How We Treat a Touch

"Perhaps some # MeToo’d men and their defenders also believe that their alleged crimes were minor too, if they were crimes at all. At least, they were too minor to warrant anything so severe as an admission of guilt, or an apology, or a proposed commitment to self-betterment — let alone professional or criminal consequences. They’ve pitted their pain from being accused directly against the pain of the women accusing them, and it’s clear whose pain we’re expected to care about more. 'I feel sorry for a lot of these men,' wrote Michelle Goldberg in the New York Times, 'but I don’t think they feel sorry for women, or think about women’s experience much at all.' Put another way, by writer Heather Havrilesky: '[C]ruel men believe they deserve redemption and eventual exaltation simply because they've suffered. Imagine if women believed that. Imagine if a woman's suffering were even a passing concern.' ”
- Shannon Keating "We Prioritize Boys' Suffering At Girls' Expense"

I watched a video this morning with female republicans who support Kavanaugh and all they could talk about was how good his reputation is and how, even if he did do what he's accused of, it's not a big deal.


How "there was maybe a touch. Can we, really? Thirty-six years later and she's still stuck on that?"

How he was just a poor "seventeen-year-old boy with testosterone running high. Tell me what boy hasn't done this in high school."

And how "maybe at that moment, she liked him and he didn't pay attention to her afterward and he went out with other girls and she got bitter."

My god.

Logically, it's not a surprise that there are women who think this way--lord knows, I've met more than my share--but it is always a punch to the gut. The fact that they have so much more sympathy for the men being called to task for their bad behavior than the women who suffered at the hands of it. That the inconvenience of being asked to take some personal responsibility so outweighs the pain and violation of victims.

They don't even really deny that he did this. A little lip service. But mostly they're worried that "someone's going to destroy your life because somewhere, at some party [...] you touched somebody the way you're not supposed to." For god's sake, he's being accused of trying to muffle and drown out her screams as he holds her down and tries to tear off her clothes. What kind of boys went to your high school?

More importantly, exactly what kind of boys are you raising and sending off to high school?

Have You No Decency, Sir? - The Ugliness of Uncontrollable Male Passion

Mark Judge is such a despicable human being, it's hard to pick out exactly which quote of this piece by Amanda Arnold in The Cut, Kavanaugh’s Alleged Accomplice Once Praised ‘Uncontrollable Male Passion,’ to use to depict that. 

Is it: “There’s also that ambiguous middle ground, where the woman seems interested and indicates, whether verbally or not, that the man needs to prove himself to her [...] And if that man is any kind of man, he’ll allow himself the awesome power, the wonderful beauty, of uncontrollable male passion.”

Or: “Oh for the days when president George W. Bush gave his wife Laura a loving but firm pat on the backside in public [...] The man knew who was boss.”

No, I think, as a proud coffee-drinking smut-seller who regularly wears lingerie as everyday outer wear, I'm going to go with: “Women who dress like prostitutes are also sending out signals [...] The signal is not that they should be raped. But if a posture while drinking coffee is indicative of the soul and personality within, than so is marching down the street in your underwear.”

Fuck you. You know what me drinking coffee says about me? I DRINK COFFEE. In the same way, the only thing my clothes say about me, in whatever state of dress I'm in, that you can be sure about, without using your words and asking me like an adult, is THAT I'M WEARING CLOTHES.

Any other assumption you make says more about you than me. And, if clothing determines whether you treat the person wearing them as a human being worthy of respect and common decency, you lack any sense of respect, common decency, or humanity.

You Might Be a Submissive If You...

"You may have been called 'vanilla' or used the term to describe yourself, but what if (and considering the scope human sexuality it may not be THAT big of an 'if') you were more? What if there was a hidden desire just under the surface that is itching to be scratched, explored, and opened up for your enjoyment and the pleasure of others/your partner? Maybe you secretly are a submissive or have one or two never uttered submissive kinks that send off little explosions of interest in your nether regions?

"Whether you know about the BDSM scene or if you only encountered BDSM through the box office hit and bestseller, Fifty Shades of Grey, maybe it’s time you did a little exploring yourself?


"While there are tons of options to explore in the BDSM scene, let’s start small…"

READ THE REST OF THIS PIECE HERE

This great piece was inspired by The Big Book of Submission Vol 2, which includes my story "The Framework of Fantasy."

Whether you're simply curious about submission or regularly revel in the delights of BDSM, these sixty-nine erotic short stories about submissives will turn you on! From participating in a musical recital that takes a very kinky turn to making a grocery run while using sex toys to indulging in a risqué office encounter during working hours, these subs delight in obeying (or deliberately disobeying) their masters and mistresses in public and in private. They're rewarded and punished the most wicked of ways that will leave you breathless. Edited by Rachel Kramer Bussel, with stories by Selena Kitt, Jade A. Waters, Dorothy Freed, and Sommer Marsden, among other talented writers, The Big Book of Submission, Volume 2 offers arousing tales that delve deep into the thrills of spanking, bondage, power dynamics, service, exhibitionism, erotic adventure, and much more.

 Available Now On

Your Choice of These Digital Stores

Proudly Feminist as Fuck & Kinky as Hell!

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Looking Back at Attraction from a Female Lens

I love this performance. Don’t get me wrong, I love it because Hailee Steinfeld and the rest of the dancers do an AMAZING job, but the main reason why I love this so much is how they not only did a lovely, very faithful homage to the original video, but they did a perfect modernization of it. 




And not just that they switched the gender roles, which can certainly be interesting, but I love that they made the conscious decision to tell this tale of attraction from a fresh, updated, female perspective.

I love this song, which sounds very sweet and flattering, but, it wasn’t until I re-watched the original music video this morning, that I realized that the video…man, from a female viewpoint, it looks way less sexy and romantic than it does a PSA on street harassment or a prelude to a crime scene investigation. 




I watched it on edge, terrified for safety of the woman in the video. I mean, sure, it’s a sexual video, but the sexuality in performance is pretty much exclusively male. Sure, the woman IS sexy, but her sexiness is only relevant in that the men in the video find it sexy. This is all about their sexual reaction to her and what it inevitably means sexually. 

In fact, I’ve watched it a couple of times now and, while I can certainly see all the moments of attraction for him that would logically lead to the ending where they end up together, I cannot for the life of me pinpoint exactly what would make her fall for him. Where does this stop being a horrifying or annoying or inconvenient event for her and turn into something attractive and enticing to her. Where are the signs that she is, or even reasonably should be, as into this as the guy? It’s as if they weren’t even trying to make it make sense. I mean, OF COURSE, she’d be into him in the end because he…dance…good? He so cool, can haz girl now, right?

Contrast that to Hailee’s performance. From the start, the performance makes it clear that her partner is as into this—as into her—as she is. From their facial expressions to their body language to, of course, the lyrics, it all makes sense now. THIS is a story about attraction that would reasonably result in the couple ending up together at the end of it because, from the beginning, they’re already in it together. It’s flirty and fun and, most importantly, mutually so. 

So often, when we talk about the way men and women view dating and romance and sex, we act as if men are after sex and woman are after love and that’s the difference in perspective.

And, while that may be true for some men and some women, I think this performance is a better example of the difference between the male and female perspective. Looking at Hailee’s performance, there is nothing about it that screams romance. It is as sexual—if not more so—than Michael’s. The moves she performs are plays on his from the original video. The setup and scene are almost identical. The only difference is reciprocity. The idea that the person Hailee wants wants her too. Watch how she pursues him at roughly the same rate and at roughly the same intensity that he pursues her. This isn’t a mating dance where one person impresses the other. It’s a mating dance they perform together, that cannot exist without the other.

So often stories told from a more masculine focus are all about overcoming obstacles. They are about winning and triumphing over some stumbling block to get your reward. And, when you apply that to dating and romance and sex…stuff gets horror-show, CSI, PSA scary. Fast. Even if that isn’t the intention. And, to be fair, we are all seeing things with new eyes now that we couldn't see in the eighties. I’m sure I’ve seen the original music video before when I was younger, before I started dating or having sex or being hit on on the street by groups of shouting, unrelenting men, and I likely didn’t think anything of it. Younger me was clearly not nail-bitingly turned off by the video. However, the me today…would rather be in, would feel safer in, a room with “Thriller” Michael than the jerk Jackson is playing in this video.

The me today, with all my lived-in experiences of how an attraction that does not see me as anything but something to be obtained or won—that, in doing so, sees me and my desires as something to be overcome or triumphed over—inevitably ends…yeah, I will take Hailee’s tale of mutual desire, that looking at the performance may just as likely be love-everlasting as lust-in-the-moment, over Michael’s creepily pushy approach at attraction any day.

#FuckLikeAFeminist - We Really Need a How-To

#FuckLikeAFeminist

I LOVE this statement Samantha Bee made on her segment covering the Ansari situation. And she made many other great points in it too (watch it here), including the point that Ansari has made a career on being able to fuck like a feminist and the fact that he can’t or won’t is a criticism worth talking about. That’s incredibly valid.

But I take issue with the idea that no one gets to judge how women discuss this issue. Because we have to. We HAVE to critically examine how we tackle and frame this issue. We have to because, one, others are going to; they just are. But, mostly, we must because it matters. This topic matters, affecting every person on the planet. How we talk about it matters, because, if we’ve learned nothing from how we talk about race and sexual orientation and gender and [insert minority issue weighed down by eons of cultural baggage here], we should have learned by now that if we don’t have a discussion that sways the other side, all we’re doing is widening the divide and encouraging the worst in them, as well as in us. Because, if we’re more concerned with our own outrage than our ability to communicate, our goal isn’t change. Our goal isn’t the greater good. We have to be honest: our goal is to make ourselves feel better at the expense of making the world better.

And, I get it, it is TIRING to keep having to have this conversation. I feel like I’ve been saying the same things for years. “We need to get better at communication.” “Affirmative, enthusiastic consent is a necessary part of healthy sex.” “If you want to know what someone wants or want something from someone else, ask.” “Even if you do everything right, you are not entitled to a yes.” 

I’ve been saying it so long, it no longer feels relevant. How could anyone NOT know about this by now?

Except, if I’m honest, there are lots of ways someone could not know. Starting with the fact that, yes, toxic norms have dominated our culture for eons. Dismantling that kind of internalized culture isn’t easy. Especially when, for all our cultural shifts and movements, it keeps getting reinforced by our media, our society as a whole, and by the people around us. 

And it’s easier to get people on-board with cases like O’Reilly, Weinstein, and Lauer. It’s not hard to convince most people right now that no one should whip their junk out in front of people who don’t want to see it. It’s not hard to convince most people at this moment that forcibly raping people is a crime. It’s not hard to convince most people that leveraging someone’s career to get sex is reprehensible. Our culture has shifted enough to be able to recognize the horror in those acts. And it’s about damned time!

But, as many people are pointing out, Ansari’s situation is different. It isn’t as simple. In a culture that, in an effort to simplify the obviously complicated, preaches “no means no” and “yes means yes,” trying to grapple with nuance isn’t easy. If she said yes to some things, but not others, what does yes mean? What exactly does any given yes cover? If she didn’t directly say no, then exactly what does no mean? And how was he, and those like him, supposed to recognize it? I mean, if we’re using coded language and signals that weren’t discussed and agreed upon beforehand, how can anyone trust anything anyone says or does? After all, if something means no to you, but doesn’t to me, how can we ever even hope to avoid this situation? Because you should ALWAYS be able to say yes to some things and no to others and have those choices respected. But, if we can’t even constructively and clearly talk to each other about how to talk to each other, respect doesn’t seem like a likely outcome.

That’s why I’ve always been in favor of learning to communicate more directly. Using clear, direct language to communicate your wants and needs that goes beyond just a simple, often incomplete yes or no. But I also acknowledge another really, crucially valid point people are bringing up, that it often doesn’t feel safe to be direct. Giving a clear, direct yes or no to someone can, in certain circumstances, put people in harm’s way, physically, emotionally, financially, etc. We see it too often to deny it. 

So, if we can’t rely on indirect signals and don’t feel safe using direct language, where does that leave us?

To be honest, I don’t know. And trying to figure out an answer that can be universally applied is going to take exhaustive work. It is going to be tiring and feel futile and make outrage feel really good.

And, you know what, be outraged. Rage, as we’ve seen in the past few years, can be effective. It can spark conversations in ways that calm rationality just can’t compete with. We, as a species, are attracted to loud, shiny objects; sometimes it pays off to be the loudest, most sensational one in the room.

But, if you want that spark your rage created to spread into something productive, there’s got to be something behind it. Something beyond it. Because, inevitably, even if you get someone to listen, they’re going to ask, “Okay, you’re mad, I see that. But now what?”

And, like it or not, it leaves you with two options. You can double-down on rage. Shout so loud, you shut down any kind of conversation. When the other side tries to engage or ask questions, you can say that you’re tired of talking about this when no one’s listening anyway. After all, to be fair, there are always those on the other side who are just trolling and aren’t actually interested in communication. And, yes, trolling them back and shutting them down feels so damned good.

But how much good does it do? When you’re not even trying to convince anyone on the other side. Not just the trolls, but the people who have been fed our toxic cultural norms from birth who honestly haven’t questioned it because, until now, they’ve never had to. Not just the trolls, but the people your rage woke up and are listening and engaging for the first time. Not just the trolls, but the people who could actually be swayed. And, who, if you let them, might surprise you and help sway and shape your own opinions in a better direction.

I’ve talked about this before, but the relationship feminism and BDSM have is a great example. When each side dismisses the other as not knowing what they’re talking about and demonizes them as either prudes or predators, no good comes out of that. No problems are solved. It widens the divide and forces those who find common ground in each to choose a side.

But, when they listen to each other, they learn from each other. No other group has helped shape our conversation about sexual ethics better than these two groups. No one has grappled with and explored and examined sexual ethics better than these two groups and they never would have done it as well, if they hadn’t butted heads and debated with each other. If they hadn’t figured out how to communicate with each other. To listen and learn. To talk and teach. Without this, kinksters would never have questioned or learned to combat the rampant sexism and potential for abuse inherent in kink culture. Without this, feminists would still be prioritizing acts over consent, dismissing context and real, lived-in experiences over theory and ideology, demonizing innocent people and loving relationships, all the while helping to stigmatize an already marginalized group. Without this, without the ability to work together and the willingness to see things from other sides, the problems inherent in kink culture—that so often are echoed in vanilla culture, as we are seeing now—would still be pushed to the shadows, hidden under rage, shame, and stigma, making it impossible for either side to fix the problems they both know are there.

I’m not saying that we have to agree with each other on everything. Or that we can’t legitimately think and call out the other side as wrong. But there has to be a better, more constructive conversation that the ones the loudest, most sensational voices are having right now. Because, if we are rightly going to criticize Ansari for not living up to his words and ideals and #FuckingLikeAFeminist, then we should probably make sure we're doing all we can to make sure more people know what that even means.

So You've Been Accused of Sexual Misconduct...

I've been thinking a lot about this lately, just like everyone else in this country and around the world. And, while I am 100% behind the MeToo Movement--we need to listen to women and take their stories seriously--I don't like the way the movement is moving.

I don't like zero-tolerance positions. I never have. Because, by erasing nuance and context, they too often end up causing more problems than they solve and end up dismantling and unraveling any good they hoped to achieve. 

Look at zero-tolerance policies on guns or bullying in schools. With guns, sure, you banned toy guns at school, which is great because we often can't tell the difference between a toy and a weapon and shouldn't have to make that distinction at a school, putting kids' lives at risk with that decision. But then we started banning finger guns under zero-tolerance policies and began becoming our own parody. It's hard to maintain the moral high ground when your shaky argument sounds irrational because it doesn't stand on sound logic. 

And, with bullying, we banned it from our schools, which is great, only to push it online, where it happens out of our view and out of our control. We solved one symptom of a problem (bad behavior at schools) only to exacerbate the condition (bad behavior in general). We didn't solve anything, didn't fix anything, we just moved it around, like a kid who doesn't want to eat their vegetables.

What we need to do is address the issue. Head-on. Don't manage the symptoms, treat the disease.

Like I said on Twitter, I don't know if Al Franken should resign. He's going to, but I don't know if that actually solves anything or if it just moves a player off the board.

Instead of Franken being the first strike at zero-tolerance, I'd rather see him used as a path to reform. While I don't condone what he did--non-consensual touching of any kind is unacceptable--I don't know if I want him to disappear from the landscape. I don't know if his fading into obscurity, while convenient and psychically satisfying, really serves a greater purpose.

Personally, I think I'd rather see him publicly confront what he's done. I want to see him truly apologize. I want the focus to be on the women he violated while he does. I want him to see him listen to his accusers without making excuses or discussing what this means for him. I want to hear him say that he's sorry. Period. That he behaved badly and wants to do better. That he wants to hear how he can do that from us--particularly the women of Minnesota who he served and let down and especially from the women who he disrespected and violated.

And then I want to hear us provide him with a path to doing better.

Because, if the only solution we can provide to people who have behaved badly is for them to disappear, we are going to create a larger problem than the one we are trying to solve.

Look at race in this country. We thought we were moving forward on racism, that we were past that. We thought we'd scared and shamed the racism out of people. Yet here we are. Turns out, scaring and shaming people isn't a great way to change people's minds. Turns out, it's a fantastic way to silence and isolate people, all while allowing those feelings to fester and grow outside of our knowledge and control. Until the day someone says out loud "what we all were thinking" and we all end up here.

We need a better path than that. Because, I don't know about you, but I am not happy about the one that we're on.

And, sure, I'll be honest, I don't know what path would work. I don't think that problems this complex or pervasive can be solved easily, cleanly, or quickly. That's why both the complacency in either throwing your hands up in the air and saying nothing can be done about this unsolvable problem in human nature or in the contextless crackdown of zero-tolerance is so attractive. It requires little from us, minimal effort and likely even less thought.

I think real culture shifts require more. 

Personally, I would like to see men like Franken, who claim to want to do and be better, be brought into the conversation about consent rather than pushed out. I'd like them listen to what we have to say and figure out where they fit in that. I'd like to know where our past teachings on sex and consent have failed and what could be done better in the future. I want to know, from them, what would have made them think before they acted. I want to know what they would like to tell other people like them to make them think before they act. 

Then I would like to see them work with women-led, sex-educated groups to change how our culture views sex and consent. I'd like to see them advocate for better training for cops, politicians, teachers, faith leaders, doctors, etc. on how to handle and talk about sex and consent. I'd like to see them advocate for better, more practical, more sex-positive, more evidence-based education on sex and consent in schools as well as in communities and work environments. I'd like to see them advocate for better portrayals of sex and consent in media and culture. I'd like to see them advocate for better accessibility to sexual health information and services for everyone. I want to see these people put their actions where their apologies are.

I'd like to see these people, if they are truly committed to change, actually aim for positive societal reform, rather than rot in isolated resentment. I'd like to find ways for them to be part of the solution, rather than write them off as perpetual problems. I think that would help them actually see how they victimized people, rather than view themselves as victims. I would rather have them, if they prove to truly be interested in making the world better, helping us, becoming part of us, rather than ousting and ostracizing them.

Because Franken was the first.

He will not be the last.

And we will HAVE to figure out how we deal with all of them, how they fit within the better world we want to create, or risk them grouping together in their resentful isolation and becoming another outright, alt-right problem.

A Pick-Up Guide: Be More Interesting Than Her Phone

I've been seeing a bunch of different versions, ranging from sincere to whiny af, from guys asking, "well, then, how should I approach women I'm interested in?"

And my gut instinct is to say: just don't. There are better ways to do this dating thing. There are dating sites and singles events and bars and clubs and getting set up by a mutual friend. There are countless other ways to find people who are also actively looking for someone to date, which significantly increases your odds as opposed to just taking a shot in the dark with a stranger you saw on the street.

But, hey, some people like long odds and who am I to judge your gambling habits?

So, if I HAD to give a piece of advice, here it is: be more interesting than her phone.

Not an easy task, I know. You're not just competing with other men, you're going up against work emails and personal emails, calls from family and texts from friends. You've got to compete with Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram, YouTube, and mobile games. Not to mention ebooks, digital streaming services, online shopping, and just the worldwide web as a whole.

Talk about long odds!

Yeesh, well, okay, if it's that difficult, is there ANYTHING I can advise on HOW to be that interesting?

Depends on the person you're approaching.


What I find interesting, someone else might not. Something they find fascinating might bore me to tears. And always keep in mind, their phone is likely already tailored to their interests; when you're choosing to approach someone, you're often choosing to start from scratch.

Ask yourself: what would interest me, if a stranger were approaching me? And, if all that takes is a willing female who finds you attractive...you ever think maybe THAT'S why women find you boring? Dude, if all you've got to talk to me about is how hot you think my boobs, butt, eyes, smile, hips, legs, cheekbones, feet, tummy, etc. are...how do I break this to you? The pedometer on my phone is still more interesting than you. I mean, what do you expect us to say to that? "Thank you; this is the millionth time someone has unsolicitedly commented on my [insert body part here] but, when you do it, it really stands out." Most people want to feel attractive, it's true. But this does not do that. You'd think it would but, like with comedy, the lines lose their punch after the first few times.

Be more interesting than my retread.

Want to be interesting to a particular person? Find out their interests. You want to figure out their interests? You know, pretty sure people's online dating profiles contain that. Convenient!

Don't get me wrong I've seen cold approaches work. Hell, I've had it happen to me! But, even when they're pleasant, phone-defeating experiences, they still won't guarantee you a date at the end of them.

Because that's not how social interactions work. There is no cheat code to success. No person owes you a yes. No one even owes you a shot. You are never owed anyone's attention. Ever.

And here's one last bit of advice that's not always true but it's a good bet to live by: the more you expect a yes from someone, the more you feel entitled to one, the less likely you are to get one.

All I Know

 Last post about this, I swear (if just for my own sense of sanity). But someone mentioned something that got stuck in my head.

Admittedly, I am kind of a passive person—I’m generally up and ready for whatever; I’m a uniquely capable person who can handle most situations, as one friend likes to put it—but I’m not what anyone would label weak or permissive. I’m likely the last person people would think of as a victim. A survivor, maybe, if you know a bit about my past. But, even then, I think “victim” isn’t usually a term people would associate with me. Hell, it’s not a term that I’m terribly comfortable with myself.

Which is weird, isn’t it?

Because, yes, I am a survivor.

I have survived domestic abuse, relationship abuse, workplace harassment, street harassment, online harassment, racial profiling, and probably more that I don’t really want to think about right now. I have survived.

Which kind of logically necessitates that, before I became a survivor, I was a victim.

There’s just not really a way for that not to be true.

No matter how tough or resilient or capable I am, I’ve been victimized. By parents, partners, friends, employers, strangers, and authority figures.

And the only reason why I think people, including myself, think of me more as a survivor than a victim is because I never needed help to get out. I was tough or resilient or capable or—hell, let’s be honest—lucky enough to find a way out.

Which sounds really admirable and courageous.

But, looking at it, it’s really just sad.

Because, in truth, I got out without help, not because I never needed help, but because I can’t remember a time where it felt like there was help. Because I, like so many of us, was raised with the idea that “the sad truth is, no one will help you in this world but you.” 

Which is a fucked-up notion, isn’t it?

To expect the most courage and action from the person with the least amount of power in an abusive situation? To ask a person who’s being beaten down to rise up and do what the rest of us don’t seem terribly inclined to do? For god’s sake, we require women to risk their careers and security to report harassment. We expect wives to risk their lives to leave abusive husbands. We ask minorities to be able to somehow navigate generations of racial tensions with supposedly trained and often armed authorities. We require children to report on parents who abuse them. All because of this terribly defeatistly pessimistic notion that you can’t expect anyone to help you in this world but you.

You might as well ask why a drowning person can’t just learn to breathe underwater. I’m sorry I couldn’t respond to abuse the way you think I should be able to; I was too busy surviving.

And I suspect it’s worse for those of us who are seen as tough or capable. Because, of course, no one ever thinks we need help. We’re tough. We aren’t victims; we’re survivors. If anyone could breathe underwater, it’d be us. 

Made worse by the fact that, if you’ve never been offered help, never received help, never seen what help looks like, how can you be expected to know how to ask for it? To be entirely fair, even when I’ve been offered help, I’ve never known what to do with it. After a lifetime of relying only on myself, it feels uniquely unsafe to rely on others. Because I’ve been taught that it could disappear or even turn on me at any time.

I’ve learned my lessons too well, it would seem.

Like I said, I don’t have any of the answers. I don’t know what should or shouldn’t be done. I don’t know how this all ends.

But I do know that it’s unfortunate that we’ve created a culture that discourages people from seeking help while simultaneously blaming them for not doing so fast or well enough. That expects solutions from people stuck in no-win situations who are just trying to survive. That seems to expect nothing better from abusers (hey, it sucks bad guys exist but that’s just the way of the world, right?), while demanding everything from victims.

I don’t have answers, but I know that that solves nothing.

You Think You Know

Just like with Cosby & O'Reilly, I'm seeing a lot of people be suspicious or dismissive or even derogatory toward the women and men coming forward to talk about their experiences with Weinstein, often asking "Doesn't it seem odd that they're coming out NOW?" 

No, it's really not.

People ask why victims or people who knew about the abuse didn't come out before.

You want to know why?

This.

People turning it around and blaming and questioning them. Having it used against them. Not being believed or even being maligned. 

This is why.

I used to work at an animation studio and, from my interview, I knew that the president of the company, whom I'd be an assistant to, had an Asian fetish and was interested in me.

But I was young and needed a job and really wanted a career in a creative field. I was even promised that, in time, I might be able to move into the writing staff. Looking back now, I'm ashamed of how much I was willing to put up with for such small promises.

And it wasn't an office secret. Everyone knew. He wasn't subtle. From creepy comments to making me fetishizing mix-tapes to invading my personal space and boundaries. Even getting to the point where any male employee who talked to me too much or too often was punished, reprimanded or even taken off projects.

It was incredibly alienating.  

It got to the point where no one really talked to me, or even came around to our end of the office. Leaving us alone all day.

No one did anything.

And it continued.

Because who was going to question or report the guy with the highest position at the office? Who would you even report him to?

It didn't stop until the company had to layoff people--turns out he was as good at business as he was with women. I remember him inviting me into his office to apologize to me personally about the layoffs--something that did not happen with any of the other now ex-employees. He knelt on the floor in front of me and grasped my hands, tears in his eyes and apologies and promises of re-hiring me if he could get another contract lined up on his tongue. He kept telling me that he knew how disappointed and crushed I must be.

In truth, I was relieved.

I went home that day feeling freer than I'd felt since I'd accepted the job.

It's the thing they don't tell you about "dream jobs;" you will--without meaning to, without in the moment knowing you are--give up so much for so little. You will do what you must to stay; how could you not, when it's your dream at stake? 

And those in power, they know that. They know how rare it is for people to make it into "dream" fields. They know how how much sheer luck it takes to break in and how hard you have to work to make it. They know that they hold your chance in their hands.

To see people take that power and abuse it...

The last people you should be pointing fingers at are the people that power is used against.

The whole thing bothers me. But what bothers me most is that there are people who both believe the victims AND still blame them. Who ask why they didn't speak up, if they knew what he was. Why didn't they come forward, if he'd done it to them. Who ask how many other women suffered because they hadn't acted.

We know.

I never reported my boss. As far as I know, no one else did either. I have no idea where he is or what he's doing. But he had connections. The company, before it failed, had won Emmys. I have no doubt that he, unlike me, is still in the industry somewhere.

And sometimes I think about his next assistant. And the one after her. And the one after her. I think about the other employees who likely had their jobs threatened for talking to the wrong person.

I know I could have done more. Believe me, I know.

That in no way makes it easier to act.

No one knows how they'll react in that kind of situation. You cannot know, until you're in it.

And, even if you think you would have acted perfectly, if you think you would have known exactly what to do--hell, even if you were in that situation and did know exactly what to do and did it perfectly--that doesn't mean that the rest of us would. Or that the rest of us could.

I don't know how to solve problems like this. How to make sure it never happens to anyone else ever again. I don't think anyone does.

But it's gotta lie somewhere in: we just have to be better to each other.

And a lot of the talk I've heard from people this week, from all sides--even and especially from the people who claim to be speaking on behalf of victims--doesn't feel like that answer.

We Are Not Unsafe

I hate this kind of rhetoric:

"Kink is not a sexual orientation. It is simply how someone enjoys having sex, not about who they participate in it with. Comparing kink to being gay minimizes being gay down to only having sex when it is so much more than that. People have not been fighting over the past few decades to only have sex with whatever gender they want. There is no need to fight about that because that could be done in secret. It is about love. It is about being able to express that love in public without criticism: holding hands, going on dates, marriage, just the simplest forms of loving one another. It is not about how a couple has sex." 

While I am not equating the LGBT experience with the kink experience--they are not the same, not historically or socially or psychically--there are similarities and crossover.

Kinksters, throughout history, have been stigmatized and diagnosed as psychiatrically sick because of who we are. I don't know any kinkster who didn't grow up being raised to think there was something deeply wrong with them. We've been shunned from all kinds of spaces, from religious spaces to medical spaces, from queer spaces to feminism, to being denied housing and employment. Thanks to doxxing, our lives get turned upside-down, from having our jobs, our homes, our kids, our friends and families taken away from us because someone found out what we do and who we are. And not "due to inappropriate behavior" but because someone found out something personal about us and decided it was okay to shame and punish us for things we should never be shamed or punished for. And thanks to that shame we're less likely to seek outside help when we do experience problems, like abuse or injury, from cops, shrinks, doctors, or even loved ones, because society is convinced--and often convinces us--that, because of who we are and what we do, we deserve all ills that we get.

And our love is CONSTANTLY being reduced to nothing more than how we have sex. Never mind the complex and valid social structures and emotional connections that are unique to kinksters. Never mind the added amount of care and communication we share that is required of our kind of love. To too many people, we are nothing but a series of inappropriate acts and toys.

We're constantly being misrepresented in society. Being portrayed as nothing more than monsters and victims or punchlines. Even the times when we're portrayed in the positive, more often than not, it's in a titillating and inaccurate way that glorifies the aspects of us that the world sees as strange and glosses over the humanity the world views as less entertaining and certainly less profitable. We're treated as circus acts or zoo exhibits or mythological beings, which sounds exotic and fun until you realize that we'd rather seen as people, with real lives and real partners.

And then there's the claim that we make spaces unsafe.

Uncomfortable? Sure.

Complicated? Absolutely.

I will be the first to admit that our open and unashamed presence in polite society--our desire to not be shoved into bedrooms and closets--is cause for a lot of awkward conversation.

But, like I said, we kinksters LOVE us some in-depth communication and comprehensive education.

And thank goodness we do.

We've been instrumental in changing and re-shaping the language of consent in our culture. We've open doors to talking about sexuality--for women, men, and people of all genders--in a way no other community has. We've been advocates for the fight for better sexual education and healthcare and welfare for people who don't fit the norm, from the LGBTQ+ community to sex workers.

We've made sex and love and relationships better for countless people. We've made sex and love and relationships safer and less taboo for countless people.

What we do and who we are may make you uncomfortable, but the last thing we've done is make you less safe.

Porn Is Sex Ed and We Need to Accept It

Like this article points out, the fact is none of my useful sex education came from school. None of it. All of it came from porn, advice columnists & podcasts, bloggers, and experience.

Which is why, as an erotica writer and a blogger who talks about sex a lot, I think it's so important to not only include things like enthusiastic consent and negotiation and communication, but to make it sexy too. To not let it be some kind of downer or obligatory write-off that needs to be rushed through so we can get to the sexy bits.

It, in and of itself, needs to be part of, wrapped up in and inextricably bound, with the sexy bits. I strive to make it so that my stories do not work without those parts. That, if you take them out, the story doesn't make sense anymore.

Because I am a firm believer that our culture needs to start thinking of sex like that. It needs to become our romantic and sexual narratives. It needs to be normalized and embraced.

Because, in real life, sex doesn't work without those things. It just doesn't. And we need to stop pretending, and definitely need to stop promoting and romanticizing the idea, that it does. It should break our fourth wall and take us out of the story, if that basic level of decency and ethics doesn't exist. Its lack should leave us wanting more, wanting better, from our stories.

Because, if we continue to treat consent and communication as unnecessary drags in our stories, can we really be surprised, when so much of our sexual knowledge and culture is shaped by what we in the porn industry do, that they're treated that way in real life too?

Interview with Erotica For All

I did a great, fun interview with Lucy Felthouse at Erotica For All! Hope you Enjoy!

How did you start writing erotica?

    I actually majored in writing speculative fiction for children in college. But I would write smutty erotica as a kind of literary palate cleanser between classwork. Then, after graduation and under the grind of being in the workforce, I realized that my cleanser had become my palate. Erotica, particularly kinky erotica, is a genre that I’ve always loved and that I found I, as a feminist, queer kinkster of color, had something unique to add. While there are a lot of great kink stories out there, much of which is written by actual kinksters, there’s still a lot of porn, erotica, and romance stories in the mainstream that still treat kink like it’s less of a sexual fantasy and IRL lifestyle and more like it’s a literary fantasy. Some mystical, unreal phenomenon that doesn’t require research, realism, or respect. Same goes for LGBTQ+ and interracial relationships. And I figured the world could use more voices out there preaching the message that, while it’s always great and awesome to HAVE a fetish or fantasy, it’s never okay to treat someone as if they ARE a fetish or fantasy...

READ THE REST HERE 

Unicornland Gives a Unique Peek at Poly

I definitely recommend Unicornland on Vimeo and absolutely want MORE! 

Every brilliantly-written, well-acted, carefully-crafted episode had me thinking either "Oh god, I've been there" or "I totally KNOW that person." I love that every episode feels self-contained and is a perfect short story in and of itself. But I was truly impressed by the show's ability to also connect the stories to show a real sense of community as well. It was a beautiful balance. 

I also love that there were examples of kink-gone-wrong and truly cringe-worthy missteps, but there was also heartwarming coming-togethers and honest moments of human connection.

Absolutely gorgeous show. Please, please, please make more. 

Bit of a SPOILER though: Dear lord, that bondage couple need to take a class on SSC kink; I know you're not supposed to say that people do kink wrong, but they did almost everything wrong. And the show portrayed that so rightly. That is how you break bottoms. Please don't do that.

Combining Complexities - Is Monogamy Unnatural?

Seriously, we need to wipe the word "naturally" from our human behavior vocabulary. It serves no actual function and leads to a lot of asinine conjecture. Because too often we conflate "natural" to mean "normal" and "right" and "easy." And when it comes to human behavior, I'm pretty sure none of those words are useful.

Take Scarlet Johansson's latest comments on marriage: "I don't think it's natural to be a monogamous person. I might be skewered for that, but I think it's work. It's a lot of work." Really, Johansson?!

Look, I've gone through long periods of celibacy, I've been in casual relationships, monogamous relationships, and poly relationships; let me tell you: It all takes work. Life, if you're trying to do it ethically, takes a lot of work.

When I was celibate, I constantly had to field questions about why I was celibate and when I was going to "get back out there" because "the clock's a-ticking and you don't want to end up alone." I constantly had to defend my decision to focus on other areas of my life other than my romantic status and insist that there was nothing wrong and that I wasn't broken or damaged or lonely. It felt like I was constantly trying to explain that being celibate isn't the same as being alone and being alone isn't necessarily the same as being lonely.

When I was in casual relationships, I had to deal with people telling me to settle down or make a decision. "Is this the person the lucky one who's going to last or not?" I also had to deal with the judgment of being called a slut or too picky, if turns out they weren't. Not to mention, well, having to just make a lot of day-to-day decisions. Do I go out tonight? Do I stay in? Do I really want to go out and make the effort to find a partner? Not to mention having to size-up every new partner and make judgments on whether or not they were someone I wanted to take a chance on or not, for my own self-protection as well as theirs. Not to mention if I wasn't interested in a long-term relationship, I constantly had to lay down and maintain boundaries, because, as much as no one wants to waste their time on partners who aren't interested in your well-being or who aren't interested in the same things you are, I'd hope no one wants to be one partners feel they've wasted their time on either.

When I was in monogamous relationships, a lot of that day-to-day stuff is easier. Typically, you know who you're going to have dinner with or who's house you're going to sleep over at. You don't worry so much over whether you'll regret going home with that person because of their temperament or safety status. People tend to bug you less about about your perceived promiscuity or likelihood of dying alone. But they do start pestering you about your future together with invasive questions about marriage dates and baby announcements. Not to mention, now every time you try to schedule anything, you have another person to consider. It's never what I want for dinner, it's what WE want. Before I can agree to any event, I need to make sure we don't have plans already. Every life plan you make, from what you do, where you do it, how long you do it, who you do it with, has to take another person into account.

When I was in poly relationships, it just meant multiplying those exact same issues. Instead of taking another person into account, now I was taking a lot of people into account. In order to make that kind of relationship work, you're constantly talking and checking in with everybody to make sure that everyone is feeling properly accounted for and no one feels left out or neglected. You're juggling not just one person's schedule and feelings and input, but multiple. Not to mention that most of the time you're pretty in the closet about it, since society is still pretty uptight about that. So some people in your life know about it, some people don't, and it's a constant balancing act of trying to explain your life to a bunch of people who have differing levels of information clearance. And you constantly have to worry about who knows what because, if the wrong person finds out, it could mean the loss of someone's job or kids or social circle. Added into that, even with the people who do know, you're often fielding awkward questions about who does what with whom and whether you have a problem with it.

Don't get me wrong; each relationship I've ever been in has corresponded to a moment in my life and a stage of my growth that fit at the time. It was a combination of the people I was involved with and the circumstances I was dealing with in my life at the time. Each relationship was filled with incredible benefits as well as inevitable drawbacks. 

Because that's how life works.

Nothing worth having comes to you without work. Nothing worth having is kept without work. And, maybe it's because I'm kinda a socially awkward introvert with what pop psychology labels attachment issues and a tendency to overthink, I'm fairly sure that nothing involving another person is ever easy and requires no work. We are complex creatures; how could combining complexities ever be easy?

We all just do the best we can with what we have.

Find relationships that work for you. That feel "natural" or "normal" or "right" for you, whatever that means in the moment. And understand that, while I hope that you are able to find and enjoy that, your natural, your normal, your right has absolutely nothing to do with anyone else's. If you are not in a relationship with someone, what they decide to do, however they decide to do it, and with whomever they decided to do it with, none of it is your business. 

Don't judge others.

Don't prescribe to others.

Don't project yourself onto others.

So long as no one is being harmed, just you do you and let everyone do the same.

We Need a Nasty Nation - Moving On Anthology

There are a few days that I will remember—with near painful vividness—for the rest of my life.

The day of the Columbine shooting, the day I learned schools weren’t the safe haven of learning I thought they were.

9/11, the day the whole nation was attacked and mourned while the world changed.

The day my dad died and I was viciously reminded how short life is and how little control we have over it.

November 8th will be a day like those. That is now burned into my brain and stamped on my soul. It was the day I felt hope die.

The hope for progress and tolerance. The hope for a better tomorrow. Hope that my country loved me as much as I love it.

That night, as I cried myself to sleep in the arms of my partner, I lost hope. In a way that—somehow through all the other tragedies in my life—I never had before. 

Which, I know, sounds so overdramatic and like eye-rolling liberal tears.

But it’s not.

This isn’t a liberal/conservative thing. This isn’t about tax plans or health insurance or court appointments or drug laws—even though all these issues are indeed very important and I wish they could be the biggest issue we have to worry about. This isn't about an outside enemy; this is about the darkness within our borders. One we must live with and work alongside to survive.

What terrified me in that moment—what terrifies me still—is that the rhetoric and sentiments being spread by this administration and its supporters tries to rob the people they view as their enemies—liberals, immigrants, people of color, muslims, women, the disabled, veterans, and so many more—of their humanity. Of our humanity.

And, terrified or not, with tears in our eyes and fear in our hearts or not, we cannot allow that.

When Hillary Clinton embraced the term “Nasty Woman,” so many of us cheered. Because the title and the emotions it evokes resonated within us.

We have been called nasty because we refused to fit ourselves into the boxes they issued us. We’ve been called nasty because we railed against their limitations and expectations we didn’t want to live by. We’ve been called nasty because we would not make ourselves less just to make someone else feel like they were more.

In that moment, nasty became a badge of honor.

We, as a nation—as a people, as a world—need more of that kind of nasty.

Because there are some crazy, improbable things happening right now. The world is becoming a crazy, improbable place. And, like other times in our past where this has happened, we must give this moment in history a voice.

We must become the thing they fear. The voice and vision of an era. We need to take all the anger and terror inside us and let it fuel us. Fuel us to act and to create. We cannot fester under the weight of our sorrow; we need to use it or we risk losing ourselves in it. We need to share it or risk missing our moment to put more empathy into the world. To allow it to see the things—the ideas and, more importantly, the people—it would rather ignore. Few things make people meet those they view as problems as people like art. Few things change the mind and touch the soul like art. 




Art has always been an act of rebellion. And they know it. One of Trump’s first budget plans is to “privatize the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and eliminate the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities entirely.” Artists have always been targets for the power-hungry. We have always been tasked to be freedom fighters. Have always needed to be bold. We explore the impossible and make the inexplicable real. We are the light that shines on society and shows it for what it is and what it could be. Times like these require more, not less, from its artists.




We cannot cower. We cannot be complacent. We need to “ask one final question man to man. A simple yet profound question recently asked of me. ‘When the stage is dark and the lights and cameras are off … Who are you? And more importantly, who do you want to be?’ ”

I don’t know about you, but I want to be bold.

I want to be nasty.

I want to be an artist. 




This is what I tried to do in my stories in Coming Together’s Moving On anthology. In “When There Are No Words,” I wanted to capture November 8th, to let its demons out into the light. To give voice to the scars I will now carry for the rest of my life. And, hopefully, it gives someone who doesn’t understand that fear and sadness a peek at an experience outside their own. In “The Help,” I wanted to explore the idea of power and submission. The difference between who we feel forced to submit to and those who we freely share and exchange power with. Because, if freedom and equality are truly ideals we want to live by, we need to examine that difference closely.

Please check out this great, defiant anthology that celebrates diversity and equality in the face of our uncertain future, whose proceeds go to Move On.

Available Now On

Your Choice of These Digital Stores

And Listen to an Excerpt

PRIDE & PUNISHMENT!

Please check out my story and get ready for some fit-on-the-streets-but-fun-in-the-sheets, pervertable play this PRIDE!

FREE on Unbound Magazine

COME GET CORRUPTED

Please check out my story, "Safeword," in this new anthology from Sexy Little Pages, where women reclaim and recognise their power in myriad ways, and it's not always pretty. 

Available Now On

Your Choice of These Digital Stores

SHOW ME WHAT YOU’VE GOT

Please check out my LGBTQ+ burlesque erotica story, “Rise or Shine” in this anthology that captures womanhood & women on stage & screen in all their beautiful, wonderful glory from Supposed Crimes!

Available Now On

Your Choice of These Digital Stores

UNIDENTIFIED FETISH OBJECT

Sometimes really it sucks being female! Please check out my feminist, space alien novella from Less Than Three Press! Available Now On

Available Now On

Your Choice of These Digital Stores

And Listen to an Excerpt

THINK YOU OWN ME?

Please check out my novel Show Me, Sir from Sinful Press that celebrates feminist kink!

Available Now On

Your Choice of These Digital Stores

Find even more great reads and Put Your Money Where Your Orgasm Is!

Also, find out how you can support me and collaborate with me on my Patreon Page!

Don't Yuck Other People's Yum; Even When It's Funny

Look, I get it. We’re all feeling a bit crazed in the face of this post-truth, Trumpian world looming ahead of us. And when salacious news drops in our laps...well, how can we not laugh?

At the ridiculousness of it all. At how, while the coolest, classiest president was giving his final impassioned, eloquent, inspiring speech to the nation, a story about our president-in-waiting hiring Russian sex workers to pee on the bed his predecessor stayed in like some pissant punk with a hard-on for immature and ineffectual vengeance and more money than sense leaked online. At how this is the state of our great nation now. 

I get it. Sometimes you have to laugh; it's either that or break Canada’s immigration site again.

All I’m asking is, like with all jokes, make sure you're aiming your humor correctly.

You may find what Trump allegedly did to be disgusting or gross, and that's fine, but the vindictive golden showers—childish as it may seem or unpleasant as you may find it—isn't the part you ought to focus your disgust on. Hiring sex workers, however you may feel about paying for sex, isn't the part you ought to be grossed out by.

The possibility that Trump lied to the American people about having ties to Russia, about his possibly knowing about Russian interference with our election, and the very real impacts both those things would have on our country and our democracy should be the story. Should be the things we all sit up and pay attention to.

If you want to attack that, I’m all for it. If you want to use piss play humor to shine a spotlight on that, hey, whether the rumor is true or not, I’m pretty sure that, with his manipulation of the media, he’s more than earned that.

But you know who hasn't earned your scorn?

Consensual clients of consenting sex workers, said sex workers, and kinksters who engage in consensual water sports.

If you talk or joke about how disgusting and gross Trump’s actions were and ONLY talk about the piss play or the sex workers, even when it's funny, that's part of the problem. Because, when you say, “Look, Trump got caught doing golden showers with sex workers; isn't he gross?!” all you’re saying that doing water sports and hiring sex workers is gross. That THAT is what we should be upset with. And, by logical extension, everyone else who does those things are gross and upsetting. 

But is that really what we mean? Other than in a tabloidy, gossipy way, do you really care about Trump’s sex life or what he chooses to do in bed between, hopefully, consenting adults? Other than in a tabloidy, gossipy way, does it actually impact your life? And, if it does—which it does just not in the way too many of us are talking about—how does it affect us and how can we make the conversation about that?

Because, yes, the man IS gross and disgusting, but those acts are not what make him so.

The man has given—and no doubt will continue to give—an unending supply of deplorable material to work with. From possibly colluding with Putin to undermine our democracy to insulting the disabled, veterans, minorities, women, and countless others. From courting a segment of the nation by preying on their fears, hate, mistrust, and ignorance to reducing the bragging over sexual assault to “locker room talk.” There is no shortage of disgust to speak of as we approach this horrifying transition of power. 

Keep focus. 

And, again, I get it. I’m not even going to pretend like my first reaction wasn’t to laugh and make juvenile jokes.

But, if we’ve learned anything over our vast human history—particularly these past few years; hell, over these past few weeks—we need to be better. We need to demand better from everyone else. It is the only way we, as a whole, will ever get better.

We need to make sure that our humor is directed at the right people, at the right things. Poke fun, poke humorous holes, at the hypocrisy or corruption in power. Use wit and laughter to make people pay attention to the establishment and their actions. Like, I’ve said before, humor is a powerful tool for forcing us to look at the ridiculousness of our world and to inspire us to change it for the better. 

But, if it’s not actively harming anyone, don’t yuck someone else’s yum and don’t let others do it either, not even for a joke. Because, to be funny, we shouldn't need to use kinksters’ or sex workers’ humanity—or the dignity of anyone who doesn’t deserve it—as a punchline for our humor.

Humor is a tool; we decide if we want to use it to fix what’s broken or as a weapon to blast at the world, damn the casualties.

If we want to actually hold Trump accountable, we have to use all our tools—from humor to ire to attention—to highlight what’s important. If we make this story about piss play and sex workers, not only are we vilifying the wrong things, and implicitly the people who engage in those things consensually, we’ll all be mindlessly laughing at the jokes, while we let him get away with the dangerously unfunny and potentially criminal acts we ought to be holding him accountable for.

Which would kinda kill the fun out of it, right?