Gods and Monsters

Was talking with Dov recently, and he mentioned something about how it's reasonable to extrapolate tastes that people have based on the folks with whom they play.  As an example : one might safely extrapolate that I'm a heavy bottom, based on the fact that I'm often characterized as an edge player.  Some of us play with monsters -  some *are* monsters.  I can't recall his exact words - but the concept of 'monster' struck me as something about which to write.

I definitely play with (and Relate to) monsters. Monsters can see me - they are stronger than I .  Monsters aren't afraid to hurt me - to make me cry.  Only a Monster would enjoy tying me up, hitting me hard enough to cause bruising, and then fuck me so hard I'm screaming.  Monsters are relentlessly persistent - they don't particularly 'care' if I say it hurts, because that's what they want...  for me to feel, right?  Granted, not all versions of Monsters are right for me...  and I'm not right for all versions of Monsters.  Thankfully there are myriad versions of Monster.

Jung might suggest that "Monster" is a variant of the Shadow - that part of our selves which is of sex and instincts - a part of our selves which is hidden and unknown.  Shadow implies darkness... it implies chaos and the unknown.   For some reason, we have a tendency as a culture to extrapolate this to 'wrong' or 'evil'.  

I see it as Wrath.

In the West (read that as monotheistic cultures), wrath has been conflated to mean some terrifying, angry God, who sweeps in and creates shit like the 2004 Tsunami or HIV as a way to punish bad people and sinners. I'm being highly reductionist here, and I hope you get the jist of what I'm communicating.

In the East (read this as polytheistic cultures), wrath has a very different meaning. Take Kali for Example.  No - not Kali of Kink Academy, although Princess Kali can be one evil Monster....   Kali: The Dark Mother. Kali is one heck of a Monster.  She is often shown with her foot on Shiva's chest, having bested him in battle. This is a big deal, because Shiva is the destroyer god - the shadow of the holy trinity in  Hinduism (trines show up all over the place, don't ya know).  If you don't know already, Shiva is generally represented by a lingam (cock).  Yup - Kali tromps on cock.  She also cuts through the illusion of time.  Talk about a Monster.

 

In Buddhism there is a delightful fellow known as Padmasambhava.  Among his other talents, he is the medicine Buddha.  He's the ultimate Healer.  Look at his picture.  Doesn't he seem nice?   He's comfortably sitting on his lotus, offering healing light.  Ahh - how sweet.  Can't you imagine curling up at this One's lotus, feeling the bliss of divine love, and just being all...  happy?

 If something is off, our friend Padmasambhava transforms into his wrathful manifestation, and becomes a monster: sometimes depicted with a horse-head, my Teacher shared with me that this manifestation literally cuts through disease and dis ease.. that the wrath of this particular god is akin to a surgeon taking a knife, cutting open a leg, and removing a tumor..   it's necessary to be wrathful at times.

So Wrath isn't necessarily about some judge saying "you're wrong!" and then punishing me.  It's about a divine manifestation of Truth -showing up to help me cut away parts of my self I don't need or aren't serving me.  Wrath is a way for me to open up parts of me that I might not otherwise be able to on my own

Again - I'm being highly reductionist, and I hope you understand my communication.  

Now, getting back to Monsters in the scene: heavy tops who are known to push boundaries and to press their bottoms in ways difficult to imagine without experiencing.  You know who I'm talking about - monsters who hurt - who See - and who have made peace with the pleasure they take in causing pain...  People with reputations.

I adore Monsters.....   especially when I can see them in their peaceful manifestation.  [Side note here - I have a theory that this is one reason aftercare is important for some bottoms].

As for little old me? I know a Monster is right for me, because at some point, I'm screaming "Oh god!  Oh god!, " and in that moment, I mean it.

Book Bonding

A while back, I went to Brooklyn to help a couple of friends christen their new Home.  They've been together for a while, and are now in a season of co-habitation.  I was so very happy to have the opportunity to share the housewarming with them and other friends, old and new.  

One of the things I noticed about the space (and you know how limited space is in New York), was how many books they have: books all around the main room - bookcase after bookcase of books books books: fiction, non-fiction, magic, psychology, kink, religion - a veritable smorgasbord of words.  On paper.

Paper you can touch, smell, feel the weight of, and open to discover worlds imagined by genius, stories of faith and desire, proofs of concept, subversions, perversions...  

I didn't really get into reading until 9th grade, when we read Clan of the Cave Bear for English Class.  That was the book that 'did' it for me.  Come to think of it - it's probably the first piece of porn I read as well.  Any hoo, since then, I've enjoyed fiction and non-fiction alike, and while I'm not afraid of a 1000+ page piece of fiction, and quite enjoy them, these days I'm more likely to be reading something non-fiction, and writing in it.  

Do you write in books?  It's amazing.

Seeing shelf after shelf of book after book  really struck me, you know?  I couldn't see why for a while, and now I know.  

Last week, I got a bunch of stuff out of storage, and part of the stuff is books.  Art books, mostly - and my tarot cards: books about sacred geometry, faeries, Buddhism, color theory - books you'd look at and say "That's Bendy".  I missed them and wanted them back with me.  

I feel possessive about books more than other things, like food, or clothing, or even money.  Books are friends I can go to for comfort, adventure, inspiration, information and merriment.  

Books have meaning to me.

Then it struck me like lightning - my friends have combined their books; they are Book-Bonded.  They've combined their libraries into one, beautiful gathering of thought. 

I've been book-bonded with one person in my lifetime.  One.

With all of the lovers, roommates, and relations I've shared space with in these 42 years, only one was safe enough for me to combine libraries.  When we separated, that was one of the most mindful areas we took apart - ensuring that books went to where they belonged - and some of mine ended up going to him - some of his to me.

I'd like to be book-bonded with someone again.  This would be delightful.

The Illusion of Differentiation and the Tales we Tell

 Earlier today, I posted this image on Fetlife, as my avatar, and not surprisingly, the image stirred some responses - several folks 'loved' it, and there were more than a couple people who posted thoughts and observations on the concept.  If you care to see the thread on Fet, go here.

One might reduce the sentiment that is expressed as "a person's behavior towards you has nothing to do with you" as "It isn't all about you"....   I would challenge that reduction and here's why.

Whatever it is in which you believe - some old dude up in the sky, the power of the elements, the flying spaghetti monster, quantum mechanics, or that we are all alone in the universe - the very fact that you can have the thought - makes it about you (and me) - this is, in my opinion, the most hilarious of cosmic ironies...  


Backing up a bit:  my personal belief system is most generally couched as Taoist, although I draw from many wisdom streams, including, but not limited to:  Buddhist, Hindu, Jungian, Unitarian, Quaker,  Quantum and more.  One of the unifying tenets in all of these systems is a quest to understand wholeness - for being in union with the divine/higher power/order (however it is defined). 

There's also an idea that we have the capacity to experience a state of non-dual awareness where we transcend ideas of me and you, this and that, right and wrong, and move into a higher-order consciousness some call god-consciousness...

Even in the realm of quantum physics, non-locality is being proven with experimental data (non-locality being a synonym for unity). Brian Greene has offered two NOVA series on this in recent years,  The Fabric of the Cosmos and The Elegant Universe that shed some light on such topics. You might also find Amit Goswami's take on unity interesting - particularly if you, like I, are not a scientist...


One of my favorite quotes from the oh-so-hot Dr Greene (sapiosexuality is my only genuine fetish) goes something like: "The job of religion/spirituality is to ask why, and the job of science is to ask how?"

Asking the big questions: "Why are we here?", "Is there a supreme being?", "Why don't Twinkies decompose?", etc.,  all require a kind of awareness of self - of sentience.  If we didn't know that we existed in the first place, it's highly unlikely that we would ask such questions, much less devote so much time and effort into exploring possible answers.


The very fact that we, as individuals, have a sense of 'I' (an ego) makes everything about  'me' - to some degree - unless and until 'I' am in a state of connection - of union, and we all can get there any number of ways : communing with nature, orgasm, childbirth, agape, meditation, peak experiences, deeply meaningful creative process, SM play.... - in those moments, whatever 'you' are transcends time and space and moves towards unity.  In Yoga the term is samadhi.

While we are all from the same Source, we have individual perspectives.  Think of it as facets on a gem, or riding a wave in infinite seas.  There's a wonderful parable about blind men and an elephant that speaks directly to this.  Here's a link to it. 

'I' am an illusion - a dream -  a story ego makes up to give itself power. 'I' (as in ego, not as in bendyogagirl) have talents/or not.  I have values/ or not. I have a family/ or not.  I have a community/ or not. I have a political perspective/or not.  I have property/or not. I am in love/or not.


So YOU don't get upset when someone acts a certain way - the ego that's driving you does.  YOU don't fall in love with someone - the ego does - and because you are so committed to the story of you as you take yourself to be, you believe the lie.  Likewise, THEY aren't being an asshole - the ego that's driving you is telling you that.  THEY aren't making you mad - they are behaving, and the ego that's is making up a story that their behavior is angering.

It's all a big con, really.  A con ego creates to delude us into believing we are separate - because we are week when we are separate, and the ego needs that frailty for its own strength. 

Put this in your pipe and smoke it:  the very thing that deludes us into believing we are separate is required to do the work that brings us back into unity.

Sex is Easy...

I was speaking with a friend recently.  We were discussing some feelings of frustration I have in one of my relationships.  The Relationship part of the relationship works for the most part, but there isn't sex.  I want sex.

Sex as in cock in my pussy - making out - feeling physically dominated while being penetrated - make me cum - full-on fucking.

He said to me something to the effect of "Yes, but sex is easy to get ; a good Relationship is harder to come by," and it started me down a path of verbalizing something to him I hadn't fully verbalized before...  something that I don't hear verbalized about sex in our community often...  something I'm writing to share with you, gentle reader.

A little background here.  I've been around many blocks many times.  I've participated in orgies, been filmed while engaging in sexual acts, enjoy what many people outside of our community would consider extreme acts, etc.  and yet, I don't really have all that much sex.

I'm an attractive, articulate, intelligent woman with a great rack and a shapely ass.  I'm well aware that I can get laid - that I could easily find someone to fuck if I wanted (which I do) more sex in my life.

The thing of it is, for me... for where I am right now, sex isn't about physical release.  That's what solo Hitachi rides are for.   Sure, there are times when I'm with a partner and want to get off - and enjoy getting off.

For me, sex is a way to share my caring and loving feelings with someone.  It's a way for me to relax into my feminine and to open to someone's masculinity.  Sex is a way for me to build a connection - to work on deepening that connection - and to have a kind of intimacy I don't experience in SM play, platonic interactions, etc..  

I'm picky.  Very picky.  I tend to know a person in several contexts before I even consider playing with them - much less fucking them.  I like to see that person interact with people in service positions (as a submissive masochist, it's helpful to see if a potential partner is an asshat to waitstaff).  I like to share a meal with a person.  I like to watch that person interact with other partners - is s/he kind and loving, aloof and distant, respectful?  

I need to believe that the person I'm fucking is at least as smart as I - preferably more so - and they have to have some sort of creative aspect to themselves that they cultivate consciously. 

I'm not generally attracted to a person because of the size of their cock.. or the fact that they shoot porn..  or even if they are the cutest Dom ever.  I'm generally attracted to a person because I see them as a person - and I move forward with people who see me as a person.

I need there to be a Relationship in order to feel relaxed and comfortable enough for there to be sex.  

That excludes a lot of folks, who interpret my use of Relationship to mean 'girlfriend' or 'full-time submissive' or 'primary', and I'm OK with that. Of the sex I *do* have, the Relationships look far more like close acquaintances to very good friends...  This also excludes a lot of folks who don't share my perspective; people looking for anonymous encounters are not likely to take time to get to know me.  I'm OK with that, too. 

But does it make me a prude, as someone recently suggested?  I don't believe so. All of this certainly does NOT make me a slut.

I have friends who are beautiful and amazing sluts.  Seriously. Guys and gals who share their bodies freely within the boundaries as they define them to be.  Friends who get all excited to fuck the porn star they've met - or who want to be tied by as many rockstars as they can.  Friends who enjoy 'fucks without dynamics'.  Friends who make being a slut look and feel like art to me.  

I use friend as in - people I know personally, who know my real name, with whom I spend social time - and with whom I have connections outside of the dungeon - actual friends.

I have occasionally considered adopting some of the slut behavior.  I'd certainly get laid more often.  Thing is - I'm never so hungry as to move away from the Who of me.  I'm not suggesting sluts are hungry - only that I would really need to be starving in some way to behave like that. I'm also not suggesting that sluts don't experience the kinds of connection I'm talking about with my personal relationship to sex... only that the way I experience it is more "exclusive" (as a former partner put it).

He was unhappy with the number of people who have Permission and his plans to have me used by his friends.  Oh well...

If he had bothered to learn enough about me, he would have found out that I'm a total slut - once I come into the space of "yes" to sex with a person.

Maybe I should call myself "The exclusive slut"...  Yeah - that has a nice ring to it.