A physically aroused young man sits on the ground, stripped and bound to a fence behind him. Semen drips down his face, chest, and from his anus as another person takes a photograph of the moment using a cell phone camera.
This drawing turns me on because it contains many elements of my sexual fantasies. However, I seriously reconsidered posting it tonight because it shows an incredibly volatile subject. Interestingly, despite all that’s depicted here, the bondage, the indications of rough, likely homosexual sex, and the intense power imbalance, it’s the inclusion of the cell phone camera that turns this fictional picture into a potential political nightmare. I’m talking, of course, about “sexting.”
Personally, I enjoy rough sex involving consensual use of restraints and, yes, photography. While restraints were simpler for me to enjoy, being photographed makes me a little uncomfortable to this day because, by and large, a man’s value is measured in everything except his sex appeal. To be considered as potentially beautiful, or at least pretty enough to be visually desirable, seemed so impossible for so long that even a hint of such attention felt more likely to be putting me at the butt of a joke than giving me a compliment.
In the hegemonic gender paradigm, what a man cannot be, a woman is, and so when I was sixteen, my then-girlfriend and I set up a few private photo shoots in which I photographed her naked. This is not uncommon, abnormal, or unhealthy. It was, as much of young people’s behavior is, simply a necessary exploration of our own bodies, feelings, and desires. It was partly through experiences such as that one that I developed my sexual personhood, and my girlfriend developed hers.
Increasingly, however, young people’s rights—and particularly their sexual freedoms—are being whittled away by outrageous, paternalistic, and contradictory claims. As I said at KinkForAll Washington DC,
In December of 2006, the Denver Post reported on a Utah court case in which two 13 year old heterosexual adolescents were convicted of sexually molesting each other. They, too, are now both registered sex offenders. This story showcases a horrible double-standard of youth sexuality: at 13, you’re too young to be capable of consenting to sex, but apparently you’re old enough to consciously decide to sexually molest someone else.
Moreover, at such young ages you’re also apparently old enough to be charged with producing and distributing child porn of yourself, even when the pictures you take are not even close
to the explicitness shown in the fictional drawing at the top of this post. So, in what is poised to be an extremely important legal case, A federal appeals court in Philadelphia may soon decide whether [teen girls] can be prosecuted under Pennsylvania child pornography laws merely for appearing in a “sexting” cell phone image,
the Post-Gazette is reporting:
In 2008, then Wyoming County District Attorney George Skumanick Jr. threatened to prosecute the girls unless they attended what their lawyers called “re-education” classes and wrote an essay about why sexting is wrong.
Yesterday, before the three-judge panel, a lawyer for Mr. Skumanick said that was a legitimate effort to protect the teens from themselves and potential child predators, and compared it to other state laws—like motor vehicle rules—that regulate teen behavior.
That claim outraged ACLU lawyer Witold J. Walczak, who argued the prosecutor cannot accuse the girls of being pornographers under the guise of protecting them from pornographers.
“We’ve been mystified how anyone can look at these photos as pornography,” he said. “These photos are not even close calls.”
(Emphasis mine.)
America is tragically embroiled in more than enough wars right now. Stop putting our kids on the front lines of the war on sex. Stop treating them like the criminals you claim to be protecting them from. Stop destroying their future by forcing them onto sex offender registration lists. And, please, stop shaming American children to their own deaths. Just, stop.
-maymay
(via orz.4chan.org)
![A young man leashed between the legs of a young woman kneels and looks up at her. The woman looks back at him, holding a hand on the back of his head.
Despite risking having a sole focus on the dominant woman, this picture, suggested by msa_10, somehow manages to pull my eyes between her and the submissive man. The difference in height and expression of each partner brings a surprisingly balanced visual weight to the total composition. I particularly like the way the man seems captivated in this situation; the woman is holding his leash short but not taut, and one of her legs is slung over his shoulder but they’re not tightly closed around him. Perhaps he’s just finished going down on her, and now she is taking care of him.
Care taking after playtime is called aftercare and in a recent blog post about aftercare, Saynine observes:
[T]here seemed to be a consensus from both Pro FemDommes and non-Pro that male bottom/subs do not require the same level of aftercare [as bottom/submissive women do] or any at all. This is fascinating to me and I do not even have a theory as to why. I do wonder if maybe FemDommes are less interested in providing aftercare.
Sadly, I’ve observed the same thing. While the idea that men—regardless of D/s orientation—don’t need or want aftercare is prevalent, it is wrong and very dangerous. Saynine quotes one dominant woman saying:
Call it stereotypical but I really would consider [a man who wants aftercare] a sissy and not want to play with him again.
I feel that this ignorant view, perpetuated not only by such women but also by many men, stems from a misinformed belief that desiring care somehow makes people not-men. But such fundamental desires don’t actually manifest as gendered dichotomies. As Eve Ensler has said:
Let’s think how compassion informs wisdom, and that vulnerability is our greatest strength, and that emotions have inherent logic[…]. And then let’s remember that we’ve been taught the exact opposite by the powers that be. That compassion clouds your thinking, that it gets in the way, that vulnerability is weakness, that emotions are not to be trusted[…].
I think the whole world has, essentially, been brought up not to be a girl. How do we bring up boys? What does it mean to be a boy? To be a boy really means not to be a girl. To be a man means not to be a girl. To be a woman means not to be a girl. To be strong means not to be a girl. To be a leader means not to be a girl.
I actually think that being a girl is so powerful that we’ve had to train everyone not to be that.
(Skip to 2:00 in the video.)
Ensler’s “girl” is not an actual person, but an acknowledgement of the multiplicity of wants and needs that exists within each of us, man and woman, dominant and submissive, adult and child. What saddens me most about the ignorant dominant woman’s quote is that she doesn’t even see how her lack of compassion not only devalues others in her own eyes, but also cuts herself off from having access to valuable others. Such dominant women are not powerful, and therefore not attractive to a submissive man like me.
-maymay](http://i613.photobucket.com/albums/tt211/msa_10/a8a1517a94b1c45baa11c0bd96fb4ac6-1.jpg)
![Kneeling on a mattress, a naked young man is tied with his arms behind his back. His mouth is gagged, stuffed with fabric (presumably clothing of some sort) as he raises his head.
I instantly liked this photograph for a few simple reasons. The relatively good rope bondage, something that’s aggravatingly horrendous in most pictures of bound men, helps it stand out. I also like the spartan nature of the room he’s in, which offers certain suggestions for potential fantasies. But more than that, I like this man’s upwards glance and how almost-but-not-quite prepared he seems for whatever is about to happen.
His is a look not of certainty, but readiness, not of mastery, but willingness, not of being unafraid, but of being courageous. In my experience, submission is not solely about the control of others over me, but about my own self-control. Willingly and eagerly challenging myself to do things a dominant partner wants me to do because it is what they desire is how I’ve come to define the line between being submissive to someone and being bullied by someone.
This is why I so heartily approve of American sexologist Dr. William Henkin’s words about submission:
Submission can actually engender power: realizing that you have something to give, and that you are capable of mastering your own will to give it up the way your top wants it instead of the way you think [they] should want it, can inspire pride: not the false pride of an inflated ego, but the true pride that, like humility, comes from knowing the depths of your self.
Some people will say such pride is a sin. I think the real sin is shame and self-subjugation under the guise of superior morality. For in the end, to be authentically prideful, you must first be able to know yourself, your desires, and successfully communicate them to others, and I refuse to be branded a sinner for that.
-maymay
mostlystraight:
derekisme:
nakedpeople:
gaysexnearby:
So try and get away, then.](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kx32h8sQ081qzs83zo1_r3_500.jpg)
![Two feline anthropomorphic humanoids have sex with one another. The larger of the two has spotted fur and is bound and gagged while laying on his back, penetrating his smaller partner on top, who is ejaculating.
This picture was sent by Alcibiades, who posted this drawing on their own blog along with a portion of the blog post as the suggested description, which is well worth a read.
I like furry porn a lot, as I’ve always been attracted to anthropomorphic ideas, especially when they manifest as sexual fantasy. Some of my favorite erotica has involved inter-species relationships, not because I find the thought of physical sensations with other intelligences necessarily pleasurable, but because of the humbling idea that such interactions demand a sensitivity to cultures, concepts, and physiology that is unfamiliar. This idea of remaining sensitive to difference is central to my sexual interactions with human partners, especially when we are new to one another. As I discussed on This Week In Kink episode 8, I often make it a priority to have “exploratory sex,” because I know that sex with someone I’ve never had sex with before is going to feel different than it ever has before, and that sex changes as we age. I get off on the novelty.
Furry facts aside, Alcibiade’s contribution is also incredibly on-point:
I’ve noticed in several gay communities online (nearly all of them also being furry communities, for whatever reason) that sub/dom is becoming a synonym for top/bottom[…]. For example, this picture was posted in the “subs coming handsfree from being fucked” thread on fchan.
It’s true that being the penetrated partner has always had submissive implications for me. […] Of course, at least part of it was because of ambient cultural memes about penetration: surely any guy that wanted that had to be submissive.
Yet it was also because of the simple mechanics of the acts as they had been presented to me so far: as far as I could tell, the penetrating partner controlled the action. He or she was generally in an upright, dominant position, with the penetrated partner in a vulnerable, inviting position, ass high in the air or on his or her back. While this is what the culture tells us what penetration should look like, it doesn’t have to be so.
Reading Alcibiades’s words, I can’t help but think that’s precisely what the woman on top sex position can be for. Moreover, penetrating can be an act of submissive service, and blowjobs can be dominant. Alcibiades’s point is well made, and I would perhaps only add that blurred distinctions between “top/bottom” and “dom/sub” are not good for the clarity of your relationship’s communication.
-maymay
(via physicalsophistry.blogspot.com)](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kwhj4iRcNC1qzs83zo1_r10_500.jpg)
![A physically aroused young man sits on the ground, stripped and bound to a fence behind him. Semen drips down his face, chest, and from his anus as another person takes a photograph of the moment using a cell phone camera.
This drawing turns me on because it contains many elements of my sexual fantasies. However, I seriously reconsidered posting it tonight because it shows an incredibly volatile subject. Interestingly, despite all that’s depicted here, the bondage, the indications of rough, likely homosexual sex, and the intense power imbalance, it’s the inclusion of the cell phone camera that turns this fictional picture into a potential political nightmare. I’m talking, of course, about “sexting.”
Personally, I enjoy rough sex involving consensual use of restraints and, yes, photography. While restraints were simpler for me to enjoy, being photographed makes me a little uncomfortable to this day because, by and large, a man’s value is measured in everything except his sex appeal. To be considered as potentially beautiful, or at least pretty enough to be visually desirable, seemed so impossible for so long that even a hint of such attention felt more likely to be putting me at the butt of a joke than giving me a compliment.
In the hegemonic gender paradigm, what a man cannot be, a woman is, and so when I was sixteen, my then-girlfriend and I set up a few private photo shoots in which I photographed her naked. This is not uncommon, abnormal, or unhealthy. It was, as much of young people’s behavior is, simply a necessary exploration of our own bodies, feelings, and desires. It was partly through experiences such as that one that I developed my sexual personhood, and my girlfriend developed hers.
Increasingly, however, young people’s rights—and particularly their sexual freedoms—are being whittled away by outrageous, paternalistic, and contradictory claims. As I said at KinkForAll Washington DC,
In December of 2006, the Denver Post reported on a Utah court case in which two 13 year old heterosexual adolescents were convicted of sexually molesting each other. They, too, are now both registered sex offenders. This story showcases a horrible double-standard of youth sexuality: at 13, you’re too young to be capable of consenting to sex, but apparently you’re old enough to consciously decide to sexually molest someone else.
Moreover, at such young ages you’re also apparently old enough to be charged with producing and distributing child porn of yourself, even when the pictures you take are not even close to the explicitness shown in the fictional drawing at the top of this post. So, in what is poised to be an extremely important legal case, A federal appeals court in Philadelphia may soon decide whether [teen girls] can be prosecuted under Pennsylvania child pornography laws merely for appearing in a “sexting” cell phone image, the Post-Gazette is reporting:
In 2008, then Wyoming County District Attorney George Skumanick Jr. threatened to prosecute the girls unless they attended what their lawyers called “re-education” classes and wrote an essay about why sexting is wrong.
Yesterday, before the three-judge panel, a lawyer for Mr. Skumanick said that was a legitimate effort to protect the teens from themselves and potential child predators, and compared it to other state laws—like motor vehicle rules—that regulate teen behavior.
That claim outraged ACLU lawyer Witold J. Walczak, who argued the prosecutor cannot accuse the girls of being pornographers under the guise of protecting them from pornographers.
“We’ve been mystified how anyone can look at these photos as pornography,” he said. “These photos are not even close calls.”
(Emphasis mine.)
America is tragically embroiled in more than enough wars right now. Stop putting our kids on the front lines of the war on sex. Stop treating them like the criminals you claim to be protecting them from. Stop destroying their future by forcing them onto sex offender registration lists. And, please, stop shaming American children to their own deaths. Just, stop.
-maymay
(via orz.4chan.org)](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kwfppnqTxm1qzs83zo1_r2_500.jpg)
