Delightful.
Author's Note: This lengthy diatribe was inspired by a
sf-drama post -- a forum I do not attend, nor do I desire becoming invested in -- which elicited a severe twitch of irritation within me. I, very reluctantly, said nothing. After all, why would I, somebody who devotes massive amounts of their time into Dare-I-Say-PC research, ever want to
(
Read more... )
I suppose the first thing I want to address is the detailing of romance -- either mildly interlocked or completely divorced from -- sex. It's something that I've mentioned grappling with internally: how a rigid line drawn for orientation (with regards to being "homo-romantic") delves into an essentialistic territory that I'm rather disconcerted by. That being stated, I grok your descriptions of sensuality (romance defined within your own parameters) perfectly. I have no reservations about eroticizing traditionally un-erotic things, provided it contains that associated pureness. Unfortunately, as I mentioned in my post, the entwining of carnality and inanimate objects, for example, is usually done with a kitschy and rancid deviance ... and one that is quite deliberate. Obviously, you understand that this isn't rooted in puritannical naysaying, because I have no problems with eroticism that ( ... )
Reply
I've always talked about how I've had sister-like relationships with my girlfriends, and people just ... don't really understand what I mean, haha.
Reply
Reply
But yes, I've even stated to people who just think that my need to redefine romance means I only have ~confused friendship feelings~ for women and don't really want them (EXPLAIN MY LOVE OF CUNNILINGUS THEN, YOU GUYS) is that although it's not my preference or ideal, I'd be in a romantic friendship with a man if I found one that I felt that way for. Or however I choose to explain the certain type of romance that I want (but seem to never be able to have. WOE).
We really should talk more about this sometime. If only because I need to talk about it as much as possible to organize my thoughts. They are so horribly jumbled because most of them stay in my head :c
Reply
Reply
Reply
Another thing you said elsewhere:"[W]hether they are trying to repress it or are thinking what makes them wet or hard is so sacred that anyone criticizing it is somehow oppressive, the Sacred Cow of Horniness.
Of course. This is one thing that got me into several explosive arguments with pro-kink types; I was demanded to define what differentiated prostitution from run-of-the-mill capitalistic exploitation ("What makes this so special?"), to which I had to reply "Well, what makes your kink so special and impervious with regards to how we discuss generalized exploitation under patriarchy ( ... )
Reply
It doesn't bother me at all.
And I just thought of how Redefining Romance could probably, and IS probably, the title of a totally cheesy "how to fix your marriage" self-help book or something. I do love the concept of it, though ( ... )
Reply
I've been leaving the computer at times, and I haven't slept yet either, so my replies will be sporadically timed. I've got a fuckton of garbage to pontificate about, and it's cathartic in a way.
Good luck sleeping/the car situation. <3
Reply
Another interesting thing. Sex work has only enhanced this, and it's a difficult mannerism to shed, which is particularly frightening given how unconscious it's become at this point. I'm conditioned to, to put it bluntly, pretending to earnestly give a shit about what imbecilic men have to say. Now, this mannerism has fortunately carried over towards how I interact with women, but the difference resides in the fact that with women, it's actually meaningful. This attribute pre-dated my feminist learnings, for what it's worth ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment