Taken in Hand, "When lulzblogging is a gift"

The lactation bit would be hotter if it weren't phrased so maternally.

I have never wanted to run away screaming more than I have at the phrase "His little milk-cow."

Your signature makes that just this little bit funnier.

It's great.

Maybe they are people who have had so much kinky sex that they can only get off by playing out exagerated 1950s heteronormative gender roles 24/7.

They aren't even 50's gender roles, this is something more akin to goddamn caveman times.

No, all cavemen were lactose intolerant.

The ironic thing being, some hunter-gatherer tribes were or are surprisingly egalitarian. Hell, look at ancient Egypt! They still fell prey to the glass ceiling (in both education and adminstration), but Egyptian women were pretty well-off in terms of personal freedoms.

This has given me inspiration for the Fetishes thread.

Oh, highest of heavens, that psychoanalysis.

It starts off OK (I like dominant women because it helps with my emotional insecurities), but then it goes into Feminazi territory.

NO. Women are not superior to men, and men are not superior to women. The world would be a lot less shit if it weren't for bastards like those at Ti H and LFA who absolutely need to feel better than someone.

I'm wondering now what Freezair's signature that I thought was so funny a few months ago.

HAI FREEZAIR, what was your signature when you posted post 52?

It was "I am assuming 'leche' means something akin to 'lechery?'"

Oh.

Heh.

I like how very vitriolic everyone is regarding this site. So far I've read:

"Because adding 'delight' blah blah blah joke about 'turd delite'..."

"... blatantly misogynistic..."

"This is something akin to caveman times."

I've looked at this website and it's fairly explicit about consent and communication. In fact, in various parts of this website, the writers go out of their way to explain that the entire set-up is wholly designed for the kink-factor. One such author mentions that the idea of actually having to "discipline" his wife sounds squicky; he'd rather "have a partner, not a recalcitrant child, for a wife."

Methinks the people posting here were a little to quick to mock. Even if it seems odd, if it involves fully informed consent (and several entries make it clear that women are often the ones to propose this kinky arrangement to their partners), can it really be "misogynistic"? Or am I way off base in thinking we shouldn't automatically attribute this to some kind of chauvinism (on the part of the man) or psychological problem (on the part of the woman)?

"The world would be a lot less shit if it weren't for bastards like those at Ti H and LFA who absolutely need to feel better than someone."

In fact, the above bullshit is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. I wonder if we have a trope called "Complaining About Websites You Very Obviously Have Not Read"?

Show us where you get "consent" from that site and we will all stop mocking it.

edited 4th Nov '10 5:19:49 PM by BlackHumor

This post was thumped by the Codfish in a Derby Hat

Hmm?

What was in that?

Nothing. Just bumping the thread so you know I'll start the liveblog again soon.

By the way, what do you think I should start liveblogging first, the contest between TiH and LFA, or the article about Victoria and Albert from the first page?

I'd almost want you to liveblog the page about being a Conan The Barbarian.

edited 7th Nov '10 1:09:46 AM by Schitzo

To the pretentiously named troper who said:

"Show us where you get "consent" from that site and we will all stop mocking it."

Do a search of the word "consent" on the engine they provide and you get a flood of results, including, but not limited to:

When is implicit consent enough?

Consent makes all the difference in the world

The dance of consent

Is there consent?

Explicit consent - finally!

Having consent to take her whenever you want assumes that you will act wisely

Is the man's authority real if consent can be revoked?

The difference between dominant and controlling

Introducing the intimate control dynamic

Can a man who believes in equal rights for women take his woman in hand?

Is your relationship abusive?

Is this really consensual?

Herp derp. Didn't think using the search function would prove such a challenge. Also, in b4 excuse as to why none of that counts and you get to keep mocking it. Proposal for a new trope? "Complaining About Websites You've Never Been To"

edited 7th Nov '10 1:28:29 AM by osconchur89

HAI LEIGH:

Liveblog that list.

EDIT: But, I'd like to point out here that several of those questions are not so conductive to your argument. Such a "Is your relationship abusive?" and "Is this really consensual?". If you have to ask the questions, it's not a good sign.

Furthermore I think I'm going to investigate one of the ones near the middle there. One second.

EDIT 2: As it turns out, I can also use the search function, and there are some very important pages you left out.

Like this.

And this.

And this one, in which the writer tries very hard to get out of calling what they're doing nonconsentual.

(Though I will give you that at least one of the ones you listed really is not as creepy as I originally thought it would be.)

edited 7th Nov '10 5:20:19 AM by BlackHumor

"If you have to ask the questions, it's not a good sign."

Because making sure you're not in an abusive relationship is a sign that you're whacko!

As for the articles you've listed, were you only looking at the titles? It feels like you kinda skipped over the content (because actually reading and understanding doesn't lend itself to black humor).

Here's what each article is actually discussing, despite your conclusions based, alone, on headlines:

1. How to establish consent and understanding subtly, when saying "okay" doesn't really lend itself to the fun of power struggle. (But because you don't like it, it's evil.)

2. Posted by a female user, again regarding the power struggle in an already established relationship. Once again, it's all about getting one's thrills from being handled roughly/dominated. (Turns out, some people can like that. I know, I know; I found it weird the first time I learned people can like stuff I don't, too.)

3. No, this writer is NOT trying to "get out" of calling it "nonsentual" [sic]. This and the first two articles in the series establish the need for consent, but, once again, you've completely ignored that this whole system is designed for people who are into this kind of power play. S&M operates in a similar way: do you think the people tied to racks really mean "no, no, please don't"? Methinks they wouldn't have even arranged a dungeon scene and talked out all the specifics beforehand if they didn't have a thing for candlewax.

Still, though, I showed you where I got "consent" from that site, and also somehow predicted you would come up with half-assed reasons why that didn't count.

Please to enjoy for make reading benefit of mind. (Look at some of these thingies to get an idea for what people are into.)

http://wikibin.org/articles/consensual-nonconsent.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent_(BDSM) "Consensual non-consensuality is a mutual agreement to be able to act as if consent has been waived. In essence it is an agreement that, subject to a safeword or other restrictions and reasonable care and common sense, consent (within defined limits) will be given in advance and with the intent of being irrevocable under normal circumstances, at times without foreknowledge of the exact actions planned. As such, it is a show of extreme trust and understanding and usually undertaken only by partners who know each other well or otherwise agree to set clear safe limits on their activities."

A woman's personal blog: http://apainfulawakening.blogspot.com/2009/06/consensual-non-consent.html "Jun 7, 2009 ... Mhhm, consensual non-consent appears to be working very well for me as well. I love struggling against my partner and being forced to submit ..."

But I guess deviant sexual behavior must absolutely be some kind of evil or psychological problem. It says so in the DSM-I.

Look, I and everyone here understands that BDSM has slightly different definitions of consent then most sex does ('fact I get off on that, but neither here nor there).

The thing we're mocking is that: 1) this is clearly BDSM but pretends not to be 2) this in fact goes FURTHER than BDSM, as BDSM is all about explicit consent beforehand, safewords, etc., where as these guys seem to take the approach of "be a really good guesser".

Or put it to you another way: Suppose you're a woman in this kind of relationship and you really don't want sex at some particular time. How would you get out of it? (Please cite sources.)

"1) this is clearly BDSM but pretends not to be..."

Where? Where does it say anywhere "You can absolutely NOT classify us as BDSM ohmigoduguise!!"? (Kind of weird to ask me to cite sources when I haven't seen you do that once, whereas I have already in my previous post.)

"2) this in fact goes FURTHER than BDSM, as BDSM is all about explicit consent beforehand, safewords, etc., where as these guys seem to take the approach of "be a really good guesser"."

Way to ignore everything I posted.

"Or put it to you another way: Suppose you're a woman in this kind of relationship and you really don't want sex at some particular time. How would you get out of it? (Please cite sources.)"

If you're the kind of person who would likely not get off on being thrown into bed whether or not you explicitly ask for it, then you're the kind of person who would probably not have sat down and arranged for that exact thing to happen. Same logic: if you don't like 100 episodes of filler and people shouting weird words while firing energy beams, you're probably going to elect not to watch Dragonball Z after having been told in no uncertain terms that this is exactly what you're going to get, whether or not you ask your DVD "Okay, now I wanna see something called a 'Special Beam Cannon.' Can we make that happen?"

It just looks like you're looking for an excuse to mock something Do you honestly think this thing is just engineered by a fringe group that thinks women are unfeeling objects? Given that they have female authors, both for articles and in conversational posts in the forum, and given that these people are taking the time to discuss the implications of what they're doing and concerns about safety and equality, I think it's safe to say that this is a site made by and for human beings. Humans aren't always the smartest or most thoughtful creatures on the planet, but we all have roughly the same capacity for reason... These are humans who, like we do for our "tropes," take the time to exchange thoughts, to plan things through, to consider very nuanced issues, and to try to open their ideas up to a larger group of people unfamiliar with them. It does us no good in any way to ignore all of that, insist that they are simply stupid, and all for the sake of a quick, cheap chuckle.

edited 7th Nov '10 2:25:22 PM by osconchur89