Fisting and Pregnancy
Master J's slavegirl
I have recently been following the Fisting thread and it brought up a
question for me. My Master and I are quite taken by vaginal fisting and
have been doing it for some time. I am pregnant right now and since
finding out about our little bundle of joy to be, we have suspended our
fisting play thinking that it could be dangerous to the pregnancy. Does
anyone here have information or experience with vaginal fisting during
pregnancy?
As for a bit of a de-lurk I am 28 yo and married to my wonderful Master
and soulmate of the last 7+ years. We have one child and (as I
mentioned) another on the way. I have been reading and enjoying this
great group for a number of years but really am not much the posting
type....though I will say I find much knowledge and information here.
Thanks for being here and lending that knowledge and experience to us
all.
~Master J's slavegirl~
~Forever bound to her Master in heart, mind, body and soul~
Janet Miles
> I have recently been following the Fisting thread and it brought up a
> question for me. My Master and I are quite taken by vaginal fisting and
> have been doing it for some time. I am pregnant right now and since
> finding out about our little bundle of joy to be, we have suspended our
> fisting play thinking that it could be dangerous to the pregnancy. Does
> anyone here have information or experience with vaginal fisting during
> pregnancy?
Welcome to SSBB and the realm of those who post.
As to your question, I would strongly advise you to ask your doctor,
because risk factors will be different for every woman and every pregnancy.
JanetM
posted
--
Janet Miles (jmi...@usit.net) <www.public.usit.net/jmiles>
Loyal Webcrafter: PenUltimate Productions <www.worthlink.net/~ysabet>
Member: SSBB Diplomatic Corps -- East Tennessee
"Bananas in the fridge. Potassium is important." -- Slash Maraud 1/30/00
Shayde
Janet Hardy wrote in message <39D2B96C...@mindspring.com>...
<SNIP of Master J's slavegirl's comments on vaginal fisting during
pregnancy>
>When we were doing the final edit on "A Hand in the Bush," I asked three
different sex-positive physicians this question. One said, "Absolutely not,"
another said, "Sure, I don't see any reason why not," and the third said
"OK, except between 16 and 32 weeks" (I may have those numbers wrong, but
that was the general idea).
>
>IOW -- nobody knows for sure.
I can't imagine why anyone would want to take the chance and risk an
injury to the fetus/unborn child, no matter how minimal that risk may be, if
there is even a 0.000001% chance that something during the fisting could
cause harm to the unborn baby... it's a risk not worth taking, imho. What if
something did happen.. and the baby was born with some type of permanent
damage from the unexpected gone wrong during the fisting... how would you
explain it to the child as he/she grew up... "sorry you're brain damaged [or
whatever] but we just had to get our kinky sex kicks at any cost and our
lack of patience in not wanting to wait until after you were born, not to
mention our selfish desire for sexual pleasure was more important than any
harm to you.." ???
Spam-proofed email ... to reply remove "N2DEEP"
us two
J's slavegirl) wrote:
>Hello Everyone,
>
>I have recently been following the Fisting thread and it brought up a
>question for me. My Master and I are quite taken by vaginal fisting and
>have been doing it for some time. I am pregnant right now and since
>finding out about our little bundle of joy to be, we have suspended our
>fisting play thinking that it could be dangerous to the pregnancy. Does
>anyone here have information or experience with vaginal fisting during
>pregnancy?
>
>As for a bit of a de-lurk I am 28 yo and married to my wonderful Master
>and soulmate of the last 7+ years. We have one child and (as I
>mentioned) another on the way. I have been reading and enjoying this
>great group for a number of years but really am not much the posting
>type....though I will say I find much knowledge and information here.
>Thanks for being here and lending that knowledge and experience to us
>all.
>
>
>
>~Master J's slavegirl~
>
>~Forever bound to her Master in heart, mind, body and soul~
>
FWIW, we found fisting to be easier while jewel was pregnant. We were
not particularly forcefull about it, but the sensations drove her
nuts.
Her doctor didn't seem to think it would have any detrimental effects,
as long as it didn't make her cramp...it didn't.
Janet Hardy
Master J's slavegirl wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> I have recently been following the Fisting thread and it brought up a
> question for me. My Master and I are quite taken by vaginal fisting and
> have been doing it for some time. I am pregnant right now and since
> finding out about our little bundle of joy to be, we have suspended our
> fisting play thinking that it could be dangerous to the pregnancy. Does
> anyone here have information or experience with vaginal fisting during
> pregnancy?
When we were doing the final edit on "A Hand in the Bush," I asked three
different sex-positive physicians this question. One said, "Absolutely
not," another said, "Sure, I don't see any reason why not," and the third
said "OK, except between 16 and 32 weeks" (I may have those numbers wrong,
but that was the general idea).
IOW -- nobody knows for sure.
Verdant
www.greenerypress.com
BLDRNRpdx
>I have recently been following the Fisting thread and it brought up a
>question for me. My Master and I are quite taken by vaginal fisting and
>have been doing it for some time. I am pregnant right now and since
>finding out about our little bundle of joy to be, we have suspended our
>fisting play thinking that it could be dangerous to the pregnancy. Does
>anyone here have information or experience with vaginal fisting during
>pregnancy?
According to a friend who's now had two children, vaginal fisting can be just
fine during pregnancy. In fact, her midwife/obgyn (honestly, I'm not sure
which now) recommended it as a way to stretch the area for when the baby came
out. I want to say that my friend and her husband were shown how to this
"internal massage", but I couldn't swear to it now. It may have only been
described to them.
And, maybe a few weeks before the due date, I remember hearing about Dad
playing "tag" with the baby - reaching up into Mom and being able to feel the
baby's head.
As always, Your Medical Condition May Vary.
Bladerunner
who thinks she'll stick to playing tag with
folks who've already been borned,
thank you very much
Nicole Cloonan
: I can't imagine why anyone would want to take the chance
: and risk an injury to the fetus/unborn child, no matter how
: minimal that risk may be, if there is even a 0.000001% chance
: that something during the fisting could cause harm to the unborn
: baby...
Then you are a person lacking imagination.
The principle is called "living", and it would be fantastic if
pregnant women could get on with it without interference from
people screaming "child abuse" at every decision made that (*oh
my gosh*) carries some risk with it.
You know, like crossing the street, driving a car, breathing the
city air, eating dinner out, having a single alcoholic beverage,
taking a paracetamol tablet, brief exposure to paint fumes, hair
spray or insecticides, petting the family cat, taking a bath,
using a microwave, drinking tap water, sitting in front of the
computer, standing up, sitting down, sleeping on the right hand
side, sleeping on your back, not getting enough sleep, exercising,
not excersicing, and (*oh my gosh*) having sex.
: it's a risk not worth taking, imho. What if something
: did happen.. and the baby was born with some type of permanent
: damage from the unexpected gone wrong during the fisting... how
: would you explain it to the child as he/she grew up... "sorry
: you're brain damaged [or whatever] but we just had to get our
: kinky sex kicks at any cost and our lack of patience in not
: wanting to wait until after you were born, not to mention our
: selfish desire for sexual pleasure was more important than any
: harm to you.." ???
Allow me to be the first to say "Fuck you, Shayde".
Although I am curious to know whether you are a hypocritical
fuckhead or just your standard garden variety fuckhead. Is it only
that nasty "sexual pleasure" thing (ewww, dirty girls and boys)
that triggers your need to protect unborn babies from their mums
or are you in favour of locking up all pregnant women in a sterile
bubble?
Nicole.
T minus 2 days and counting. Assuming the squid is on time. (HA!)
--
There are people whose actions cause others to think
"What a nut". I am (apparently) one of these people.
duny...@my-deja.com
As Bladerunner mentioned, fisting can be used to stretch the vaginal
opening in preparation for birth. It is a more extreme form of
"perineal massage", which is recommended for women in their 3rd
trimester.My Darling and I used fisting this way, and I felt no pain
and did not tear when pushing the little cherub out, dispite the fact
that she was almost 9 pounds. Fisting should probably be avoided if
you have a high risk or complicated pregnancy. In addition, the fister
should always wear gloves. And, of course, now is not the time to test
the limits of your physical endurance. YMMV, of course.
Duny, going back to bed for another 3 hours until her leige lady needs
her again.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
JOHN WARREN
news:uczA5.7716$103....@news1.atl...
> I can't imagine why anyone would want to take the chance and risk an
> injury to the fetus/unborn child, no matter how minimal that risk may be,
if
> there is even a 0.000001% chance that something during the fisting could
Then I suppose you are against women working during pregnancy, driving,
exercising or living in a city since each of those activities probably
greater than one chance in a million of causing fetal harm or death.
Why are some people so willing to put restrictions on pleasure as if it was
somehow less valid than the other activities humans do?
--
Diversified Services Books Toys and Videos to the Scene since 1993
www.diversified--services.com (new products added 9/26)
Master J's slavegirl
unsure whether or not fisting during this time is something we will try
and know that we will not until we speak with my OB about it's effects
on me personally and my individual pregnancy. But hearing everyone's
experiences and opinions was most helpful to us. I have brought this
question up in other forums during my first pregnancy and got literally
nothing but flames and in all honesty was a bit nervous about bringing
it up here. I sincerely thank you for making me feel comfortable in
asking this and for sharing with us.
Oh yes and by the way, I may have forgotten this in my first post (ok, I
KNOW I forgot-sorry)...chocolate is still taken as a thank you here I
would hope...so I will leave this rather heavy box of Godiva's over here
on the table and hope I am able to scurry out again before the feeding
frenzy begins...
Thanks :)
webm...@houstonbdsm.com
you only got to say this first because you live on the East coast and
get up earlier than I do.
so in short
"what he said"
twice
Travis
Kepytan
"JOHN WARREN" <ment...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:zYGA5.3097$fx6.1...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Shayde <shay...@bellDEEPsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:uczA5.7716$103....@news1.atl...
> > I can't imagine why anyone would want to take the chance and risk an
> > injury to the fetus/unborn child, no matter how minimal that risk may
be,
> if
> > there is even a 0.000001% chance that something during the fisting could
> > cause harm to the unborn baby... it's a risk not worth taking, imho.
What
>
> Then I suppose you are against women working during pregnancy, driving,
> exercising or living in a city since each of those activities probably
> greater than one chance in a million of causing fetal harm or death.
>
> Why are some people so willing to put restrictions on pleasure as if it
was
> somehow less valid than the other activities humans do?
>
>
When I was working, we had a guy come through the drive-thru, see pregnant
me working the reg. and went inside to complain!! seems that the sight of
"fat pregnant cows" made him lose his appetite. he believed that pregnant
women shouldnt be allowed out of their houses..
of course, 90% of the people I worked with were women, so he was politely
told to f**k off.. if he had made the fat pregnant cow remark to my face,
he probably would have lost more than his lunch... some people are just
ignorant stupid morons..
of course, if he had offered to support my family so that I didnt have to
work......
dainerra
Kepytan
be!!
and an even bigger Good Luck and Good Sleeping to all of our new Moms!!
dainerra
Shalon Wood
> Shayde <shay...@bellDEEPsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:uczA5.7716$103....@news1.atl...
> > I can't imagine why anyone would want to take the chance and risk an
> > injury to the fetus/unborn child, no matter how minimal that risk may be,
> if
> > there is even a 0.000001% chance that something during the fisting could
> > cause harm to the unborn baby... it's a risk not worth taking, imho. What
>
> Then I suppose you are against women working during pregnancy, driving,
> exercising or living in a city since each of those activities probably
> greater than one chance in a million of causing fetal harm or death.
>
> Why are some people so willing to put restrictions on pleasure as if it was
> somehow less valid than the other activities humans do?
And don't forget -- oh my god -- *STAIRS*! Why, there's probably a
.005 percent chance of someone falling down stairs and having a
miscarriage. Selfish bitch, not being willing to wait 9 months to go
upstairs to the bedroom. She can sleep on the couch.
Shalon Wood
--
"The PROPER way to handle HTML postings is to cancel the article, then hire a
hitman to kill the poster, his wife and kids, and fuck his dog and smash his
computer into little bits. Anything more is just extremism." - Paul Tomblin
Spyral Fox
<janet...@mindspring.com> writes:
>When we were doing the final edit on "A Hand in the Bush," I asked three
>different sex-positive physicians this question. One said, "Absolutely
>not," another said, "Sure, I don't see any reason why not," and the third
>said "OK, except between 16 and 32 weeks" (I may have those numbers wrong,
>but that was the general idea).
>
>IOW -- nobody knows for sure.
Well, I am not an MD, and do not play one on usenet, but
I have a few comments that may shed additional light on
this.....
Personally, I'd be cautious. There is a mucous plug in the
cervix which forms during pregnancy to act as a barrier to
ensure that nothing bad gets from the vagina into the uterus.
If your hand is clean (or gloved)[1], that's one worry gone (and
it should be, whether or not one is pregnant). But some of the
lubricants might (note: speculation) have an effect on the
plug, making it more permeable. This is why douching during
pregnancy is a definite "don't.[2]" I would guess (note: more
speculation) that otherwise (note that word and refer to the
above) the risks would be simlar to those involved with having
regular penis-vagina sex, where there are some women
for whom it is a Bad Idea due to problems with the cervix or
uterus. Because of this, I think checking with one's own
personal obstetrician is probably a good idea. There
certainly should be benefits, too, as others have noted,
possibly decreasing the risk of tearing or someone giving
a few snips with scissors through the perineum to ease
baby's way out.
[1] I won't get into the clean vs gloved debate, but I will note that
if the woman has a latex allergy, nitrile gloxes are a possible
substitute and that the glove should be clean on the outside, too
-- talcum powder in particular has a tendency of wandering
through the female reproductive tract if given an opportunity.
[2] barring a medical condition for which one's physician
prescribes douching as less dangerous than allowing the
problem to continue without douching.
- - Spyral Fox
--
... a fox to recognize traps, and a lion to frighten wolves
San Diego Resources: http://members.aol.com/spyralfox/
SSBB Cookbook: http://members.aol.com/ssbbcooks/
SSBB Diplomatic Corps member & Depooty Charter Enforcer (CLG)
Sockermom9
> I can't imagine why anyone would want to take the chance and risk an
>injury to the fetus/unborn child, no matter how minimal that risk may be, if
>there is even a 0.000001% chance that something during the fisting could
>cause harm to the unborn baby... it's a risk not worth taking, imho. What if
>something did happen.. and the baby was born with some type of permanent
>damage from the unexpected gone wrong during the fisting... how would you
>explain it to the child as he/she grew up... "sorry you're brain damaged [or
>whatever] but we just had to get our kinky sex kicks at any cost and our
>lack of patience in not wanting to wait until after you were born, not to
>mention our selfish desire for sexual pleasure was more important than any
>harm to you.." ???
So you plan on completely foregoing sex during any pregnancies with which you
may become involved?
Let's do a short review on how pregnancy works. Mom gets knocked up (I must
assume that we all know how this works). The fetus grows in a protective sea
of amniotic fluid for roughly nine months. Nothing gets in or out but through
mom's bloodstream. The cervix is squeezed tightly shut.
Now, lots of things can happen to a fetus in there, but the only ones that can
cause brain-damage or other birthdefects are those things that were there to
start with or got in through the mother's connection to the fetus. Sticking a
penis, or a hand, or a vibrator, or a cucumber, into the vagina won't do it.
My fear would be that there could be camage to the waxy plug covering the
cervix, or that intense sexual activity late in pregnancy could cause
miscarriage or premature contractions. For instance, very late in pregnancy,
nipple stimulation is used as a way of testing whether the uterus is ready to
begin contractions, i.e. labor. Thus, if an OB knows that a woman is prone to
premature contractions, who might be told to avoid such stimulation. And,
thus, if that OB knows nothing of the sort, there will occasionally be women
who are unknowingly risking giving premature birth by engaging in that kinky
sexual pleasure of having their partner play with their nipples.
Ohhhh, dangerous! Don't do it!
Lynn
New to the world of submission? Check out http://members.aol.com/oldrope/ for
some thoughts for newcomers from those who've been there and decided to stick
around.
Sockermom9
>Allow me to be the first to say "Fuck you, Shayde".
Well, I might not have been that hard on hir. Lots of people are
less-than-educated about pregnancy and birth. They're not malicious,
just...well, uneducated.
>T minus 2 days and counting. Assuming the squid is on time. (HA!)
Now *this* might get me to Australia! Here's to a safe, easy delivery and a
happy baby!
Bacchae
>
> Janet Hardy wrote in message ...
>
> <SNIP of Master J's slavegirl's comments on vaginal fisting
during
> pregnancy>
>
>
asked three
> different sex-positive physicians this question. One said,
"Absolutely not,"
> another said, "Sure, I don't see any reason why not," and the
third said
> "OK, except between 16 and 32 weeks" (I may have those numbers
wrong, but
> that was the general idea).
> >
> >IOW -- nobody knows for sure.
>
>
risk an
> injury to the fetus/unborn child, no matter how minimal that risk
may be, if
> there is even a 0.000001% chance that something during the fisting
could
> cause harm to the unborn baby... it's a risk not worth taking,
imho.
<gulp> Not too long ago I did a little bit of reading on the topic
of vaginal insufflation which is when air gets into the vagina; this
can be a very grave concern. During pregnancy the risk of serious
damage (embolism causing near-instantaneous death) is higher because
of the nature of the placenta. Now having said this I have to
remark that it is usually as a result of orogenital sex (blowing
into the vagina) when this happens but I would be concerned that
fisting could have a "air piston" effect such that air is caught
around or over the hand and accidentally forced into the vagina.
I admit the likelihood of vaginal insufflation happening is pretty
rare and I imagine the chance of it happening as a result of fisting
is even rarer but I personally wouldn't risk it. From what I have
discovered it just wouldn't be worth it to me.
Cites below:
TITLE: Air embolism death of a pregnant woman secondary to
orogenital sex.
AUTHORS: Kaiser RT
AUTHOR AFFILIATION: Section of Emergency Medicine, University of
Chicago Hospitals, USA.
SOURCE: Acad Emerg Med 1994 Nov-Dec;1(6):555-8
CITATION IDS: PMID: 7600403 UI: 95323787
ABSTRACT: Air embolism produced by vaginal insufflation is an
unusual but potentially lethal consequence of sexual activity,
especially in the pregnant patient. Reported here is the case of a
young pregnant woman who presented to the ED in full cardiac arrest,
with little history to explain her condition. Despite aggressive
resuscitative measures, the patient died, but her infant son was
delivered via perimortem cesarean section and survived. A high level
of suspicion for air embolism should be maintained for young women
who unexpectedly develop cardiac arrest, particularly during sexual
activity. Air embolism patients may require vigorous medical
resuscitation, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, or surgical intervention
to survive. The emergency physician should be familiar with the
indications for perimortem cesarean delivery in the third-trimester
patient presenting to the ED with cardiac arrest.
TITLE: Venous air embolism following orogenital sex during
pregnancy.
AUTHORS: Hill BF; Jones JS
AUTHOR AFFILIATION: Emergency Medicine Residency Program,
Butterworth Hospital, Michigan State University College of Human
Medicine, Grand Rapids.
SOURCE: Am J Emerg Med 1993 Mar;11(2):155-7
CITATION IDS: PMID: 8476458 UI: 93236621
ABSTRACT: Venous air embolism is an infrequent complication of
pregnancy but may occur if air is blown into the vagina during
orogenital sex. Air passes beneath the fetal membranes and into the
circulation of the subplacental sinuses, invariably causing death to
both mother and fetus within minutes. Reported is the case of a
nonfatal air embolism following vaginal air insufflation in the 38th
week of pregnancy. The hospital course was complicated by
hypotension, metabolic acidosis, acute neurologic changes, and
emergency caesarean section with eventual fetal demise. Clinical and
laboratory abnormalities as well as treatment measures are
discussed. Familiarity with this syndrome is essential if prompt and
appropriate therapy is to be rendered.
TITLE: Venous air embolism. Life-threatening complication of
orogenital sex during pregnancy.
AUTHORS: Fyke FE 3d; Kazmier FJ; Harms RW
SOURCE: Am J Med 1985 Feb;78(2):333-6
CITATION IDS: PMID: 3970057 UI: 85119316
ABSTRACT: Vaginal insufflation in pregnant women leading to acute
venous air embolism has been appreciated by obstetricians and
pathologists for several decades. Initially described as a
complication of powder insufflation for treatment of trichomonal
vaginitis, insufflation-induced air embolism has been more recently
associated with orogenital sex. The case herein illustrates a
typical history that is almost pathognomonic. Clinical and
laboratory abnormalities as well as treatment measures are briefly
described. Familiarity with this syndrome is essential if prompt and
appropriate therapy is to be rendered.
- Sandy
Bacchae at cadvision dot com
Velvet Wood
> Allow me to be the first to say "Fuck you, Shayde".
>
> Although I am curious to know whether you are a hypocritical
> fuckhead or just your standard garden variety fuckhead. Is it only
> that nasty "sexual pleasure" thing (ewww, dirty girls and boys)
> that triggers your need to protect unborn babies from their mums
> or are you in favour of locking up all pregnant women in a sterile
> bubble?
>
I think you're overreacting here, (though I think Shayde was overreacting
too, so maybe it's justified) and possibly being a bit more sensitive on the
subject than you might normally be. I know that when I was pregnant there
came a point when if just *ONE MORE* person told me that I ought not be
drinking that cup of coffee while I was pregnant I was *going* to get
violent. That said, in a general way I agree with Shayde. Not for the
specific...I'd have to talk to a doctor about that. But in general I don't
see anything wrong with minimizing risks when you're pregnant. It's just
for nine months, after all. Nine months that can feel like nine years if
you do every damned thing they tell you to and avoid every damned thing you're
supposed to. So we come to the concept of 'acceptable risk.' Let's take
my cup of coffee. Caffeine has been shown to possibly have a correlation to
low-birth weight babies. On the other hand, if I don't have some caffiene
every once in a while, I will kill someone. So I compromised by dropping
my caffiene intake down to the lowest point I could stand to decrease it's
chances of hurting the baby. The risk to the baby was very low, and the
benefit to me was tremendous. Now, I also happen to like to get stinking
drunk every once in a while. A bit of research on this turned up evidence that
doing so would be a very big risk of very severe damage. My monthly (then,
yearly now) drinking binges were not worth the risk of severe brain damage
and physical defects in my baby, so they got skipped while I was pregnant.
I do believe that with some things, the possible outcome is so terrible that
it's not worth any risk. Logically, I know that the possibility of me getting
in a car wreck on any given day is practically zero. However, my kids are
always buckled into their carseats because the thought of losing them to
that .0001 chance and *knowing* that if I had buckled them in they would
probably be alive is just too horrifying. This fact was reinforced by the fact
that I did, indeed, have a wreck last January with the baby in the car. Thanks
to her car seat, she had one tiny bruise instead of being flung through
the windshield. So, IMO, if the possible outcome is bad enough, then no, no
amount of *avoidable* risk is justified. Sure, I know that just breathing
is dangerous. Can't avoid it. However, things like fisting, bungee-jumping,
water-skiing, and other potentially dangers to unborn children are not
unavoidable, and neither are they of significant benefit to the mother, so
if there's risk involved, they should be avoided. Personally, I couldn't live
with the guilt of knowing that something I did for a quick pleasure had
caused my child to be born brain-damaged or stillborn.
As to the specifics of fisting...I would have to talk to a doctor or two but
I can see two possible ways that it could be particularly dangerous during
pregnancy. I think that it could possible be traumatic enough to induce
contractions and maybe miscarraige, and it would seem logical that it
would increase the odds of an air embolism and thus be a danger to mother and
child. I have no idea whether or not these two hypothesis have any basis
in reality, but I would certainly check them out before I tried it.
Hang in there, Nicole. You'll get to take out all that frustration on
arrogant doctors and nurses/interns/other idjits who approach you with
three-inch long fingernails any day now. Don't hesitate to kick 'em
across the room. And the endorphin rush is *great*!
Velvet
Binder
>
> Nicole writes:
> >T minus 2 days and counting. Assuming the squid is on time. (HA!)
>
> Now *this* might get me to Australia! Here's to a safe, easy delivery and a
> happy baby!
AMEN! Er, Aboy. nopenopenope. Agirl? (hmmmmm that don't sound
right...)
AY-person! (that's it <G> )
Binder
R. Kane
> Shayde <shay...@bellDEEPsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:uczA5.7716$103....@news1.atl...
>> I can't imagine why anyone would want to take the chance and risk an
>> injury to the fetus/unborn child, no matter how minimal that risk may be, if
>> there is even a 0.000001% chance that something during the fisting could
>> cause harm to the unborn baby... it's a risk not worth taking, imho. What
> Then I suppose you are against women working during pregnancy, driving,
> exercising or living in a city since each of those activities probably
> greater than one chance in a million of causing fetal harm or death.
I'm sorry but I've got to side with Shayde on this one to some degree.
I don't presume to speak for her but I suspect that the 0.000001% figure
she used was intended to make a point, not to draw a line in the sand.
Those activities which a pregnant woman chooses not to engage in should
be chosen by the impact it has on her life as well as that of her child.
And of course it is her choice to make, no one elses.
Should she work? I guess it depends on what she does for a living, if she
is an x-ray technician it's probably not a good idea. If she is a banker
or an attorney, why not? It also depends on her life circumstances; can
she afford not to work, if she chooses not to work is there someone else
to support her?, etc.
Should she drive? Sure, people drive every day, accepting the risk that
comes with it. I don't see why it should matter if the driver is pregnant.
If she lives in the city should she move to the country so she can breath
clearner air? Of course not, that's completely impractical.
> Why are some people so willing to put restrictions on pleasure as if it was
> somehow less valid than the other activities humans do?
Because it's optional, at least to some extent. I can't stop eating, if I do
I will die. But I can stop eating candy and other foods rich in fat and
refined sugar and I will be healthier. I have to deny myself the pleasure
of eating these things in order to achieve the healthier state however.
People make choices like this all the time. Sex is less of an imperative to
a healthy existence than eating is and many people survive very long periods
with no sex at all.
Before you jump all over me, I am not for one second suggesting that pregnant
women abstain. But if certain sexual practices pose a greater risk of injury
to the fetus it would seem prudent to preclude those, at least for nine months.
I have no experience with fisting but it seems as though it would be at least
incrementally more risky than intercourse.
When my wife became pregnant after more than a year of trying we were overjoyed
and considered ourselves incredibly blessed. We (mostly she) took whatever
steps we practically could to ensure that our daughter enjoyed a healthy and
uneventful gestation. She didn't drink alcohol (except for a toast on New
Year's Eve) or take ibuprofen (her pain reliever of choice, and she has a bad
back) and she switched her blood-pressure medication. She laid off caffeine,
aspertame and hot tubs. She still worked, she still drove and we did not move
out of the city.
Did we have sex? You betcha, although we did abstain from intercourse for the
first trimester on the advice of her ob/gyn and numerous other sources. No matter,
there are plenty of other ways to have fun. Incidentally, we noticed a distinct
spike in her libido, especially toward the end. <Sexist humor>I began to
understand the attraction of "Keepin' 'em barefoot and pregnant"</Sexist humor>
Did we scene? Certainly, in fact the little one was conceived during a
particularly hot session.
Did I whack her on the belly with my riding crop? Of course not.
She missed all of the things that she gave up but the nine months (actually
twelve for some things since she was nursing) passed quickly. I am sure she
would say that it was worth it.
Geez, I seem to have rambled on here.
To summarize: I certainly do not have the answer to the question of whether
or not fisting is safe during pregnancy. I would tend to think it is somewhat
riskier than conventional intercourse and if it were me, I would wait until
after the "blessed event". Nine months will be over before you know it.
Bob
--
R. Kane <rNOka...@capital.net> "I am resplendent in divergence"
remove the obvious to reply by mail - Robert Fripp
Sockermom9
>Before you jump all over me, I am not for one second suggesting that pregnant
>women abstain. But if certain sexual practices pose a greater risk of injury
>to the fetus it would seem prudent to preclude those, at least for nine
>months.
>I have no experience with fisting but it seems as though it would be at least
>incrementally more risky than intercourse.
Why? How so?
Nicole Cloonan
: Nicole Cloonan <zznc...@fox.uq.net.au> writes:
I said some nasty stuff, including:
:> Allow me to be the first to say "Fuck you, Shayde".
Velvet Wood wrote:
: I think you're overreacting here,
and Sockermom wrote:
: Well, I might not have been that hard on hir.
Yes, you both are right. I think I can see where I may not
have been completely reasonable, and unbiased in my reply. =)
My apologies for the unnecessary tone Shayde. While I still
firmly believe that nobody except my husband and (to a lesser
extent) my care provider get to tell me what risks are
acceptable, my way of responding was uncalled for.
Nicole.
Shayde
How nice of you to judge me so harshly when you know nothing about me
or my prior 5 pregnancies. Not once did I say not to have sex, I was
referring ONLY to someone ramming a fist up a pregnant woman's vagina, and
as the post that I was responding to from Janet Hardy implied, one doctor
said definitely not, one said ok, etc. My remark was in lieu of that one
doctor who said definitely not. Has and had nothing to do with having sex.
In fact, if that is the only way *you* can get pleasure during your
pregnancy, by fisting, Nicole, then I would turn the tables and say perhaps
*you* are lacking imagination if you can't come up with other ways for
sexual pleasure (and yes, that includes intercourse). And your remarks
about driving, breathing, eating, etc. are so inane as to not even deserve a
response. And regardless of whether or not I agreed with what you personally
chose to do, I would never stoop so low as to call YOU a fuckhead. Believe
it or not, I hope your pregnancy is uneventful, the birth short and easy,
and the baby a picture of perfect health. May you never have to go through
the experience of losing a baby or having one born dead. And I also hope you
get all the sexual pleasure you need and want during your pregnancy(ies) :)
2. To Velvet Wood:
Thank you for agreeing with me, even if in a general way. You are right,
perhaps I did overreact a bit, and your response is certainly a more
dignified way of informing me of that, as opposed to the more vitriolic
"Fuck You Shayde" lol... You know that saying, you can catch more flies with
honey than you can with vinegar. Often times getting someone to see where
they may have erred or overreacted in a post can be more productive when
done in a calm and collected manner instead of rashly and harshly. Perhaps
my overreaction was because I have gone through 5 pregnancies and yet only
have one living daughter. 1 miscarriage, 1 stillborn, 1 died 24 hours after
birth, 1 died a week after her 10th birthday. Maybe I'm the one that's just
a tad sensitive when it comes to taking risks during pregnancy. I am very
glad that your baby was not badly hurt in the car wreck, I'm sure that must
have been very scary for you to go through. And thank you again, for the
emphasis on *avoidable* risk. The absurdity of some of the posts about not
driving, etc. is just, well, absurd.
3. Ben's post was more in reply to Velvet, so no comments here.
4. To Nicole (again):
Yes, you did say some nasty hurtful things. I'm not sure you can fathom
the depth of the effect words like that can have on a person, nor am I sure
you even care or you would perhaps not have said them. Regardless, apology
accepted. Wear your badge of honor in the newsgroup proudly in being the
first person to vehemently flame me. Maybe that means I'm finally starting
to become a PART of this newsgroup, who knows (nah, I doubt it).
5. To Sockermom9:
Lots of people don't make blind assumptions about whether or not someone
is educated about pregnancy and birth (see above regarding 5 pregnancies). I
also worked for some time for an internationally known doctor who headed up
newborn research at one of the USA's (Houston, Texas) most prestigious
medical universities and affiliated hospitals. In fact, she was the first, I
believe, to actually do the research on the effects of caffeine on unborn
infants, many years ago. She also did a study on smoking, etc. (and no, I am
not telling anyone not to drink coffee or not to smoke, I've been told to
fuck off enough for one post, thank you very much, lol). The rest of what I
have to say to you was sent in a private email.
6. To John Warren:
See my replies above about inane comments & the absurdity of remarks
about driving or living in a city or any other thing. Don't put words in my
mouth .. I didn't say to put restrictions on anyone's pleasure, what I *did*
say was my thoughts about *FISTING* during pregnancy... nothing else...
sheesh. The rest of what I have to say to you was sent in email. I will say
here, however, how surprised and disappointed I am in your comments and you
know my reasons for it.
7. To webmaster:
In short, what I said to John, only no email for you :)
8. To Shalon Wood:
See above comments re absurdity. Walking up stairs can hardly be
classified in the same category as a fist up the vagina of a pregnant woman.
9. To R. Kane:
THANK YOU very much. You are one of maybe three people in this entire
newsgroup who are not now out to bury me (and for those who still feel like
it, email me & I'll tell you where I live so you can.. that way my life
insurance policy will pay off... it won't if I do it myself). Anyway, you
are right, that figure was just to make a point. You made your remarks in a
much clearer way than I have here, I know. Again, thanks... I was ready to
give up on this newsgroup and the hurtful (hateful?) people in it.
10. To Bacchae:
Ditto what I said to R. Kane. And thanks for the email, I was able to be
forewarned before I even read the resulting posts. It helped a little to
know several daggers were coming my way, even though I couldn't dodge them.
We may not always agree with each other, but I have always respected you and
your opinions. Sadly, my respect for some others I used to hold in high
regard here has been, however, seriously deflated.
11. To Spyral Fox:
Even though your comments were not directed to me, you made an excellent
point re the mucous plug and other areas to be cautious.
12. To Everyone Else
Amazing how many of you read in my post things I didn't write, such as
thinking or implying I said not to have any sex or pleasure at all during
pregnancy. Not the case. In fact, during most of my pregnancies the doctor
advised that sexual intercourse was not harmful during the first two
trimesters, and depending on how big the mother got, how low the baby was
being carried during the third trimester, the doctor suggested intercourse
could be done safely if a hand was placed around the base of the penis shaft
so as not to penetrate too deeply when there would be a risk to the fetus.
Even more amazing was how many males had so much to say about pregnancy.
I will listen to them with a bit more seriousness when they can say they
have been there, done that, during their pregnancies... (and I am not
commenting to the males who may have commented based on their wife's
experience with pregnancy... still if you have never actually *been*
pregnant, there's no real way you can truly know what it's like.. no
offense).
OK, I will go take the bottle of sleeping pills with me now to the car
while I close the garage door and turn it on so I can breathe the carbon
monoxide while slashing my wrists after tightening the noose around my neck.
P.S. Gee, I love you all, too...
Shalon Wood
> 8. To Shalon Wood:
> See above comments re absurdity. Walking up stairs can hardly be
> classified in the same category as a fist up the vagina of a pregnant woman.
Really? Prove it. Gimme cites.
I suspect that the two aren't *nearly* as far apart as you seem to
think. Stairs are more hazardous than you seem to think; fisting is
almost certainly less so. Indeed, fisting could quite easily be
beneficial; it could easily be done as an extension of perineal
massage, and would greatly reduce the chance of tearing.
Does anyone know what the incidence is of injury/miscarriage due to
falling down stairs?
webm...@houstonbdsm.com
<shay...@bellDEEPsouth.net> wrote:
>7. To webmaster:
> In short, what I said to John, only no email for you :)
ah,but I have now emailed you about my views on what you said. And
about my views on what you say below.
Travis
> Even more amazing was how many males had so much to say about pregnancy.
>I will listen to them with a bit more seriousness when they can say they
>have been there, done that, during their pregnancies... (and I am not
>commenting to the males who may have commented based on their wife's
>experience with pregnancy... still if you have never actually *been*
>pregnant, there's no real way you can truly know what it's like.. no
>offense).
>
>Spam-proofed email ... to reply remove "N2DEEP"
>
Velvet Wood
> "Shayde" <shay...@bellDEEPsouth.net> writes:
>
> > 8. To Shalon Wood:
> > See above comments re absurdity. Walking up stairs can hardly be
> > classified in the same category as a fist up the vagina of a pregnant woman.
>
> Really? Prove it. Gimme cites.
>
> I suspect that the two aren't *nearly* as far apart as you seem to
> think. Stairs are more hazardous than you seem to think; fisting is
> almost certainly less so. Indeed, fisting could quite easily be
> beneficial; it could easily be done as an extension of perineal
> massage, and would greatly reduce the chance of tearing.
>
> Does anyone know what the incidence is of injury/miscarriage due to
> falling down stairs?
Actually it's probably lower than you would think. If you'll recall, I've
never been the epitome of grace and beauty, and my ankles do that "collapse
under me for no appreciable reason whatsoever" thing quite often, and this
is one of the things I asked about (well, falling in general, not necessarily
down stairs) and was told that the baby is very well protected against falls,
being cushioned by a large bag of water and all. Hmmm..expieriment, take one
egg, syphon out some egg gunk using hypodermic, inject air and cover hole
with superglue or something to make airtight again. Place air in a balloon.
Fill balloon with water. Bounce it down the stairs. I bet the egg comes out
ok more times than not.
As for fisting...if you'll recall, when I was pregnant, a few times after
particularly vigorous sex, especially if I were on top or on my knees,
the bumping of yourself against my cervix was quite uncomfortable and at
least a couple of times resulted in bleeding. This is, I believe, what
led us to discover that oh-so-comfortable position with me on my back and
you on your side. The couple of times that I've had your fist or something
of equivalent size inserted since then, I could most definately feel
bumping or *something* on my cervix and there was always a bit of blood
afterwards. Thus it seems to me that this would not be a good thing to do
if one's cervix is in that swollen, easily irritatable, and somewhat fragile
state that it achieves during pregnancy.
Velvet
Velvet Wood
> with superglue or something to make airtight again. Place air in a balloon.
> Fill balloon with water. Bounce it down the stairs. I bet the egg comes out
> ok more times than not.
The second sentence should have read, "Place *egg* in a balloon." I'm going
to bed now.
Velvet
Shalon Wood
> : OK, I will go take the bottle of sleeping pills with me now
> : to the car while I close the garage door and turn it on so I can
> : breathe the carbon monoxide while slashing my wrists after tightening
> : the noose around my neck.
>
> Remember, "down, not across".
1: I didn't know you were a monk.
2: Thanks. I skipped that bit, figuring that someone would do a better
job than I could in my current state.
Binder
... Not once did I say not to have sex, I was
> referring ONLY to someone ramming a fist up a pregnant woman's vagina,
Er, Shayde? Not all fisting involves "ramming" anything... in fact,
as I understand it, "punch fucking" is relatively rare. I've
certainly done both, but not during a pregnancy. If I were faced
with that particular dilemma, I don't know precisely what I would
do, or not do. Depending on Doctor's Orders... but I sincerely doubt
that punch fucking would be involved for at least the nine month
term.
{curettage]
> OK, I will go take the bottle of sleeping pills with me now to the car
> while I close the garage door and turn it on so I can breathe the carbon
> monoxide while slashing my wrists after tightening the noose around my neck.
Now, CUT THAT OUT!
It's a very unpleasant strategem to use on people that *do* care
about you, and there ARE those here. If you need to rant, or call us
all shits, that's fine with me... but don't pull this suicide crap,
please.
We've been there before, M, and I seem to remember a promise that
you wouldn't do it again. (Yes, I AM posting it to the newsgroup, so
that those of us that are concerned will know it may not be a
serious threat.)
I'm honestly, deeply sorry. But we can't fix it for you; all we can
do is help you fix it. Maybe we can help... it's really up to you.
Binder
--
*to reply, remove the idjit*
Spammers will be Spade (see samspade.org for more info)
SSBDC, Vallejo, CA
duny...@my-deja.com
And to Nicole, good luck! I hope you have a timely delivery. My
little package arrived 2 days before her due date, and the fun
hasn't stopped since. Of course, I never imagined that I would enjoy
being a service slave, or have such a high tolerance for nipple
torture. Thus does fortune (and hormones), make fools of us all.
Duny, whose darling little girl could easily suck a golf ball
through a garden hose.
Steven S. Davis
: 1. To Nicole:
: How nice of you to judge me so harshly when you know nothing about
: me or my prior 5 pregnancies. Not once did I say not to have sex, I was
: referring ONLY to someone ramming a fist up a pregnant woman's vagina,
Since there was no one discussing any such thing, that makes you
an even bigger idjiot than you'd have been had you been discussing
fisting, as was everyone else.
: and
: as the post that I was responding to from Janet Hardy implied, one doctor
: said definitely not, one said ok, etc. My remark was in lieu of that one
: doctor who said definitely not. Has and had nothing to do with having sex.
As Janet said, no one knows how much of a risk fisting during
pregnancy is. Nor does anyone know how big a risk sex during
pregnancy is (but since lots of people do it, we figure it's
OK), but the remarks you made in the article to which
I'm responding indicate that it *is* a risk (anything which can
be made less of a risk by a corrective action must be a risk), and
according to your own logic pregnant women should therefore avoid
the unnecessary (since it's only about something as unimportant
as pleasure (really, John, you know the reason why pleasure, and
especially sexual pleasure, is considered too frivolous a reason
to justify any risk, it's because we've never entirely overcome
the Puritan heritage (that's the USAian answer; those people
from other countries (besides, perhaps, England) need your own
excuse))) risk of sex during pregnancy (OK, if we use your
statements narrowly, only during the last trimester need pregnant
women avoid sex).
But since sex - by which is meant vaginal intercourse - is understood
by many and enjoyed by most, no one is going to say not to have
sex while pregnant. But since fisting is understood, practiced,
and enjoyed by few, to fist during pregnancy is something people
are happy to condemn even while not condemning vagina intercourse
even though the same logic they use to tell people not to fist
during pregnancy would also tell them not to fuck during pregnancy
(a more rational argument about comparative risks and risk thresholds
could have been made, but it was not, you made an absolutist argument
that any risk that's avoidable should be avoided, so if you are not
a liar or fool then vagina intercourse should also be avoided. It
is, after all, just sexual pleasure, and people can go without such
for 9 months, and shouldn't anyone do so if it might make even the
smallest reduction in the risk to your child. That was the standard
you said should apply to fisting. Why does it not apply to fucking,
aside from the fact that you know something about the latter and
apparently nothing about the former ?
: and the baby a picture of perfect health. May you never have to go
: through the experience of losing a baby or having one born dead.
You are going to be crud in my view for, at the least, a very, very,
long time.
: 8. To Shalon Wood:
: See above comments re absurdity. Walking up stairs can hardly be
: classified in the same category as a fist up the vagina of a pregnant
: woman.
Already well answered.
: 12. To Everyone Else
: Amazing how many of you read in my post things I didn't write, such as
: thinking or implying I said not to have any sex or pleasure at all during
: pregnancy.
Everyone else knew what you said. You apparently don't understand
your own statements any better than you understand fisting.
: Not the case. In fact, during most of my pregnancies the doctor
: advised that sexual intercourse was not harmful during the first two
: trimesters, and depending on how big the mother got, how low the baby was
: being carried during the third trimester, the doctor suggested intercourse
: could be done safely if a hand was placed around the base of the penis shaft
: so as not to penetrate too deeply when there would be a risk to the fetus.
But obviously if there is any such risk - and there must be if there are
actions recommended to mitigate risk - the way to make the risk zero is
to not have sex.
As I said, an argument might be made that the miniscule risk from
fisting is still greater than the miniscule risk from fucking, and
that this is why one is OK and the other is not. But to make that
argument requires some real facts about the comparative risks, which
no one has, and not just a prejudice against a practice that you
don't understand, which you have in abundance. And in any event,
you didn't discuss comparative risks and risk tolerance, you claimed
an imperative to reduce all risk - at least all related to sexual
pleasure (actually, it was "kinky" pleasure, IIRC, that you were
so dismissive of, so we should grant you that, you didn't say to
avoid sex, you said to avoid kinky kinds of sex) - as far as is
possible.
: OK, I will go take the bottle of sleeping pills with me now
: to the car while I close the garage door and turn it on so I can
: breathe the carbon monoxide while slashing my wrists after tightening
: the noose around my neck.
Remember, "down, not across".
Spyral Fox
(Sockermom9) writes:
>Let's do a short review on how pregnancy works. Mom gets knocked up (I must
>assume that we all know how this works). The fetus grows in a protective sea
>of amniotic fluid for roughly nine months. Nothing gets in or out but
>through mom's bloodstream. The cervix is squeezed tightly shut.
>
>Now, lots of things can happen to a fetus in there, but the only ones that
>can cause brain-damage or other birthdefects are those things that were there
to
>start with or got in through the mother's connection to the fetus. Sticking
>a penis, or a hand, or a vibrator, or a cucumber, into the vagina won't do it.
[...snip of rest of post, most of which I do agree with...]
Lynnn, you're incorrect. The cervix isn't "squeezed tightly shut"
-- it's more accurate to say its in the "normal" *undilated* state, and
sealed with a mucous plug. In later pregnancy in particular, it
is not unheard of for the mom to wander around half a cm or
more dilated for several days or more. I know a bunch of women
who spent several days at 5 cm in the last week of pregnancy.
However, I'd assume that for most women the actvity would not
be quite so close to labor unless you're trying to induce it.
The mucous plug is certainly a nice handy way to shut the fetus
and its membranes up in the safety of the uterus, but there have
been cases where vaginal infections did manage to migrate upward,
attacking the placental, amniotic, alantoic, and chorionic membranes
and leading to fetal damage or death. In most of the cases I
have read, the idjit woman had been douching -- a great way
of dislodging that mucous plug -- but in a few she had not.
I'll happily stress that this infectious route is not a common type
of problem, and I certainly wouldn't worry personally about a
penis, hand, vibrator, cucumber, etc. -- unless I was a woman
who was known to have an "incompetent" cervix. Most of these
women have already had several kids, and the cervix is more
"open," but it can occur in primaparas, too.
I'd want to check with my gynecologist to ensure that things
really were properly sealed up, that the cervix was staying in
its normal, non-dilated condition, and so on. IMO, it's a good
idea for any pregnant woman to see a specialist early in
pregnancy and often throughout [often may vary considerably
depending on the woman's health and family history -- in my
family it's usually every week, but in most it's not] and to check
with that medical specialist (whether a midwife or an obstetrician)
to make sure that for that particular woman there are not any
major risk factors.
duny...@my-deja.com
"Shayde" <shaydeN2@@bellDEEPsouth.net> wrote:
> 1. To Nicole:
> How nice of you to judge me so harshly when you know nothing
about me
> or my prior 5 pregnancies. Not once did I say not to have sex, I was
> referring ONLY to someone ramming a fist up a pregnant woman's vagina,
I must point out here, especially for the benefit of the original
posters, that when I discussed fisting during pregnancy, I was NOT
referring to the practice of "punch fucking", which is what Shayde
is describing here. Shayde, I am deeply sorry for your losses. I
can understand your level of risk aversion during pregnancy. I
avoided a lot of risk factors during my pregnancy, and I would
have to say that fisting, the way we practiced it, was not a risky
activity. I don't know if you have ever engaged in fisting, but
the most common type of vaginal fisting involves the gradual insertion
of the fingers of one hand into the vagina as far as they will go,
then curling the fingers into a fist only after the hand is mostly
inside. Pistoning the fist in and out at this point would be very
dangerous to any woman, pregnant or not. "Punch fucking" is usually
something done with anal fisting, when it is done at all. Every
experience I have had has ended with a slow uncurling of fingers and
gentle withdrawl.
That said, it is important to remember that, during pregnancy, the
geometry changes, and the vagina will shorten as the uterus expands.
A hand that used to fit quite nicely may not be able to get in all the
way anymore. This is where the focus should be on the process, not
the goal. When done with gentleness and patience, it can be a very
effective way to stretch the perineal tissues. Again, the disclaimer:
Fisting during certain pregnancies and conditions (placenta previa or
incompetant cervix, for example), may be a Bad Idea, so check with your
OB or midwife.
Duny
Sockermom9
> Not once did I say not to have sex, I was
>referring ONLY to someone ramming a fist up a pregnant woman's vagina,
Which I suspect may explain a lot. Lots of people misunderstand the term
"fisting" to mean some sort of bizarre boxing experience, in which partner A
rams a knuckle sandwich into partner B's orifice.
That, of course, is not the way it works. I've had more discomfort having
"normal" sex with a too-large-in-either-dimension partner than I've had being
fisted. Ditto not being lubed enough during "normal" sex.
I'm not out to require every person here to go out and get fisted, or to do so
everyday, particularly during pregnancy. But neither am I going to tell anyone
not to do the things that I'm reasonably sure they're going to do anyway. If
fisting happens to be one of those things, then learn what you can, make an
informed decision, and take whatever safety precautions you and your caregiver
decide are appropriate.
Sockermom9
But since fisting is understood, practiced,
>and enjoyed by few, to fist during pregnancy is something people
>are happy to condemn even while not condemning vagina intercourse
The fear of the unknown makes people think illogically all the time. Shayde
has, perhaps, somewhat more reason to be defensive of pregnancies. I don't
think we're going to convince her of anything by badgering her, and I don't
particularly care. "He said/she said" arguements are the least enjoyable
things we get into here--I'd rather talk about statistics.
Leave her alone, let her BP get back to normal; maybe she'll realize our
sterling worth, maybe she'll hate us for all eternity (oh, woe is me!), but
you're beating a dead...horse.
Sockermom9
>Lynnn, you're incorrect. The cervix isn't "squeezed tightly shut"
>-- it's more accurate to say its in the "normal" *undilated* state, and
>sealed with a mucous plug.
Yeah, that's what I meant. I didn't want to go into details, and get into the
"my textbook is bigger than your textbook" debate (as I have no intention at
all of going to get my textbook).
>In later pregnancy in particular, it
>is not unheard of for the mom to wander around half a cm or
>more dilated for several days or more. I know a bunch of women
>who spent several days at 5 cm in the last week of pregnancy.
I should have been so lucky.
>However, I'd assume that for most women the actvity would not
>be quite so close to labor unless you're trying to induce it.
My OB told us, apparently jokingly, that a great way to induce labor was to
engage in "wild sex". Looking back, the joke was on me--virtually any sex, at
nine months, is "wild". But, if he'd know what my definition of "wild sex" was
to become, I doubt he'd have said anything so frivolous.
It worked, for the record, Number One Son was born on 8/8/88.
Nicole Cloonan
: I'd rather talk about statistics.
Let no one question your pervertedness.
shining-one{WH}
> 1. To Nicole:
<snip rant>
And when you're finshed playing the martyr, you might want to surrender the
cross to someone else; we have limited play space here.
People took you to task because you made a sweeping and exceedingly
judgmental characterization of an activity you don't appear to know much
about.
Others have made the point about your argumentative imperative to all women
reduce all possible risks during pregnancy far better than I. I would just
like to point out one other thing. Your experience with pregnancy is just
that: your experience. Your doctor told you that sex during *your*
pregnancy was fine up to the third trimester; my doctor (and most of the
texts I've read on the subject) told me that most people should be very
careful about sex during the *first* trimester, when strong uterine
contractions from orgasm could result in spontaneous abortion (aka
miscarriage). Had I been into fisting at the time I was pregnant, I would
certainly have asked the doc's opinion on that, as well.
Oh, and I do take exception with your sweeping characterization of fisting
as "ramming" the fist into the vagina; that is certainly not my experience
with it, and while I'm know some people do fist in precisely that manner,
you should be aware that not everyone (in fact, probably not the majority of
people) use that particular technique. YMMV, YKIOK (did I miss any
disclaimers there?).
--
shining-one{WH}
Property of her beloved Master Whiphand
(The movers are coming on Monday and I'm NOT READY!!!)
R. Kane
> Bob writes:
>>I have no experience with fisting but it seems as though it would be at least
>>incrementally more risky than intercourse.
> Why? How so?
The size I guess. And I have the feeling that the thusting of a full sized fist,
especially that of a man (we tend to have larger hands), might shake things up
down there a little bit more than a penis would. That's kinda the point, no?
Like I said, I have no experience with fisting (yet) and if I am wrong please
enlighten me.
When my wife became pregnant we were counselled to avoid intercourse for the
first several weeks. My understanding was that intercourse might interfere
with the embryo embedding itself in the uterus. We had had a difficult time
getting pregnant and she was considered a high risk pregnancy due to her
age so we abstained for about the first trimester. Perhaps this is
unnecessary for younger mothers.
Kepytan
"Spyral Fox" <spyr...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000928230649...@nso-fk.aol.com...
*SNIP SO THIS POST WONT BE 9 PAGES LONG*
> Lynnn, you're incorrect. The cervix isn't "squeezed tightly shut"
> -- it's more accurate to say its in the "normal" *undilated* state, and
> sealed with a mucous plug. In later pregnancy in particular, it
> is not unheard of for the mom to wander around half a cm or
> more dilated for several days or more. I know a bunch of women
> who spent several days at 5 cm in the last week of pregnancy.
> However, I'd assume that for most women the actvity would not
> be quite so close to labor unless you're trying to induce it.
I can agree with that!! pregnancy number 1: dilated 1.5 cms from 3rd month
on
pregnancy number 2: went into pre-term labor July 4. was 5.5 cms dilated
until they induced labor on 8-7.. my doctor was afraid the baby was
eventually going to fall out as the contractions had never completely
stopped. :) I wasnt put on bedrest, just reduced activity as the orig.
diagnosis was that I would go home and give birth in 1-2 days. a month
later the dr gave up and induced 2 weeks before my due date.. I, on the
other hand, had given up long before and went back to normal activities,
including sex (with drs knowledge)
I guess I didnt go into labor because I wanted to hehe such a stubborn
child....
dainerra
R. Kane
> It worked, for the record, Number One Son was born on 8/8/88.
A friend of mine had a daughter that was born on 8/8/80. Therefore she
turned 8 years old on 8/8/88 :-)
Spyral Fox
>Hmmm..expieriment, take one
>egg, syphon out some egg gunk using hypodermic, inject air and cover hole
>with superglue or something to make airtight again. Place air in a balloon.
>Fill balloon with water. Bounce it down the stairs. I bet the egg comes out
>ok more times than not.
?????
OK, I get that the egg goes in the water-filled balloon.
But I'm still missing something.....
Why would you want to empty the egg shell for this? When we do
egg-drop type experiments, we usually use intact eggs. For one
thing, it makes the harline cracks easier to spot. For another, the
act of holing the shell decreases the integrity.
Spyral Fox
Davis) writes:
>As Janet said, no one knows how much of a risk fisting during
>pregnancy is. Nor does anyone know how big a risk sex during
>pregnancy is (but since lots of people do it, we figure it's
>OK), but the remarks you made in the article to which
>I'm responding indicate that it *is* a risk (anything which can
>be made less of a risk by a corrective action must be a risk), and
>according to your own logic pregnant women should therefore avoid
>the unnecessary (since it's only about something as unimportant
>as pleasure (really, John, you know the reason why pleasure, and
>especially sexual pleasure, is considered too frivolous a reason
>to justify any risk, it's because we've never entirely overcome
>the Puritan heritage (that's the USAian answer; those people
>from other countries (besides, perhaps, England) need your own
>excuse))) risk of sex during pregnancy (OK, if we use your
>statements narrowly, only during the last trimester need pregnant
>women avoid sex).
I was going to say that you've been hanging out with Steven
Davis too much, but then I saw that it would be redundant.
>But since sex - by which is meant vaginal intercourse - is understood
>by many and enjoyed by most, no one is going to say not to have
>sex while pregnant.
*Unless* you have a risk factor or set of risk factors such that
your MD would prefer you not to do so. I know several women
who have not only been put on bed-rest, but have also been
told to abstain from sexual activities of any sort while pregnant,
lest they miscarry.
However, for the vast majority of women, the rule is "if you
fell like it, go for it."
Sockermom9
>>>I have no experience with fisting but it seems as though it would be at
>least
>>>incrementally more risky than intercourse.
>
>> Why? How so?
>
>The size I guess. And I have the feeling that the thusting of a full sized
>fist,
>especially that of a man (we tend to have larger hands), might shake things
>up
>down there a little bit more than a penis would. That's kinda the point, no?
>Like I said, I have no experience with fisting (yet) and if I am wrong please
>
>enlighten me.
I don't know that you're wrong, but I've met some *big* penises in my time.
(From time to time, during sex, I'll reflect back on Nick Danger, and hear
"Rocky Rococco, at your cervix.")
>
>When my wife became pregnant we were counselled to avoid intercourse for the
>first several weeks. My understanding was that intercourse might interfere
>with the embryo embedding itself in the uterus. We had had a difficult time
>getting pregnant and she was considered a high risk pregnancy due to her
>age so we abstained for about the first trimester. Perhaps this is
>unnecessary for younger mothers.
No, not necesarily. So asking a caregiver is a good idea. With luck, your
caregiver is sex-positive, and won't go off knee-jerking against a practive
with which they're unfamiliar.
Lynn
New to the world of submission? Check out http://members.aol.com/oldrope/ for
some thoughts for newcomers from those who've been there and decided to stick
around.
Sockermom9
>A friend of mine had a daughter that was born on 8/8/80. Therefore she
>turned 8 years old on 8/8/88 :-)
My guy is pretty convinced that the big new local library opened on his
birthday to honor him.
Spyral Fox
<rNOka...@capital.net> writes:
>When my wife became pregnant we were counselled to avoid intercourse for the
>first several weeks. My understanding was that intercourse might interfere
>with the embryo embedding itself in the uterus. We had had a difficult time
>getting pregnant and she was considered a high risk pregnancy due to her
>age so we abstained for about the first trimester. Perhaps this is
>unnecessary for younger mothers.
Not necessarily -- it depends on the risk factors. In her case, the
history of trouble getting pregnant was more likely to have been a
factor than her age. I'm not a doctor (or midwife) & don't play one
on usenet, but I've been teaching embryology for a number of years,
albeit with the emphasis on non-humans (chicks, sea urchins). Also,
my five female second cousins have all had trouble with conception
and pregnancies, and between them they have had one live birth,
three adoptions, and 17 first-trimester miscarriages. So I know more
than I want to about things that can go wrong. 8-(
In humans who have had trouble with getting pregnant, there is
often the possibility that the conception part worked, but not the
implantation. The contractions of orgasm may (according to
*some* experts) make it more likely that a poorly infiltrated placenta
will detatch, or a young embryo may even fail to be able to
implant, depending on the timing, leading to an early miscarriage.
However, for women with normal fertility, no history of familial
problems, no signs on physical examination of physical problems,
etc. there is very little risk from intercourse at any time during
pregnancy.
Laura Antoniou
<< Not once did I say not to have sex, I was
referring ONLY to someone ramming a fist up a pregnant woman's vagina >>
Well...
Having been a fister for many years, coached by partners who have had kids and
not...
Fisting is only "ramming a fist" anywhere in badly written porn and in the
very rare instances of experienced players who often have to convince their
fist-inserting partner to do what they like/want.
Most of my time fisting has been spent doing a form of vaginal massage,
opening the body, spreading and adding lube, teasing, stretching, etc - with
the hand in various elongated (ie: not curled into a fist) position.
There is certainly no single answer on whether any action is safe during some
generic pregnancy. I've known women to go to their midwives with a Hitachi
Magic Wand and their partner, having joyfully fucked with hands and toys up
until the final days before birth, and I have had two friends who were
basically told not to move during their final trimester. Fisting wasn't the
only thing out of the question for them - driving and stairs and walking more
than three blocks were! So how can any of us, doctors included, make a
judgement on a physical event that can differ so much from woman to woman?
Fisting, if partners normally do it to full insertion of the balled hand and
touching the cervex (either accidently or on purpose), could be adjusted to
less-stretching and less-cervex threatening if one's midwife/OB-GYN is
concerned - a lot of the hand can come into play at the vaginal opening and
along the lower walls.
But I think - in my not-so-humble opinion - that the only arbitor of what is
safe for any individual has to be decided by that individual, with information
available for them to consider, and in the case of a pregnancy, a sex positive
midwife or nurse practitioner or OB - whom the patient trusts - is the best
person to answer the question. But ultimately, just as that woman will have to
decide about coffee and second hand smoke and fatty meats and refined sugar and
whether to go to Disneyland and ride the roller coasters, or swim in the ocean
or whatever provides a major and proven or possible yet miniscule chance of
harm to her or her pregnancy - she may decide to throw her heels back and see
how it feels. There is no woman in the world who cannot be accused of "taking
chances" during pregnancy, and no pregnancy that is completely free from the
potential for accidents or even fate, if you believe in that sort of thing.
I am deeply, deeply sorry about the difficulties you have had with your
pregnancies, and of course it explains your contention that women should avoid
as much as possible which might be harmful. However - there is no such thing as
eliminating risk, only lowering it. You believe that fisting is always unsafe
for all pregnant women. There are people who disagree with you, including some
doctors, and some women who have enjoyed fisting as a prelude to pregnancy, as
sport during it, or even as massage prior to delivery. They may be abstaining
from opther thinsg you did choose to do or consume during your pregnancies -
but I hope they wouldn't be so harsh as to accuse you of pueposefully
endagering yourself because you made different choices than they.
Laura
webm...@houstonbdsm.com
Now Spyral, I am pretty sure that falling is not ok for pregnant
women. I know you are the one who does the research and all, but this
falling thing has just got to not be a good thing
Travis
Velvet Wood
> OK, I get that the egg goes in the water-filled balloon.
>
> But I'm still missing something.....
>
> Why would you want to empty the egg shell for this? When we do
> egg-drop type experiments, we usually use intact eggs. For one
> thing, it makes the harline cracks easier to spot. For another, the
> act of holing the shell decreases the integrity.
>
Well, I thought that eggs, when dropped in water, generally sink to the
bottom, unless they're rotten. No one wants to do an experiment with
rotten eggs. However, a baby in the womb is rather bouyant and doesn't
sink to the bottom. So to make the egg more like a baby, it needs something
to make it float better. Thus, a bit of air. I think. Or I could be
totally wrong. Who knows?
Velvet
Binder
>
> Bob writes:
>
> >A friend of mine had a daughter that was born on 8/8/80. Therefore she
> >turned 8 years old on 8/8/88 :-)
>
> My guy is pretty convinced that the big new local library opened on his
> birthday to honor him.
No coincidence there, IMO. Lucky Guy! And, if he's enamoroured of
bookish persuits, so much the better!
Binder
Spyral Fox
webm...@houstonbdsm.com writes:
Obviously, the keyboard has gremlins. Or maybe diet soda.
That should have read "...if you feel like it..."
Bacchae
"Perhaps my overreaction was because I have gone through 5
pregnancies and yet only
have one living daughter. 1 miscarriage, 1 stillborn, 1 died
24 hours after
birth, 1 died a week after her 10th birthday. Maybe I'm the one
that's just
a tad sensitive when it comes to taking risks during
pregnancy."
Steven S. Davis replies:
"that makes you an even bigger idjiot"
"You are going to be crud in my view for, at the least, a very,
very, long time."
and to her comments about wrist-slashing he writes:
"Remember, "down, not across"."
Steven, this is the ugliest, most insensitive, least
compassionate, horrifying and repulsive post I think I have
seen posted to this newsgroup in a long time, if ever.
Shayde has an incredibly good reason to be sensitive about
unnecessary risks taken during pregnancy and I am astounded
that you are so incredibly insensitive. This isn't "your kink
isn't okay", this is a "profound, life-altering pain from
tragic personal experience about how precious the life of a
child is" hot button. You jumped up and down on her hot button
as if you were going for team gold in the trampoline event at
the Olympics all by yourself.
Shame on you. I am disgusted and repulsed to have even read
how inhumane you are.
Do you kick little old ladies when they're down too?
Jerk.
- Sandy
Bacchae at cadvision dot com
--
Bacchae at cadvision dot com
"Beauty is terror. Whatever we call beautiful, we quiver
before it. We want to be devoured by it, to hide ourselves
in that fire which refines us."
- Donna Tartt
webm...@houstonbdsm.com
<bac...@nospamcadvision.com> wrote:
>
>Steven S. Davis replies:
>
>"that makes you an even bigger idjiot"
>
>"You are going to be crud in my view for, at the least, a very,
>very, long time."
just a note, this second comment by Stephen was made in response to a
totally different comment then the one pointed out by Sandy, and read
the way I read the comment Stephen was responding to, I can see why he
said what he did.
>
>and to her comments about wrist-slashing he writes:
>
>"Remember, "down, not across"."
>
>Steven, this is the ugliest, most insensitive, least
>compassionate, horrifying and repulsive post I think I have
>seen posted to this newsgroup in a long time, if ever.
>
sorry. When people threaten suicide in order to be martyred because
people very correctly point out the illogical and judmental nature of
their post, then explaining to them how to do the suicide in a more
successful way is absolutely not insensitive. Manipulation by
martyrdom is no better than any other form of manipulation and no more
entitled to respect or "success"
and I have seen many posts just as insensitive and just as
intentionally cruel written very recently in this newsgroup,
concerning other peoples "hot buttons" as you say later on in your
post.
>
>Shayde has an incredibly good reason to be sensitive about
>unnecessary risks taken during pregnancy
no. She has incredibly good reason for her being sensitive to her
taking unnecessary risks during pregnancy. I have high blood pressure.
I have good reason for me to be sensitive about running risks. I do
not have good reason to be sensitive or judgmental about other people
without the same problem running risks for themselves.
and I am astounded
>that you are so incredibly insensitive. This isn't "your kink
>isn't okay",
yes it was. It was very clearly judmental about folks taking any risk
where pregnancy was involved. It was absolutely judmental about folks
that would run the risk of fisting during pregnancy or doing something
just for kinky sex that would involve a risk. It was clearly putting
them in the "not good" "selfish" catagory. Not just a "do it safe",
"study the consequences" sort of thing, but very clearly a strongly
judmental attack at people who have that kink.
>this is a "profound, life-altering pain from
>tragic personal experience about how precious the life of a
>child is" hot button.
same logic as defending the lady who said fucking dogs was bad because
of her religion. Her beliefs came about as a result of very profound
life altering things in her life. Her religion was a hot button to
her. It was just not a good basis for being judmental of others who do
not share that hot button, and who did not have the same or similar
"life-altering" experience.
>You jumped up and down on her hot button
>as if you were going for team gold in the trampoline event at
>the Olympics all by yourself.
boy did that happen very recently with reference to the religious
threads, and with great glee by many.
hot buttons are fine. I have mine, and my reading of your posts is
that you pretty clearly have yours, at least with reference to
strongly "pro female" things. ( I do not say "feminist") I suspect
that your hot buttons have grown out of profound life altering
situations in your life. Mine have as well.
Nothing wrong with the hot buttons, so long as we realize what they
are, and realize they are ours, not the rest of the worlds. just do
not be judmental toward others who do not share your hot button. And
no, pregnancy and loss of a child is no different than other "hot
buttons". It is no more life altering than other things. I do not say
that to be insensitive. There are just lots of things as bad.
I lost a wife to disease when she was beautiful and 42 years old.
Terrible pain. Not as bad though as my son's loss. He lost his mother
when he was 11. I was able to seek some form of comfort, and has Ty
has said, sometimes men "replace". I sought, unsuccessfully to
"replace" rather than mourn, and found I could not replace until I
had mourned. My son had no alternatives. No one to even attempt to
"replace " with. He was stuck with me.
Our pain from that shared loss gives neither of us the right to be
judmental about others. Gives neither of us the right to martyr
ourselves or make other people buy into our illogical statements
because we have had great pain.
If John talks about his war experiences that is fine. If he expects me
to believe in some stupid argument he makes because he had it tough in
SE Asia, that does not work. (I do not remember any "stupid arguments
by John, so that was not a slam, but a "potential" example)
We can share our experiences, good and painful,
give rational and logical advice, but then understand our experience
is our own, and no one makes it through this life without great pain.
No one.
>
>Shame on you. I am disgusted and repulsed to have even read
>how inhumane you are.
he isn't. He can be coldly logical, which obvioulsy Shade is not. Her
original post was judmental and illogical, and people pointed it out.
She responded with a great lack of logic and very sexist comments,
and threatened suicide over a stupid thread on a newsgroup that is
composed of people she does not even know. She was obvioulsly on an
emotional tirade.
>
>Do you kick little old ladies when they're down too?
no. He pointed out some of the flaws of her comments, and failed to
fall for the martyr manipulation trick.
>- Sandy
>Bacchae at cadvision dot com
Travis
M Shirley Chong
about unnecessary risks taken during pregnancy...
Shirley: Well, I can match her five pregnancies, raise her one and
call on "no living children at all." Does that mean that it would be
even more acceptable for me to make hysterical, judgmental posts
about pregnancy and risk?
I think not.
Bacchae wrote: and I am astounded that you are so incredibly
insensitive. This isn't "your kink isn't okay", this is a
"profound, life-altering pain from tragic personal experience about
how precious the life of a child is" hot button. You jumped up and
down on her hot button as if you were going for team gold in the
trampoline event at the Olympics all by yourself.
Shirley: Everyone has hot buttons. And the responsibility for those
buttons belongs to the individual to whom the buttons belong. No one
else is required or even encouraged to avoid such buttons.
I've let my buttons be pushed a few times on this newsgroup and I've
been called up short when it happened (I think I vaguely remember a
post from you in that category; however, my memory being what it is
nowadays, I wouldn't swear to it). And yeah, it hurt--I feel
humiliated when I lose sight of my personal responsibilities. That
doesn't mean that anyone should avoid pushing my buttons--that's my lookout.
Bacchae wrote: Shame on you. I am disgusted and repulsed to have
even read how inhumane you are.
Do you kick little old ladies when they're down too?
Shirley: And this is supposed to be some sort of devastating close?
Personally, I was absolutely revolted by Shayde's posts (the one
that start the brouhaha and the one that was an answer to a
multitude of people). I recently lost a friend to suicide--about a
year ago, she joked that her family wouldn't notice she was dead
until her body started to stink. When it happened, her family
(living in the same house) didn't discover her body for 24
hours--and they were prompted to make the discovery by the efforts
of a friend who'd gotten a disturbing e-mail from her and tried to
telephone her. I'm still having the horrors over it.
Does this give me permission to have a temper tantrum over Shayde's
rather blatant attempt at martyrdom?
Shirley
to reply via e-mail remove the trees from my address
JOHN WARREN
news:01993694BEACB5A1.2D513A79...@lp.airnews.net...
> If John talks about his war experiences that is fine. If he expects me
> to believe in some stupid argument he makes because he had it tough in
> SE Asia, that does not work. (I do not remember any "stupid arguments
> by John, so that was not a slam, but a "potential" example)
I will admit to being a tad put off by the use of the word "sadist" without
"consensual" or other modifier as a result of having met sadists up close
and personal. However, I like to think I make it clear this is a personal
prejudice while warning that it may be more common than we in the scene want
to admit and so might create an unnecessary communications problem if used
where vanillas are exposed to it.
--
Diversified Services Books Toys and Videos to the Scene since 1993
www.diversified--services.com (new products added 9/26)
Steven S. Davis
: On Fri, 29 Sep 2000 20:07:33 -0600, "Bacchae"
: <bac...@nospamcadvision.com> wrote:
:
: >Steven S. Davis replies:
: >
: >"that makes you an even bigger idjiot"
: >
: >"You are going to be crud in my view for, at the least, a very,
: >very, long time."
:
: just a note, this second comment by Stephen was made in response to a
: totally different comment then the one pointed out by Sandy, and read
: the way I read the comment Stephen was responding to, I can see why he
: said what he did.
Actually, *both* of my comments quoted by Sandy were in direct
response to different statments by Shayde than the one which
Sandy quoted. And both were entirely justified responses to the
statements in response to which they were made. As for Sandy's
rearranging and snipping for effect, it doesn't alter the truth
concerning - or the truth of - what I wrote.
The SSB FAQ: http://www.unrealities.com/adult/ssbb/faq.htm
The SSB Charter: http://www.mindspring.com/~frites/charter.htm
The SSB Homepage: http://www.phszx81.demon.co.uk/ssb/
The ASB/SSB Welcome: http://www.mindspring.com/~frites/wel.htm
My homepage: http://links.magenta.com/lmnop/users/sd/sd.html
Bacchae
news:8r4qtm$mk5$1...@links.magenta.com...
> webm...@houstonbdsm.com wrote:
>
> : On Fri, 29 Sep 2000 20:07:33 -0600, "Bacchae" wrote:
> :
> : >Steven S. Davis replies:
> : >
> : >"that makes you an even bigger idjiot"
> : >
> : >"You are going to be crud in my view for, at the least, a
very,
> : >very, long time."
> :
> : just a note, this second comment by Stephen was made in
response to a
> : totally different comment then the one pointed out by
Sandy, and read
> : the way I read the comment Stephen was responding to, I can
see why he
> : said what he did.
>
direct
> response to different statments by Shayde than the one which
> Sandy quoted. And both were entirely justified responses to
the
> statements in response to which they were made. As for
Sandy's
> rearranging and snipping for effect, it doesn't alter the
truth
> concerning - or the truth of - what I wrote.
Yes, the comments by Steven weren't necessarily in reply to the
comments I snipped from Shayde's post. The reason I snipped
the comments I did were because, as far as I was concerned,
Shayde's sensitivity to the topic was more than sufficiently
explained in those few details. Steven's persistance in being
cruel to Shayde, even after knowing how heart-wrenching the
topic for her must be, is unconscionable.
Sorry for any confusion.
Bacchae
> Bacchae wrote: Shayde has an incredibly good reason to be
sensitive
> about unnecessary risks taken during pregnancy...
>
> Shirley: Well, I can match her five pregnancies, raise her
one and
> call on "no living children at all." Does that mean that it
would be
> even more acceptable for me to make hysterical, judgmental
posts
> about pregnancy and risk?
>
> I think not.
I would think so.
You could say pretty well anything on the topic and my heart
would twist in compassion for you and for anyone else who had
lost a child.
> Shirley: Everyone has hot buttons. And the responsibility for
those
> buttons belongs to the individual to whom the buttons belong.
No one
> else is required or even encouraged to avoid such buttons.
It is obviously a character flaw of mine that I have a special
sensitivity to certain hot buttons, whether they are mine or
not.
>
> I've let my buttons be pushed a few times on this newsgroup
and I've
> been called up short when it happened (I think I vaguely
remember a
> post from you in that category; however, my memory being what
it is
> nowadays, I wouldn't swear to it). And yeah, it hurt--I feel
> humiliated when I lose sight of my personal responsibilities.
That
> doesn't mean that anyone should avoid pushing my
buttons--that's my lookout.
I am sorry that I may have hurt you (I am trying to think of
what I may have said either but I can't think of anything, if
you remember, please let me know and I will do what I can to
provide a more complete reply that will hopefully explain my
own feelings on the topic, whatever it was).
There is one mean thing I recall myself saying (other than to
trolls) and which I still carry some guilt over and that was to
John Warren and I will take this opportunity to apologize to
him for that.
>
> Bacchae wrote: Shame on you. I am disgusted and repulsed to
have
> even read how inhumane you are.
>
> Do you kick little old ladies when they're down too?
>
> Shirley: And this is supposed to be some sort of devastating
close?
No. I just had an image in my head that expressed the sort of
bully-ism I felt his post represented. I daresay I am not
quite naive enough to think anything I could possibly think of
saying would be devastating to Steven S. Davis.
>
> Personally, I was absolutely revolted by Shayde's posts (the
one
> that start the brouhaha and the one that was an answer to a
> multitude of people). I recently lost a friend to
suicide--about a
> year ago, she joked that her family wouldn't notice she was
dead
> until her body started to stink. When it happened, her family
> (living in the same house) didn't discover her body for 24
> hours--and they were prompted to make the discovery by the
efforts
> of a friend who'd gotten a disturbing e-mail from her and
tried to
> telephone her. I'm still having the horrors over it.
>
> Does this give me permission to have a temper tantrum over
Shayde's
> rather blatant attempt at martyrdom?
It might have.
What I saw in Shayde's comments is that she was profoundly hurt
by the comments received in reply to her first posting. I
think her use of hyperbole showed she wasn't serious but tried
to express how deeply shaken she was by the topic.
Although the tone of her first comments were somewhat
ill-advised as soon as she posted her reply indicating her
personal experience with loss I felt people would understand
her sensitivity and that would be that. It appears I was
wrong.
JOHN WARREN
nonconsensual connotations
--
Diversified Services Books Toys and Videos to the Scene since 1993
www.diversified--services.com (new products added 9/26)
<thor...@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:39d610fb...@news.xgate.co.kr...
> On Sat, 30 Sep 2000 13:46:35 GMT, "JOHN WARREN"
> <ment...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> ><webm...@houstonbdsm.com> wrote in message
> >news:01993694BEACB5A1.2D513A79...@lp.airnews.net...
> >> If John talks about his war experiences that is fine. If he expects me
> >> to believe in some stupid argument he makes because he had it tough in
> >> SE Asia, that does not work. (I do not remember any "stupid arguments
> >> by John, so that was not a slam, but a "potential" example)
> >
> >I will admit to being a tad put off by the use of the word "sadist"
without
> >"consensual" or other modifier as a result of having met sadists up close
> >and personal. However, I like to think I make it clear this is a
personal
> >prejudice while warning that it may be more common than we in the scene
want
> >to admit and so might create an unnecessary communications problem if
used
> >where vanillas are exposed to it.
> >
> >--
> >Diversified Services Books Toys and Videos to the Scene since 1993
> >www.diversified--services.com (new products added 9/26)
> >
>
> How would you, John, define the term "sadist" as used specifically
> within the structure of this group?
>
> Speaking for myself, and only for myself, it is difficult if not
> impossible to define ones-self as a sadist and still comply with the
> concept of "safe, sane and consensual" since sadism by definition is
> almost never consensual. Safety and sanity are of course in the eye of
> the beholder but I do think "consensual" is rather rigidly defined
> even within a news group that prides itself on its lack of rigidity.
>
>
> Thorn
> Ecstasy is the perfect union of pleasure and pain.
>
> _____NetZero Free Internet Access and Email______
> http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
>
Steven S. Davis
: Yes, the comments by Steven weren't necessarily in reply to the
: comments I snipped from Shayde's post. The reason I snipped
: the comments I did were because, as far as I was concerned,
: Shayde's sensitivity to the topic was more than sufficiently
: explained in those few details. Steven's persistance in being
: cruel to Shayde,
One article responding to her attacks may be cruel. It's
not persistent cruelty.
: even after knowing how heart-wrenching the
: topic for her must be,
Strangely enough, I assume that anyone may have suffered in
ways that I don't know, and so try not to say to people
what I wouldn't say to them had I known their histories.
: is unconscionable.
Being cold, calloused, and calculatingly cruel, my conscious
is quite clear.
But let's examine your maxim.
So then if someone who has suffered because of what
she associates with BDSM were to came to SSB and said that
we should stop doing BDSM because of its great potential
for harm, which she knew about from personal experience
(not too far from ES's position, in his clearer moments
(including the part about selfish pursuit of kinky thrills
at the risk of harm to others)), her comments should go
without answer, her idiocies should be ignored, distortions
of fact overlooked, hurtful comments given a free pass, and
cheap attempted manipulations tolerated ? All is permitted
if someone says she's suffered ?
And, of course, anyone whose reason for feeling deeply
about an issue (we know some reasons that don't pass muster)
meets your particular standards gets a free pass for any
inanity ?
I think not.
If something is too sensitive for someone to discuss,
especially if that hypersensitivity inclines zir to make
stupid comments, there's a simple solution to that problem:
don't discuss it. Not without labelling it as a coredump.
If zie decides to just go ahead and dump the opinions derived
from zir hypersensitive state on others, zie's not entitled
to expect only positive responses.
Fools who have suffered are still fools, and while we might
feel sympathy for their suffering, we don't have to suffer
their foolishness.
: Sorry for any confusion.
*shrug* Considering the source, it was unsurprising.
webm...@houstonbdsm.com
<bac...@nospamcadvision.com> wrote:
>"M Shirley Chong" wrote in message ...
>> Bacchae wrote: Shayde has an incredibly good reason to be
>sensitive
>> about unnecessary risks taken during pregnancy...
>>
>> Shirley: Well, I can match her five pregnancies, raise her
>one and
>> call on "no living children at all." Does that mean that it
>would be
>> even more acceptable for me to make hysterical, judgmental
>posts
>> about pregnancy and risk?
>>
>> I think not.
>
>I would think so.
not if she expected them to not be answered with intelligence and
logic.
>
>You could say pretty well anything on the topic and my heart
>would twist in compassion for you and for anyone else who had
>lost a child.
I will bet you that there is not one person posting on this newsgroup
whose heart does not twist with compassion for anyone who has lost a
child, or a spouse or a sibling. Any untimely death (ok, we all expect
to see our parents die when we are old and they are older, we still
give sympathy for that, but probably not at the same level as an
"untimely" death) brings that about.We have seen it over and over on
this newsgroup where people have opened up, and gotten a ton of
compassion.
had Shayde opened up seeking compassion, that would have been one
thing, and she would have received lots of it. What she did was be
very judgmental, post things that made no sense, and then when she was
called on it, she tried manipulation to make people feel guilty.
I am terribly sorry for her loss. I am sorry she feels the way she
does now. I am not sorry that her blatant effort at manipulation was
seen exactly for what it was.
Travis
>
>> Shirley: Everyone has hot buttons. And the responsibility for
>those
>> buttons belongs to the individual to whom the buttons belong.
>No one
>> else is required or even encouraged to avoid such buttons.
>
>It is obviously a character flaw of mine that I have a special
>sensitivity to certain hot buttons, whether they are mine or
>not.
>
>
Again, this puts you right in the middle of the pact on this newsgroup
when it comes to sensitivity and compassion. Most of the posters I
read here have our hot buttons, most of them (and I hope I do as well)
feel some senstivity to the hot buttons of others. Few try to use
their hot buttons to seek others to buy into their weak arguments or
for manipulative purposes.
>>
>
Travis
>
>
>
>
Gerhard
Steven S. Davis wrote in message <8r5fui$4...@netaxs.com>...
>Bacchae (bac...@nospamcadvision.com) wrote:
>
>
:: snip
>Being cold, calloused, and calculatingly cruel, my conscious
>is quite clear.
>
You may be all of the above, including conscious and clear, but your
conscience is not clean, as this statement reveals. If you believe in
'Tricky Dick' type of slips, that is.
Have a good one,
Gerhard
raenedaz
interested to see this below Shalon's Friday post.
<snipped post>
Shalon Wood
--
"The PROPER way to handle HTML postings is to cancel the article, then
hire a
hitman to kill the poster, his wife and kids, and fuck his dog and smash
his
computer into little bits. Anything more is just extremism." - Paul
Tomblin
That sure doesn't sound like someone who's actually torn apart by the
thought of someone accidentally hurting their unborn baby. I'm not giving
my viewpoints on the topic of fisting because I actually was interested in
learning about it myself. Glad to know I'm not the only human reading this
ng though.
raenedaz
Steven S. Davis
: Steven S. Davis wrote in message <8r5fui$4...@netaxs.com>...
I believe that one of the few solid statements attributed to Freud
is that "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar".
Joe Zeff
>That sure doesn't sound like someone who's actually torn apart by the
>thought of someone accidentally hurting their unborn baby.
What a disgusting cheap-shot! Not only that, it's followed by a quote
of an entire post by a third-party, without comment. Have you
considered seeing a doctor to have your cranial-rectal insertion
corrected?
--
Joe Zeff
The Guy With the Sideburns
The point here is that there are stupid people all over.
http://www.lasfs.org http://home.earthlink.net/~sidebrnz
TyMeDwn1st
>I've definitely been following this thread from the beginning and was
>interested to see this below Shalon's Friday post.
>
><snipped post>
>
>Shalon Wood
>
>--
>"The PROPER way to handle HTML postings is to cancel the article,
>then hire a hitman to kill the poster, his wife and kids, and fuck his dog
> and smash his computer into little bits. Anything more is just extremism." -
Paul Tomblin
>
>That sure doesn't sound like someone who's actually torn apart by the
>thought of someone accidentally hurting their unborn baby. I'm not giving
>my viewpoints on the topic of fisting because I actually was interested in
>learning about it myself. Glad to know I'm not the only human reading this
>ng though.
>raenedaz
Am I missing some kind of sarcasm here, or are you actually trying to connect a
smart-ass sig statement about HTML with someone's views on compassion, fisting,
and fetuses?
Ty
Who is mostly just
a slightly skewed
Donna Reed
Official Depooty of Sheriff of Nettingham's Charter Enforcers on SSBB
(To reply via email, simply remove my pearls...)
Anthony Hilbert
>I've definitely been following this thread from the beginning and was
>interested to see this below Shalon's Friday post.
>
><snipped post>
>
>Shalon Wood
>
>--
>"The PROPER way to handle HTML postings is to cancel the article, then
>hire a
>hitman to kill the poster, his wife and kids, and fuck his dog and smash
>his
>computer into little bits. Anything more is just extremism." - Paul
>Tomblin
>
>That sure doesn't sound like someone who's actually torn apart by the
>thought of someone accidentally hurting their unborn baby.
Ye gods, I thought I'd seen some humour-impaired characters on this
thread, but that is a clinical case.
--
Anthony Hilbert
Fool, again the dream, the fancy! but I know my words are wild.
- Tennyson: Locksley Hall
Bacchae
So then if someone who has suffered because of what
she associates with BDSM were to came to SSB and said that
we should stop doing BDSM because of its great potential
for harm, which she knew about from personal experience
(not too far from ES's position, in his clearer moments
(including the part about selfish pursuit of kinky thrills
at the risk of harm to others)), her comments should go
without answer, her idiocies should be ignored, distortions
of fact overlooked, hurtful comments given a free pass, and
cheap attempted manipulations tolerated ? All is permitted
if someone says she's suffered ?
Sandy:
Well, for starters, you could do as I did recently when I
ignored Sherman. Completely. You *do* have that option. You
do not need to engage people whose statements are not
consistent with your own world view.
Secondly, if the person you are conjecturing had experience
where BDSM activities resulted in the deaths of 4 people I
think they would have a pretty good foundation to say "what you
are planning could be fatal." Even if you are not doing the
exact thing they have done I think their shared information
requires a moment of reflection rather than immediate derision.
This is the whole point of negotiation and informed consent.
Thirdly, to reiterate Shayde's point in a less confrontational
way:
Would you wait 7 months for someone's shoulder injury to heal
before you suspended them?
Would you wait 6 months for someone's clear AIDS test so you
can have unprotected sex?
Would you wait 5 months for someone's carpal tunnel syndrome
surgery to fully heal before you dragged them around in
handcuffs?
Would you wait 4 months while someone's anal fissure healed
before you anally fucked them with a big dildo?
Would you wait 3 months for your wife's episiotomy to heal
before you had vigorous intercourse?
Would you wait 2 months for someone's corns or bunion to be
treated before you put them back in 6" stilettos?
Would you wait 1 month until someone you are dating is
comfortable having sex?
If you can wait for any of these, why can't you wait for a
child to be born? I would suspect that by the time the woman
even knows she is pregnant it would be less than 7 1/2 months
that you would have to wait. And I am not saying you can't
have regular intercourse, or even somewhat irregular
intercourse. I am not saying you can't practice BDSM. I am
not saying you can't have orgasms (although, as we have seen,
some Doctors have said just that). I am not even saying a
little perineum stretching might not be helpful. I am saying,
why would you not take "worst case scenario" into consideration
when thinking about doing something that *might* have some risk
to it? Wouldn't it be reasonable to be cautious? Isn't the
life and well-being of your child worth at least that?
JOHN WARREN
news:39d7a...@news.cadvision.com...
> Secondly, if the person you are conjecturing had experience
> where BDSM activities resulted in the deaths of 4 people I
> think they would have a pretty good foundation to say "what you
> are planning could be fatal." Even if you are not doing the
> exact thing they have done I think their shared information
> requires a moment of reflection rather than immediate derision.
> This is the whole point of negotiation and informed consent.
Are you saying that fisting caused the death of her children?
Steven S. Davis
: If you can wait for any of these, why can't you wait for a
: child to be born? I would suspect that by the time the woman
: even knows she is pregnant it would be less than 7 1/2 months
: that you would have to wait. And I am not saying you can't
: have regular intercourse, or even somewhat irregular
: intercourse.
Why aren't you ? There is a risk from regular intercourse.
Why aren't you advocating reducing it to zero my refraining
from intercourse ?
: I am not saying you can't practice BDSM.
1;0c
Why aren't you ? BDSM always has risks. It will have greater
risks when the risk factor of pregnancy is introduced. If you
argue for for reducing risk as much as possible and for
consideration of worst case scenarios, why aren't you saying
that people should forgo BDSM for 7 1/2 months ?
: I am not saying you can't have orgasms (although, as we have seen,
: some Doctors have said just that).
And despite the fact that doctors tell you that there are risks,
you don't say to avoid orgasms ? Why not. That is not consistent
with your position on risk avoidance as regards fisting.
: I am not even saying a little perineum stretching might not be
: helpful.
Avoid all fisting however practiced, but some perineum stretching
is OK ?
If you say so.
: I am saying, why would you not take "worst case scenario" into
: consideration when thinking about doing something that *might*
: have some risk to it?
Fine. But why is the worst case scenario considered with regard
to fisting, but not as regards other activities that do have
risk associated with them ?
: Wouldn't it be reasonable to be cautious?
Caution based on reason ? That's certainly reasonable. But
caution based on reason is applied reasonably towards all
risks. You and Shadye would be making a lot more sense if
you *were* arguing for avoidance of sex and BDSM while pregnant
as well as the avoidance of fisting. The degree of popularity
of a practice should not be what determines whether or not it
is acceptably safe.
An argument could be made that those activities are safer than
fisting and that therefore that is why they are OK and fisting
is not. But then you'd have to have some facts to support that
position (anyone can, of course, say "it seems to me that fisting
is not as safe as sex and therefore *I* will not fist but will
have sex during pregnancy"; that would be a perfectly reasonable
position, as would a personal choice to avoid BDSM during pregnancy).
But it would bring the discussion into the realm of risk analysis
and assessments of acceptable risk levels, and since the only
point you seem to have is the emotional blackmail of "shouldn't
you do whatever you need to do to maximize your child's chances"
comparitive risk assessment, acceptable risk, and risk thresholds
isn't where you want to go.
: Isn't the life and well-being of your child worth at least that?
Why isn't the life and well-being of your child worth giving up
vaginal intercourse, and BDSM, for that short time period ? That
vaginal intercourse has risks has been acknowledged by the person
who raised this issue, and others have pointed out the the risks
are not just in late pregancy but also much earlier. Why are you
rejecting the logic of your own argument and not also recommending
avoidance of vaginal intercourse, which your position of considering
the worst case scenario, and of taking all plausible measures to
maximize the health and safety of your precious child, would
dictate that you should do ?
The reason you're not doing it is because if you did apply
your argument consistently people would see that it's a crock
and simply reject it out of hand (so to speak). But by applying
it to something practiced by many fewer people you expect the
weakness of your position to be overlooked. It always much more
popular to supress what "they" do - suppressing it for the good
of the children, of course - than it is to suppress what "we" do.
Bacchae
> Secondly, if the person you are conjecturing had experience
> where BDSM activities resulted in the deaths of 4 people I
> think they would have a pretty good foundation to say "what
you
> are planning could be fatal." Even if you are not doing the
> exact thing they have done I think their shared information
> requires a moment of reflection rather than immediate
derision.
> This is the whole point of negotiation and informed consent.
John Warren asks:
Are you saying that fisting caused the death of her children?
Sandy:
Not even remotely.
The way I read Steven's comments were that he was asking me if
someone who had a bad BDSM experience were to come to SSBB and
make comments about any BDSM activity would I have the same
reaction.
My feeling is, for example, if someone knew of 4 deaths related
to asphyxiation, let's say, you can imagine they might not be
all gung-ho about breath play. Wouldn't their negative
experiences suggest that you need to pause and think twice
about breath play before you consider doing it?
Bacchae
But then you'd have to have some facts to support that position
(anyone can, of course, say "it seems to me that fisting is not
as safe as sex and therefore *I* will not fist but will have
sex during pregnancy"; that would be a perfectly reasonable
position, as would a personal choice to avoid BDSM during
pregnancy).
Sandy says:
If you would like to review my original post where I mention
vaginal insufflation and provide cites you will see that is
exactly my position (from my first post on the topic "I admit
the likelihood of vaginal insufflation happening is pretty rare
and I imagine the chance of it happening as a result of fisting
is even rarer but I personally wouldn't risk it. From what I
have discovered it just wouldn't be worth it to me.") Spyral
Fox's posts on the conjecture that lubricants *could* have an
effect on the mucus plug and premature cervical dilation are
also reasonable statements.
I think you are having a hissy fit because I think you're an
insensitive prick and now you are flinging your derision my
way. I suppose that is fair enough since I flung some your
way.
You are off on a tangent that I am not on. Rather irrational
of you actually.
TyMeDwn1st
>My feeling is, for example, if someone knew of 4 deaths related
>to asphyxiation, let's say, you can imagine they might not be
>all gung-ho about breath play. Wouldn't their negative
>experiences suggest that you need to pause and think twice
>about breath play before you consider doing it?
No. The situations are not similar. I can't recall an instance in six years
in which a question regarding a particular form of play by a particular
individual *who was under the care of a physician for a particular medical
issue* was not discussed with the caveat of "be sure to talk to your own
physician about this," even when all other commentary involved assertions of
safety for the particular activity when performed by others.
Nicole Cloonan
I have tried, really really hard, not to be nasty. It may or
may not have worked, but I did try. I know that I don't feel
angry when writing this. Mostly what I feel is an overwhelming
sadness, because I don't think it's going to make one whit of
difference.
: If you can wait for any of these, why can't you wait for a
: child to be born?
[snip]
: Isn't the life and well-being of your child worth at least that?
*sigh*
The implication being of course that if you don't happen to agree,
you must be a callous and coldhearted child abuser.
I have been pregnant for the last nine months. I was due yesterday
(but not expecting anything to actually happen). I hate being
pregnant. I don't mean that I have been uncomfortable. I mean that
I have *hated* it. With a passion. If I had a time machine, I'd
go back and reverse my decision to concieve. If I could only go
back seven months, I would terminate my pregnancy. Shocking eh? I
should be grateful that my body is able to do this "miracle" at
all when there have been so many heart wrenching tales of those
who's bodies can't, time and time again. Obviously, I can't love
the squid if I can think about terminating him, right?
Obviously I can't love the squid if I can think about doing
something that may increase the risk that the pregnancy would
terminate, right? I mean, isn't the life and well being of my
child worth that?
Sandy, your analogies are crap.
Sure, on an activity by activity basis it may be hard to see
why a pregnant woman may not choose to accept your "worst case
scenario" attitude. You give examples of single activities and
say:
: If you can wait for any of these, why can't you wait for a
: child to be born?
But your worst case scenario attitude doesn't require that I
give up only one activity. It requires that I give up *any*
voluntary activity where there may be an increased risk of
danger to the child. Isn't the life and well being of my child
worth that?
Quite frankly, no it's not.
Because you seem to have exactly *no* idea of the magnitude of
the sacrifice you are asking for. You *are* asking that I give
up orgasms, because these are a voluntary activity which is
known to increase the risk of a premature birth, and hence the
risk of a premature death. You *are* asking that I give up
vaginal intercourse, for the same reasons. You *are* asking that
I give up BDSM. You are asking that I give up swimming. You are
asking that I give up my friends, because getting a cold is
dangerous and taking medication for it is worse. And after all,
socialising is a voluntary activity. Etc. etc. ad nauseum.
As soon as you use the emotional blackmail of "isn't the life
and well being of your child worth it", you *are* asking me to
give up every voluntary activity which increases the risk to my
yet to be born child. If you say you are not, then you either
don't understand your argument, or you don't understand your own
predjudices.
You can't even claim that you are simply asking me to *think*
about the risks. You have asked why I wouldn't give up this
activity, isn't the life and well being of my child worth it?
That is most certainly *not* asking me to think.
As it happens, I do love my squid, and I can't wait to meet him
face to face. Despite whatever emotional tricks you may use to
swing sympathy for your crusade, nothing is going to change that.
Of course, maybe I'd be a bit more patient if I thought the
criticism of my maternal instincts and parenting ability was
going to cease after the child was born. But of course, we all
know it's not going to.
After all, the child will be just as dependant on me after it's
born. And therefore I should give up any voluntary activity that
will increase the risk of me dying prematurely. Like say, BDSM.
Or driving a car.
After all, isn't the life and well being of my child worth it?
Nicole.
--
There are people whose actions cause others to think
"What a nut". I am (apparently) one of these people.
Bacchae
Spyral Fox's posts on the conjecture that lubricants *could*
have an
effect on the mucus plug and premature cervical dilation are
also reasonable statements.
Let me clarify this so it doesn't seem as though I am putting
words in Spyral's mouth. I did not mean to imply that Spyral
said anything about lubricants having an effect on premature
cervical dilation, I meant that it was a separate subject that
was also relevant and based on some conjecture (if I recall her
post correctly).
Sorry Spyral.
M Shirley Chong
child worth giving up vaginal intercourse, and BDSM, for that short
time period ? That vaginal intercourse has risks has been
acknowledged by the person who raised this issue, and others have
pointed out the the risks are not just in late pregancy but also
much earlier. Why are you rejecting the logic of your own argument
and not also recommending avoidance of vaginal intercourse, which
your position of considering the worst case scenario, and of taking
all plausible measures to maximize the health and safety of your
precious child, would dictate that you should do ?
Shirley: This is exactly the same sort of logical inconsistency I've
seen in the debate over abortion. The commonest position against
abortion is to deny it with three exceptions: pregnancy that
threatens the life of the mother, pregnancy that is the result of
rape and pregnancy that is the result of incest. This isn't the only
anti-abortion position but it seems to be the one I've seen most frequently.
And it totally puzzles me. If abortion really is killing a human
being, then how can the three popular exceptions be possible? I can
see a possible logically self-consistent argument for the
anti-abortion proponents for allowing abortion in the case of a
pregnancy that threatens the life of the mother--this could be
viewed as a form of triage, where care is allotted to those who are
most likely to survive (and thus benefit from the resources
expended) and denied or postponed to those who are unlikely to
survive. Since the fetus is unlikely to survive if the mother
doesn't survive, a logical anti-abortion proponent could defend
abortion in this case.
However, abortion in the case of rape or incest? The mother's
physical life isn't likely to be at risk. Does having a father who
is a rapist or whose relationship falls within the statutory
guidelines for incest (in most places, any ancestors, brothers,
nephews and often first cousins) mean that the fetus is no longer a
human being (assuming that fetuses are human beings...)?
It's inconsistent. And such inconsistencies make for a much weaker
argument--to me, anyway. Arguments based on emotional appeal have
little effect on me.
Steven S. Davis wrote: The reason you're not doing it is because if
you did apply your argument consistently people would see that it's
a crock and simply reject it out of hand (so to speak). But by
applying it to something practiced by many fewer people you expect
the weakness of your position to be overlooked. It always much more
popular to supress what "they" do - suppressing it for the good of
the children, of course - than it is to suppress what "we" do.
Shirley: And what Steven did not say is that if you accept the
premise that it is okay for one group of people to nonconsensually
suppress the behaviour of another group of people on the basis of
emotional impression, there is a risk that the proponent of such an
argument will eventually fall into the group of supressees rather
than suppressors.
I've done things in my life that were extremely physically dangerous
and were not practiced by the vast majority of people in my culture.
I will bear the scars of some of those activities to the grave. But
I treasure the freedom I had to do those things. So what if it was
dangerous, so what if I risked my life? The benefits, to me, were
well worth it. I would be a poorer person if I had not done those things.
If I want my freedom, then it is incumbent upon me to support it for
other people, even people doing things that I might not personally
approve of--or *especially* for people doing things I don't
personally approve of.
In this election year for the USA, I don't grant any points to any
politician who proclaims that s/he is against crime, for better
schooling, etc. Who in their right mind is *for* crime??? It's a
bogus claim. I'm much more impressed by someone who has a logical
plan for reducing crime.
To bring up yet another beaten-to-the-death argument on SSBB, it's
important to me to defend the (very few) people who play with loaded
guns. I don't approve, it's certainly nothing I want to do myself or
want to be in proximity to--but they deserve the same freedom I was
given to do my own crazy, life-threatening, glorious acts.
Binder
[jumbo snip]
> You can't even claim that you are simply asking me to *think*
> about the risks. You have asked why I wouldn't give up this
> activity, isn't the life and well being of my child worth it?
> That is most certainly *not* asking me to think.
And you've not yet gone to the full extreme of giving up possibly
infanticidal activities. One would, to protect the unborn
compleetely, need give up any activity that ever caused the death of
an unborn, and all the activities that might, but haven't yet.
I agree, this is one of the saddest threads in memory, on many
fronts.
Binder
Steven S. Davis
:
: Of course, maybe I'd be a bit more patient if I thought the
: criticism of my maternal instincts and parenting ability was
: going to cease after the child was born. But of course, we all
: know it's not going to.
Yup. Expect all the second guessing, here and elsewhere, to
continue.
: After all, the child will be just as dependant on me after it's
: born. And therefore I should give up any voluntary activity that
: will increase the risk of me dying prematurely. Like say, BDSM.
: Or driving a car.
:
: After all, isn't the life and well being of my child worth it?
Well, if Australia is anything like the USA, you can't stop
driving a car because after the squid arrives you become his
designated driver for at least the next 16 years. And you may
need to drive for good sound reasons like getting to work to
support the family and the economy.
But anything that you do merely for your own pleasure that
contains any risk, yup, you're a bad parent if you continue it.
Better put that stuff aside for the next 18 years. That's not
so much to ask, is it ?
JOHN WARREN
> Sandy says:
> > Secondly, if the person you are conjecturing had experience
> > where BDSM activities resulted in the deaths of 4 people I
> > think they would have a pretty good foundation to say "what
> you
> > are planning could be fatal." Even if you are not doing the
> > exact thing they have done I think their shared information
> > requires a moment of reflection rather than immediate
> derision.
> > This is the whole point of negotiation and informed consent.
>
>
> John Warren asks:
>
> Are you saying that fisting caused the death of her children?
>
> Sandy:
>
> Not even remotely.
>
> The way I read Steven's comments were that he was asking me if
> someone who had a bad BDSM experience were to come to SSBB and
> make comments about any BDSM activity would I have the same
> reaction.
>
> to asphyxiation, let's say, you can imagine they might not be
> all gung-ho about breath play. Wouldn't their negative
> experiences suggest that you need to pause and think twice
> about breath play before you consider doing it?
>
>
> Bacchae at cadvision dot com
So you are saying that her fear is due to the deaths of her children were
due to some kind of sexual behavor she participated in. Because if that
isn't the case, why is she so negative about genital insertion rather than
the activity that caused the deaths? If I knew four people who had died
from eating tainted meat, it wouldn't be logical for me to be opposed to
people skydiving?
If the deaths were not due to fisting, why should she be opposed to it
unless it was an unthinking prejudice?
Spyral Fox
<ant...@hilbert.demon.co.uk> writes:
>raenedaz <raen...@yahoo.com> writes
>>I've definitely been following this thread from the beginning and was
>>interested to see this below Shalon's Friday post.
>>"The PROPER way to handle HTML postings is to cancel the article, then
>>hire a
>>hitman to kill the poster, his wife and kids, and fuck his dog and smash
>>his
>>computer into little bits. Anything more is just extremism." - Paul
>>Tomblin
>>
>>That sure doesn't sound like someone who's actually torn apart by the
>>thought of someone accidentally hurting their unborn baby.
>
>Ye gods, I thought I'd seen some humour-impaired characters on this
>thread, but that is a clinical case
Even *I* agree with that.
- - Spyral Fox
--
... a fox to recognize traps, and a lion to frighten wolves
San Diego Resources: http://members.aol.com/spyralfox/
SSBB Cookbook: http://members.aol.com/ssbbcooks/
SSBB Diplomatic Corps member & Depooty Charter Enforcer (CLG)
Spyral Fox
<bac...@nospamcadvision.com> writes:
No ptroblem -- I knew I wrote them as separate ideas, and
I was not myself confused by the juxtaposition. ;-)
Sockermom9
>If you can wait for any of these, why can't you wait for a
>child to be born?
Except that the question, for most women, is more like, "would you wait six
weeks for your back injury to heal to have a pedicure?" Shayde has the idea
that fisting involved "ramming a fist up someone's vagina" or some such thing.
I can wait any *number* of years to have that done.
Lynn
New to the world of submission? Check out http://members.aol.com/oldrope/ for
some thoughts for newcomers from those who've been there and decided to stick
around.
Sockermom9
>But anything that you do merely for your own pleasure that
>contains any risk, yup, you're a bad parent if you continue it.
>Better put that stuff aside for the next 18 years. That's not
>so much to ask, is it ?
You thought you were joking, right?
Sadly, you weren't. There's not much to make you become your mother like having
a kid. Suddenly, the voice in your head becomes frightfully clear, and it's
your mother. She's telling you that it's time for you to become all those
things you've resisted becoming all these years. Are you a free spirit? Time
to develop a schedule! Flexible about laundry? Time to start boiling diapers!
Don't care whether dinner is a Big Mac or rice and lentils? Time to buy all
those nutrition books, and be sure to follow them to the letter, or we'll know
why your offspring didn't make Student Of The Month in kindergarten.
I love my guys. But someday, I want to go back to being me. Someday *soon*.
raenedaz
irked me at all. Just didn't seem appropriate considering her original post
to see her post that shortly afterwards in a thread about protecting
children. JMO
raenedaz
Anthony Hilbert wrote:
> raenedaz <raen...@yahoo.com> writes
> >I've definitely been following this thread from the beginning and was
> >interested to see this below Shalon's Friday post.
> >
> ><snipped post>
> >
> >Shalon Wood
> >
> >--
> >"The PROPER way to handle HTML postings is to cancel the article, then
> >hire a
> >hitman to kill the poster, his wife and kids, and fuck his dog and smash
> >his
> >computer into little bits. Anything more is just extremism." - Paul
> >Tomblin
> >
> >That sure doesn't sound like someone who's actually torn apart by the
> >thought of someone accidentally hurting their unborn baby.
>
> Ye gods, I thought I'd seen some humour-impaired characters on this
raenedaz
> There's a scandalous rumor that raenedaz <raen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >That sure doesn't sound like someone who's actually torn apart by the
> >thought of someone accidentally hurting their unborn baby.
>
> What a disgusting cheap-shot! Not only that, it's followed by a quote
> of an entire post by a third-party, without comment.
Nope. It was directly on her post. Written by her, unless she didn't
notice she had left that little bit there without the reply characters
(whatever you call those darned arrow things that show it's part of
another post). That would mean though that she someone deleted them
without even seeing what they were in front of. Correct me if I'm wrong on
that one. It was just something I noticed. It is an insensitive quote on
what quickly became a very sensitive thread.
> Have you
> considered seeing a doctor to have your cranial-rectal insertion
> corrected?
You must have me confused with someone else because my head is firmly
planted on my shoulders, although it does tend to look down when He tells
me to.
raenedaz
raenedaz
stand against doing something to injure a child in this thread. A couple days later
in the same thread she follows it up with a sig line like that. I do find that
hypocritical. Maybe it's just me, but if I'm making a stand on something, I don't
follow up my stand with any joking comment during the same discussion. JMHO. Take
for what little it's worth. Ignore, flame, whatever.
raenedaz
TyMeDwn1st wrote:
> raenedaz raen...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >I've definitely been following this thread from the beginning and was
> >interested to see this below Shalon's Friday post.
> >
> ><snipped post>
> >
> >Shalon Wood
> >
> >--
> >"The PROPER way to handle HTML postings is to cancel the article,
> >then hire a hitman to kill the poster, his wife and kids, and fuck his dog
> > and smash his computer into little bits. Anything more is just extremism." -
> Paul Tomblin
> >
> >That sure doesn't sound like someone who's actually torn apart by the
> >thought of someone accidentally hurting their unborn baby. I'm not giving
> >my viewpoints on the topic of fisting because I actually was interested in
> >learning about it myself. Glad to know I'm not the only human reading this
> >ng though.
> >raenedaz
>
> Am I missing some kind of sarcasm here, or are you actually trying to connect a
> smart-ass sig statement about HTML with someone's views on compassion, fisting,
> and fetuses?
>
Spyral Fox
<eri...@pacbell.idjit.net> writes:
>And you've not yet gone to the full extreme of giving up possibly
>infanticidal activities. One would, to protect the unborn
>compleetely, need give up any activity that ever caused the death of
>an unborn, and all the activities that might, but haven't yet.
Why look, one of my hot buttons has been triggered.
Fewer than half the ova that come into contact with sperm make
it through to the point of a live baby's birth. Some of these never
even make it to the point of first cleavage -- but lots of other ones
die after that point. If every zygote is treated as equivalent to a
baby, we're going to have to treat every potentially pregnant
woman more strictly than you suggest. There are many substances
that are linked not only to the death of a zygote/morula/embryo/fetus
but also to vausing developmental problems. Nicotine or Alcohol
are probably the most well-known examples. But there are a number
of more subtle things going on, too. For example, take folic acid.
If a woman is deficient in this vitamin during early pregnancy, her
odds of giving birth to a child with spina bifida go up markedly.
OTOH, if she is well supplemented, that rate decreases, but the
miscarriage rate goes up, according to some studies done last
year. Whatcha gonna do? Murder the little things, or let them be
born deformed.
Then there's the whole rape/incest thing -- any woman of reproductive
age who is not surgically sterilized or otherwise unable to concieve
could get pregnant at any time through an act of rape. So, we would
therefore have to ban dozeons of activities to women of reproductive
age, lest they accidentally, even against their own will, end up
pregnant. The old legal case with the women working for the battery
manufacturer (maybe 15 years ago? The manufacturer wanted to
keep the women off a part of the line that paid better but was more
hazardous, because of the danger of lead exposure should the women
become pregnant while working there) would be like nothing compared
to keeping women out of multiple job categories and limiting their
daily activities in some ways while enforcing them in others (no wine
but you must do half an hour of aerobics...)
Treating all women as second class citizens, vessels for the precious
next generation, is not a way I'd like to see society move.
[::::mutter, foam, mutter::::] Hmmm.... someone help me down
off the soap box, eh?
Sockermom9
>And it totally puzzles me. If abortion really is killing a human
>being, then how can the three popular exceptions be possible?
Shirley? In the debate on abortion, logic is not allowed. Stop thinking
logically immediately, or depart from this discussion--the statistics thread
could use you.
Steven S. Davis
> And it totally puzzles me. If abortion really is killing a human
> being, then how can the three popular exceptions be possible?
Because they know they don't have any chance of banning abortion
without those exceptions. It's a position driven not by logic
- as you point out, it has none (well, there is this logic: there
will a very small percentage of abortions allowed by those exceptions,
but by allowing those exceptions they can disallow most abortions,
and that's a victory for their position) - but by "what the market
will bear". That the market, in this case the body politic, is
driven by emotion rather than reason is any accurate assessment
on their part.
TyMeDwn1st
>
> Actually, yes. I found the connection only in the fact that Shalon made a solid
> stand against doing something to injure a child in this thread. A couple days later
> in the same thread she follows it up with a sig line like that.
As I noted in a humorous aside a couple of days ago, Shalon Wood
and Velvet Wood seem to be a partnered male/female couple. I'm
pretty sure "Velvet" denotes a feminine name.
> I do find that
> hypocritical.
I find you tasteless.
--
Ty
Who is mostly just a
slightly skewed
Donna Reed
... and who receives email only at TyMeDwn1st at aol.com
Bacchae
"JOHN WARREN" wrote in message ...
> So you are saying that her fear is due to the deaths of her
children were
> due to some kind of sexual behavor she participated in.
No. I certainly haven't said that.
I am saying that she has the right to be alarmed about anything to
do with pregnancy because it is her personal hot button. If she is
anything like me, the torment of second-guessing yourself and your
behaviour during the unsuccessful pregnancies would be practically
crippling. There might not *be* a reason for the loss of her
children other than really bad luck of the cosmic draw but her
resulting concern is certainly justifiable.
Because if that
> isn't the case, why is she so negative about genital insertion
rather than
> the activity that caused the deaths?
I don't know why she is. But I certainly can't condemn her for her
stance given her personal circumstances.
If I knew four people who had died
> from eating tainted meat, it wouldn't be logical for me to be
opposed to
> people skydiving?
But if they all died from eating canned tainted meat wouldn't that
make you spend a split second thinking about eating canned meat
yourself, even if it wasn't the same brand? If the can was dented
or the top was bulging would you feel even a brief moment of
concern? How about if it was canned soup instead? Would you maybe
sniff it? If you rejected it, would you give it to your beloved
dog?
> If the deaths were not due to fisting, why should she be opposed
to it
> unless it was an unthinking prejudice?
And calling someone who has tragically lost children an idjiot and
crud is being sensitive and non-prejudicial?
She has a foundation for her fear, whether it is completely rational
or not (and I think there could be an argument that some fear is
irrational almost by default). Her pregnancies were unsuccessful 3
times for unknown reasons. Prejudiced or not I think she personally
is more than entitled to be scared that others may suffer as she
did.
I have not condemned the practice of fisting although my own fears
about vaginal insufflation and Spyral's recent comments about the
mucus plug and comments about premature cervical dilation are all
enough to give me pause. Shayde's comments did not convince me to
fist or not fist during pregnancy but they sure in hell made me feel
deep compassion for her loss and revisit my own personal "do or
don't" list of what to do during pregnancy. I am certainly, in the
case where there is insufficient evidence either way, going to be
more inclined to wait rather than proceed. I just don't see the
problem with waiting through something that is going to resolve
itself shortly. <shrug> Obviously this is not a popularly held
view.
bayo...@webtv.net
having a kid."
I hate to tell you, Lynn, but you don't have to have kids to become like
your mother. Just getting older will do it. I was horrified the first
time the phrase "because I said so" came out of my mouth. OTOH, when
someone recently called me relentless, I smiled, thanked him, and
replied "I get it from my mother". It isn't all bad.
As for getting your life back, I wouldn't hold my breath. My mom is 60,
and she doesn't have hers back yet. Your kids are your kids forever, no
matter what they do or where they go. (Or at least in my family they
are--families vary greatly) I suspect she doesn't want to go back to
eating a cold can of corn over the sink for dinner like she did in her
twenties.
Bayou
webm...@houstonbdsm.com
female. I was pleased to meet a very nice, quite attractive and quite
bright young man
Travis
webm...@houstonbdsm.com
>Lynn comments: "There's not much to make you become your mother like
>having a kid."
>
>I hate to tell you, Lynn, but you don't have to have kids to become like
>your mother.
>
>Bayou
this is true. When my son and I were driving to his mother/my wife's
funeral ( we buried her near her parents, a 6 hour drive away), we
were talking about how we would lead our life from that day forward. I
was assuring him that not much would change, that I would not spend
anything more or less on him. But his Mom and I had already decided he
needed a new computer, so I was just in the process of telling him
that the only change right then would be I would take him out and buy
him a new computer. As I was saying those words, two guys on Harleys
drove by. Now i had always wanted one. So I said, "ok, you get a new
computer to help take your mind off of things, I am gettting the
Harley I have always wanted".
within 30 seconds I realized that I was now both a mom and a dad. The
dad was perfectly ok with the Harley idea. The mom said no.
want to guess who won
Travis
Shalon Wood
> When I met Shalon in New Orleans, I, too, thought the name Shalon was
> female. I was pleased to meet a very nice, quite attractive and quite
> bright young man
Thanks, Travis. For my part I have to say that you were pretty much as
I expected, except for the beard. For some reason, I hadn't expected
the beard.
DonSideB
webm...@houstonbdsm.com writes:
>within 30 seconds I realized that I was now both a mom and a dad. The
>dad was perfectly ok with the Harley idea. The mom said no.
>
>want to guess who won
>
>Travis
>
My guess?
Mom won.
With no spare parent remaining we get a lot more careful about taking risks
with our own lives and you, quite obviously, put your son aehad of yourself.
don
A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves. - Edward R Murrow
SSBB Diplomatic Corps: Tidewater Virginia
webm...@houstonbdsm.com
you will understand when you are my age
beards save a lot of money in facial plastic surgery
Travis
On 02 Oct 2000 11:39:35 -0500, Shalon Wood
webm...@houstonbdsm.com
like I was putting my son ahead of me. I felt like i was putting fear
ahead of running risks. The funny thing is, that as I may have done
that for me, for exactly the reason you mention, I have spent the last
6 years trying to teach Scott to do exactly the opposite. Teaching
kids to run risks, it seems to me, is every bit as important as
teaching them to avoid risks.
I guess as Lynn kind of mentions, sometimes when we are in that parent
role, we put aside the "running risks" for ourselves, so that our kids
can be safe to run theirs.
or something like that. I am not sure.
Travis
On 02 Oct 2000 16:53:41 GMT, dons...@aol.combackatyu (DonSideB)
wrote:
Binder
>
> Binder writes:
>
> >And you've not yet gone to the full extreme of giving up possibly
> >infanticidal activities. One would, to protect the unborn
> >compleetely, need give up any activity that ever caused the death of
> >an unborn, and all the activities that might, but haven't yet.
>
> Why look, one of my hot buttons has been triggered.
Not in a bad way, I hope.
> Fewer than half the ova that come into contact with sperm make
> it through to the point of a live baby's birth.
[snip]
>Whatcha gonna do? Murder the little things, or let them be
> born deformed.
I don't know. What I do know, is that I wasn't born deformed in any
significant way, and my larger deformities are spiritual/emotional.
fter years of effort, I've not been able to substantially undo any
of those parental "gifts". I like my parents, but I do sometimes
wish they had been better parents, even at the loss of them being
good "people."
The most devistating thing I learned from them was not to take
risks. In spite of my best efforts to take reasonable risks, I
manage to end up on the owie side of many of my efforts, unless I am
truly unlucky. I'm just terminally unclued in some very
critical-to-being-functional-in-our-society areas.
I'm not a bad person, but I was set up to fail, by my parental
units. If only my brothers had succeeded in their apparent attempts
at infanticide. So for me, the question is: "Murder, deformity, or
adoption?" If I had it do all over again, I'd plead the first. :(
> Treating all women as second class citizens, vessels for the precious
> next generation, is not a way I'd like to see society move.
I'll gladly pronounce my assessment: T'ain't gonna happen unless
children have the "immortality" gene removed, or learn (through some
major miracle) how to assess risk, objectively. IMO, nothing is
completely safe; there's no such thing as a pregnancy without risks.
Mom has to choose how much she'll sacrifice for the good of the
unborn. Period. Well, ok, short of throwing them all in the dungeon.
> [::::mutter, foam, mutter::::] Hmmm.... someone help me down
> off the soap box, eh?
Move over! (minemineminemine) <g>
Binder
--
*to reply, remove the idjit*
Spammers will be Spade (see samspade.org for more info)
SSBDC, Vallejo, CA