To see a full-size view of the images posted, just click on them.

RULES FOR POSTING COMMENTS: This blog is meant to be interactive. Please utilize the comment feature to respond to posts that prompt a reaction. You do not have to agree with me to post, but I do ask that your comment pertain to the post itself. I also ask that "anonymous" guests attach some sort of name to their comments so readers can tell everyone apart. (If you cannot follow these simple rules, your post may be DELETED or at the very least mocked for the entertainment of those who can respect my guidelines.)

Thursday, October 20, 2016

Go for it.

Today I thought to take a break from long, revealing posts to just offer a thought to accompany this cute cartoon I found online:

(just click on it to see it larger)

It seems lately that I've been seeing a lot of sad accounts from people who are suppressing their kinkier desires in order to maintain some sort of harmonious, yet unsatisfying, status quo in their lives. I cannot understand this. I think that just like the lady in the cartoon, people would be surprised at how simple it might be to have their desires met if they just took the bold step to reveal them. It starts with letting people know who you really are, up front, right from the start.........and without undue shame!

4 comments:

  1. Agreed on this point, at least that it shouldn't hurt to make a request for one's kinky desires to be met. If the romantic/sexual partner is going to be upset and/or offended at merely being *asked,* then I'd have to wonder exactly how solid that relationship actually was in the first place.

    That being stated, I must admit that I openly confessed my spanko-submissive tendencies to my darling spouse only after she'd come across evidence of them (spanking photo sets from Nu-West), although it was so sloppily "hidden" by me that I'm pretty certain I subconsciously wanted her to discover the evidence. (She'd ignored rather broad hints about my *bottomish* feelings during our courtship and the first year of our marriage, but it turned out that she had simply been totally clueless about even the existence of the spanking fetish.)

    Once she realized that it was my behind rather than hers which I desired to be reddened, she accepted my feelings although she still doesn't share or truly understand them--but as she'll say while gripping a paddle's handle in her hand, "Whatever, it's *your* bottom!"

    So I was pretty fortunate for a person with a 'vanilla' partner (whom I love for numerous non-kinky reasons), yet I'd also venture that, as my wife suggests, it shouldn't be that demanding for a caring partner to satisfy the receiving desires of a spanko-bottom individual.

    Asking a 'vanilla' person to endure a fairly sound spanking, that's obviously a more problematical situation for a *toppish* type... --C.K.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Great background, CK, that supports my point. Thanks for sharing that.

      As for 'Toppy-types'? Compromise is still the key. We have an A&G flogger made from moosehide that looks menacing but bites like a baby with no teeth. Deerskin ones are even gentler. Wouldn't a loving partner be willing to endure something that'll feel more like a massage than a punishment? but still seem pretty real to the Top?

      Delete
    2. I'll agree that "in theory" a loving 'vanilla' partner with a *toppish* paramour should be willing to accept light, love-pat-style spanking from him/her, but not everybody is all that enlightened.

      Receiving a spanking, even a very mild, playful one, from a lover would quite likely be considered more "childish" and even perhaps "demeaning" to a 'vanilla' person than administering one to him/her--this would especially apply to socially conservative, reactionary 'macho' males, I'm figuring.

      While my darling spouse is willing to smack my bare behind in private fairly often, she's quite concerned about anyone else knowing about our moderate spanking play, even though it's me who's the "kinky" one while she simply accomodates my *bottomish* desires.

      I'd venture that it's rather obvious that the issue with less-than-accomodating 'vanilla' partners is overwhelmingly psychological and social, rather than physical... --C.K.

      Delete
    3. Well then it just goes back to partnering up with someone compatible. People are just going to have to figure out their own situations like you and I did. You worked out a compromise that met your needs and I always laid out what was a necessary ingredient for any relationship of mine to work. Two different approaches both with satisfactory results.

      Delete