Sunday, July 31, 2005

Spanked -- Rehab Progresses

The knee replacement was three weeks old on Friday. Progress has been good -- everyone we talk with remarks at how very well He is doing; how quickly He is gaining strength and flexibility and mobility. All we could have hoped for and more.

We resumed regular, vanilla sexual activity (with remarkable success and very little difficulty) days less than two weeks after the surgery. Hooray for us! Way better than we expected.

But the knee is stiff and sore and achy and the muscles don't always respond the way He wants them to. He gets tired easily. Nothing is the way it was before, and it certainly isn't "better" yet than it was before the surgery. It will get to that eventually, but it isn't there yet. It has been a damper on His spirit. To make a long story short, we've fucked, but we haven't spanked. He hasn't been up to it -- hasn't been interested, or at least hasn't been interested enough to initiate anything much.

I understand intellectually. Healing and wellness and full recovery takes time. To gain strength from such a major surgery requires more than the simple healing of the visible wound. The required rehabilitation of this knee is grueling and exhausting and, beyond that, emotionally devastating. I know. I am aware and the part of me that is logical and rational and sane and sensible is perfectly clear that it is just going to take time.

But there is the other part of who I am. The part of me that is truly a masochist. That relates through the submission and connection of pain received at the hand of this One... That part of me has waited and held my breath and listened intently for the return of the voice that calls me to be there. To come to Him and be held close and be hurt and allow and accept the hurting. The longer it has been, the harder it has been to feel the connection, to feel wanted, to feel real and alive and here. What I know and what I feel begin to move apart in the absence of this connecting. And knowing that it makes no sense doesn't change the reaction.

So when the time came this morning for a spanking, I was almost afraid to believe it was really real. Not sure He was serious. Tender from feeling alone and lost and cut lose for this span of time... I piled up the pillows and went over them, still with questioning in my eyes and in my heart. Felt the collar and the cuffs... and then the tears and sobs began -- not because I was afraid (although I was, some), but because I'd been so long "alone" without His hand on me in this way that I so need...

He stopped, wondering what brought my tears. I almost couldn't tell Him. The emotion was so deep and so wordless. I'd been so lost without Him. No blame -- just the reality of this passage.

When He knew I was alright and just awash in my feelings, He went after me with intent and intensity. He surely did not spare me because it had been so long. There were paddles and the cane and the leather strap -- welts and blisters and blood drawn and groans and grunts and sweat and cries and sobs. I begged and thanked Him and writhed under His hand. When it was over we made love and I curled into Him, sated and exhausted and home again.

Thank you for my spanking, Sir.


Friday, July 29, 2005


In response to Master's declaration of His ownership of me in our post about the cutting, Malcolm commented:

"I think about the assertion that anyone can belong to someone else exclusively for ever ... I could never make such an assertion; nor could I agree that one person can "own" another. Bodies, personalities, yes; but souls aren't in the business of owning and being owned. Free of this 3-D universe, time and forever have no meaning. Tom and sue both may have other tasks in separate times and places in other lives, separate allegiances and responsibilities - who knows? It's nice to dream of "mine forever", but that dream, like every other dream, like every attachment, must be relinquished eventually. We cannot "enter the kingdom of heaven" without relinquishing all our attachments. That's how I feel about the matter.

This is not to say that sue and Tom's attachment is not a great and wonderful thing, here and now. But sooner or later, love will demand a letting go, as it always must."

The notion and language of consensual erotic slavery is difficult to explain to those who do not practice it, who do not live it, who do not experience it as a reality. There is, to be sure, much fiction "literature" about the subject, but it is largely useless in terms of any factual discussion of the topic. Even within the lifestyle community, it is nearly impossible to convene a sensible conversation on the topic -- there are so few genuine practitioners of the art with any real experience from which to offer much input.

Among those who do live this life, definitions of what it is vary widely, as do reasons for doing it, and drives toward it as a way of expressing relatedness. I'd no more presume to speak for other Master/slave pairs than I'd think to explain what it was that led them to choose their place of residence or their careers or their child-rearing methodologies or...

I can speak, at least from my perspective, about how we came to our understanding of M/s, and our relationship.

We became acquainted as participants on an online listserv discussing Domestic Discipline. From very early on, something in our interactions connected. It was as if, out of a list of 2000 members, the two of us (with our very divergent experience and backgrounds) saw each other and just "knew" each other. Don't be confused here. It wasn't that we actually "liked" each other right away. That took awhile. We circled. We danced around. We tested. We dodged and wove. Still, we couldn't stay away from each other. We just kept coming back...

It didn't stay that way of course. By the time we decided to meet in person, things had progressed way beyond our cautious testing the waters. We were meeting as teacher and pupil, but with an eagerness that went far beyond the "first day of school." The energy that drew me across the continent for that first meeting was not simply curiosity. I tore across what is generally thought of as "fly-over" territory with a good deal of anticipation and trepidation, but also with a singing in my heart that I didn't understand then, but now know was a "going to meet" the One to whom I've always belonged -- a true going home. That very first day, in the hotel, wandering the halls, before even actually meeting, we passed each other. I remember thinking, "I bet that's them..." Later, when we actually did meet, it turned out that I'd been right.

As we came, over time to become friends and then lovers, we grew into a deeper and deeper power exchange dynamic as well. It wasn't something that we pursued consciously. It simply was the most natural expression of who we were with one another. For a very long time, we resisted the Master/slave language. It seemed "odd" to us in some sense. Too much lurid fiction... In the end, we came to use the description of Owner and owned, not because it was fashionable; not because it was sexy; not because it was stylish or edgy. We took that description for ourselves because it was the truth. It is. It has ever been the fact for us.

I'm not sure, Malcolm, about "entering the kingdom of heaven." I am sure that we've been around together before this. I am sure that we'll come around together again after this. Perhaps the relationships will shift, but I am certain that we've found each other through many many lifetimes and will again and again. Spirits link to one another in many interesting ways. I am clear that my children came to me quite specifically because they needed me (especially my dear "mermaid" daughter who never has been entirely comfortable in her land-bound skin). I am sure there have been those I've met here and there along the way that I was supposed to meet because they belonged to me in other lifetimes (you perhaps?) and they are precious every one.

Ownership and being owned is not a bad thing... Not when the owning and the being owned are touched with the possibility of transforming things into great treasures...


Wednesday, July 27, 2005

The Cutting -- A Significant Date for Us

Three years ago today sue and I cemented our M/s relationship with a ceremonial ritual cutting of my initials into her back. At a gathering of our family, and a few friends, I announced that the confluence of life flow that had coalesced to form our family culminated in my releasing from sue’s flesh the marks of my ownership that already existed on her soul. In freeing them to surface on her flesh, we made them visible and known to all. We made it known and visible to all, that she is mine and mine alone, in body, mind, and soul, and that she will be mine for all time, as she always had been until we found each other and recognized our connection which she and I are certain transcends the meager boundaries of this life.


Go confidently in the direction of your dreams. Live the life you’ve imagined.

Today, July 27th marks the 3rd anniversary of the night that Master did me the honor of placing His initials on my left shoulder blade in a ritual cutting. It was an event that had deep resonance for us all at the time, and one that has continued to be a meaningful link and symbol in our family these years later. Honestly, I remember very little of the actual words He spoke to me that night. I remember His voice reaching something deep in my heart, and I remember holding on to the sound of it with all my strength. I remember my dear sister and friend, T, right there through the intense burning and cutting -- holding my hand and stroking me and crooning soft words to me -- holding me and supporting me, as she has through so many other moments. And I remember shining with joy and wonder and peace and softness, when it was over and He lifted me from the table and held me close.

Cutting is at the edge in terms of BDSM sado/masochistic "play," and there is certainly that element to this cutting. It was, at the time, a stretch of limits and boundaries for me -- a reach that I wanted to make because I was excited to finally be here with Master, and something that I knew He had learned how to do in workshops at BDSM conferences, but hadn't had the opportunity to do "for real" with anyone. I wanted to go there with Him even though, up until that point, one of my limits had been that I wanted to not bleed...

Cutting is also particularly intimate. It breaks the very personal boundary of the skin. It crosses over the line and breaks through to the inside of the person who dwells inside the body. It deals in blood and pain rather than just pain.

For us, this cutting had the additional intention of creating deliberate scarring. I wear the marks that resulted from our ritual that night as most slaves wear their collars. Not all cutting has that as a goal. Sometimes, those who cut mean for the cuts to heal leaving no visible, permanent marks, but we wanted scarring. That desire meant that our venture into cutting was a commitment to increased pain and lengthy discomfort as well as the long-term body modification that would result. Within 24 hours after the cutting was finished, we began a daily routine of scrubbing the cuts with a soft toothbrush and anti-bacterial soap. This irritated the wounds and kept them from healing for much longer than would have otherwise been the case, forcing the keloid scars that we desired. Even after the scars formed, I resisted using the ointments and creams that might have eased the hellish itching that ensued, because most of them would have reduced the scarring along with the itching. The healing scars itched for most of the first year and a half. Even today, if the weather is just right, the cutting can "wake up" and itch wildly -- a reminder that it is still there.

Obviously, such vivid and noticeable marks elicit responses from those that see them. I am cautious about keeping the cutting under wraps in social settings where displaying it would compromise our well-being. There are situations where having Master's initials on display on my back would simply be politically foolish. Some people, upon seeing it are openly curious. Some are horrified (my dermatologist is among this number). A few, especially within the lifestyle are quite taken with it. Generally, if people ask what it is, I simply explain that it is from a ritual cutting. Few ever ask more than that. Scene people, of course understand more clearly...

We made impressions on silk on the night that we made the cuts. Using good quality silk handkerchiefs laid on the fresh wounds, we were able to preserve three imprints of the actual cutting from the very first moments. These we had professionally matted and framed. The finished piece hangs as a treasured memento and deeply meaningful work of art in our bedroom.

So, tonight, in the midst of a quiet place in our lives -- as we recover and recuperate from the much more intense, much less sexy cutting of July 8th, I remember and celebrate the wonder that is this life I am given. I am so very grateful for this day and for this love. Thank you, Sir...


Favorite Toys -- Temptation's Tag

Temptation tagged me with the question: "What 5 toys would you keep if you had to give up everything else? Which ones are your favorites?" There are so many, it is tough to say which ones are really "favorites." They fill different places in our lives and our play and our relationship, and many of them have stories to tell. Still, the question is there, so here goes...

I would, given my choice, almost always choose --

The buffalo flogger. It is heavy and thuddy without a lot of sting. Buffalo hide has a texture that is not rough and scratchy like suede; much more sensual even though it is heavier.

The red, braided, llama-hide cat. This one is light but stingy without being horribly wicked. Besides, it is just a lovely piece of work, and one of the few whips from Snakepit Leather that I still have from the several that were acquired by my ex-husband and I.

The long, narrow leather strap that came as a "throw-in" freebie from Hanson paddle. It stings like mad and leaves welts and makes me catch my breath, but there is something about it that I really like better than the much heavier straps that we own. It doesn't feel like it will break skin (or bones) in the same way that the heavier beasties do.

The rattan cane. I am not a fan of canes generally, but when it comes time for caning, I like that one way better than the synthetic cousins...

The single tail. This is a love-hate pick. I really hate and fear the whip. It scares me to death and I never willingly choose the whip. It is always His to command and the entire time that I spend under the whip is an effort and an agony and an ordeal. That said, I know that the whip was and is my gift to Him, and making it through a session with the whip brings me a sense of triumph that is hard to describe.


Friday, July 22, 2005

The Ugly Duckling

I've spent some of my time this spring and summer re-reading "Women Who Run With the Wolves," by Clarissa Pinkola Estes. I first read it many years ago when I was a young wife and mother, trying to survive and trying to make sense of who I was in that context. What I took from it then helped me in many ways, but it spoke to me differently then, and gave me different lessons. No surprise.

I've been particularly fascinated this time around by her rendering of the story of The Ugly Duckling. She begins with the classic Hans Christian Anderson tale (and some regional variants) and then weaves meaning in and around the "children's story."

Throughout, she explores what happens when we are born into families to whom we don't "belong." They don't understand us and we don't understand them -- no one's fault; it is simply the nature of our disparate realities. That has always seemed to be my experience, and my frustration with my family. They are good people, they really are, but they have always seemed as foreign to me as I am sure I have seemed to them. No amount of reaching has ever seemed to bridge the gap that has ever spanned between us. That remains true even now -- perhaps even more sincerely and supremely now.

What Estes elucidates is that the ugly duckling does not transform into the swan. The ugly duckling IS a swan. It is not about becoming something different and "better." It is about becoming who and what one really is. For those of us who are born into families to whom we do not really belong, that becomes a lifelong quest and a journey. We are lost and alone in the world, doomed to flail and flounder until we find those with whom we really belong, and the difficulty and the danger is that we likely will believe that we ARE ducks.

For me, it has been ironic, this journey to becoming the swan. I was, when my Master and my T found me, truly an ugly duckling -- hiding behind frumpy clothes and granny glasses and dowdy hair. It was as if I did not know any other way to be or look. I really was trying to be the duck that I thought I was.

When Master first began seeing the swan in me, I thought that it was something that He'd done. I realize now that the "transformation" was that He saw me. Knew me. Gave me the home I'd never had. In coming to Him and to T, I finally found the place that I belonged.


Thursday, July 21, 2005

Was that a dream?

We've worked so hard. Physical therapy and ice packs on the hour day after day... Nights when sleep is interrupted over and over to change the ice in the "ice bondage" machine, and when even the effort to walk to the bathroom seems too much of an effort.

Just getting through the rounds of appointments and exercises and meals and getting a shower and a walk each day sucks up all our time and energy. Just monitoring the medications and the blood tests and making sure that the towels and the sheets and the clothes get washed keeps us tired to the bone. All the lifting and hauling has muscles and joints aching and stiff.

Even being able to roll over in bed to hug has been a distant dream that seemed like it might never come again.

But leaps forward happen suddenly with this. We've learned that, too. All at once, Master can lift His own leg. Within the last two days, He's begun to make the transition from the walker to a cane. Within the last twenty-four hours, His use of pain medication has decreased by half...

Then, last night, in the middle of the night, He was there, wrapped around me, holding me tight and hard... Really? Can we do this? "We'll never know if we don't try," He told me with some sense of urgency.

No need to tell me twice!

With great trepidation and extreme care and caution I climbed on top of Him -- so aware of that knee and that "oh my gosh" incision that just Monday had the staples removed... No shrieking happened, and so I began the rhythm we know so well. Holding my breath -- watching His face for any sign that things were amiss. It seemed OK, and was so good!!!

We loved each other there in the darkness -- not, perhaps, with complete abandon. We were cautious but it worked!! Whoohooo! We made it and it was joyous and glorious, and damn! On day 12, I think it was down right prodigious! Left me laughing and crying for joy, and He didn't seem unhappy either ;-)

We both fell asleep again fairly quickly. It was sometime later, when I woke up and wondered -- was that a dream???


Monday, July 18, 2005

Right now...

The road to submission/slavery takes many different curves. Everyone follows their own way and ends up in the place that suits them and those to whom they belong and serve. Along the way, changes happen and growth comes and life brings its own lessons. Through the years that I've done this, I've struggled and hurt and soared and despaired; thought I knew it all and figured I'd never get it figured out at all...

Right now I am involved and consumed in changing ice packs. In helping with physical therapy twice a day. In assisting with showering and middle of the night toileting. In figuring out how the in blazes one puts those blasted compression stockings on without causing even more pain. In keeping track of medications. In helping to manage all the many little day to day tasks that negotiating life with a walker makes almost impossible. I rub His head and scratch His feet with His beloved knives and soothe Him when He is tired and frustrated.

Submission, for now, is expressing itself in a sense of calm, a sense of peace, an intent focus on the work that needs to be done for my Master's well-being and healing. I am aware of the banking of my sexual drives at this moment, even as His are in abeyance -- there will be time for us to find that place again together, but that time is not now. Now, I am feeling easy and sweet and simply here in the rhythm of these days, working to bring Him to wellness and strength.

Not sexy reading I know... But here is my heart this day.


Saturday, July 16, 2005

More To Anonymous on The Origins of Modern Monogamy

Anonymous said...

What about Adam and Eve? Or the concept of duality? What you write is interesting, but I do think there is a basis for duality in marriage. I don't necessarily see polygamy as a bad thing. Gay rights activists seem to hate it as much as they think their opponents hate them. The analysis I would like to see. What would the US look like if the determinant religions was purely secularism, spirtitual christianity, buddhism. I believe polygamy arises from desires for variety. Is it wrong in the above contexts? I think same sex arises from incarnational puzzles that have vague boundaries when measured against their intensity. Genes and enviroment are mutable to the mind, and the mind is mutable to the other two. Now that last statement you can see it's form plastered all over the major minds processes of the past.

8:34 PM

This post is in response to the above comment which was made by an anonymous respndent to my earlier post regarding the origins of monogamy. I have no idea if this "anonymous" is the same as the "anonymous" my earlier post on this topic was
written in response to or not. In any case, I find it interesting that the more orthodox Christian prespectives offered in this discussion seem to come from authors unwilling to identify themselves even via an Internet pseudonymn.

The debate over contempory marriage in America centers around two variables: numerosity or how many partners may simultaneoulsy live in a publically sanctioned union, and gender or what mix of genders may be party to a publically sanctioned union. I am discussing publically and not religiously sanctioned unions. I assume that the governemnt cannot and should not tell religions what they must believe or accept as a marriage, and that likewise religion has no business dictating what secular law should or must be. If we get to the point that that assumption is invalid then we need to have a larger discussion about the fact we are no longer a democracy but have become a theocracy.

Admittedly the myth of Adam and Eve is about a couple, a man and a woman, who are depicted as the two first human beings. Admittedly all human procreation occurs out of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman (other than in the Christian scripture as revised by the Council of Nicea to incorporate the ancient Roman Pagan tradition that the Saviour of all men was born of a virgin birth). It is the hugest of leaps in logic however to infer from that myth that the only ethical or even optimal family structure is monogamy.

The story of Adam and Eve is at the very beginning of Old Testament Scripture. Presumably all the earliest Hebrew Fathers and Prophets were privy to it. Presumably Moses being visited by God via the burning bush was aware of the story of Adam and Eve. Somehow the prescription that the duality of Adam and Eve meaning that men and women were to live monogamously escaped not only Moses, but David and Abraham, and well, everyone for the supposed 405 centuries from the date some attribute to Adam and Eve until when The Pope suddenly came to understand the entire Judeo-Christian world had until that time been living in sin, and needed to become monogamous. Co-incidentally at the same time it became law that the assets of anyone dying intestate would innure to the Church.

If the story of Adam and Eve is prescriptive of the optimal numerosity of marriage why should not the Holy Trinity not also be a basis? Our family is a triad.....a threesome.....a trinity. Perhaps we are the optimal number of marriage partners. There were twelve lost tribes of Israel and twelve disciples could the optimal number in a marrraige be twelve partners?

Numerosity aside, there is the issue of gender mix in marriage. What would beome of us if homosexual unions were permitted? What would become of us indeed? The primary role marriage plays in modern society is to create legal responsibility for child support (although umarried parents can be held as legally responsible for child support as married ones can), and to prescribe the distribution of assets at the time of divorce/dissolution, as is the case in the end of the vast majority of marriages. This latter role for marriage seems remarkably consistent with the role marriage was created to perform by the Church 2000 years ago. I would asume that if same sex marriage had been permitted historically that in the rare cases where a same sex couple had adopted children they would have been held financially responsible for child support and that their marital assets would have been distributed according to divorce law if their union ended before the death of either partner, and according to probate law if one/or both partner(s) died.

You question what it would be like if there were some differet mix of "determinant religions" in America. This question assumes a falacy. For many Americans and certainly for a majority of America's founders there was no determinant religion. There are many many peoplw who do not live their lives based upon some superstitious myth and the belief in an all knowing all powerful invisible giant or force in the sky. The majority of the most inflential American founding fathers were not Christian, but were Deists whose philosophy was primarily rationalist coming out of the industial revolution. America is the result of "determinant religion" to only a minor degree. The reason for the frenetic assaults on secualr freedom today by Christianity is their own recognition that their influence, which was never as great as it was in their own minds, is likely to be non-existant within a couple generations.

How would America be different if there had been less or differeent mixtures of "determinant relgions?' I suspect there would not have been witch trials and burnings, or the genocide of native Americans, or lynchings of blacks or a huge plethora of social evils which while they generally seem to fly in the face of Christian precepts also always seem to occur based upon Christian rationalization.

I've tried to decide how to resond to the last two sentences about genes, and mutablility, and the mind etc. I've read and reread them several times. I am just not smart enough to understand what they mean so I am not going to respond.

Your comments, Anonymous, have kicked off quite a discussion here. I hope if you want to continue this that you will attach some identity to your posts or comments, so that we can at least know if we are responding to the same individual or various different writers.

All the best:)


Go confidently in the direction of your dreams. Live the life you've imagined.

Friday, July 15, 2005

Thinking About Power

These are interesting times.

We sat up late the night before the surgery, sitting on the patio, talking about many things -- not really talking about other things.

Master reminisced about His time in the streets, protesting the Vietnam War. He talked about being a young man, believing passionately in what He was doing, and knowing the first taste of His own power and control as cops would quail and turn away in the face of His certainty and determination. He told me that He has never doubted His Dominance since that time...

We've been a week now since His surgery... It has been a week that has had Him almost entirely dependent on T and I for most of His care. Most would assume that those circumstances would reduce the sense of power and Dominance that would be manifest in our household and in our relationships. To believe that would miss the deepest realities.

It is true that the physical needs are tended to by T and I; that the schedules are set and kept by us; that there are limits and requirements for compliance with routines that we are imposing at this juncture. However all of it is in absolute service to Him and His recovery, His well-being, and His comfort.

Last night, in a for now rare moment of levity, I joked that I might decide to run wild and be out of control -- act wild and have a fit and throw things and behave badly. He simply looked at me and said (very quietly), "you would never behave that way."

His tone was so sure and so reassuring that it calmed whatever unsettledness and sense of being strung out that I was feeling, and I immediately replied, "No, Sir." I curled in next to Him. He patted my head. Order returned to the universe.


Wednesday, July 13, 2005

The New Knee

We've been very busy and not here much. We got Master and His new knee home from the hospital on Monday afternoon, and it has been a whirl of activity ever since: nurses and therapists and just the business of getting Him up and down and taken care of has kept us occupied through just about every waking hour. Add to that the fact that we are all just worn to a frazzle...

With that all said, the good news is that He is doing spectacularly well, making excellent progress in terms of His general well-being and His therapy. The goals set by the physical therapy team were that He be able to flex the knee to 90 degrees by the end of the first week post-surgically. Today, on day five, He achieved 96 degrees of flexion. He is regaining strength and control and flexibility at a remarkable pace. We are all thrilled. Today for the first time since the surgery, His temperature is near normal. Swelling continues to be an issue, but we are working on that. Each day is better. Give us some time and we'll hopefully be back here posting about our more mundane M/s life again.

Here's a picture of the actual critter if you are "into" staple play. The incision is just under 6" which is significantly less than it would have been with the more traditional knee replacement surgery...


Sunday, July 10, 2005

Surgery Update

Master's knee replacement went very well on Friday. There was, according to the surgeon, tremendous arthritis in the joint. No surprise there. According to the operative reports that we've been able to get nurses to look at, it does seem that the joint and patella were replaced. He is as of today (just over 48 hours post surgically) off the IV and off the morphine, using percocet as needed for pain, off the catheter, doing exceptionally well with His therapy (recovering strength and range of motion), and has been up and to the shower. There is some redness around the incision (which is about 5 inches long) and He has run a low grade fever. Neither of those things are causing a great deal of concern at this point and are fairly typical at this point, although they are watching them of course. We are relieved and happy, although quite tired. Our expectation is that we will all be home tomorrow. Now I'm off for a nap.

Thanks for all your good thoughts and healing energies...


Wednesday, July 06, 2005


Sometimes things turn up silly.

We were snuggled in early this morning -- me all pulled in close under His chin and curled into His embrace while He rubbed against my knee. It is a favorite trick of His. Often, I lie there and enjoy the sleepy, dreamy motion of it and just drift in the warmth and cozy safety of His arms. It is a place where I am particularly likely to be vulnerable and open...

Generally, I am not ticklish.

This morning however, He drifted His hand down the curve of my hip bone along my belly and toward my pussy and suddenly I was a giggly mess. He was instantly alert to my response, wondering what that was all about, and I was amazed enough to simply tell Him that it "tickled." Well that was IT. We were off to the races. With my legs pinned under His, He proceeded to tickle me gently, eliciting squirms, giggles, and squeals as I buried my face in His chest and held on for dear life. The offer to trade tickling for paddling, I politely declined...

We tickled until He heard my squeals turn to purrs and we both were ready for an early morning fuck...

Both of us were tickled...


Tuesday, July 05, 2005

Being Owned

His ownership has settled somewhere deep inside of me.

These have been challenging days. Our energies, and our attentions are pretty intently focused on getting ready for the upcoming ordeal of total knee replacement surgery and the subsequent rehabilitation. It is a looming reality that we have chosen with care and deliberation and much study -- and it is still significantly intimidating for each one of us. The effort to approach it with some measure of calm doesn't leave a lot of energy for "other" things.

I think that Master has worried, as we've approached this, about how we, and specifically He, will maintain the M/s dynamic in our relationship when He cannot physically or emotionally exercise His dominance actively. I know it is something I have thought about.

But then there have been these last two weeks...

The recovery from Master's biopsies has not been simple or straight forward. He turned up with some sort of infection that nearly hospitalized Him, and laid Him low for days. Somewhere in all the many medical appointments that have been required to prepare for this surgery, He picked up a virus that left Him feverish and feeling just crummy. In getting ready to undergo the surgery, He's had to lay off of His arthritis medication, and many of the herbal supplements and vitamins that keep Him feeling strong and vibrant and relatively comfortable. Suffice it to say, in these last few days, He hasn't been feeling at the top of His game. He's slept. A lot. When He's been awake, He's been listless and lacked the energy to do much of anything beyond getting rubbed and scratched and petted.

There was a time, early in my coming to terms with my submissive and masochistic nature, when I needed, and more truthfully, WANTED to feel that long-denied side of me affirmed and reinforced on a frequent and regular basis. It was such a sexual and emotional turn on and gave me so much attention that I craved it like chocolate. It seemed that I couldn't get enough of it and to have it denied for very long put me into a funk and a pout that was not pretty. I wanted spankings and I wanted rules and I wanted the constant attentiveness of my "Dominant." If I didn't get those things, I began to wonder if there was serious crumbling at the foundation of the D/s itself -- if maybe there was some real lack in the Dominant... I think I am not unique in that sort of thinking. Most submissives go through some variation on that theme I suspect. The duration and intensity of that stage depends on a lot of different factors.

What I am noticing now is that I am deeply and calmly owned. There is no doubt of that. We've not spanked much in these intense and busy and scary days. The energy for it is just not there. We are looking down the barrel of a long space of time where the likelihood is that His physical capacity to dominate me in that sense will obviously be diminished. It matters not at all to me. I am sure that I am His. He will need me in ways far more significant and more intensely intimate than He ever has up until this moment. T and I will be more surely bound in our will to serve His recovery. We are His, even as He is ours.

Ownership comes quietly and dwells in the spaces of the heart and the mind. We, all of us, will miss the rollicking and randy spanking and fucking that are the hallmarks of robust good health. We'll look forward to the happy day when Master can bounce up on His new bionic knee and run me to ground if I should decide to make a race of it with Him. Until then, I am utterly owned -- His always and all ways.


Monday, July 04, 2005

The Origins of Modern Monogamy

This post is written in response to an attack levied against a post written here over the weekend by an anonymous "Christian." It is not going to deal with the usual thematic content of this Blog. If you are here looking for our usual discussions of how our polyamorous family deals with life, or some more lurid descriptions of BDSM practice, or our usual discourse, you may want to not read this but go on to some of our earlier posts or to browse our archives. There is a lot there.

This is a continuation of the discussion of the definition of polyamory and the attempts by the predominate activist Christian movement in the United States to recreate the United States into a theocratic imperialist state.

"Anonymous said...

It's not just Christians or some modern silliness. Through out time and through out all cultures marriage has always been seen as a union between man and woman. So drop the foul act against Christians. It was the same 2000 years ago in North America, Europe, Africa, Asia, Australia-- practically everywhere, the same 1000 years ago, 500.. and so on. Everywhere you look, all over the world, in most every culture, through out time that is how it has been. "

Factually, Christianity grew out of Judaism. Jewish society, both pre-and post Christ, was polygamous. The great prophets of the Old Testament had dozens and in some cases hundreds of wives not to mention many concubines and slaves whom they "knew." Christ was born into a polygamous society. He died in a polygamous society. The first five centuries C. E. the early Christians, true to their heritage and teaching, practiced polygamy if they chose to. Generally, polygamy was socially preferred and was certainly economically efficacious.

In 325 A. D. the Roman Emperor Constantine, faced with an empire coming apart at the seams because of infighting between Christian and more traditional believers in the Roman Pagan State religion, convened the Council of Nicea. The Council was tasked to create a new hybrid Roman State religion that would bring the warring factions into one common worship and preserve the Empire. They revised and created the first State sanctioned scripture, creating numerous theological constructs out of political necessity, which lack any basis in history or documented religious teaching. These included the teachings that Jesus was the son of god, that he was born to a virgin, and that he was killed and rose from the dead, and that he considered himself a savior. The Council created the first State operated "Christian" Church. They created the first paid clergy.

At the end of their process they codified their new religion in a statement of belief, "The Nicene Creed." All Christians were required to accept this creed. It is passed down to us today verbatim and is chanted each Sunday in nearly every Christian Church with those, who bother to think what its words mean, having no idea that there is no basis for its theological precepts, other than the need to resolve a political crisis in the fourth century Roman Empire. Those who adopted the Nicene Creed became Christians. Those who refused, wanting to adhere to the teachings of Christ and the disciples, were called "those who chose....choice makers." The Latin for Choice maker is hereticus (plural heretici). They were heretici the first "heretics." Heretics were proclaimed enemies of God and the state. The Romans and the newly reborn Christians then banded together to persecute their formerly Christian brethren with a ferocity that made the persecution of the early Christians by Rome seem benign. Nicene Creed Christians have been true to that "faith" ever since.

The important aspects of history to the Council of Nicea discussion is that a Central Holy Roman Church was created that paralleled the Roman Imperial Government. The new Church had aspirations to gather wealth and power over all the world rivaling the government. It was challenged though. It could not levy taxes. It could not make war. It could not usurp property. It negotiated a dispensation. It was legislated that the assets of anyone who died without heirs would inure to The Church. This could be most helpful but there was a problem. Society was still polygamous. If you had many wives and dozens or even hundreds of offspring there always was an heir standing in line in front of The Church to inherit assets unless very exceptional circumstances occurred. While The Church could not levy taxes it could define religion.

It was decreed by the Holy Roman Church in the fifth Century that marriage could only be between one man and one woman. The Church had no previous theology upon which to base this. It was a step that would create huge intestacy and ergo wealth for the Church. Over the two subsequent centuries it enriched the Church beyond the Roman Empire or any previous political, social, or religious institution.

Monogamy is a much cherished concept within Christianity. It's basis is economic. It has no theologically historical basis in our culture. Additionally review by objective Bible scholars can find no Biblical texts that speak to the number of men and women able to enter into marriage. Neither of course, does the Talmud. Interestingly the Koran does address this but it permits both monogamy and polygamy and counsels the relative merits of each type of marriage.

The statement that, "Throughout time and throughout all cultures marriage has always been seen as a union between one man and one woman," is a lie. It is not the Judeo Christian tradition prior to the 600's and thereafter only to create intestacy to fatten the coffers of the Holy Roman Church. It is not even spoken to in the inherently corrupt post-Nicene Council Christian scripture. It is not the practice of the Moslem world and has not been for thousands of years as well. Very basic sociological research will easily reveal that adherence to monogamy is a social aberration throughout world culture, not a norm. Anyone looking back upon our society in centuries hence will certainly look upon our "monogamous society and legal system" with over half of all marriages ending in divorce to be followed with one or two or three or four subsequent marriages and statistical trends towards non-married cohabiting households appearing to tend towards likely eclipsing married co-habiting households in the decades ahead, as an exercise in denial and hypocrisy.

So anonymous Christian if you are still about, I've given you a small portion of the basis of debunking the lies you've expressed here, and are too cowardly to even sign. What basis do you have? I agree there are "foul attacks" made on Christianity. I've made none. I've explained historical facts........truths. The most foul attacks on Christianity occur weekly from pulpits, and in legislatures and Congress, and in posts like yours.


Go confidently in the direction of your dreams. Live the life you've imagined.

Saturday, July 02, 2005

Happy Birthday America

As the Fourth of July commemoration of the U. S. Declaration of Independence approaches, I'd like to express a message of great sadness as the civil rights of most Americans are being actively eroded, we bankrupt our nation's econocmy, and look like inept bufoons to the rest of the world, for prosecuting an unprovoked war of agression against a pathetic enemy who is likely to beat us eventually as badly as did the Viet Namese.

At the Fourth of July this year, as increasingly a state religion appears to likley become the basis of U. S. law, social policy, and foreign policy I look with pride to my heritage and my friends from Canada who have just enacted Federal law legalizing same sex marriage throughout their democracy. I wonder when Americans will be able to define their families as they choose rather than in line with an ancient mythos.

I hope if we fight and hang together and speak up and vote we can again someday be proud to live in a nation where people are free to choose their destiny regardless of religious precepts, and not as the nation that is the "Bully of Baghdad."

At the Fourth of July I sing, "Oh Canada, We Stand on Guard for Thee." You Canooks had better start beefing up your military though. As the Christian Right Wing Neo-cons continue to sweep our government, when they hear of your precipitous action and unbridled liberty, they may feel that to be far greater provocation than Iraq ever made against their religious doctrine.



Go confidently in the direction of your dreams. Live the life you've imagined.

Polyamory -- our way

That last post generated some questions about polyamory. Some of them we made efforts to answer in responses in the comments window, but maybe it is time to be a little more explanatory here.

We practice polyamory. It is a word coined to connote "many loves." It is not polygamy, polygyny, or polyandry -- all words that describe marriages between multiple spouses in various combinations (and all illegal in the US). Often too, polyamory is equated with "swinging" which is a more casual and social practice of engaging in deliberate sexual relating between multiple partners. There are frequent "debates" and discussions in the polyamory community about whether swinging is a "legitimate" form of polyamory. I think whatever consenting adults do that enhances their lives and the lives of their families, is "legitimate." We are not swingers. If others are then I honor their choice.

Polyamory is about honest, loving relationships between multiple, consenting partners who understand that the religious and social limits that insist that there must be only one love for each person is not a TRUTH that has to define the reality for all of us. Polyamorous relationships may be found in many different forms, and those who participate in them describe those relationships in many different ways. In poly circles, there are relationships that call themselves triads, quads, clans, tribes, families, webs, nets, etc. Some groups talk about primary, secondary and tertiary relationships. Some poly relationships involve bisexuality, some are gay/lesbian, and others are heterosexual. There are wide variations in the kinds of living arrangements that groups create for themselves. Some poly relationships are very fluid and others are stable over many many years. There are poly relationships that include parents who are raising young children and adolescents, others are made up of adults and do not involve children. There are no "typical" polyamorous relationships. Obviously, there is no legal or social recognition for what it is that we do. We live in a society that misunderstands, and often, is openly hostile to our life choice.

Our family is a fMf, heterosexual, fidelitous, BDSM, intentional family, triad-V, with Master as the "hinge." T and I interact "sexually" with Him and not with each other (we just aren't wired that way). Master and T are "legally" married. I am not married to Master. We use the term "wife," when we apply it to me, loosely. More often T and I refer to each other as "spice" (the plural of mouse is mice therefore the plural of spouse is.....:) We maintain two separate addresses with separate mortgages, separate bank accounts, pay our taxes separately, have our own car loans, etc. In all the "legal" ways, we are "not married," and understand that we cannot and will not be. That is not our wish, not our desire -- it is the law and the constraint put upon us by the culture and the society. We live within the limits of the law. However, inside our homes, behind our closed doors, and more importantly within our hearts where the law cannot reach... love makes more love.