Lady Lubyanka

 
And again, with the verbosity and having to cut stuff out which I couldn’t bear to throw away.

So here you go.   :)
 

But First, Some Packaging Strangeness

 
I thought the packaging was worth mentioning, because there were several weird elements about it which struck me as noteworthy.
 

1. LoveHoney, the retailer from whom I sourced my dongy goodness, advertises the dong as made by a company called “Love Labs”, but the only branding anywhere on the packaging was “Max Passion®”.

 

2. I can’t find anything resembling a home website for “Max Passion®”.

 

3. The retailer’s advertised name for the dong (Spiral Massage Glass Dildo) is not mentioned anywhere on the packaging - the box simply announces the contents as containing a generic “ROCK-HARD DILDO”.
    

4. One of the other dongs  (which I’m not otherwise going to describe)  came in “LoveHoney®” branded packaging, and indeed was advertised on their site as being a LoveHoney® branded item.   Aside from the branding, the “LoveHoney®” branded packaging was nearly identical to the “Max Passion®” branded packaging -
• nearly identical size and shape boxes
• identical external and internal packaging materials
• identical polystyrene forms inside
• similar text copy
• very similar generic contents label
• extremely similar warning notices
• both were made in China
• both came with an identical velvet bag tucked away identically inside the box in the same place.

 

5. “Love Labs” apparently also make the iBuzz and iBuzz Two vibrator attachments for Apple iPods.

 

6. Interestingly, ibuzz.co.uk redirects to LoveHoney’s iBuzz Two product and video page.

 

7. A web search for “Max Passion” turns up a lot of online retailers in the Netherlands, and a few in the UK.   All of those are selling glass dongs under the “Max Passion®” branding, including both the “Max Passion®” and “LoveHoney®” branded ones I got  (all of which are priced much more expensively than at LoveHoney).

 

8. The model number on the LoveHoney glass dong is the same model number as an identical glass dong under the “Max Passion®” branding offered for sale on other sites.

   (I’m not linking to it, so you’ll just have to work it out yourself if you want to un-surprise the surprise)   :)

 

9. Are Love Labs, LoveHoney, and Max Passion all the same company?   Frankly, I don’t have the energy or the interest to research this any more, but I do feel kind of misled when products are advertised as being one branding and they turn out to be another.

 
   
 
   
 
   
 
The images in the order they appear, are

• Both boxes front view; back view; enlarged text back view
• Max Passion label; LoveHoney label; both boxes identical warning text end view
• Both boxes side view; identical polystyrene inserts front view; identical recesses for velvet bags back view

General Rantness

 
Ok, I’m bored with this now, is it time for the fun part yet?

And I answer myself, yes, it’s most definitely past time for the fun part yet.   :)

But no, I couldn’t stop myself, so there are more deleted scenes to come before I actually get to finish the damn review.
 
 
Now, to be perfectly honest, when it comes to assessing an actual product, I don’t actually give a flying rat’s arse whether the thing came in packaging of one branding or another.   Mostly I am just interested in the contents of the box, you know?   I mean, I can’t very well fuck myself, be fucked, or fuck somebody else, I mean, consensually explore my sexuality with myself or others using only the packaging, if you see what I mean.

Well, I might have been ethically or fiscally fucked, I mean intercoursed, but that’s a different issue.   And I think we can pretty safely eliminate my having been fiscally fucked, I mean intercoursed, having seen the thing retailing for at least ±£10 GBP or ±€15 EUR  more  on lots and lots of other websites.

What’s really annoying me at this point, is that, because of all the confusion with the packaging and the branding, I spent way more time than is interesting on researching and documenting the damn branding discrepancies!   I mean, I could have spent lots more of my time creating an erotic and fun blog post talking all about how I fucked myself, I mean, explored my self-love with my pretty new glass dong of allurement!

But no.   I just had to do the damn research.   I’m going to look into this compulsive research thingy, I think it might be, oh, fuck it, let’s just call me fuckingly thorough, I mean, fuckingly thorough, and have done with it, k?   And now on top of all this, I’m ranting as well!!

Fuck.

So anyhow, that’s been pissing me off, a bit.

Now all I want to do is talk about my pretty,  pretty  new glass dong and how much fun it is, so there.

But I can’t, because I feel like I’m a bloody volcano with all these words inside me which just have to keep coming out regardless.

So first, a bit of a drool about Fun Factory.
 
 

A Bit Of A Drool Over Fun Factory Toys

 
I’d like to take a moment to share a drool over Fun Factory toys.

I have never,  ever  come across any sex toys to which I emotively respond in the way that I do to Fun Factory toys.   They are so engaging in their design and manufacture, I find it impossible to describe how drawn I am to them.

I have quite a few vibrators and other bits and pieces from Fun Factory, and they’re all amAZing.   They’re exquisite, appealing, magnificent, compelling, charming objects - always a pleasure to handle, even when they aren’t vibrating.   And even with all these words, I still feel like I’m not expressing my feelings adequately.   And that’s not a feeling I have often, as you might imagine.   ;)

On top of all that, I know that Fun Factory aren’t making their distinctive toys for anybody else under any other name, and that if Fun Factory are also another company, at least they’re better than some at not fucking up their company image by disclosing this fact all over their packaging and the internet.

(end micro-rant)

Anyhow, so you can understand why it was  quite  impossible for me to even consider resisting this latest temptation from the Fun Factory range.
 
 

Hey, lookie how I interestingly seem to have very little trouble expressing quite accurately, and fairly colourfully, all about the stuff I hate, whereas when it comes to stuff I really like, I appear to be having some difficulties.

Funny, that.

The term “anger management issues” springs to mind.   ;)

 
 
Anyhow, having taken this moment to tell you how I drool over Fun Factory toys, I’d like to take another moment to tell you about how I feel about red dildos.
 
 

How I Feel About Red Dongs

 
I spent ages researching strap-on harnesses before choosing one which didn’t look like it was going to be cheap tat, uncomfortable, or useless.   I finally decided on this one.
 

Mmmmmm, yummy strap-on harness  (and a big, fat, dong).

 
After I bought that harness, I needed a dong to go with it.
 

(this sounds like one of those children’s books - “My First Dong”, “My First Strap-On Harness”)

 
After much considerosity and ponderment and reflectness, I settled on what was to become my first cock.   I used that cock with some enjoyment for approximately six months.

It was red, really deep, vivid,  red.   :)
 

My first dong - red cocky goodness
(not as nice a translucent red as this)

 
I loved the redness, the bright in-your-face colour of it.   Red is the colour of blood, and the colour of life.  

I loved that the shape was quite cock-like.   I loved the red not being a live penis, and yet, with the cock shape, sort of more penisier.  

Red says “Action cock” to me much more than blue does.   “Blue” in a cock just leaves me thinking “Oh dear, cyanosed, about to die and drop off”.

In my mind, Red says active health.   Blue says passive illness.
 
Just for the record, I am aware that

• these emotive colour associations are only in my mind, and not in reality
• there are some medical conditions which feature redness, which in fact indicates very poor health, such as
• the flushed face associated with certain heart conditions
• facial flushing and/or cherry red blood associated with CO or cyanide poisoning.

 
So anyhow, I was delighted to have such a splendid big red juicy cock, and I wielded it with pleasure and to much good effect in my lovely strap-on harness.   :)
 
You know how there’s usually a “but” coming along at this point in stories like this?   Well, get ready.

Are you ready?

But…
 
 

My First Cock - Just One Teensy Drawback

 
I mentioned above that I had and used and enjoyed my first cock for approximately six months.   In a way it’s a shame that I don’t have it anymore, as it would be nice to have a tangible memorial of my first adventures into dominance and strap-on play.   But in fact, I still have the harness, and expect to have it for many years to come, so that’s all right then.   :)   Although somehow, a big juicy red cock is just so much more evocative than an empty harness, you know?

Anyhow.

Having done a search of my blog, I see that somehow, I’ve omitted mention of an element which features very largely in my life, which that I have more than the usual acute sense of smell.   In a way, that isn’t even relevant here, because even the most olfactorily oblivious person would be able to  taste  the airborne rubber fumes from this cock, just from breathing in the same room as it.   The smell was more insistent and persistent than door-to-door religion pushers.
 

A person could literally get whiplash from the head-jerking-back effect of this slap-in-the-face rubber smell.   This is one big, red, cock-shaped, phthalates delivery service.

 
And it wasn’t only the cock itself, it was the way that the fumes from it insidiously invaded every object stored near it, even when it was wrapped alone in several layers of plastic bag.   Every single thing which shared the toybag with this wrapped-up cock  reeked  of rubber.   My beautiful and otherwise fragrant leather harness stank of it, the bag stank of it - every bloody item sharing that toy bag had its own personal smell masked and overwhelmed by this pervasively persistent  rankness.
 

That smell just  killed  every positive feature of my lovely cock.

 
I had lingering hopes that the cloying fumes would decloymigate and defuminise over time.   But my hopes dwindled to nothing as they perpetually went without succour.

I gave six months to that cock, hoping against hope for some small reward, for some small diminishment of the fœtid abhorrence.   Six months! of suffering, of nasal endurance, of eye-popping, head-squeezing headaches, of depressment, of vile unpleasantness.

The pain!   The anguish!   Oy veeyyyyyyy…
 

(ok, so maybe I was hamming it up there, just a smidge)

 
So anyhow, despite the fabulousness of the colour, the deliciousness of the shape, the perfection of the size, and the enthralling tactility of the texture;   despite the good times we’d had together - I had no other choice but to get rid of it, permanently.

So, reluctantly, but also gladly, I gave up on it, dropped it in the bin, and walked away.
 

To kvetch’s credit, and to the credit of my other play partners, none of them ever complained about or even mentioned the taste of this cock.   Several months after I got rid of it, kvetch did mention that the taste was similar to the smell.

 
I include my original review of this cock down at the bottom of the post for your perusal.
 
 
That final abandonment happened in January, 2007.   Since then, I have somehow not had a favourite red cock for my harness.   Oh, I’ve got red dildos, but somehow, none of them move me in the same way as that first one did, and I find that I just don’t use the red ones I do have very often.

But now, all that looks like it’s about to change.   Please allow me to introduce you to … Tiger!   :D
 
 

A Note About Dongy Photogenicness - Tiger

 
For those who are interested in such things, I use the Konica KD-510z to take all my pictures.   It’s a really amazing point-and-shoot 5 megapixel digital camera, first sold in 2003.   It has sadly since been discontinued.   It has not disappointed me in the ±4 years I’ve owned it.

It’s an oldie but goodie.   :)

So anyhow, I took everything I wanted to photograph to one of my favourite photographing spots - the fire stairs outside the door of my flat.   The fire stairs have got ground-to-rooftop windows, and the light in there is just beautiful.   I took the pictures of my electric violin there.

I photographed Tiger first.   I had to take very many pictures, because I found it was somehow tremendously difficult to get the light right so that Tiger’s red would reproduce accurately.   I found that I was getting images which showed Tiger as much redder than she appears to my eyes.

It seems that the manufacturers had the same problems.   Fun Factory’s image of Tiger shows up as a deep crimson, my image shows up as a relatively bright red.   Tiger’s actual red colour appears just about exactly between the two, to my eyes.

Photographing Tiger was a somewhat frustrating experience.   She just isn’t as photogenic as one might expect.   I took many pictures, spent a lot of time rearranging things, picking fluff off, moving, re-orienting, trying again, moving Tiger, moving the background, moving myself.

Essentially, I just carried on until I was too fed up to try anymore, and I settled for what I got.

I did tweak the colour in iPhoto, but still, Tiger is quite a bit redder in the photograph than she is to my eyes.

Oh well, that’ll have to do.

I imagine you get enough of an idea without me having to endure any more of this tediousness.
 
 

(the colour doesn’t gradually fade as it may appear in my image, it’s all one shade.   The colour at the base very much resembles the colour as it appears to my eyes when I look at Tiger)

Advertised image of Tiger       My image of Tiger

A Note About Dongy Photogenicness - Spiral

 
Oooooh, now Spiral was a whole other story!   As soon as I started photographing her, I felt exceedingly grateful that I’d done Tiger first.   Spiral was a dream to photograph.

I’m telling you, the camera just loves Spiral!  (she’s such a poser…)   Every picture I took of Spiral looked fabulous, her colours were true, her glass just looked so stunning.   Even though the manufacturer’s images of this model look very lovely, I think that my Spiral looks much prettier in the shots I took.   I really think that the manufacturer’s images don’t do Spiral justice.   Some of the reviewers would seem to agree that Spiral looks more attractive in-the-flesh (so to speak :p ) than she does in the web pictures.
 

(this was a big part of the reason why I decided to take my own pictures and not just use the manufacturer’s ones from the web)

1 - Advertised image of Spiral

2 - Another advertised image of Spiral

3 - My image of Spiral

As I said.   No contest.   Magnificent.

I appreciate that, because of the background I used, this is just a bit like comparing oranges and fruit loops again, but never mind.   :)

 
 
And, unsurprisingly, I see that the deleted scenes has somehow turned out to be significantly longer than the original post.

How’d that happen.

Oh well, c’est la vie.
 
 

Review - Trojan Single Redi-Lock Dildo With Tickler

 

 
Description
Flexi-smooth, rubber cock-and-ball-shaped dildo, with a frond-like protrusion at the base for clitoral stimulation.   The Redi-Lock base detaches for versatile use in or out of a harness.
 
Product Details

• Brand  - TSX
• Overall Length  - 8 inches
• Insertable Length  - 7.5 inches
• Circumference  - 6 inches
• Diameter  - 1.9 inches
• Material  - Rubber
• Waterproof  - Completely Submersible
• Harness Compatible  - Yes
• Contains Latex  - Yes
• Flexibility  - Firm
• Colour  - Red
• Colour  - Flesh
• Colour  - Blue

 
 
Review   -     Trojan Single Redi-Lock Dildo With Tickler

Great shape and texture, intolerable smell.

09 Jan 2007
Reviewer - Lubyanka
 
 
I was delighted when this beauty arrived in the post, I initially couldn’t stop groping it through the packaging! It was firm, yet squishy and bendy. I got the red one, which, in real life, looks much more “cartoony” red (opaque, all one shade, bright red) than the translucent effect in the picture, but I didn’t mind. The size is great. I used it in my strap-on harness to great effect, and much pleasure was had therein. ;)

When I took it out of the packaging, however, the incredibly strong and unpleasant smell of rubber quite knocked me back. I still loved the size, shape and feel, and was hoping the smell would wear off over time, and with use. This was not to be, unfortunately. Perhaps a rubber fetishist would enjoy the smell of this cock, but I did not, and nor did my play partners.

It’s now about 6 months since I bought it, and the unpleasant smell (and, I’m told, taste) is every bit as strong as when I first got it. Repeated washing, use, and storage in a bag has seemed to have had absolutely no effect on the smell whatsoever. If only new leather smells were this persistent! ;) This is such a shame, because otherwise, it’s a great thing.

I kept the cock wrapped in it’s own plastic bag, and together with the harness, in another plastic bag when travelling with it. When I put the harness bag in an overnight bag with my other things, the redolent, pervasive, rubber smell permeated everything else in there, even through 2 layers of bags separating it from everything else. This left my clothes and other toys reeking of rubber as well. It took several days of hanging up and airing out to dissipate the smell from my other things. The smell is Very Strong, I cannot emphasise this too much.

I can thoroughly recommend the Trojan Single Redi-Lock Dildo With Tickler to anybody who enjoys the smell of rubber, and wants a nice big solid cock for their strap on harness. Or perhaps, somebody with no sense of smell would enjoy it. Unfortunately, the smell was just too intolerable, and unrelentingly persistent over time, so, disappointingly, my only option was to throw it away.
 
 
Pros
Great shape, size, and squishy texture. Pleasurable in a strap-on harness.
 
Cons
Persistent, invasive, intolerable smell (and taste).
 
Bottom Line
Perfect for rubber fetishists, or the olfactorily challenged. Unsuitable for anybody else.
 

 
One of the really fun things for me about polyamourily playing with multiple play partners, is discovering the delightful ways in which the same anatomical features can vary from one person to the next.

And one of the really fun things for me about being  bisexual,  is being able to experience being on the dishing-out end of anatomical features which are like  (and at the same time different to)  my very own.
 
 

(you dahlinks know who you are)   :)

Trying Things Out

 
Normally, I make a habit of trying out new toys on myself before trying them out on my play partners, so that I know how they feel, how hard I can use them, how risky they’re likely to be, and so on.   Although this works very well for smacky-type toys in the force-utilising department, this isn’t always practical with prostate-related toys, or indeed, in the strap-on department.
 
 

Notwithstanding that I don’t have a prostate, I can hardly strap on my strap-on and poke myself with it.   I don’t think that would work even if I stood on a chair.

 
 
Anyhow, since I happen to be more accustomed to playing with men than playing with women, the tasty collection of harness-compatible dongs I’ve accumulated were pretty much all chosen with the prostate in mind.

Not too long ago, I was fortunate enough to enjoy some uncommonly delightful canoodlement with an exceptional woman.   As a result of said canoodlement, I felt compelled to augment my toy collection with some harness-compatible dongy additions.

On this occasion, I restricted my perusal of strap-onables to those which are particularly suitable for sharing with my play partners who are of the internal-reproductive-organs persuasion.
 
 

(and on whom I enjoy reproductive-organ-internalling my persuasion)   :D

 
 
And thusly, I browsed around, made some selections, narrowed things down, did some more choosing, narrowed down again  (and so on and so on),  clicked some buttons, filled in some stuff, clicked some more buttons, et voilá!   Parcelled up goodies were whizzing my way.
 

I don’t think I’ll ever stop thinking how way cool!! that is.   :D

Receipt Of Dongy Parcel Goodness

 
And thus, I was happily in receipt of my parcel of brand new, woman-friendly, strap-onable additions to my toy collection.   My exceptional friend reads this blog, and I’m hoping she’s as interested as I am in trying out the new goodies.  (ooooooh goodies…)  ;)   So in the interests of keeping some of these items as a surprise for her, I’m not going to discuss every item in the parcel just now.   :)

In my customary practice of trying new toys out on myself prior to introducing them to my play partners, of course I had to give these a try, in the interests of science and safety and consideration and stuff.
 
 

Yeah, yeah, ok, so this time it was also in the interests of my own personal pleasure.   So I’m interested in my own personal pleasure.   Sue me.   ;)   I’m sure you’re all shocked by this.
 
(ok, I may have lied about the “shocked” part.)

 
 
I only got the parcel today.   Since I’m not a teenaged boy, there’s really a limit on how often I am likely to want to masturbate, I mean, explore self-love, in a day.   And even though I knew the parcel was due to arrive, I got just a wee spludge of hornyosity earlier on, so I couldn’t resist having a play with my favourite vibrator before the parcel even arrived.

The upshot of all this is, that during the course of the day, I tried out  (at well spaced intervals)  two of the new toys, and so those are the ones I’m going to tell you about.

The first dong I’m going to tell you about is made of glass.   It’s my first experience of a glass dong, and I assure you, after this experience, it will not be my last.   :)
 

(see deleted scenes for some ranty stuff about the packaging which would have gone here)

(also see deleted scenes for some general rantness which would have come after the packaging thingy)

Spiral Dongy Glass Allurement

Mmmmmm,  pretteeeeeeeee!

 
This gorgeous dong is presented on the LoveHoney site as the  Love Labs Spiral Massage Glass Dildo 7 Inch.

I’ve never had a glass dong before.   To be honest, I was never much into insertable toys for myself at all  (and they were never much into me, so to speak).   My favourite personal toys have all been clitoral vibrators.   And although my mind has not diverged from the juicy joyness that is clitoral vibrators, I may possibly have to change my mind about glass insertables.
 
 

One word.   Smoooooooooooooth.

(I think I’ve been seduced by a glass dildo.)

 
 
The thing that always bugged me about insertable toys, at least with regards to myself, is the way the flexy ones all seem to kind of, like,  cling  to my skin, making it necessary to apply tons of lubricant, make a slippery mess, struggle to keep a hold of them, and kind of  shove  and  drag  them a bit.   This always marred the pleasure for me.   I mean, I could never just get so drippingly wet and turned on at the seduction attempts of a flexy insertable toy.

Let’s face it.   Insertable toys have  really  sucky seduction techniques.
 
 

(Let’s also face it - I’m not that easy, so Spiral IS exceptional in the seduction department.)

 
 
Spiral, being glass, is smoooooooooooth.  (did I mention the smoooooooothosity?)  The tiniest dribble of my favourite lubricant was sufficient to do the trick.   I used Spiral in conjunction with my favourite clitoral vibrator.

Spiral’s bulbous head feels quite large going in, but goes in smoothly and easily with a just the wee dribbleness of lubricant, as I mentioned.   Once in, Spiral does provide a delicious feeling.   Her shaft is very narrow, and I hardly noticed it going in and out, possibly because I was so distracted by the gooey sensations of her head doing whatever yummy thing it was doing.

I have a feeling that I enjoyed the swirly things on Spiral’s shaft, but to be honest, I was so diverted by the joys of her bulbous headness that I cannot categorically comment on her swirly things.   If I were writing this review for cash remuneration, then chances are, I’d play with Spiral some more and pay more attention to her pretty blue swirly things.
 
 

(but since I’m not getting any cash for this, I can’t be bothered to divert my attention from my personal oh-so-unintellectual enjoyment, frankly)   ;)

 
 
Whilst in the fog of my pleasurable bliss, I vaguely noticed, as if from far away, that I was working Spiral faster and faster without thinking about it or meaning to.   And she was really swooshily gooooood.

My orgasm seemed to last for several minutes.   I think it did actually last for at least 60 seconds.   When I came to  (so to speak),  I noted with interest that Spiral had come out as far as her head, but the size of her head in relation to the shaft had conveniently kept her from pooping all the way out.   So I couldn’t resist sneaking out a hand mirror and seeing if I could see up myself through the clear glass.

Bonus - I could!   :D
 
 

Spiral Glass Allurement - Features

 
Ok, so let’s run through Spiral’s cool features.

• Glass
• Gorgeous!
• A pleasing weight in the hand
• Smoooooooooth
• Fabulous bulbous head
• Pretty swirly things on the shaft
• Narrow shaft
• Pretteeee!
• Minimal lubricant required
• The head feels wonderful
• The head stops the thing from popping out inconveniently
• The harness-compatible base makes a good place to grip for self-play
• Smoooooooooth
• The pretty swirly things on the shaft probably feel good, if you’re in any condition to notice
• Internal-reproductive-organ friendly
• Even when Spiral isn’t deliberately chilled, her coolness persists for awhile, which is gorgeous
• Warms up soon enough
• Slides in and out just beautifully
• Smoooooooooth
• Pretteeee!
• Can see up inside whomever and wherever it’s put  (if you’re into that kind of thing, which I am)
• Lengthy orgasms
• Relatively inexpensive  (at least from one retailer)
• Gorgeous, smoooooooooooooth, pretteeeee!!

 
My final word on Spiral:

• Buy Spiral if you’ve got the cash.
• Spiral adores vaginas.
• Buy Spiral if you have a vagina.
• Buy Spiral if you play with anybody who has a vagina.

 
Right, that should do it for the allurement of my new Spiral pal of dongness.

Ok, next, we have Tiger, from Fun Factory.  
 

(see deleted scenes for raveness and droolage over Fun Factory goodness, which was supposed to go here)

(also see deleted scenes for the story of my first cock, and first  [and current]  strap-on harness, which was originally supposed to be here)

(also ALSO see deleted scenes for more about my first cock, and review, which was going to be here)

 
Right, so, having got all that out of my system, it’s now, finally time for the fucking review already!

(literally)

Oh, and I didn’t mean fucking review, I meant, sexuality and self-love exploration review.
 
 

Tiger - rrrrRRRRRAWRRRRRRRR

Mmmmmmmm, a big package of red dongy chutzpah

 
This drop-dead-red-gorgeous, cock-like dong is presented on the LoveHoney site as the  Fun Factory Tiger Silicone Dildo 6.5 Inch.

Looking at it, it just grabbed me as something I wanted to strap on and wield at my unsuspecting victims, I mean, consensual play partners.
 
 

(whoops, did I say that out loud?)

 
 
I was less interested in playing with it myself, but y’know, in the interests of science, and completeness, and stuff, I gave it a go.   And I was pleasantly surprised, actually.

First off, we have that thingy I mentioned above, which is that materials such as silicone tend to  cling  to my skin, kind of dragging me with them on the way in and out, and requiring more shoving and dragging than I would prefer, no matter how much lubricant is used.   And that was true in Tiger’s case too.

I mean, I don’t see WHY I should have to endure even a second of discomfort when I’m trying to enjoy a private moment fucking myself with a toy, I mean, exploring self-love, you know?

And Tiger does create what seem to be those inevitable moments of discomfort on her way in, and on her way out, despite generous applications of lubricant to the affected areas.
 
So, one demerit there.
 
 

(but then, I think I may have been completely seduced, I mean, converted, to the joyful creed that is glass dildoness)

 
 
Anyhow, once she was in, Tiger was much more difficult than Spiral to work in and out because of the way Tiger’s silicone surface clung to my skin.   But the sensations were pleasant, especially from the ridge at her tip.   As with Spiral, I was accompanying fucking myself, I mean, exploring self love, with the use of my favourite vibrator.

Like last time, I found myself working Tiger faster and faster without really meaning to, although “faster” in this case was slower than with Spiral  (who is my new best dongy friend),  because of the seriously decreased slipperiness of Tiger as compared with Spiral  (despite the muchness of lubrication, as I’ve said).   This made Tiger more difficult to use, and felt more like work than Spiral did.   But I appreciate that I’m not really comparing like with like here.   More like apples and oranges, or bananas and fruit loops.
 
 
Or something.
 
 

By the way, I’m really looking forward to strapping Tiger on in my harness, because I think she’s gonna be fabulous in it.   However, I’ll have to get back to you on that one.

 
 
Anyhow, although I didn’t feel intensely turned on, I did have a really hard orgasm.   Not only that, I had another one almost immediately afterwards, perhaps even harder than the first one.   I don’t know if that was because of Tiger, or because that’s just what my body was doing at that time, but I look forward to finding out if I can reproduce the effect  (in more than just me!).   ;)
 
 

Tiger Dongy Allurement - Features

 
Ok, so let’s run through Tiger’s spiffing features.

• Another compelling Fun Factory product
• Beautifully made
• Amazingly designed
• Lends herself well to anthropomorphisation
• Red!
• Feels wonderful in the hand
• Medical grade silicone
• Wonderful strategically placed bumps and ridges
• Red!
• Harness compatible base doubles for good hand-grippageness in use, reducing likely lubricious droppingnesses
• The harness-compatible base has a built-in suction cup for those who want to fuck themselves, I mean, explore self love  (see what I mean about amazing design?)
• Did I mention the harness-compatible part?
• Red!
• Womanly-organism-of-internal-reproductiveness friendly
• Kind of expensive, more than I usually want to pay for a dong
• Doesn’t pop out by itself
• Lengthy, multiple orgasms
• Exquisite, appealing, magnificent, compelling, charming, beguiling, enchanting object
• Bags of personality!
• Red!

 
My final word on Tiger:

• Buy Tiger if you’ve got an extra dollop of cash.
• Tiger craves being wielded.
• Buy Tiger if you want a wieldable strap-on cock-like dong with a suction cup.
• Buy Tiger if you want a red! silicone dong with planetloads of chutzpah.

 
Right, that should do it for Tiger’s red silicone dongy allurement.
 
 

Deleted Scenes

 
If you’d like to have a look at the extensive verbosity which I had to leave out for this post to end up a manageable length  (and which is in fact longer than this post),  then here’s an index of deleted scenes for your perusal.
 

• Some Packaging Strangeness
• General Rantness
• A rather large droolfest over Fun Factory Toys
• How I Feel About Red Strap-On Cocks (my first cock and my first [and current] strap-on harness)
• My First Cock - Just one teensy drawback
• A Note About Dongy Photogenicness - Tiger
• A Note About Dongy Photogenicness - Spiral
• Review - Trojan Single Redi-Lock Dildo With Tickler

 
 
Ok, I’m really out of here now.

Ciao dahlinks.   :)

 
Whilst we’re in the neighbourhood of banana topics, I thought I’d share this fun t-shirt thingy I got last year:
 

 
And by the way, kvetch has a matching one.   It says:
 

bananaslut

 
He looks so cute in it.   :)

I hope the fruit activists don’t come after me - for hate crimes against fruit, or fruitism, or some such thing.   ;)
 

 
For quite some time, kvetch had been noodging me to get a bell, so I can ring for him when I want him.   I’d been resisting, partly because

1. I thought I’d get tired of hearing the bell sound
2. I thought  kvetch  would get tired of hearing the bell sound  (and therefore wouldn’t respond well to it)
and
3. I just wasn’t too interested in the idea of schlepping a bell and waving my arm around just to get kvetch’s attention when I should have his attention already, you know?

But then something interesting happened.   :)
 
 

The Sign

 
One day when we were out in town, whilst my attention was directed elsewhere, I heard kvetch make this noise.   It was something kind of like between a squeak and a moan.   It’s the sound he makes when he’s feeling all submissive and serviceable and owned and excited all at once.

So naturally I turned around to see what was making him go all owned when I wasn’t doing it.   And there he was, holding this sign, and looking at it, and making this sound, and beaming his face off.

He was beaming so much I could practically see his molars.   :)

I don’t know if he could even articulate words at this point.   He’d spotted this sort of retro metal sign thingy, and had it in his hands.   He squeak-moaned again and held up the sign for me to see.   Once I saw the front of it, I had to admit it was  quite  compelling.

He turned around straight away and bought it.   It wasn’t too expensive, something like 7 euro.   I just stood there and watched him buy it, beaming his head off.

And I smiled too.   :)
 

The Sign Of Serviceness

The Bell

 
So anyhow, that sign had hung on our wall for a few months, with no bell to go with it.   And I still wasn’t too interested in a bell with a handle that you pick up and wave around, because frankly, I thought that seemed too much like work.   I mean, it doesn’t take much for me to announce “Hey, KVETCH!” for him to respond pretty sharpish.   So why should I wave my arm around when I don’t have to?

And then a *ding!!* dinged in my head, and I recalled those bells in hotel receptions which sit on the desk, and you just hit them a slap on top, and they ding really loud.
 
And I thought to myself

Now that is my kind of bell!

 
So I mentioned this to kvetch, and he immediately started searching for one, and sending me links to ones he thought might be suitable.
 
 
Choosing The Bell
 
After looking at lots of hotel reception type bells, I finally decided on one which

1. looked like it had a nice shape for a sonorous *ding* sound
2. had a chrome finish instead of brass  (won’t tarnish)
3. came sitting atop a wooden plinth  (looked pretty)
4. was conveniently available on eBay
5. was a few euros dearer than the sign

 
The bid was duly placed, the auction won, the bell shipped, and fortunately arrived without too much fuss from An Post  (don’t get me started on the nightmare that is An Post).
 
 
Customising The Bell
 
When I tried to ding it for the first time, I found there was a kind of strange issue with the mechanism, so that the hammer didn’t pop right back to where it should, and as a result, the button on top for dinging the bell wouldn’t pop back up again immediately after I slapped it.

But I worked a wee bit of magic with a strategically placed elastic band, and that sorted everything all out.   :)

And now I have a fully functional bell I can slap whenever I want service.   And incidentally, it sounds great.
 

The Bell Of Serviceness.

(I am away from kvetch at the moment and don’t have the bell with me, but I plan to record the sound of the bell, and upload the file so everybody can hear how great it sounds.   Just a teensy smidgen of patience will be required on your part)
 
 

The Bell And The Sign

 
Since we’ve had both the bell and the sign, kvetch has shown absolutely no signs of getting fed up with the sound of the bell.   (me neither, actually, since it’s got such a nice sound)   Even when I ding it accidentally, and it’s quiet enough that he knows that it was an accident, he still perks up, immediately focuses on me, and announces:
 

“Service!“

 
(that is his customary response every time I ding that bell)

Recently, as a kind of afterthought thingy, he’s been tacking on “(…and comfort)” at the end of his  ”Service!“  announcements, because of what it says on the sign.

So now when I ding the bell, he immediately jumps to attention, and announces
 

“Service!   (…and comfort)“

 
followed by a smile, and 100% focused attention on me, waiting for me to tell him what I want.

(Can I just say, that rocks so heavily?   Oops, silly question, it’s my blog, I can say whatever I like, and besides, I’m SWMBO!)

That rocks so heavily!!   :D

(and also, kvetch rocks very heavily)   :D
 

Mmmmmm, The Equation Of Serviceness.

Image © 2008 Stephen Fry & The Sampsonian Co.   All Rights Reserved.
 
 
If you have not yet come across the diverse work of the savourily delicious Stephen Fry, then I think your life may be about to experience some enrichment.   :)

Recently, I have been enjoying some of the newish juicy niblets available from the sumptuous buffet known as The Adventures Of Mr Stephen Fry.

The linguicious Mr Fry has added an audio-visual menu item to his other tasty treats on offer, which he has stylishly designated “podgrams“.   In his third podgrammatic expedition, Stephen Fry extemporises from Colorado, and spends a good chunk of the podgram discussing the justly celebrated Oscar Wilde, and some principles of aesthetics.

Something struck me whilst I was listening to the podgram, and I wanted to discuss my thoughts on it.   Anyhow, I must have been mistaken about being blogged out recently, because I have been feeling rather restless of late - somehow as if I needed to spout forth about something in a blog post.

So here we are.   Welcome to my spout forthingness.   :)
 
 

The Expoundments Of Stephen Fry

Image © 2008 Stephen Fry & The Sampsonian Co.   All Rights Reserved.
 
 
In chapter three of podgram three   (both titled “Wallpaper“),   the wordsational Stephen Fry   (transcribed on the forum by the delightfully obliging Fryphile)   discusses violence in America, goes into the tiniest yet ever-so-satisfying rant about “family values”, quotes a question Wilde was asked, and discusses his own thoughts on Wilde’s answer.

In summary:
 

So, around this time, Oscar was asked a question. A very intelligent question actually. He was asked why he thought America was so violent. Seems an odd question at first blush, but it was an America that had just emerged from [...] the bloodiest Civil War [...] Not only that, but the west which was being developed   (ha, developed),   that had caused violence too. Violence of course to the indigenous [...] Native Americans [...] The gunslingers were becoming very famous. Gang warfare was erupting in Chicago and New York. This was all very puzzling [...] Why should a country that was established on principles of peace and tolerance, wisdom - all the glories of the Enlightenment, have descended into such terrible internecine strife? Of course the usual answer as to why people get violent is that they depart from family values.

 
Here comes that lovely rant about “family values”.   :)
 

Ha-ha-ha don’t get me started on that argument. After all, most murders take place within families. Most violence takes place within families. Even organised crime is structured according to families. It’s a ghastly parody of a family, but the idea that family values are responsible for stopping people being violent seems to me to be so insane as hardly to worth repeat. I hope you take my point. That’s it, isn’t it? Family values and violence that seems to be no more relation between them than a skunk and a rattlesnake. Both nasty, but they’re not connected. Except in the great scheme of life, the colours of the wind and the circle of how do you do.

 
Personally, I might venture forth and hypothesise that “family values”  (actual “family values”,  from real actual families, not the plastic invented ones espoused but so seldom exemplified by politicians),  are in fact very closely related to violence, because I suspect that those “family values” actually create and cause violence, but that’s by the by.

I included that rant because I liked it so much.   :D

(besides, it does actually have bags of relevance, which you’ll come to later on)

Anyhow, this is the meaty part.
 

But Wilde had a different explanation, and it’s one that on the surface seems very trivial.

“Why, Mr. Wilde, do you think America is such a violent country?”

“I can tell you why,” he said. “It’s susceptible readily of an explanation. America is such a violent country because your wallpaper is so ugly.”

Now that seems, you might snort with laughter at first and say, “Well, how amusing.” Part you you may say, “Well this is just a typical peacocking primped camp remark from a shallow and trivial man who thinks it’s amusing to say things like that.”

But actually, to understand what the Aesthetic Movement is all about, one has to take that quite seriously. Instead of judging things by being good or bad, things are judged by whether they are beautiful or ugly. [...] actually it’s a lot easier to judge when things are beautiful than it is when things are bad or good. [...] However, beauty acts on us in a very real way, and what Wilde was partly saying was, if we look out of the window into our world, we see things that are universally and entirely beautiful from nature. [...]

Except where man has intervened.

And what Wilde is saying is, imagine belonging to a species where [...] all you can do to the world is to uglify it. To make it worse. To despoil it. Which is what we do. [...] That we were making the earth uglier [...] with bad architecture, uglier with badly designed factories, uglier with badly stamped out tin trays and cheap ornaments, ugly with appalling wallpaper.
 

And if you’re someone who grows up [...] surrounded by badly made ugly things, then you think ugly thoughts of yourself and the world [...] [and] your whole species. There is nothing for you to do but to crap in your own nest. It’s what we do when we don’t believe in ourselves.

 
And so although it seems a cheap response to a question about violence, the aesthetic point of view is actually I think a very valuable one, a very profound one, a very extraordinary one. And it makes people think beyond the knee-jerk reflexes of conventional morality [...] You’ve got to think harder than that, Wilde was arguing.

 
All emphasis added by me.   All due respect and credit to the wordacious My Fry for his wordaciousness, and very specially to Fryphile on the forum for transcribing the podgram for the benefit of us all.   Thank you so very much, Mr Fry, and Fryphile.   :)
 
© 2008 Stephen Fry & The Sampsonian Co.   All Rights Reserved.

And I add my thanks to the team at The Positive Internet Company for their contribution.
 
 

Why I Agree

 
At this stage I feel that I must point out how very much I agree with Stephen Fry that badly made, ugly things do detract from much that is good in the world.   I really do agree with, validate, and support that position.

I also would like to emphasise my understanding that Stephen Fry has used “badly made ugly things” solely as an example of those aesthetically displeasing manufactured items which are all around us.   So when I use “badly made ugly things” throughout this post, I too am using them solely as an example.
 

I am not in any way trying to say that I think Stephen Fry is saying or thinking that “badly made ugly things” are the predominant cause of human violence.

 
On the contrary, I feel that I perfectly understand that the very admirable and learned Stephen Fry is trying to illustrate his feelings on the often overlooked significance of the influence which displeasing items exert on us all the time without our noticing it.   I agree with, validate, and support that position as well.
 
 
Having said that, I am using this post carry my thoughts about those ideas further - to illustrate my problems not only with the significance which some people assign to ugliness’s role in world badness, but also my issues with the commonplace assumptions of how concrete and specific problems can apparently only be the responsibility of the abstract and non-specific  (which don’t bite back when you criticise them).
 
 

He Was Almost There

 
However much I agree that the aesthetic premise is largely meritworthy   (and I do agree),   I would have liked to have seen those explorations carried a few steps further.   Stephen Fry was SO close!   After the family rant, he says (and I paraphrase)
 

“If you’re someone who grows up surrounded by badly made ugly things, then you think ugly thoughts of yourself, the world, and your whole species. Crapping in your own nest is what we do when we don’t believe in ourselves.”

 
Stephen Fry then says
 

“the aesthetic point of view is actually I think a very valuable one, a very profound one, a very extraordinary one. And it makes people think beyond the knee-jerk reflexes of conventional morality [...] You’ve got to think harder than that”

 
I’d like to think harder about this, and take it just a wee bit further.   I think that Stephen Fry came so close with this, so very close, especially with his rant about families, but unfortunately I think he stopped just short of the big banana.
 
 

Taking It Further

 
I think that what the erudite Stephen Fry has said here about families, and about crapping in one’s own nest, gets about as close as I’ve seen, if not the closest, to the root of some problems I’ve been considering.   But I think the ideas he discusses just don’t go quite far enough.

Amongst the ideas I have been working on in my head, a lot of them are built around one hypothesis - that pretty much every one of the huge number of bigger personal problems everybody endures all the time, is most likely caused   (or at the very least, aggravated)   by a surprisingly small number of root problems.   I have what I feel is a good approximate overview of both the root problems and the causes.   However, I won’t be going into those here in any depth.

What I will be doing, is to point towards some of the basic issues which I feel are important, and try to highlight how I think they relate to what Stephen Fry said in his “Wallpaper” podgram.
 
 

Taking It Further - 1 - Avoidance Is Easier

 
I know how infinitely easier, infinitely safer, and infinitely more pleasant it is to be able to blame the problems of the world on something abstract such as ugliness, or on faceless nameless other people who may or may not be responsible for the abstract ugliness, than it is to clearly identify specific scary individuals who have the ability to fight back at us.

My experience is that most of the time, most people are not even aware that what they’re identifying as the cause of a problem, is in fact actually abstract or non-specific or both.   Most uses of the term “society” are good examples of this.
 

As has been observed by others, the scariest, most dangerous, most difficult part of a profound fear, is naming it.
 
Or, more precisely, the scariest part can often be the seemingingly-simple (but astonishingly difficult) act of acknowledging the specific name of the actual source of our fear.

 
To paraphrase what I think is by far one of Stephen Fry’s most salient points:

When we don’t believe in ourselves, we think ugly thoughts of ourselves, our world, and our whole species, and we crap in our own nest.

 
Yes!   That is exactly what we do when we don’t believe in ourselves.
 

However.

 
I think the reasons why we do this have very little to do with badly made ugly things.   Badly made ugly things may indeed be used by people to contribute to this effect, but I don’t see how they can be the actual cause.
 

“Ugliness” does nothing.   PEOPLE do ugly things.

Taking It Further - 2 - Identifying Logical Gaps

 
Reiterating the paraphrasement of Stephen whose-work-I-muchly-admire Fry:

“If you grew up surrounded by badly made ugly things, then you think ugly thoughts of yourself, the world, and your whole species. Crapping in your own nest is what we do when we don’t believe in ourselves.”

 
 
Frankly, I would have a very difficult time assigning any credibility at all to an adult who perpetrated a violent transgression, and who then tried to abdicate responsibility for their behaviour by blaming it on badly made ugly surroundings during their childhood.

To be honest, I would have an even harder time believing any whatever-ologist who tried to assert that people are violent as a result of ongoing exposure to badly made ugly objects during childhood.

It is my firmly held belief that badly made ugly things cannot, in and of themselves, and solely by themselves, contribute to or result in violence.   I cannot believe that badly made ugly objects in isolation can so damage a child’s psyche that this child, when grown, is likely to be violent when confronted with something like ugly wallpaper.   I’d like to maintain a more realistic and proportional view of appropriately attributed responsibility.

 
I’m missing something in the logical progression here, connecting

• Formative years surrounded by badly made ugly things
to
• Thinking ugly thoughts about oneself
• Thinking ugly thoughts about the world
• Thinking ugly thoughts about all of humanity
• Not believing positively in oneself
• Disrespect for oneself and one’s world (crapping in it)

 
I’m missing how there’s supposed to be a specific logical and causal connection between

• ongoing childhood exposure to badly made ugly things
and
• human beings perpetrating violence

 
Where’s the link?

(don’t worry, it’s a rhetorical question, I’m coming to it)
 
 

Taking It Further - 3 - Identifying Missing Connections

 
For the purposes of the statements I’m about to present, I am going to be assuming the absence of any pre-existing organic physiological brain dysfunction, physical head trauma, neurological disorder, or any severely impairing relevant emotional, psychological, or psychiatric disorder.

I acknowledge that the above can easily co-exist in all kinds of combinations, and thus create all kinds of confusion.   In this instance, I am going to be describing human beings who are functioning within the usual range of what is considered “normal” by the bulk of qualified health professionals.
 

• Specific types of badly made ugly things could perhaps, in specific people, trigger unpleasant flashbacks relating to past trauma   (which may or may not have been previously or consciously identified).
• Flashbacks could conceivably, in some individuals, lead to violent emotional responses, regardless of whether the violent response is acted upon or not.
• Flashbacks can be triggered by literally anything at all, simply by reminding any individual of their original trauma   (whether consciously reminiscent or not).
• A flashback cannot be triggered if there is no underlying trauma to which the flashback relates.
• Badly made ugly things could possibly be used by any person to induce trauma in children or adults, and may thus by association trigger flashbacks in some individuals.
• Badly made ugly things, as inanimate objects, cannot in any case be held responsible for traumatising any person, and therefore cannot be held responsible for causing an original trauma, or for triggering traumatic flashbacks.
• Trauma and its related triggered flashbacks are not solely associated with badly made ugly things.

 

• A trigger does not a trauma make.

Taking It Further - 4 - Unaddressed Questions

The Big Banana.

 
I feel strongly that in the interests of avoiding the knee-jerk reflexes of established thought   (which would seem to include accepting an idea and allowing it to rest there),   and in an effort to think harder and to build on the established ideas and take them further, I would like to observe that I think that some important questions have been critically and crucially left unaddressed.

Consider the hugely enormous numbers of badly made ugly things in circulation everywhere.   If it were really true that badly made ugly things could cause people to be violent, then I really think significantly larger proportions of entire populations would be violent.   And they aren’t.   So there must be important variables in this equation which have not been accounted for.
 
 

Taking It Further - 5 - The Big Banana

 
For the purposes of the questions I am about to present, I am again going to be assuming the absence of any pre-existing organic physiological brain dysfunction, physical head trauma, neurological disorder, or any severely impairing relevant emotional, psychological, or psychiatric disorder.

I reiterate my acknowledgment that the above can easily confusingly co-exist in all kinds of combinations, and I am therefore going to be describing human beings who are functioning within the usual range of what is considered “normal” by the bulk of qualified health professionals.
 

1. How can a child’s response to having been surrounded by badly made ugly things, lead to their violent behaviour as an adult?   I think this response is quite largely disproportionate unless other factors are taken into account.
2. Who decided to put badly made, ugly things in a growing child’s home environment?
3. Who taught a child that they didn’t deserve to have their environment created with the utmost thought and care?
4. Who made it possible for a child to have and keep having a poor self image supported by ugly thoughts about themselves?
5. Who enforces and reinforces a child’s poor self image and ugly thoughts about themselves   (whether or not that is accomplished in part by surrounding a child with badly made ugly things) ?
6. Who is really responsible for creating a home environment which fails to establish and reinforce a child’s positive self image and belief in themselves?
7. Who are the primary people responsible for establishing and reinforcing a child’s poor self image, ugly thoughts about themselves, and that they are not worth believing in?
8. Who are the only people who can truly be responsible for enforcing and reinforcing a child’s poor self image, supported by the idea that everybody else is more important than they are?
9. If a child   does   have a poor self image and ugly thoughts about themselves, then why assume that this outlook cannot possibly be responsive to improvement   during childhood   by ongoing positive encouragement and nurturing from concerned, interested, involved, and emotionally resourceful primary caretakers?
10. Where were the primary caretakers and what were they doing when their child’s poor self image was developing and growing?
11. If a child were raised in a nurturing supportive resourceful home environment by interested, involved, and emotionally resourceful primary caretakers, then how can it even be possible for a child with such a carefully nurtured, nourished, and healthy psyche to grow up into an adult who is likely to respond violently to something as simple as exposure to ugly wallpaper??

 
Let’s keep an eye on the disproportionate responses.

 
My personal conclusion is that most, if not all primary caretakers have a whole lot to answer for.
 
 

Taking It Further - 6 - Avoiding Difficult Realisations

 
I know how incredibly difficult it can be to realise

1. Hey, I was a child!   However “difficult” (or whatever) I was, I was never in charge and therefore I could not have been responsible for my parents’ problems!
or
2. Hey, in a parent/child relationship, the parent is in charge!   How come I got blamed for so many things when I was only a child, had no power in the relationship, and had insufficient knowledge and experience to make optimal decisions??

 
I appreciate that these realisations can result in a person’s whole world going topsy turvy as they realise how very many things they assumed were “normal” and appropriate, were actually wrong - more specifically, realising that they were lied to.   (guess who did the lying)

I can’t tell you how many people I know who unwittingly go to unbelievably convoluted lengthy lengths to maintain the illusion that they really were a “bad”, “difficult”, “awkward” or “troublemaking” child - solely to save themselves from the too-scary knowledge of naming their fear, of recognising that their primary caretakers were wrong.

I am frequently amazed at how utterly determined some people are to convince themselves and others that they were really a horrible child and a bad person, and that their primary caretakers raised them better than anybody could reasonably have expected, considering the rubbish they had to work with.
 
 
My experience of people who take this line with me, is that there are three possible responses I can give to these kinds of assertions.

1. I disagree and assure them that they really aren’t worthlessness incarnate.
   (this never has any useful effect whatsoever - one might as well try to have a conversation with a bottle of washing up liquid)
2. I agree with their badness.
   (somehow they’re able to hear and respond to that, and they’ll nod and agree right back)
3. I agree with enthusiasm and tell them how unbelievably horrid and vile they are.
   (at which point they’ll either look at me like a hurt child  [and maybe argue],  or they’ll laugh and accept the reality check)

Taking It Further - 7 - Why The Big Banana Is So Scary

 
I believe that there are some very logical reasons why this information is too scary to face for so many.
 

1. Acknowledging that you were NOT responsible for all that you were blamed for, also means acknowledging that you were really not in control of the situation at all.
2. Acknowledging that you were NOT in control of those situations for which you were held responsible, also means acknowledging that your parents were wrong, and that they lied to you.
3. Acknowledging that your parents lied to you about something, and therefore are not trustworthy about that something, also means acknowledging that they are NOT trustworthy about other things.
4. Acknowledging that your parents are not trustworthy, also means acknowledging that there was no truly safe person in between you and the big wide scary world to protect you from harm.
5. Acknowledging that there was no truly safe person in between you and the big wide scary world to protect you from harm, also means acknowledging that the ones who were supposed to protect you from harm, were therefore the ones responsible for the harm which you suffered.

 
To be fair, I acknowledge that this is all really scary stuff.   And this isn’t even a complete list.
 
 

Taking It Further - 8 - What To Do With The Big Banana

 
Ok, having presented you all with what I consider to be The Big Banana, you might be wondering, what are you supposed to do now?

The fact is that right at this moment, I just don’t know.   To be honest, I’m still working on identifying and naming the problems.

I’m hoping to do a course soon, which I am optimistic will help with my explorations in this and other areas.

I’ll have to wait til after that to get back to you with any further results I’ve come up with.

In the meanwhile, we’ll just all have to suffer together, unless somebody else figures all of this stuff out first.

Which I hope they do.   :)
 

And now for some extra stuff which just couldn’t be squozen into the “This Is You, Yes YOU.” post, no matter how hard I tried.
 
 

My Point Is…

 
Since it seems that I wasn’t clear enough in the original post, I just wanted to see if I can fix that up a wee bit.
 

• In essence, I am just not happy with the “The End Justifies The Means” approach to problem solving.
• I feel really strongly that we would all benefit hugely, if each and every one of us invested a great deal more thought and care, into every choice we make, about everything we say and do.   I’d like to see a whole lot more of that.
• I think that whatever other people do or don’t do, this does not create a consequence-free zone for us to commit transgrssions ourselves, no matter in how good a name those transgressions are committed.
• I think my overall intention was to illustrate that
  1. Pointing out other people’s transgressions is never a “get-out-of-jail-free card” for our own responsibility and accountability for our own behaviour, and
  2. It is really easy to transgress without noticing, in the name of “improvements”, and
  3. I think the whole world would be a hugely better place for us all to live in if more of these transgressions were reduced, including those from “the good guys”.

 
Ok, these next bits were the ones which were originally going to be in the post but it was just waaaaay too much longer with them in.

I worked hard on them, and kind of like them, and besides, we bonded, so I couldn’t bear to just dump them like an old sock full of holes, so in the interests of my inability to throw stuff away, here they are.

Phew.
 
 

Some Facts

1. “Kinks” are not capable of marginalising, excluding, or insulting;   people do that, not kinks
2. People with kinks do not usually acquire, have, or explore them specifically to marginalise or exclude others
3. There is no automatic or logical connection between any specific erotic orientation, or behaviour involving that orientation, and any other person with the same or different erotic orientation
4. Possession of, or play incorporating, or behaviour exploring one’s specific kinks is not synonymous with promoting and/or advocating any specific behaviour towards or amongst other people
5. Feelings of exclusion or marginalisation do not necessarily reflect the current existence of excluding or marginalising behaviour

 
So please think about what you’re saying the next time you advocate the idea that the mere existence or media portrayal of a person with kinks is directly and logically culpable for your pain.
 
 

Dispelling Common Hypocrismical Myths

• Other people’s kinks are no more directed at you than your kinks are directed at other people
• People publicised with a kink cannot be a direct, logical, sole cause of your pain, any more than people publicised with   your   kink can be directly, logically, solely responsible for other people’s pain   (and no, it’s NOT “different”, your kink is not “special”)
• Your feelings of exclusion cannot be a direct, logical, sole result of other people’s erotic orientation and play, just as your erotic orientation and play cannot directly, logically, and solely be responsible for other people’s feelings of exclusion   (and no, it’s NOT “different”, you are you and they are them and that’s all there is to it)
• Your exclusion of others cannot be legitimised by other excluders supporting you, just as other people’s exclusion of you cannot be legitimised by other excluders supporting them   (again, NOT “different”)
• Other people cannot be entitled to speak on your behalf without your consent or approval, using you to legitimise and support their excluding behaviour, just as you cannot be entitled to speak on behalf of other people without their consent or approval, using them to legitimise and support your excluding behaviour
• It is no more necessary to exclude others for the purpose of highlighting their exclusions, than it is necessary for other people to exclude you for the purpose of highlighting your exclusions

Stuff Improvathon

 
This is what I think about how it’s possible to modify our own behaviour so that lots of things get improved and mended and better and stuff.

My opinion is that your behaviour is always your own responsibility and never anybody else’s.

Similarly, I regard other people’s behaviour as always their own responsibility and never yours.

In my experience, justifying your behaviour by blaming others for perpetrating similar behaviour not only fails to achieve a productive outcome, it also results in your failure to take appropriate responsibility for your behaviour, and your inappropriately assigning that responsibility elsewhere.   This is also known as “passing the buck”.   An example of this tired old strategy is exemplified by the often-used rapist’s defence - “she was asking for it”.
 

Taking appropriate responsibility for your behaviour is one key way to avoid hypocrism and One True Way-ism.

 
Practicing what you preach is not only a good way to avoid both hypocrism and One True Way-ism, it also unequivocally demonstrates an excellent example to others.

In my experience, the “Do As I Say, Not As I Do” approach to advice and instruction is not only ineffective, it is also annoying, and more usually results in a less-than-desirable outcome.

In my experience, the annoyance factor of the “Do As I Say, Not As I Do” approach tends to discourage others from following verbally given advice, yet conversely   encourages   them to follow the examples being set.   This usually results in behaviour being emulated which is not only contrary to the verbal advice, but also includes that of saying one thing and doing another.

I think that everything we do as human beings is part of our social experience, even if we do it alone. Most people masturbate alone, yet masturbation is not an entirely unknown topic of social conversation.
 

If we train ourselves to do precisely as we advise, then not only is the quality of our advice likely to improve, but also the words we use will be reinforced by the example we set.   This can make our words AND our example very much more compelling and powerful.

 
(I acknowledge that my own efforts in this area are not always entirely successful)
 
 
Doing precisely what you object to other people doing would seem a counter-productive way of trying to achieve change. I mean, in order to perpetrate change, one would logically have to   demonstrate   perpetration of that change.

Most people don’t seem to notice the obvious logical flaws in their premise that whilst they say that certain behaviour is not ok for everybody else, their actions clearly indicate their notion that this behaviour is somehow perfectly ok for them. I don’t know why it is so often necessary to point this out to people who are otherwise supposed to be perfectly capable of logical thought.

But clearly it is necessary, because otherwise I wouldn’t need to be doing this post.
 
 

More From - I Hate Having To Do This - It’s Depressing

 
I expect some backlash from people in their responses to this post.   I suspect people will mostly be erroneously assuming that

• it is my pleasure to attack and rip these bloggers’ posts to shreds
• my points are directed towards these bloggers personally, instead of at their writing alone
• my points are emotively intended
• my points are irrelevant, inconsequential, and fallacious
• I’m nitpicking to no logical purpose
• I’m pissed off about what I’m responding to

 
Honestly, I mostly just feel depressed about what I’m responding to.   I feel it’s symptomatic of so much that’s wrong and broken everywhere, I feel kind of hopeless that the human race will ever heal from its massive dose of pain and painful behaviour.

I mean, if the “good” guys, the ones who are being transgressed against, are unwittingly perpetrating precisely the same transgressions which they say are hurting them, how is   anything   ever   going to get any better if   everybody   is committing   the same   transgressions and nobody is saying anything about it??
 
I’m doing my best to be respectful about this, but honestly?   I don’t think my frustration is out of line here.
 
 

Commentness

 
To finish off, I’d like to address a comment left by one of the bloggers I referenced.   I chose to address that comment here, rather than in the comments of the post where it was submitted for publication, because only a small part of the comment addressed the actual post.   As you see, a larger part of the comment was directed towards and referring to me personally.
 
 

maymay     Saturday, 7 June, 2008   at 04:30:59 IST
 
It wasn’t the lack of public response this woman got in the group, it was the lack of apparent compassion at all, whether that be public or private. But that’s the first and the last thing I’m going to say to you about this topic, because we’ve had hours-long conversations about hypocrasy before and, frankly, I’m going to choose to spend by energies somewhere other than on you now.

1. “It wasn’t the lack of public response this woman got in the group”
    
   • You were objecting to specific public responses, and quoting public responses.
   • I mentioned you mentioning the public responses, and I mentioned your specific objections to them.

    
   Question:   Was I thinking you were talking about a lack of public response the woman got in the group?
    
   Answer:   No.

 

2. “it was the lack of apparent compassion at all”
    
   • If you wish to discuss a specific something, I think that specifically mentioning that something in your discussion would certainly help your discuss-ees to understand what you’re trying to say.
   • You never used the term “compassion” in your post, although you did describe what sounded to me like “empathy”.
   • Since you used neither term anywhere in your post or the comments, I had no way of knowing that your intention was to discuss “compassion”, or lack of it.

 

3. “whether that [compassion] be public or private.”
    
   • If you were talking about a lack of compassion expressed privately, I would have found it very helpful if you had specified that you had been given access to group members’ private communications which demonstrated the lack of compassion you mention.
   • I’m wondering if you have experience of a lack of compassion on this topic from other chastity group members in private correspondence you exchanged with them.
   • I’m wondering if the woman asking the question or any other group member shared with you their private correspondence demonstrating a lack of compassion from group members on this topic.
   • I find myself wondering how else you could know about any private communications lacking compassion on this topic from group members, since you didn’t specify this in your post.

 

4. “But that’s the first and the last thing I’m going to say to you about this topic”
    
   • I’m glad to hear it, thank you for letting me know.
   • I thank you for clarifying your specific perceptual limits.
   • I thank you for demonstrating that my efforts to clearly express to you what I meant were unsuccessful.
   • I genuinely found your response helpful for those reasons.