to allow gay marriage. The 36th. With every single federal court case going in favour of gay marriage, you'd think that the states would see the writing on the wall and accept the inevitable, but instead all too many of them are fighting tooth and nail. It's taken decades to get this far, and the rearguard action from the conservatives on this particular losing battle is as pathetic as it is arrogant. Soon they'll turn back to their other remaining legal forms bigotry and things will settle down for another period of slow progress before another major hump gets crossed.

The line that upset me the most, though, actually wasn't the new law, or the way kink was lumped in with "other mental disorders". The piece that upset me the most was that the Russian Psychiatric Association didn't voice concern because it was asinine and based on something that wasn't reality; he voiced concern because, with the new law, people would avoid seeking psychiatric help.

It's been a stressful couple of weeks for me, with a number of things going on at work, at home, and in my personal life... But this really pushed my buttons. It isn't normally easy for me to get angry, but this really did push me over the edge.

Whatever. I'll see y'all in a few days - hopefully far more calm. And in the meantime, I'll proudly remember that me and my wife and almost every last one of my friends now cannot get a driver's license in Russia.

Somewhere between "oops" and "ooh noooooo"

So, it's Christmas. Good ol' December 25th. I'm not a fan, but a lot of people are, so let's not dwell on that.

What today's date also means is that I'm basically a hair's breadth away from being 31 years old. I've changed a lot over the past few years (a lot of it for the better, I'd say), and one thing I thought I had gotten over was my ability to completely and utterly embarrass myself to the point of not being able to replay the situation over and over in my head until I collapse. It's useless in terms of damage control and it isn't particularly kind to my mental state, but I had managed to lose that part of myself a while ago.

At least, I thought I had.

Last week, late in the evening, Mike's exwife stopped by to grab something their son had left at our place. Our place, the tiny mess. Our place, where you enter in the living room and can see my command center of a computer in its entirety, the monitors readable at a step or  two from the door.

On the main screen was Facebook, and in the corner was a conversation with my friend Rex. In that conversation was the phrase "whenever Mike starts talking to new people on OkCupid."

Fuck.

So the exwife came into the apartment, took a few steps toward the table/desk we spend most of our time at, and, I fear, read the conversation. The one that points toward a non-standard relationship. The type of relationship she has hinted at being unacceptable and worth hauling his ass into court over in the hopes of taking his parental rights away.

Nope, that panicky embarrassment is still there, front and center.

Fuck.

I tried to figure out if coming out to people about my sexuality and facing rejection was worse than accidentally coming out as poly/open to a potentially hostile woman whose existence in our lives is dictated by the existence of the stepson I adore beyond reason. Maybe it's the fact that I'm now half a lifetime away from the days I admitted I "like girls," but this actually feels more painful. The harassment back then was awful, but this? This potentially carries more weight.

Mike's response to the situation was, initially "fuck her" (not literally) and that, if it came up, we would deal with it. He didn't blame me or say I fucked up (that's all me), and his feeling was, if she says anything, he has no problem pointing out that she shouldn't have been reading my screen, regardless of it being out in plain view.

Meanwhile, I'm just hoping it doesn't come up. I spend enough time feeling alienated in terms of being able to talk to people about how our relationship works that I don't need someone to know who will ultimately have a problem with it -- more than the average person does to begin with, I guess.

What's fun is that I'm totally in favor of people just being out and open about their sexuality and their relationships. But because I'm still not comfortable with the perception of certain flavors of relationships, it keeps me from actually engaging the part of myself that is polyamorous and bisexual. I'll admit to being a total wimp and taking the easy way out and hiding in the appearance of heteronormativity, sticking to admitting ladycrushes to my husband and a few friends and playing loops of sexy-girl-time in my head when the situation warrants it.

Standard stuff, I guess, for most married people. It just makes me feel like a fraud.

Ultimately, the panic has lessened enough that I can function again, but I'm still afraid. Thankfully we will be out of this apartment soon and you can be damn sure I will be hiding my computer screen better in the next place.

A Little Bit Backwards

There've been a number of times I've listened to a Savage Lovecast and gotten an idea from it. I mean, he does advice and news day in and day out and it's hard to go through one of his podcasts without hearing something I feel is worth commenting on. This time, though, it was the other way around; I started writing about a topic and then listened to a Savage Lovecast that talked about the same topic. It was a funny turnaround, and almost made me feel like I should change it... Which I suppose doesn't make much sense. But either way.

I spent last week visiting family. Quite a lot of people did; it was, after all, Thanksgiving week. I mean, the day before Thanksgiving is one of the busiest travel days of the year (apparently its being the busiest is a myth? It's still in the top ten) as people scurry to their parents' or childrens' or siblings' or in-laws' houses to eat to much and watch ridiculous things on TV (If you're curious, we watched a bunch of Cutthroat Kitchen; turns out I'm a sucker for Alton Brown.). You play games, you talk, you reminisce, you argue and get grumpy over stupid things... All the things families do.

Thanksgiving is really the beginning of what is the biggest family season for a lot of people. There's Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Boxing Day, New Years, make-up or alternate holidays for split families, various school breaks, massive amounts of shopping... It's not uncommon for this time of year to be the only time you see more distant family members. The thing is, though, that you don't have just one family. Everyone has the family they're born into, but there's also the family you choose... And when the two groups aren't out to each other, that can bring conflict.

Most people have a chosen family separate from their biological family, even if that isn't how they define it. It consists of their friends, significant others and loved ones - the people they surround themselves with intentionally. Another term people use is "intentional families", but it really amounts to the same thing; the people you choose rather than the people you were handed.

The biggest conflict comes, like I said, when the two groups aren't entirely aware of each other. The common scenario is when you haven't come out as non-straight, and haven't introduced your family to the fact that your significant other is the same sex as you. Coming out as gay or lesbian or bi to your family can be traumatic; and yet from my own (probably selfish) point of view, coming out as poly or - the horror - kinky is easily as bad if not worse.

I mean, Ash and I currently do not have a third, and yet what if we did? What if I did have a slave who I did not want to leave behind?  I was having a conversation with Persephone the other day about what I want out of a submissive, and the comment that stuck in my mind was that I don't want someone bound to me by a collar; I want someone who loves their collar because they love me. And it may be totally alien to someone who doesn't feel the same way, but that type of situation isn't one where I would want to leave my sub - part of my family - when I went somewhere for the holidays.

It's complicated, of course, by their family. With my family I could, if I needed to, bring along a sub or a girlfriend as a "friend", and whether or not my parents were suspicious they would at least not say much. With Ash's family, I suspect it'd be rather harder; I can't think of a graceful way to bring a friend along with most of them, though we probably could if we talked fast enough. And with this hypothetical sub's family... Unless they were remarkably open-minded, unless you're out to them, it would be hard to explain her bringing a *married couple* with her to her family at the holidays.

Honestly, in some cases there's just no good answer; no matter how it's handled someone is going to be uncomfortable or upset.  Some families will turn it into a choice - your give family or your intentional family - and that choice is never good. It's not fair to you or your loved ones. To me, it comes back to that they are trying to love you for who they want you to be, not necessarily who you are; and that's an unsustainable situation in the long run. Dan Savage's advice is always, when you aren't dependent on them, simply tell them the truth; give them the ultimatum that they can either love you for who you are or hate you for not being who they wanted you to be. I agree with the advice... But it's scary. And it's advice that, for better or for worse, I haven't followed as of yet.

In this season, though, remember your families - both of them - and take comfort in them as best you can. My families - my given family and my chosen family - are both small... And I regret that most days. I miss them, and they should not be taken for granted... No matter how much stress they cause.

I've discussed names and labels previous, including here: http://othersidesthoughts.blogspot.com/2014/06/a-kinster-by-any-other-name.html. It's one of my pet peeves, one of the things I think about most (outside of food, of course!), and I could rant on this for weeks and weeks if y'all let me. There's a comic I've linked to before as well - "Shades of A" (http://www.discordcomics.com/shades-cover/) and its immediate follow-on "Shades After" (http://www.discordcomics.com/category/comic/shades-after/) - about asexuality and the struggles asexuals and kinksters encounter. And for today, with minimal comment, I'll leave you with this one page where the last panel summarizes so perfectly how I feel about it:

http://www.discordcomics.com/shades-after-033/

Hope this Thanksgiving finds you all well, and my best wishes to you all and your families... Whether biological, chosen, or whatever else.

====

EDIT: This was posted two days early by mistake. I'm being lazy and moving it to its proper time. Sorry!!!

While True, It's Not the Whole Story

Hello Dan; I am a mid-40s male in the midwest. I have just been told by my 12-year-old daughter her mom has told her that the reason that her mom and I divorced is that I cheated on her. While that is true it does not tell the whole story...

That was the first couple of sentences of a caller's message on the Savage Lovecast this week. It's from episode 420; check it out here (I recommend the podcast in general, not just the ones I comment on). It's not the first time I've heard it... And it struck very close to home. This is a person who was with his wife for a number of years; a marriage that turned into a sexless, possibly emotionally abusive relationship. There was cheating, a divorce, and then he married the person he cheated with; and his ex, the mother of his daughter, has explicitly fingered that and him to be the reason their marriage fell apart.

This struck me for two reasons - first, because of how much it reminded me of our own marriage; and second, because of how close-to-home it strikes me relative to my ex's threats around my son. And the guy's problem, while I sympathize and identify with it, isn't the most important part of the podcast, not the part most worth listening to; Dan's response is.

I don't think I've talked about it directly before, but my marriage ended in an incredibly ugly way. There were accusations of cheating, actual cheating, yelling, arguments, suicide attempts, a mental hospital, a coming out as bisexual (which to this day I still don't know whether it was honest) followed - two years later - by a coming out as lesbian, and an enormous amount of pain. I'll never know with certainty how much of our marriage was her lying to herself and how much was her lying to me; I do have a pretty good idea how much of it was her using me to get what she wanted at my expense even after she no longer loved me or wanted to be with me. And yet with all this, with all this history, she still felt virtuous in threatening to take my kinks to a judge and trying to have my son taken away - because in her mind, I was a monster, and therefore it was natural to assume everyone else would agree. And the really damning part? Most of them would.

You asked me, how do you convince her you're not a monster? You don't be a monster.

It's hard enough presenting my lifestyle to adults. It's hard enough trying to make them understand there's nothing wrong with me because of my interest in pain, or blood, or bondage, or domination and submission. It's hard enough trying to make them understand there's nothing wrong with me because of the fact I don't use monogamy as a natural rest state and am honest enough to sometimes say that out loud.

What most people seem to forget is that in these cases, most of the time, we're not the bad guys; all too often we're the victims. It's easy to condemn us because we're different; it's easy to condemn us because our minds don't run in quite the same circles as everyone else. It's worse because we're open about it sometimes, even proud of it... It's worse when we aren't ashamed, because we're accused of flaunting it or "spreading our disease".

The best defense you have against this is education. When your children are 8, or 12? No, this isn't a conversation you should be having, at least in the specific sense; they shouldn't know all about your sex life. But when they're 16, 18, 20? When your parents are the ones? Your siblings? Yes - they should know. They should know the truth about the kinks, about the interests, about the fact that there's nothing wrong with being poly or dominant or masochistic or anything else. This won't be any easier with kink than it is with homosexuality; some people are just bigoted and no amount of logic or truth will sway that. And sometimes, they should know that the ones their bigotry and ignorance are hurting are their family.

I'm terrified of talking to my parents about it, because they are bigoted and set in their ways; I'm not scared of telling my sister or my cousins any more, because they're much more supportive of the.. Different and minorities (...and, well, because we already told my one cousin we're poly anyway). And I'm scared of telling my son, but I actually don't think it'll go badly. I don't particularly care if he grows up being straight or gay or bi or pansexual; vanilla or kinky or whatever. He has a shot at being brought up without the kindof of narrow-minded bigotry that poisons too much of our culture and leads to me being labelled a monster.

The real monster in this situation is ignorance... And it's not something you'll ever escape. It's something you simply have to pick your battles and stand you ground and be proud of who you are.

A Lesbian by Any Other Name...

So this is a very long article, and I suspect it'd be copyright infringement to copy it here, so I won't - I'll just link to it. However, I encourage you to go read this:

http://www.salon.com/2014/07/29/im_a_lesbian_marrying_a_man/

It's an article by a self-identified lesbian who fell in love with, married, and - apparently - is having kids with a man. What I consider the most important aspects can be summed up with this paragraph here:

I know plenty of people who identify as bisexual; I am not. The term simply doesn’t apply. I am not, as a rule, attracted to men. I simply fell in love with this person and didn’t hold his gender against him. That won’t change because of our vows, any more than my eye color will. My fundamental coordinates are unaltered.

When I first read it, it actually reminded me a lot of Ash. She's a high-sex-drive low-romantic-drive borderline vanilla girl (I suspect she'll disagree with that in part, but I'll leave an in-depth analysis of Ash, her self-perception, and my perception of her for another day), and I'm a high-romantic-drive low-sex-drive anything-but-vanilla demisexual guy. Most people who I've tried to explain our relationship with gave me some version of "...And why exactly are the two of you together?" It's not even that I can't understand where they're coming from; it's that they're basing their reaction on a totally different standard than our relationship is based on. Ash knows it's okay if she wants to get sex somewhere else, and is mostly okay with the conversations she has with some of her old... Acquaintances and the sex we do have. For my part, she encourages me to find an outlet for my dominant and sadistic sides, and tries not to push me if she thinks she's going too far over my own sex drive. It's not perfect - I've never seen a relationship that was - but it's open, honest, and in every other way we mesh far better than most people seem to realize.

There's a quote I found recently on a Tumblr feed I follow:

Being able to find someone you click with so naturally is the best feeling ever. You feel like you’ve been best friends you’re[sic] whole life, it feels like you’re coming home. You’re so comfortable with them. Maybe that’s what a soulmate is. Not someone who shares every single thing in common with you, but someone who feels like home.

The important take-away, to me, is simply this: she identifies as a lesbian, because as a rule she's attracted to women. That's not something someone else can argue, because it's her own identity. The fact that, arguably, her relationship conflicts with that self-identity isn't self-deception or malicious manipulation of the people around her; it's narrow-mindedness on the friends, family, and internet trolls who are giving her grief. If her husband is her home, the place where she's comfortable, it doesn't change whether or not she sees herself as a lesbian... Only whether she's married to a woman.

People seem to get so worked up at someone else who doesn't quite meet their own definition of some term when they claim it. I've seen discussions online where someone says "I'm asexual but occasionally enjoy sex with my partner" or "I enjoy sex, I just have no sex drive" and promptly gets jumped on by the AVEN definition nazis. I mean, in all fairness, those occasions are few and far between (the asexual/demisexual community is one of the more inclusive and accepting ones I've ever encountered), but it's much more common in the gay and bisexual communities.

Not everyone agrees with your definition on everything; get over it. My definition of "dominant" disagrees with 95% of all other self-identified dominants; my definition of submissive, since I don't actually identify that way and such am less invested in it, is far broader. My definition of "sadist" is not the same as that of every other self-identified sadist I've talked to. My definition of "asexual" is not the same as every other self-identified demisexual I've talked to... And that's okay, really.

I have to admit, I find the comments on this article more than a little depressing. People flipped out on EJ - the author - and ranted on and on about how she's giving lesbians a bad name, and fooling herself; that she's bi in denial, was never a lesbian, and this is the reason why people say lesbians don't actually exist. EJ's attitude isn't single-handedly defeating all lesbian process; those who disagree with or try to fight "lesbian culture" would do so with some other thin excuse if this one weren't available. All they're doing is excluding her in their own heads, from their narrow little worlds.

Ash, when she read it, came away with a totally different reaction, and I'll leave you with this comment that summarizes her view nicely:

Max the CommunistAug 16, 2014
@Lauremcln @Max the Communist "She can't make herself leave little Italy."  Frankly, my concern is more than some fuss over her personal identity and whether it fits the purity codes of the lesbian and gay male communities.  What if the real problem is that she can't make little Italy NOT leave her? 

In other words, even if it may seem to her lesbian and gay friends that she can pass as straight now and that her life is on easy street from here on out, what if EJ is suffering from loss of community that is dear to her and recognition that the gender of her partner has changed but her values as a lesbian, not to mention her sexual attraction to women, have not changed?  She still wants to belong, she still wants to participate, she still wants to be regarded as a person still engaged in LGBTQ struggle and culture--not as a traitor or a sell-out, accusations that some gays and lesbians hurl quite frequently at bisexuals.  Accusations and attitudes that EJ herself may have held (and may still hold?) against bisexuals.

She doesn't want the "bisexual demotion" because a terrible cost comes with the bisexual demotion--the loss of regard and respect and the feeling of a community having your back and understanding your sexuality and/or gender, even if the homo/bi/tranphobic mainstream does not. 

The cost that accompanies biphobia from the gay and lesbian community is real.  National studies of bisexual health disparities show rates of depression, anxiety, self-harm and suicidality (contemplating suicide) are higher for bisexuals than they are for their straight, gay and lesbian counterparts.  Not only that, but smaller studies than national samples have shown that even those people within the LGBTQ community who think of themselves as "mostly gay" or "mostly lesbian" have rates of depression, anxiety, etc., greater than those identifying as lesbian/gay and on par with the depression, etc., levels of bisexuals. 

You've probably taken a gander at the dearth of negative comments from some lesbians on this thread.  That's just the tip of the iceberg.  And it's negativity and rejection that has to be taken seriously for its destructive impact on the mental health of the groups it targets.

Cisgender non-monosexual people in opposite sex relationships may not have the easy ride that lesbian/gay culture thinks we do.  We may be in heterosexual culture, but not of it, and therefore feel more isolated and disempowered than ever before within a mainstream culture that has greater power to erase us than the lesbian and gay counterculture does.  Furthermore, I have come across various bisexuals who have met with discrimination, such as being fired when coming out/being outed at work, even when they were in long-term relationships/married with the opposite sex.  So the days of EJ never running into anti-queer discrimination are not over, especially if she outs herself continually--as she does in this article--even though she is currently married to a man.  

Harriet the Spy has been around for plenty long - according to Wikipedia it was first published in 1964, well before I was born - but I've never read it. I spent more of my time reading action and science fiction and fantasy instead. Still, I ran across the following quote the other day and I liked it very much:

You’re an individual, and that makes people nervous. And it’s gonna keep making people nervous for the rest of your life. Stay true to who you are and accept the cost.

- Harriet the Spy, “Be Yourself”

I certainly can understand the idea of making people nervous; I've spent most of my life doing so. It's not just my kinks, either; after all, I spent most of my life keeping them mostly hidden. I've been an outsider for most of my life. I was a math geek, a nerd, a theatre and music geek; I didn't play sports, I didn't hang out with the popular kids, and I was far more likely to be found playing Magic: The Gathering or with my nose in a book than "hanging out". Once I started understanding my kinks and exploring them - talking to people about them - there were a couple of blunders that *could* have been much worse; I was lucky not to have been outed to my entire school. I have a habit of being quiet and then very blunt; I understand people and read them well, but I make some people uncomfortable because I'm not often willing to lie to them. None of this made me popular, and I paid that cost - the cost of being myself, and spending time on the things and people that were important to me ostracized me for a decade in school.

It's very easy to look at that and say "Well, your problems are so juvenile!" And to some extent, of course they are - they started when I was 10 or less. That doesn't mean they aren't still true, even worse in some cases.

I mentioned this quote to my friend and coworker Ace, and her response was:

You know, it's something I really wish I heard when I was younger. Not that I didn't hear a variety of terms like that just that I didn't "hear" that. Stay true to who you are. I was always told I didn't fit in and I needed to.

I've touched on this before... But being yourself, when society can be so hostile and not hiding your kinks or your interests seems so dangerous, can be scary. But building a good life as someone you aren't isn't actually building a good life - it's building a lie. Keep that in mind.

Bonus Link!

I liked this, especially since it related back to one of my recent posts. Enjoy!

http://cinematicsymphony.tumblr.com/post/98998038935/bodysexgender-thisisaurlbytheblackkeys-true

My Relationship is NOT Just Pixie Dust and Leather!

So in Savage Love #295, Dan Savage gave the following quote:

"To 50 shaders, readers and people who are throwing shade on it, BDSM is cops and robbers for grownups with your pants off plus orgasms. People do it for fun; it is not a cry for help. Because there's some criticism sloshing around about the book, that the character who's kinky is portrayed as this psychologically damaged man who needs this woman to heal him and then he won't be kinky any more. [...] Some BDSMers take BDSM very very seriously of course, and strive to make it as real as possible; but it's still make-believe. [...] A marriage, for that matter, is only as real as the two people in it decide to make it. All human relationships are basically make-believe. I'm not saying that love ain't real, that marriage ain't real, but if the two people who are married to each other don't believe, they don't honour their commitment, they don't live up to the promises they've made to each other, they don't work to maintain that bond & those feelings of affection - it goes away. Marriage is a decision, it's a choice that people make, and it's a choice they don't make just once; they make it many many many times, hundreds of times, maybe even thousands of times over the course of a four, five, six decade marriage - to continue to believe in it. You know, a marriage is greater than the sum of its parts, a marriage is a kind of a Tinkerbell and you've got to clap, you've got to believe. Terry and I are married because we believe that we are; because we treat each other like we are, because we know ourselves to be. It's still a concept, it's still an idea of who we are and what we are to each other; and in that way, a marriage - even a successful one, a loving one - in that way a marriage is a kind of make believe."

Normally it makes me incredibly grumpy when he goes off on his "BDSM as make-believe" rants, because his attitude comes across as incredibly condescending; but in this context, I actually find myself agreeing with it. Relationships - any relationships - are exactly as real as they are to the people in them, no more, no less... No matter what type of relationship they are.

People get into relationships for all sorts of reasons. Ash and I get the question all the time; why did we get married? The answer (from me, at least) really comes down to "Besides the fact that she's incredibly good for me and my best friend? Well, we're planning on spending the rest of our lives together anyway, and government and private sectors extend almost no protections to non-spousal partners." It always feels a little mercenary to say you're marrying someone for the tax, insurance, and death benefits, but it's still true, at least in part - there's almost always a social pressure aspect to your relationships beyond the interpersonal one related directly to the two of you... Whether that pressure is familiar, personal, financial, legal, or something else.

When it comes down to it, though, the relationship you're in needs to work for you - for the people in it. A marriage of convenience is a relationship that works for you because of some benefit - financial or social status or a green card or whatever. A marriage for love is still a relationship that works for you because of some benefit - just the benefit is emotional rather than something else.

And of course most relationships are a mix. I like to imagine that most marriages are for love, but they still have social and legal and financial implications - generally, hopefully, good ones. There's nothing wrong with that, and anyone who isn't fooling themselves should realize that's the norm. But that doesn't mean the relationship necessarily means anything to anyone except you - the people involved in it. The benefits you get from it are yours; to everyone else, it's a label. It may be a label that affects your behaviour... But it's nothing more than that.

Unfortunately, it's very easy for people to look at their relationships and say "This fits social norms while yours doesn't, therefore your relationship isn't valid while mine is." They're forgetting that their relationship was a prioritization just as much as yours was; they prioritized their view of social norms, or financial benefits, or religious views, or whatever it might be over being single; just like you did. The perceived and actual benefits may be different, but it was the same decision.

Never let them talk down to your relationships just because they don't understand them. It's no different than their having a different favourite colour or preferring chocolate ice cream instead of strawberry or tea instead of coffee; they judged the situation by their own worldview and made a choice, just like you did. Never listen when they say your relationship isn't "real" just because the benefits are emotional rather than legal, or vice versa.

Being a sub or a slave is a mindset; it's a role that some people value. The fact that the majority of the world doesn't understand it puts them in the wrong, not you, for not seeing the prejudice they apply to you.

Out in the Open

Folsom Street Fair is coming up in a few days. It's one of those events that fascinates me; I've never been to it, and I suspect I wouldn't actually enjoy it a huge amount, but I'm so intrigued that I want to go some year - just for the experience.

A lot of people are really upset by it, of course. Even in San Francisco, some people consider Folsom over-the-top. I suppose of anywhere in the country, SF may be the most accepting place they could find... I shudder to think the types of riots it may start in the south. Still, Folsom gets protests, and it shouldn't really surprise anyone.

Kink frequently has a terrible reputation in society in general, and there are a lot of reasons for it... Not the least of which is that it can be incredibly scary. There's a lot to be scared of. Just in the area of BDSM, there's loss of control; loss of privacy; pain, embarrassment, harassment, belittlement, discomfort, pain, and god only knows what else. More generally there's lack of tolerance or acceptance from society at large - a lot of people just aren't okay with the out-of-the-ordinary relationships that kinksters revel in.

Part of it is that kink is so often perceived to as not subtle. Either it's totally invisible, or so up-in-your-face that it scares you. That isn't true, of course; it's just that when it's not in-your-face most people don't notice it. A person in a collar and on a leash? Everyone on the street sees it, and most of them would be uncomfortable (at least on most streets). A person walking up the street with clamps on their body somewhere, or a butt plug in, or even more subtly heeling to their master? Most people would simply never notice. And that's an issue; subtle kink isn't recognized because it doesn't look like kink, while unsubtle kink is frequently more than a little obnoxious to those who aren't involved - or at least aren't interested.

Of course a huge part of this disconnect is the basic assumption society makes that anything that isn't obviously different therefore isn't different. This is what happens to bisexual folks all the time; a bisexual male married to a female is assumed to be straight, while a bisexual male married to a male is assumed to be gay... Even though it's never more than just an assumption. Similarly, anything that isn't obviously kinky is assumed to not be kinky... Even though often enough that isn't the case.

So when is it okay to be open about your kinks in public? And the answer is, of course, "it depends". What's totally acceptable in San Francisco at Folsom Street Fair could be totally unacceptable at a church in Cincinnati on a Sunday morning. Or anywhere near children. I mean, is it okay to go around in public with your sub or slave on a leash? It's legal, everywhere that I know of, but that doesn't mean it's okay. Many people won't appreciate it - won't appreciate having that world thrown in their face like that.

It's always going to come down to the area you're in and just how far you're pushing things. NYC cops still have to be reminded not to arrest topless women, even though it's legal. Something which is inherently legal can still cause you a great deal of trouble, with the police or otherwise - and honestly it's the "otherwise" that should scare most people. Like I discussed a bit back in the "poly and kids" area, letting the community around you know your actual lifestyle can get you - and your family - excluded and ostracized.

And there's definitely real danger here. What may seem innocent to you really may be private - even if that "privacy" is out in the open - and it's not fair to include other people in your private lives without their consent. Consent is a major piece of kink in general, and strangers on the street haven't given theirs. There's always a thrill to public play - some people enjoy it, some people don't - but that thrill is almost exclusively for the people involved. Mothers doing their grocery shopping mostly just don't want their afternoons interrupted, whatever the interruption may be... And some of them would be truly upset by a mostly-naked, bondage-leather-clad guy or girl on the street. Possibly most of them.

This is really a lot of empathy, and that can be incredibly hard. However much they don't want to hear it, most people aren't particularly empathetic, because it's hard to put yourself in someone else's position and see things how they might see it. Because it's hard to strip away all your preconceptions and assumptions and load yourself up with theirs.

If you're ever in doubt, just don't go public - or when you do, make sure it's subtle... As in "people don't notice it or can deny it in their own heads if they do". There are plenty of ways to exert ownership or control in public without being quite as blatant as most people would be in private - and it's far less likely to upset the muggles. It isn't so different from public displays of affection; in fact, really, it is public displays of affection... Just in ways normals may not recognize as affectionate rather than abusive.

And that, of course, is the real key. A person who sees a couple making out on the street probably won't do much. They may be vaguely offended by its being in public, but it's something they understand. If they're conservative and see two men kissing (read: homophobic), really, they're not upset that it's a couple making out; they're upset that they can't comprehend the couple who is making out isn't heterosexual - doesn't fit into their own world view. And seeing a Dom(me) leading their sub down the street on a leash... It's not affection; it's abuse.

So when in doubt, don't; you may not agree with their worldview, but everyone is entitled to their own. And then just be sneakier about how to get away with it. Instead of a collar, teach your sub to heel; instead of giving oral commands, teach them subtler hand commands or other signals. Make a game out of it. There's plenty of ways to kink in public without scaring the muggles!

Friday Rant - Polygamy Et Al

In a news article that couldn't have been better timed if I'd planned it:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimdalrympleii/polygamy-is-legal-in-utah-for-now

A Utah judge ruled that the law making polygamy illegal in Utah was unconstitutional. This has been around for a while and this is actually the conclusion of an appeal, not the original judgement. See here:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/56894145-78/utah-polygamy-waddoups-ruling.html.csp

http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/14/justice/utah-polygamy-law/

...Well, actually, it's not quite that simple. It isn't "Polygamy"; it's cohabitation. The judge struck it down because, essentially, there are already laws to prosecute bigamy; there are already laws to prosecute abuses inflicted on partners, especially under-age partners, in certain forms of polygamous marriages (the famous "marrying 14- and 15-year-old girls to 50+-year-old religious leaders" thing which has gotten some Mormon sects a lot of bad press); and Utah does not prosecute adultery or adulterous cohabitation... So prosecuting "religious cohabitation" when no other crimes have been committed is unconstitutional. It's an interesting spin from part of the media on what, underneath, is really a decision based around religious discrimination.

According to Wikipedia (and who doesn't trust the Oracle? *cough*) there are now three states that have anti-cohabitation laws - Mississippi, Florida, and Michigan - and there's some level of expectation that if/when they're challenged they're going to be struck down due to various precedents. When it comes down to it, though, these laws are ones that are generally totally ignored except in particular cases; Utah in particular was famous for totally ignoring their cohabitation law in the case of couples and only using it to threaten polyamorous families - such as the "Sister Wives" case in the original link. It's all part of the same prejudice - the idea that a coupled relationship is "normal", even when it's technically in violation of the law. The total lack of acceptance... But worse, the totally *unthinking* lack of acceptance. It's not even an active discrimination on most cases; it's just the blithe assumption that since it's abnormal it can't be accepted.

I mentioned when I linked the video this week I was going to refer back to it; so let me tie it in here. Right near the beginning at 1:17 is a woman (one of their experts - even re-watching it, I didn't catch her name) talking about BDSM "pretty much being about kinky sex". At 32:35, Hudsy Hawn talks about how important it is to "Let yourself go and role-play." The video was specifically referring to BDSM and power exchange, but the same general attitude is endemic to all of kink - whether it be BDSM, poly relationships, asexuality, or something else. If it's not something you personally believe in or understand, all too often it's "fantasy" or "make-believe"... And frankly, this is an attitude that drives me frigging crazy. Do some people get involved in kink, BDSM, Poly, or something else as "play"? As just something to fool around with? Absolutely. I'm even willing to go so far as to say most people involved feel that way. But even in the video it contradicts itself - one of the couples there are a permanent, married, 24/7 Dom/sub relationship complete with negotiated contract. Parts of their relationship - that contract - may not be protected by law, but that doesn't make it "not real".

It's not just BDSM. Too many people look at poly or open relationships and just call it "cheating" or "unworkable" or "selfish" or "a phase". Too many people look at asexual relationships and say "Oh, if they don't want sex they don't want a relationship, they just want a friend"... When what's really going on is that they have every bit as much desire to be loved, wanted, protected, held close as any other person - they just can't relate to what most people assume about relationships.

Funnily enough, this is the root of my single large disagreement with Dan Savage. He constantly refers to BDSM as "Cops and Robbers for adults with their pants off", which - as I said above - is true enough (in a glib sense) for most BDSM relationships but totally discounts a significant minority of the culture. Similarly he frequently discounts asexual folk because to him the sexual relationship is the center of the relationship, and so a missing sexual relationship means the more general relationship is almost invalid from the start. For someone who's so open, so - to use his term - GGG about almost everything, it's such a strange blind spot to me.

It's astounding to me the blind spots that people don't seem to see they have. Even many of my most progressive friends and family, who are rabidly in favour of freedom for same-sex marriage and gay adoption and all sorts of similar things - just get skeeved out by the idea of either a coupled relationship with a demi- or asexual partner... Or a permanent, committed relationship with more than two members... Or a permanent D/s relationship.

It doesn't help that something like a permanent D/s relationship is very hard to enshrine in law, and rightfully so. Asexual relationships are - for the most part - already supported by law; not having sex, or having a modified sex life, isn't normally a cause for the relationship being invalidated or ignored. Poly relationships are essentially totally unsupported in Western civilization; unless the relationship is a monogamous couple it's either ignored or banned. Many of the same problems found here by same-sex couples apply to multiple partnerships, just in a slightly stranger way; if Ash and I did end up in a relationship with a third, if we settled into a family with someone else, and I ended up in the hospital or - god forbid - dead, Ash would be the only one with any rights or protections. If a poly triangle has a child, two of them are the legal parents as well as the biological parents - and the third  If the same family decides to adopt a child, it's actually one couple that is adopting the child and the third has no rights at all... And the fact there's a third adult in the house may be looked at seriously askance when being interviewed for the adoption. Poly legal issues really are directly parallel, with only a fraction of the attention.

A D/s relationship, though, is usually a formalization of removing part of someone's rights - and I doubt there's any viable way to enshrine that into law without offering significant risk of abuse... If we're ever able to make it past the revulsion most people have when you bring up "no, I don't just mean for play - like, for real." One thing that Ash has brought up with me is that when you start talking submissives, start talking long-term permanent Master/slave relationships, the only real comparison most people have had is the looming spectre of slavery that still even these days hangs over race relations in the US; forced sexual slavery of women being trafficked around the world; and, these days, the 50 Shades trilogy which enshrines an abusive relationship in the trappings of BDSM and tries to make it sexy. None of them are very positive examples... But they're the only examples too many people have.

This has been a very rough week for me. I know I'm essentially just very deep in my own head, but it's been very difficult to shake off a lot of depression, and a big chunk of it is centered around this discussion. People who are okay with BDSM may not be okay with poly or demisexual; people who are okay with poly may not be okay with BDSM or demisexual; people who are fine with demisexual may be totally freaked out by BDSM or poly; and very few of any of them are okay with my limits surrounding my ex-wife and the trouble it will inevitable cause me if I'm fully open about most of this. Just that look of disgust, or that dreaded "...Oh, I see" when you're talking to them... Or even just that sympathetic look when they're trying to explain why you're wrong and assuming you don't understand them when really you understand them perfectly well and are just exhausted of being patronized. It's very easy to fall into despair and fear at never finding someone who can look at you and meet your needs and fit into your life and never give you that look... Of never finding a place where you feel like you fit in because you're just a little bit too far over the edge for anyone around you to ever be comfortable with you, or for you to be comfortable with yourself.

When it comes down to it I know it's just fear and not rational, but I don't have an answer to this one except to keep the faith.

I'll let you know how it goes.

Bonus Links - Kink in Real Life TV Spot

Upworthy posted this:

http://www.upworthy.com/some-think-its-just-plain-kinky-but-the-amount-of-trust-this-lifestyle-takes-is-staggering?c=ufb1

Which I definitely think was worth the time to watch. I'll come back to a couple of specific topics in this in future posts.

A Matter of Context

I went on a short overnight business trip this week; I was there for one day out of a two-day meeting at a conference center a couple of hours away. This is actually the fourth of five that I've gone to at the same place, and for most of them I actually got a ride from one of my coworkers. The first time we went, she came to pick me up and so I gave her directions. It talked about turning off the main road, going around through the access road, going through the intersection, etcetera... And it ended up confusing her - I'm bad at directions, I guess. When she got there she looked up and said "Oh! Why didn't you just tell me it was the white building?" So I looked around and of course she was right - every building in our complex is plain brick except ours which is painted.

The answer, of course, is that I didn't mention it to her because it had never crossed my mind. I can be less than perceptive on occasion, I admit, but I can be extremely perceptive at others - it's a matter of context, not just my total oblivious nature. I knew the building was white; what didn't occur to me was the significance of that in relation to the context at hand.

Over the weekend Ash and I were out shopping - looking at craft supplies, as it happens, and discussing projects one could make with them - and I'd made a comment about replicating a Doctor Who thing I'd seen online and giving it to her sister. There was a fair amount of discussion around it, centered around the question she had for me, "Do you 'like my' sister?" Ash is concerned about the possibility of coming across as coming on to her - whether or not there's any truth to it, or whether or not it's reasonable or logical - to the other family members who'd probably end up observing at least part of our interactions.

The answer, if you're curious, is "no"; she's cute and kindof adorable, but we have very little in common outside of video games and my fiance. More to the point - and completely ignoring that I'm engaged to her sister, which is potentially creepy enough, and that I'm ten years older than her, which is enough to turn off the majority of folks - I have no particular reason to believe she'd be the tiniest bit comfortable with a number of aspects of my lifestyle and preferences. But the problem isn't reality, or what I'm thinking, or what the sister is thinking, but the perception different people apply to the situation. In a very similar way to it just never occuring to me that the colour of my apartment building was relevant to the question at hand, the idea that people would perceive anything I'd been doing as a come-on or something inappropriate.

The occurrence is really demonstrative of what I've always personally found to be the worst aspect of being into various kinks and having an alternative lifestyle; people simply don't understand. I've talked about assumptions before, because they touch on so many different aspects of alternative lifestyles. I've talked before about addressing your assumptions, trying to identify them and tear them down to resolve them - because as a rule they're dangerous. What do you do, though, when it's simply such a different context that you can't see the assumption in the first place?

In my life it comes up most often because of my asexual/demisexual side; it gives me a very strange perspective on interactions with other people at times. It's certainly not the only thing, however. When you're into this sort of edgy thing - in the sense of "edge of society", at the very least - you end up getting a lot of blank stares. People just hear these ideas that don't grok, these concepts which are so far outside their worldview that they don't have any basis for analyzing or relating to it. What do you do? Most people run away or freak out or get weirded out and turn their backs... And this is one of the worst things that can happen to a kinkster.

This entry is less about advice and more about fear. This is what drives people to avoid kink, to compromise on what they want, to give up their dreams. To be in vanilla relationships even though they're unsatisfied. To refuse to come out to their friends, family, and loved ones. It can lead to an incredible amount of isolation, depression, fear and dread - it's not hard to convince yourself you'll never find anyone who'll really fill that hole in your life... And when you do, your family and friends and coworkers will still never accept it.

When Ash and I were on vacation a couple of weeks back, we got together overnight with a friend of mine and her fiance - Lorena and Xavier, we'll call them. Lorena and I have known each other for a number of years, though this was only the second time we'd actually met; I'd never met Xavier before, and Ash had never met either of them. It was a really good time, even if I - very unfairly, I'd say - never did have a chance to tie Lorena up and play with her tits (which, obviously, is what you do with a hot girl with a nice chest when you meet her at the beach...). There was a fair amount of mutual attraction floating around the group, though the level of comfort was obviously limited by the fact we were really only just meeting as a group (as a pair of couples) for the first time; still, we have a lot of common interests, a lot of similar personality traits, and I happen to know Lorena would love to fool around with Ash and - if it weren't for the current state of her relationship with Xavier - me as well. It's not hard to imagine the four of us settling into a life together, really; I mean there's a lot of "if"s and unknowns and problems and barriers, but - no matter how unlikely the idea is - the basic compatibility is there. And of course, the three of them would probably have a very pleasant, fulfilling sex life; and I... Well, none of them are submissives or masochists or particularly into bondage except as a feature of sex; and as I've frequently ended up in my life, however much I loved them and however much they'd be willing to include me in vanilla sexual activities, my base sexual proclivities wouldn't be satisfied. And the idea was... Very depressing. Knowing that even as one part of me was totally fulfilled beyond what I'd once considered would be possible, another part of me would still be looking for a way to be satisfied. It can be hard being faced with that kind of situation - very hard to get past the isolation you feel when you realize that.

Ash is amazing to me. She's very supportive, she loves me, she's my best friend, and she wants me to be happy; and she's never - since she really understood them - been anything but open about the fact that she'll never be able to satisfy some of my core needs. That's part of why she's so supportive of my seeking that with someone else. Not all of it, but an important part; she knows that there's some level where we'll both be unsatisfied together. Dan Savage would refer to it as the "price of admission" - is what we're missing worth what we get out of our relationship? - and the answer for us is a "yes" that neither of us questions, but in some cases it can be harder to agree or decide.

There are a few things you can do, but most of them aren't different from what you do in every-day life; just scarier and occasionally more difficult. You can find people who support you, who are willing to accept you even when they don't understand. And you can find people who are a fit to the relationship you need. It can be a long process; it can be scary, and difficult, and even painful. But it's just as possible as any search for a partner, and you can find the right person - or people - who will fulfill you and give you what you need to be happy

Don't give up hope.

The Limits of Your Limits

I originally had a totally different idea for this entry, but I realized last night there was something I was much more invested in right now. When I started working through that, though, I realized there was really a prequel entry I wanted to do. I thought it through, and whether I could do them the other way around (I wanted to do one on a Tuesday and the other on a Friday), but it started getting complicated... And eventually I decided to just take it by the horns and do both.

I had a conversation with one of my friends... Hmmm. Let's call her Janet. I had a conversation with Janet about one of her friends who was just discovering the entire "BDSM" thing. Long story short, I ended up reading through "Submissive Training" by Elizabeth Cramer.

This book was well-written, easy to read, and - to me - nothing I'd never heard before. Since I've been involved in BDSM for creeping up on 20 years now, its not being new isn't immensely surprising to me. What did surprise me was how narrowly this book was focused. Essentially, this book is an excellent reference for a very narrow class of people - female total power exchange submissives beginning their roles as slaves.

Recently, I have encountered a number of people who are just first really exposing themselves to the wider world of BDSM. Bettina is the obvious example, who'd never actually encountered it before me. We've had a number of conversations around kink, her interests, what scares her, what she thinks about it... I've tried hard not to just teach her my own views - it wouldn't really be too hard to present my own views as gospel, given her relative isolation from the larger Scene - and rather am trying to encourage her to think about her own instincts and beliefs in the area. It's not just my own views I have to try and protect her from - she also has far more preconceptions and prejudices than I would have imagined before we really got into these topics. She finds herself trying to decide if she fits into some preconceived notion of "slave" or "sub" or "pet" or "little" or whatever else.

More than just Bettina, a number of posts have shown up on Fetlife recently as well... Which isn't unusual. There's inevitably a steady stream of people who are just discovering the entire world of kink, and it's not hard to encounter them if you want to do so. Similar to Bettina, though, most people ask the wrong question up front. One of the most frequent things you'll see is "Am I a X?" or "Do I fit in with group Y?" People almost always start off by taking an idea or a term or a phrase or a role and trying to ram themselves into it - frequently a square peg in a round hole... Or at least a rectangular one.

A couple of weeks ago, after To The Ends of Comfort and Beyond, Ash asked me a question - my advice to "know your limits" is great, but how do you figure them out? If you never step past your limits, how do you ever know what they are?

These are all symptoms of the same problem, unfortunately; kink is a huge world, kids. There's a lot out there to know. There are countless kinks, terms, adjectives, verbs, toys, bits of history, norms, bits of etiquette... It'll take anyone a lifetime to figure it all out. Coming into it from ground zero is imposing - and most people lose sight of the real goal in light of that barrier.

So, how do you figure out where you belong? How do you figure out if you're an "X" or a "Y" or a "Z" - a sub or a Dom/me or a little or a daddy/mommy or whatever else? How do you know what your limits are? There are a lot of possible glib answers. "Carefully," in particular, comes to mind. Really, though, the more important question has always been "what are you comfortable with?"

Names are very important to me - I wrote a whole entry on how much so. Names can cut both ways, though; they can describe who you are or they can constrain who you are, depening on how you use them. beginners to kink often take a name, a description, a role, and then try to mold themselves to fit it as carefully as they can. More often than not, though, they miss the crucial understanding that those molds are what they create for themselves, not what they have to make themselves to fit in.

So be brave; try a few things out. Carefully, of course; it's better to be cautious and drag it out than to rush in and panic. Don't do anything you're uncomfortable with; but if you are comfortable with it or aren't sure, try it! Safely, as carefully as you need to... But find out. If possible, find a mentor - someone who knows more of the pitfalls and possibilities than you and can help you fill out your identity.

How do you know your limits? Through conversation; through question and answer; through experimentation; through research; through careful consideration of the vast world now open to you. It seems scary at first, but some day you'll look back and laugh at how much worse it was just because it was all unknown. Never compromise your own self for someone else's definition; figure out your definition and own it. Most of all, be true to yourself and have fun.

A Kinkster by Any Other Name...

I was having a conversation with Bettina earlier today, and she commented that the idea of calling someone "Sir" makes her think of an old man, and so makes her laugh; and that "Master" struck her as funny too. I can think of quite a few Doms who would be lividly angry with that; it's probably quite lucky for her she isn't involved with one of them.

Similarly, Pearl - a kinkster I know, a switch really but primarily a Domme at the moment - has her toys and subs calling her Empress at the moment. It's something that one of them called her (I don't know the context - attempting to be respectful? Flatter her? Butter her up? A name he go from a previous Domme?) and she liked it, having others call her that as well.

In a different conversation, Persephone Belle and I were talking earlier in the week, discussing the name I use for her - or, more specifically, talking about an alternate name I could use for her. She goes by two names generally, and I specifically prefer one of them for casual conversation. I actually prefer the other as... Lets say a more "formal" form of address. When it comes to it, though, neither

This blog is under the name Mike Miner; the people who know me well know that it isn't my real name. It's a nickname I adopted in certain online contexts way back when I was about 16, almost 20 years ago now; Mike the Mad Miner. I'd be amazed if anyone even remembered the origins except me... And yet it's what I thought back to when I was looking to create an account separate from my own identity.

Most people have a number of names over their lifetime. I've been told that names are one of five types: generic, descriptive, suggestive, arbitrary, and fanciful. I tried to look into it, and found a reference to the "five types of names" describing company names, so maybe the person was confused? One dictionary has a huge list of types of names: aliases, nicknames, noms de plume, noms de guerre, first names, last names, middle names, maiden names, pet names, pseudonyms, titles and more. Every name has a meaning, a context, a purpose... More to the point, though every name has power.

Power. Some people will look at me askance that I've said that, but I'll stand by it. People believe that names are special. Some people believe that, besides the descriptors you get during your life, every person also has a True Name - a name linked to them mystically, and knowledge of that True Name gives a person power over you - the ability to influence you, or control you, or kill you.

Power, though, doesn't have to be so dramatic. I could say, for example, that one of my coworkers was called Bob. That would tell you something; you'd probably assume he was a guy, for example. You may assume he's friendly, or at least approachable, because I called him "Bob" and not "Robert". If on the other hand I described him as "a manager", that gives you a different impression; someone more serious, someone responsible, someone more important. If I described him as "an executive", that gives you a different impression. And yet it's entirely possible that all of those things could be true. Other people - or people at different times - may call him "Bobby", "coach", "daddy", "father", "husband", "valedictorian", "doctor", or dozens of other things... And every one of those has a context, a meaning, a value, an impression. Every one of those frames him differently. Every one of those makes you see him differently, in your mind.

That's my point. A name is created to describe the person somehow - but it also creates them. It changes how people react to them, and so it impacts them, directly and indirectly. A name changes how people see you, how people act towards you. Calling someone "love" can lift someone up; calling someone "bastard" can wound them. Names are important, critical to our every day. It's amazing to me how people take them for granted all the time.

In the world of kink, just as anywhere else, names have amazing power. A lot of the time, a kinkster frames their entire world with how they identify themselves. I identify myself as a male, cisgendered, heterosexual, polyamorous, dominant, sadistic, demisexual kinkster. When it comes to the community, it gives them a lot to work with - a good basis to work from if they're trying to get to know me. Obviously it's very high-level - there's a lot of details not covered - but it's all relevant... And it's all important.

Part of how it's important is for other people... But to me, more of why it's important is for yourself. You have to understand yourself. You have to own your names. Three years ago, most of those names scared me. Ten years ago, two of them I tried to hide, two I wouldn't even have understood, and the rest I would never have talked about.  Eighteen years ago, when I graduated high school? I wouldn't have even understood that it mattered. But today those names are badges of honour. Oh, not because I'm proud of being a sadist; not because I'm proud of being poly. But just because they're who I am. They're part of me, part of what I think, part of what I feel, and there's nothing to be ashamed of there.

I have dozens, hundreds of names. Some are insulting, some are ones I adore and which make my heart soar every time I hear them; some are silly, some are serious; some are happy, some are sad; but I'll wear them all with pride, because those names are mine... And you should be proud of yours, too.

Collaring, Part 3

With Collaring and Collaring: Part 2 turning into a real series (one's an accident, two's coincidence, and three's a conspiracy?), the lovely and talented Persephone suggested I might do one on different styles of collars - specifically in her case because issues with her neck make many traditional collars problematic. There are plenty of other reasons... And plenty of ways around it.

So first, why might you want an alternative collar? Oh, the list of reasons could go on for days and days. To name a few:

• Leather allergies
• Nickel (or other metal) allergies - many metal collars and the metal fixtures on leather collars are nickel alloys.
• Sensitive/easily irritated skin
• Bruising susceptibility
• Mental concerns - panic, anxiety, or bad associations either with specific types of collars or collars in general.
• Moral concerns - for example, a vegetarian/vegan - depending on why they choose that lifestyle - may object to a leather collar.
• Privacy concerns - wanting to be collared 24/7 but not being able to due to professional or personal limitations. 
• Medical concerns - severe alignment issues (poor Persephone!), breathing stoma, neck injuries, etcetera. 
• Aesthetic concerns - maybe you just don't like the damned things.

Obviously, depending on the specific reason you don't want a normal collar, you'll end up wanting something different. But before we get too deep into it, what exactly is a collar?

A lot of definitions focus on the vanilla aspects. Ask Google, and you get this:

1. A band of material around the neck of a shirt, dress, coat, or jacket, either upright or turned over and generally an integral part of the garment.
2. A restraining or connecting band, ring, or pipe in machinery.

Merriam-Webster adds lines for "a short necklace", "a band around the neck of an animal", "part of the harness of a draft animal", "an indication of control/token of subservience", and "protective or supportive device".  Look in Wikipedia under "Collar (BDSM)" and it goes into a little more detail about a couple of specific types of collars, some hints at alternatives to traditional collars, and some portion of the social significance of them. Look in other books or sources, and they go into discussions of the equivalence of collaring and marriage, the different forms of collars, the different reasons for them, the different sources, the different materials... The one thing they all have in common: no two places define them the same way. They have enormous amounts of overlap and they have lots of similar thoughts and ideas, but the only really underlying point is that every one is different because every one of them are coming at it from different points of view. A collar is a tool, a decoration, a symbol, or whatever the people involved think of it... And this is part of what complicates it so much. To that point, though, collars can grouped into two major groups - utilitarian and decorative.

The form of a utilitarian collar is driven directly by its use, and - to a lesser extent - its use is driven by its form. Probably the most common collar you will see is a simple synthetic or leather band with a plastic or metal buckle and a D-ring on the front; in other words, a dog collar, sized to fit a person. They can come in all different materials and shapes; some have O-rings rather than D-rings; some have two or three rings rather than one; some are rigid rather than flexible; some are hinged; some are lockable, some are not; some fasten in other ways. This is where they really start to differentiate themselves, and you need to seriously consider what you want it for. Posture collars, for example, tend to be very wide bands and intentionally make movement of the head very difficult; while thin metal bands are no more intrusive than a normal necklace. Something tighter will be better for control of position or movement of the head but has the inherent danger of applying more pressure, and therefore being more of a risk for someone sensitive to it - physically or mentally.

Some specific types of utilitarian collars include:

• Basic collars - Nothing more than a band with one or more attachment points. Basic and functional.
• Posture collar - as above, wide collars intended to make it difficult to move the wearer's head. Notorious for being uncomfortable and unforgiving to wear, especially over long periods.
• "Wolf collars" - collars with spikes on them, frequently decorative but usually also utilitarian - even if just for attaching a leash.
• Choke collars - collars which have a sliding ring rather than a buckle or latch, allowing it to contract when pulled.
• Pinch collars - Similar to choke collars, except instead they pinch or jab the neck when pulled.
• Martingale collars - essentially a cross between a choke collar and standard strap collar.
• "Gimmick"/device collars - those whose function comes not from the collar themselves, but from something attached to it.
• GPS collars - to locate people.
• Anti-bark/shock collars - occasionally used on humans, too.
• Vibrating collars - Similar to shock collars, but less painful.
• Rigid collars - solid rings of metal, wood, plastic, or some similar inflexible material.

With decorative collars, of course, form follows fashion - not function. Decorative collars have wormed their way into mainstream culture with chokers and tight necklaces - though of course most people don't see that way. A decorative collar is pretty much defined by its lack of utility; they aren't structurally strong enough to be used for bondage purposes. It's hard to describe these effectively, simply because they can be anything that a person can think of - the variety is too great. Use your imagination; these show up in books, movies, fashion shows, and on the streets of your town as well as clubs, private parties, dungeons and bedrooms.

Collars can be made out of almost anything. Some of the most common materials, with their pros and cons, include:

• Leather - very common, very popular. Prices range from dirt cheap (if you don't care about quality) to extremely expensive (if you do). Depending on quality and finish, can be very comfortable. Easier than most to cut, easy to decorate. Can cause irritation to some people.
• Fabric - nylon, rayon, polyester, velvet, silk, hemp, or others. Safest in that they're the easiest to cut off if it becomes necessary. Again, ranging from dirt cheap ($5 for a cheap synthetic one) to... Well, much much more for something fancy out of silk. Some people can be sensitive to some fabrics.
• Metal - solid metal or chain collars can be made out of almost any metal you're willing to pay for. Steel is the most common. Strong and durable, but some people can be sensitive to some metals - especially nickel.
• Plastic - not particularly common, because metal is more common for rigid collars and leather or fabrics are more common for flexible ones. They do exist, however. Their primary virtue is low price compared to other rigid collars... But because they're so uncommon, even then they're usually much pricier than a standard synthetic one.
• Wood - obviously only useful for rigid collars. Uncommon, easily damaged, frequently brittle, and generally expensive; however, it can be quite beautiful if done correctly.

One thing you'll notice is I didn't really list any of them as dangerous... For the simple reason that they all are. Any collar, used ignorantly, can lead indirectly or directly to injury or death. Any even partially rigid object around the neck can be deadly if the wrong type of force is applied. Any force applied to the front of the collar tends to pull against the spine - possibly causing damage - while any force applied to the back constricts the throat - possibly cutting off the wearer's breathing. Attaching a collar to something over the wearer's head can, in extreme cases, lead to accidental strangulation. As counter-intuitive as it may be, especially since most people immediately lead to "leashes" as a major use, attaching anything or applying any force to a collar is a questionable thing to do.

Be very careful playing with these things, kids. Don't take them for granted no matter what you do.

Decorative collars are frequently much safer, for the simple reason that any strong force is more likely to break them or tear them off rather than injure the wearer. A good rule of thumb, though, is that you should never put something on someone that you're unable to get off in a hurry while they're panicking. Safety scissors are a good idea, as are spare keys if you plan on locking them.

When it comes down to it, though, traditional collars aren't always what you want. In the case where they are more symbolic than functional, a collar may be made out of anything... Or not even a collar. Collars can be replaced with earrings, especially cuffs; nose-rings; rings on your finger; bracelets; anklets; necklaces; even tattoos. They can be hand-made to give them more personal meaning; learning to cut, punch, and rivet your own leather isn't excessively hard and can even turn into a nice little side business. Collars can be created out of woven cord, braided leather, crocheted yarn... I even know a couple where the submissive's collar was a two-foot-long segment of the first piece of rope her Master ever used to tie her up.

So when you're picking a collar, first identify what you want it for (is it to be utilitarian, decorative, or somewhere in the middle?); decide your budget (are you making it yourself, do you just want the cheapest nylon one in the pet store, or are you willing to spend hundreds on a meaningful custom-hand-made engraved masterpiece?); decide your style (locking, attachment points, decorated?); and then start looking. They can be found everywhere from Amazon.com to pet stores to clothing stores to department stores to accessory stores to specialized BDSM and sex shops. With a little research, you can find the perfect one for you, no matter who you are.

Book Review: Opening Up

I just finished Opening Up, by Tristan Taormino (Goodreads link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1128665.Opening_Up), and I'll admit that - as a first choice for a book to review here - I'm really happy with my choice. The thing is, though, once I finished it I found it hard to figure out how to review it... Mostly because I was an indifferent English student at best, and I just agreed with way too much of what it said. Going through the book, there were only one or two concepts I was not already conscious of and comfortable with; the main difference was her terminology, where she may use a different word or phrase than I did.

Tristan Taormino is an excellent author who writes in an approachable yet intelligent manner, and I was instantly comfortable with how she presented all the information. She found and interviewed a number of people in all forms of poly relationships as source, as well as seeking out all sorts of academic and popular books on the subject. Tristan lays out all the topics in a logical, well-ordered manner, splitting them up by chapter and addressing each concept in order; with relevant quotes and excerpts from her interviewees, each segment is easy to understand and easily relatable.

The biggest concept I'd never really heard of before is the idea of compersion, or taking joy in the joy of a loved one - essentially the antonym of schadenfreude. When it comes to polyamoury, it's a major part of many - if not most - functional relationships. If you aren't happy and comfortable with the idea of people getting joy externally to their immediate relationship with you, it's all too easy to fall into jealousy.

At its heart, Opening Up has everything you need to introduce anyone to all the major and most of the minor ideas involved in polyamoury. If you're new to it as a lifestyle, or simply want to ground some of your thoughts, this is a great book for you; more to the point, though, this is an excellent book to use to introduce other people who aren't involved to your lifestyle. I'd recommend this to anyone who is looking to learn more about it, and its approachable nature makes it perfect for someone trying to figure all of this out.

Collaring, Part 2

So with my last post getting so long, I let it go without actually answering my feelings on the matter. So how do I feel about collaring? As I said, I am actually of mixed feelings on the matter - or rather, depending on the context, I fit into both of the major categories I talked about last week.

On the one hand, I find collars exceedingly useful, and use them frequently when fooling around with someone. Ash and I, for example, have a metal choke chain and a nylon collar on our headboard which admittedly haven't been used in the last couple of months, but are convenient when we want to grab them. They're convenient for grabbing onto; both only have a single attachment point, but it's enough for a leash or a carabiner or a padlock or attaching to some convenient hook, when appropriate.

I actually used to have a very nice leather collar with two d-rings on it, which was part of a matched set with four leather manacles; sadly, they were all lost when a backpack with a number of my toys in it was lost to an unusually uncommunicative ex. Let this be a lesson to you, kids; never leave your toys at someone else's house, just in case they break up with you and you can't reasonably get them back...

My point is, though, that these collars have no significance to me other than their convenience in the area of attaching them to people or other things. They do that job very well, but signify nothing else.

On the other hand, when I have a serious submissive or slave, at some point - if we want it to be permanent - we will talk about collaring. I've never done a formal collaring ceremony myself; but it still has significance to me as a symbol of my control/ownership. A submissive I will typically buy the collar for; while a slave will buy the collar themselves and present it to me to put on them - symbolically, it's the only thing they actually own, having given up everything else to their new owner.

(Obviously, that doesn't hold any legal standing... But so little of the lifestyle does.)

So yes - just to make it even more complicated than it otherwise might have been, never forget that a collar is just a collar... Until it isn't, and then it's something far more and significant.

Collaring

Daphne, of everyone I know and talk about the subject with - and also of all the people I know read this - is the newest to the whole kink scene, so I asked her what she would be interesting in hearing more about... And the answer she came up with is "Collars". This falls back into the area of "Things Daphne has heard only one opinion on", and she was even kind enough to send me the link to a recorded commentary. The recording there is two of Daphne's friends (someone I don't know), speaking of their own experience; but my conversations with Daphne made it clear that I don't necessarily agree entirely with them... And so she asked me to clarify. With Belle's (the friend's) permission, the original link to it in her Tumblr is here, with Daphne's transcription:

http://hislittleharlotstarlet.tumblr.com/post/86125046555/second-question-what-is-your-view-on-collars-i-know

Inquiry:
[What] is your view on collars? I know they mean different things to different people but I feel like they hold, or should hold more significance in true D/s or DD/lg relationships.

Belle:
First of all, again, I’m going to emphasize- and I know you probably didn’t mean it that way but- for anyone who is reading this or listening to this, I very much feel there is no such thing as true D/s or DD/lg, it’s whatever you make it.

Merida:
Exactly.

Belle:
I know you didn’t mean it that way, probably. But just for clarification for anyone else who’s going “Oh! Belle and Merida advocate the true way”. No we don’t, there is no true way.

Merida:
I don’t even know what that means.

Belle:
[Laughing] … actually. What is my view on collars? I… I very much view collars almost on the same level as a marriage contract. They’re very serious to me, and I know they aren’t to everybody, but to me they are very serious which is probably why it’s taken so long for me to be okay to be collared. To me, having a collar around my neck, symbolizes that even though things might get incredibly difficult, I am going to stick to this dynamic. It’s like marriage, like the difference between dating and marriage. When you’re dating somebody I feel like- and again this is just my personal opinion- I feel like there’s more room for error when you’re dating someone. I feel like certain things, mistakes that might happen or you know big arguments or things that are said in the heat of anger can happen during dating and be forgiven, whereas like if that same instance happened with that intensity when you’re married it’s more like a “Oh my God, you are not taking this as seriously as I thought you would.” For me, being collared is like that next step. Like marriage is the next step to dating, in solidifying like, “okay, I’ve fooled around enough, this is what I really want, this is, this is it.” So it’s very serious to me and I take it very seriously. So that is, that is how I view collars I guess.

Merida:
I agree with you, I mean…

Belle:
Maybe you should star answering first, I feel bad. I like take all of your words and then you’re like…

Merida:
No but I mean you put it in a good way. Like, collars are a very serious thing, they, in my opinion, they- it’s not something you take lightly. It’s like, it’s a commitment. Like any other commitment you make in your life, take it seriously. Just, like you know, what Belle said. What Belle said. She put it good. Well. Whatever.

So... What are my thoughts on collaring? And the problem is, here I want to hedge, because I'm of more than one mind, and I know how strongly some other people feel about it. Collaring is one of those things that people can get very worked up over - a lot of people have strong opinions, but those opinions vary so much that it can be a bit of a minefield at times. I guess what it really comes down to, however, is one of two major camps: those who consider it as an enormous commitment and those who don't consider it important at all. Belle and Merida, obviously, fall into the first category; but I'll start with the second.

One school of thought simply considers them a decoration or a tool, along with every other bondage implement in the toolbox (or, alternately, in the dungeon). And in this regard, they are excellent. If you've never taken the time to look at some of the variety of collars out there, consider some of these links:

• https://www.etsy.com/market/bdsm_collar
• https://www.etsy.com/search/handmade?q=slave+collar
• http://collarfactory.com/
• http://thecollarshop.com/
• http://www.leathermystics.com/collars/v_collars.html

And there are dozens, if not hundreds, more out there. They are cloth, synthetic, wooden, leather, metal, plain, jeweled, subtle, garish, utilitarian, decorative... They can be a fashion statement and they can be anchors for leashes and chains. They are used regularly as ways to immobilize or decorate, and they don't have to be anything more complex than that. I've seen people with a dozen or two collars in a bag, picking out the one that went best with their date's shirt or had d-rings in the exact right position for whatever it was they were about to do... And it doesn't have to be complicated.

Going back to Belle and Merida and the first group, they consider it equivalent to a marriage contract, and that's not a bad comparison. There's an impressive amount of material out there, including:

• What it means to be collared: http://www.submissiveguide.com/2012/05/what-it-means-to-be-collared/
• Collars and their Meaning: http://kimdebron.tripod.com/id4.html
• Collaring and Collaring Ceremonies: http://houseofvoid.com/2009/03/18/bdsm-101-collaring-and-collaring-ceremonies/
• What does a collar mean: http://kinkylittlegirl.wordpress.com/2009/12/21/what-does-a-collar-mean/ 

Those are all fairly good resources (for one opinion or another), and all from the first page of one Google search... And there are hundreds more out there, if not thousands.

The point is, though, that this view of collars gives them essentially the same status as an engagement ring, or wedding band, or a promise ring, or any other alternative. They're indicative of a new step, a new level of commitment, a new level of dedication... A sign that this is a permanent relationship and not just dating or fooling around. This level of commitment can come with a ceremony - which can be simple and heartfelt, exchanging or donning the collar... Or long and formal to rival any traditional wedding ceremony.

When you're in a BDSM relationship of any kind, when the idea of a collar come up... Make sure you understand its significance. Whatever significance you choose to put on it, make sure you and your partner agree - if one of you takes it more seriously than the other, it's a disaster (or at least an argument) waiting to happen.

The Casual Perv

The articles Ash pointed me about about the poly trio's marriage have definitely set the theme for my this side of my thoughts for the week. The tone of them was a little... Strange to me, but I haven't been able to put my finger on it. Still, vague sensation of discomfort aside, I love what they represent - their brazen disregard for society's pressure - and their bravery in doing it. They talked about the fact that Kitten's father had stopped talking to her for a while when she came out to him, and how important it was to her that they'd reconnected in time for this to happen.

I was at Barnes and Noble yesterday buying a book - "The Ethical Slut" by Dossie Easton and Janet Hardy, if you're curious - and at some point was struck by the hilarity of the situation. Here I am paranoidly separating my kink-focused and professional lives pretty strictly online, so I spend my lunch break walking through a store at the mall with dozens of people looking at me, holding a book with a provocative title and then having an in-depth, intimate relationship with the cashier on the subject:

"Did you find everything you were looking for?"

*hands her the book* "Yup."

"Do you have a membership with us?"

"Yup, if you wouldn't mind looking it up for me."

"Here you are! That's this much. Would you like your receipt in the bag?"

"Yes please."

"Have a great day!"

"You too."

And like that, I was outed as a pervert.

Well, maybe not intimate or in-depth... But quite often this is how it happens, something trivial, something easy, something... Well, if not innocent, at least trite and mundane. And that's very much what it is, to some people - coming out in the same sense as coming out as gay or lesbian or dominant or submissive or anything else. Coming out isn't about being gay - it's about being afraid of being accepted... And if there's one thing endemic to all humans everywhere it's fear, especially the fear of rejection. Everyone has their own prejudices, their own blind spots, and touchy areas... And for better or for worse it affects us every day. This cashier ignored it openly, but I have no idea what she was thinking. Was she as totally indifferent as she seemed? Was she secretly disgusted and upset to even be touching the book? Was she curious? Amused? Excited?

It's not actually the reaction that scares me - it's not knowing beforehand what the reaction will be. I mean, someone refusing to talk to me because of how I feel or how I act or how I handle my relationships, would be upsetting. If I care for someone, or if they're important to me in some manner, obviously I want them to reciprocate. I can look at this, the situation, and admit I'm deathly afraid of telling my family about my kinks - not because I'm convinced they're going to be upset, but because I don't know if they'll be upset. I don't know if my mother and father will shrug and make some sarcastic comment and move on, or if they'll freak out and refuse to talk to me for a year. My fiance and I are going away with my family for a week this summer - is it worth risking their being upset beforehand and ruining or cancelling the trip? Our wedding is scheduled for August - is it worth risking my parents not coming if they aren't okay with the life I'm living?

It's often something trivial. Right now, I'm very pointedly (though I hope subtly) outing myself to my sister. She's a contact of mine on Goodreads; and while the stream of books has been silly and pointless for the most part for the most part (sci-fi, fantasy, the odd martial arts book), she's started getting a trickle of e-mails saying "Your brother is reading badly-written bondage erotica" and "Your brother is reading books exploring BDSM, kink, and open relationships". Call it a very tentative foot in the water, and even though this is exactly the type of thing that outs people by accident, I'm doing it intentionally. Probably not as effectively outed as when I accidentally left my copy of "The Secret Life of a Submissive" (by Sarah K) on the floor and Ash's family came over... But still there. Because to me, having parsed my way through these thoughts over the last years and consciously making the decision about how I really I identify to myself, I feel like I'm lying to them now by not identifying that way to them as well.

I don't remember where the quote came from, but I heard recently a line I agree 100% with - your sex life is private, but your love life is public. In my case it's not a matter of introducing my boyfriend instead of my girlfriend, but at some point it may be a matter of introducing my fiance and my girlfriend... Or god forbid, my fiance and my slave. I don't like the idea of lying about the status of my "friend" when they come up around my family. At the end of the day if my family is going to love me, they need to love me for who I am and not for who I think they want me to be.

That's what it all comes down to, isn't it? Disappointment. I don't want them to be disappointed in their son or their brother, to believe I'm making mistakes or living the wrong life... But it's the life I'm going to live either way. And it's terrifying, utterly terrifying. But I'm working on it... And for those of you who haven't, I hope you look at the example of the three girls above and work on it too.

As an aside, I will partially retract my bile from several entries ago - "50 Shades of Kink" is actually by Tristan Taormino, who I've had reason recently to investigate further and who I believe should be respected for her efforts to expand awareness and equal protection for nonmonogamy, gay rights and sexual expression in general. In fact, I have very strong motivation to get a copy of her "Opening Up" to read. I will, however, continue my grumpiness with the "50 Shades of X" titling scheme that still seems to dominate the industry.