Quarterhorse says

105 views
Skip to first unread message

wi....@wizvax.methuen.ma.us

unread,
Jun 19, 1991, 8:48:03 PM6/19/91
to

Quarterhorse says (Whinnies? Raps his hoof on the parquet?):

> Apologies, that last article was written on less than three hours
>of sleep and in an incredible fog... I can't cancel it, but I would like
>to make a more coherent reply.

All right.

>Larry, you were right about the decisions I had to make, and that
>I was the only one who could make them. No one could really make them
>for me. Ctan said that, too.

>You were also perfectly (and happily) right about the fact that my
>spouse wouldn't mind the milder side of what is explored on this group.

That's encouraging. You can always spring the electrified nipple clamps
and brillo dildo on her after the milder stuff has her lulled 8^).

>And, yes, that first article was *really* obtuse,

More PURPLE than obtuse, I thought.

>eventhough it
>perfectly reflected my state at that time. I felt pretty much like I *was*
>going to take the step of looking for a playmate; and I was scared
>shitless of that first step.

Perfectly natural.

>>Larry Spense wrote:
>>Please, no offense meant to other a.s.b posters. Most people who post here
>>seem to be pretty comfortable with their personal kinks, and don't go
>>whining and begging for someone to tell them it's OK (they may whine and
>>beg for other reasons, of course %).

> Is a.s.b. really *only* for people who are *comfortable* with their
>'kink'?

Good lord(ess) no. Be pretty self-referential if it were. I post
partly to commune with others of like mind, partly to give a little
help and reassurance if I can, and _quite_a_bit_ to learn what
it's like in the other person's skin. Comfortable might mean that
one has stopped growing.

>I don't think so. Someone said in email that every person in the
>Scene, at one point in their lives has thought, "I'm never going to do
>THAT."

No doubt about it. averti has found hirself saying ``I'm never..'' out of
one side of head while other side is yelling, ``Lemme at it!''

>There have been others who have been ambivalent about what they
>wanted to do, as well. I know that Elektra had a terrible time working
>through the same problem that the 101 student had with the ambivalence of
>HURTING someone and pleasuring them. What got her to finally *do* it was
>having someone tell her, in no uncertain terms, that it was O.K.
>
>Finally, yesterday, after I'd sent that last article off, I got
>some notes from folks that are in the same place that I was. I'm
>wondering if there are others, so I'm posting. There is one thing that I
>definitely disagree with Larry about, that a long-term arraingement with
>someone outside the marriage for a S&D relationship would have damaged our
>marriage. It would have changed it, but I don't think there would have
>been *damage* because our communication lines would have had to have been
>very clear for me to actually *do* it. Both of us had agreed and I was
>doing my best to keep my spouse completely and absolutely informed
>about everything.

For what it's worth, I have been married a LONG time; SO doesn't like
BDSM; knows I like it, knows what I do (generally); is not wildly happy
that I like to play these scenes once in a while, but puts up with it
as long as it is kept ex-home. Opinion is that both lying to SO about
what you do and/or telling SO that what they do is ``sick, dirty''
or whatever--are both much more destructive to a relationship than
almost anything else could be. I don't like Opera; don't go. SO
don't like BDSM; she don't go. Works for us.

Keeping your spouse ``completely and absolutely informed about
everything'', and the other hand, might not be in your best
interests. Part of this involves the fantasy you that resides only
inside your own head. ``First we did this, and then we did this''
type narratives might not come out right without _your_ own
personal imaginative context. Just a thought.

> I wasn't cheating, I wasn't trying to hide a damned thing.

>Both my spouse and I don't think that there is *anything* hurtful
>or wrong about looking to satisfy a need outside of the marriage. When we
>got married, we did it knowing what we were, and on the hope and intent
>that what we would be in the future would still want us together. You
>can't *blame* the marriage for changes in personality. People GROW and
>change, it's part of *living*. A marriage that's going to last has to take
>that into account and be flexible enough to allow it.

>The liver and eggplant analogy was a stupid one. A better one
>would be the fact that one of us loves working on cars, tinkering and
>using them off-road for weekends at a time, the other likes to take a
>weekend here and there for SF cons. We don't *both* do either activity,
>but we give the other person the freedom to pursue our individual
>interests. There is nothing wrong with a marriage that can do that. And
>despite all the hooha, doing non-sexual Scenes with a friend that I'd
>learned to trust would have qualified as an interest that didn't threaten
>our marriage in the least. When my spouse said that I should go out and
>satisfy my curiousity, my spouse MEANT it.

Only commentary I have here is that it ALL is sexual. However, if
structuring it so that if you don't include penile stimulation and
orgasm in the scene, it's not considered sexual, so be it.

>I have to admit that I would rather Larry had said things a little
>more kindly, but I'll take Truth, even (especially? ;) when it hurts.

>But I'm GLAD that it worked out so that I didn't have to hurt for
>very long. (*laughter*)


>Quarterhorse

BTW, Quarterhorse, you write well. Couple 100 lines of your passion
is worth more that the entire dopey Master Wade sausage-string of
numbing prose.

averti, been there 131 times and still too goofy not to go back

--
To use this service, send EMAIL to:
Anonymous posting: wi-...@wizvax.methuen.ma.us (yes, a dash)
Anonymous reply: <user's alias>@wizvax.methuen.ma.us
Test path/get alias: wi-...@wizvax.methuen.ma.us (yes, a dash)
ACS administrator: wi-a...@wizvax.methuen.ma.us (yes, a dash)

Jennifer S Broekman

unread,
Jun 20, 1991, 12:29:59 AM6/20/91
to
In article <11...@wizvax.methuen.ma.us> wi....@wizvax.methuen.ma.us writes:
> BTW, Quarterhorse, you write well. Couple 100 lines of your passion
>is worth more that the entire dopey Master Wade sausage-string of
>numbing prose.
>
>averti, been there 131 times and still too goofy not to go back

I agree! Keep it up Quarterhorse.:-)

I *really* have to go shopping. jb

For those wondering: JF=Just a Friend, SO=Significant Other, NRAO=National
Radio Astronomy Observatory, AOC=Array Operations Center, Socorro, New Mexico.
Warning:
This article was posted by a student stressed by the absence of her SO.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages