i have much to say about all this.constintinaJune 26 2003, 18:05:16 UTC
1-"Pregnancy has got to be the most vile, disgusting thing the human body can go through"
yes. i'd like to think that my body is incapable of such a thing. I find it inconceivable that i would be a hospitable environment for some tiny delicate repulsive hellspawn to thrive.
2- "I find it inconceivable..."
no pun intended. ew.
3-"an orifice that is already pretty mysterious and terrifying when at ease."
no. you don't want to be saying that or i will start talking in very broken psychoanalysis about why i prefer slasher films to possession films. here's a taste of what you might be in for:
" I was reading today in men women and chainsaws about possession movies. How the classic, rarely altered, scenario is they involve some type of possission (devil..dead spirit...some nonsensical racist crap...whatever) of a girl or woman, and the related crisis and coming to clarification for a guy. often a guy who is both healed and properly masculized by the experience of dealing with the posssesion. really, slasher films as a genre are more subversive than possession films as a genre. possession filme lay it out less contridictorily/complexly...what a woman is and what a woman’s body is...and basically a woman’s body is a horror. it’s the unknowable that must be ever-explored and colonized by the knowlege of science...to be men, men must explore discover colonize women’s bodies literally..."
4-"Yeah a dick up the ass seems oppressive to me. It’s all about a display of dominance."
no. fucking someone's ass is not necessarily a display of domination as broadly defined--or more specifically, it is not inherantly a display of what i would call *oppressive* domination, which is the kind that is bad. however it can be a fun way to consensually play with the the potentially upsetting dynamics of oppressive domination that find their way into all our private lives as we live in a world where sex is a primary location of re-inscriptions of oppressive power and thus feel a whole lot better. i would especially recomend enjoying a dominating dick up your ass while your head is encased in a latex hood and your ankles are bound to your headboard next to your wrists. however this requires a level of flexibility that not everyone can enjoy.
5-"While the expression is generally not used in such circumstances, I suppose this would probably hold true as well for heterosexual anal sex."
not *neccessarily* as anal sex in a heterosexual context is so (offensively) constructed as a top/bottom, degrader/degradee, will-she-*let*-you-do-that/what a disgusting pig cuz she *likes* it kinda thing. much like fellatio or coming in someones mouth or, better yet, on their face. these are all also fun things to do and fuck with oppressive constructions of. of course it's funner for me as i'm not heterosexual.
6-"Yet in a position where equipment differences render only one capable of pitching and one receiving, there's some sort of consolation prize granted for a particular position that allows the receiver to be granted agressive status, and the pitcher submissive. Isn't that weird?"
no it's not weird, it's the obvious fall out of illogical reformist feminism. i don't want a consolation prize. a better thing to do is deconstruct top/bottom, passive/active as it applies to penatration. and in conjunction realize that "equipment differences render only one capable of pitching and one receiving" is a misleading statement. non-permanent equipment which facilitates pitching can and should be purchased (or if your crafty and wanna be all anti-consumerist about it, crafted, i guess. though now i'm a little uncomfortable.) by all heterosexual couples with an interest in assfucking. also, we all have hands. ok, i'm asking for trouble with that one. but realistically, even those of us without permanantly attached hands i would hope own prosthetics, though i'm honestly not up on the safety precautions or cleaning and maintainence guidelines that this would (hopefully) involve.
yes. i'd like to think that my body is incapable of such a thing. I find it inconceivable that i would be a hospitable environment for some tiny delicate repulsive hellspawn to thrive.
2- "I find it inconceivable..."
no pun intended. ew.
3-"an orifice that is already pretty mysterious and terrifying when at ease."
no. you don't want to be saying that or i will start talking in very broken psychoanalysis about why i prefer slasher films to possession films. here's a taste of what you might be in for:
" I was reading today in men women and chainsaws about possession movies. How the classic, rarely altered, scenario is they involve some type of possission (devil..dead spirit...some nonsensical racist crap...whatever) of a girl or woman, and the related crisis and coming to clarification for a guy. often a guy who is both healed and properly masculized by the experience of dealing with the posssesion. really, slasher films as a genre are more subversive than possession films as a genre. possession filme lay it out less contridictorily/complexly...what a woman is and what a woman’s body is...and basically a woman’s body is a horror. it’s the unknowable that must be ever-explored and colonized by the knowlege of science...to be men, men must explore discover colonize women’s bodies literally..."
oh and there's more. it is here
4-"Yeah a dick up the ass seems oppressive to me. It’s all about a display of dominance."
no. fucking someone's ass is not necessarily a display of domination as broadly defined--or more specifically, it is not inherantly a display of what i would call *oppressive* domination, which is the kind that is bad. however it can be a fun way to consensually play with the the potentially upsetting dynamics of oppressive domination that find their way into all our private lives as we live in a world where sex is a primary location of re-inscriptions of oppressive power and thus feel a whole lot better. i would especially recomend enjoying a dominating dick up your ass while your head is encased in a latex hood and your ankles are bound to your headboard next to your wrists. however this requires a level of flexibility that not everyone can enjoy.
5-"While the expression is generally not used in such circumstances, I suppose this would probably hold true as well for heterosexual anal sex."
not *neccessarily* as anal sex in a heterosexual context is so (offensively) constructed as a top/bottom, degrader/degradee, will-she-*let*-you-do-that/what a disgusting pig cuz she *likes* it kinda thing. much like fellatio or coming in someones mouth or, better yet, on their face. these are all also fun things to do and fuck with oppressive constructions of. of course it's funner for me as i'm not heterosexual.
6-"Yet in a position where equipment differences render only one capable of pitching and one receiving, there's some sort of consolation prize granted for a particular position that allows the receiver to be granted agressive status, and the pitcher submissive.
Isn't that weird?"
no it's not weird, it's the obvious fall out of illogical reformist feminism. i don't want a consolation prize. a better thing to do is deconstruct top/bottom, passive/active as it applies to penatration. and in conjunction realize that "equipment differences render only one capable of pitching and one receiving" is a misleading statement. non-permanent equipment which facilitates pitching can and should be purchased (or if your crafty and wanna be all anti-consumerist about it, crafted, i guess. though now i'm a little uncomfortable.) by all heterosexual couples with an interest in assfucking. also, we all have hands. ok, i'm asking for trouble with that one. but realistically, even those of us without permanantly attached hands i would hope own prosthetics, though i'm honestly not up on the safety precautions or cleaning and maintainence guidelines that this would (hopefully) involve.
Reply
Leave a comment