4' 33"
[Most Recent Entries]
[Calendar View]
[Friends]
Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in
4min33sec's LiveJournal:
[ << Previous 20 ]
| Friday, October 16th, 2009 | | 5:37 am |
A question for other BDSM-types...
Say we have a dom and a sub, and that these two people are a couple. Then let's say that dom2 comes around wanting to engage in D/s with dom1's sub. What is the appropriate course of action for dom2 to take in this situation? My answer to this is that dom2 should go to dom1 to, first of all, ask permission to dominate the sub, and second, to ask about any rules or limits that dom1 has placed on the sub. Then and only then, dom2 and sub can discuss what they want to do while still abiding by any rules and or limits put in place by dom1. Obviously, I'm dom1 in this situation, and dom2, who shall remain nameless, has violated every rule I've described here. For example, I said "no marks," and he proceeded to pick up a cane and leave bruises. Everyone with whom I've talked about dom2 says that he's a great guy who knows what he's doing when it comes to BDSM. I have tried to explain, multiple times and in multiple ways, how he has violated my expectations. Have I done something wrong? Can I not in fact reasonably expect other doms to follow the rules I outlined above? If I follow these rules in a situation in which I'm dom2, would that make me an asshole? Anyone? | | Sunday, September 27th, 2009 | | 2:16 pm |
"How could anything originate out of its opposite? For example, truth out of error? or the Will to Truth out of the will to deception? or the generous deed out of selfishness? or the pure sun-bright vision of the wise man out of covetousness? Such genesis is impossible; whoever dreams of it is a fool, nay, worse than a fool; things of the highest value must have a different origin, an origin of THEIR own--in this transitory, seductive, illusory, paltry world, in this turmoil of delusion and cupidity, they cannot have their source. But rather in the lap of Being, in the intransitory, in the concealed God, in the 'Thing-in-itself-- THERE must be their source, and nowhere else!" --This mode of reasoning discloses the typical prejudice by which metaphysicians of all times can be recognized, this mode of valuation is at the back of all their logical procedure; through this "belief" of theirs, they exert themselves for their "knowledge," for something that is in the end solemnly christened "the Truth." The fundamental belief of metaphysicians is THE BELIEF IN ANTITHESES OF VALUES. It never occurred even to the wariest of them to doubt here on the very threshold (where doubt, however, was most necessary); though they had made a solemn vow, "DE OMNIBUS DUBITANDUM." (Doubt every thing.) For it may be doubted, firstly, whether antitheses exist at all; and secondly, whether the popular valuations and antitheses of value upon which metaphysicians have set their seal, are not perhaps merely superficial estimates, merely provisional perspectives, besides being probably made from some corner, perhaps from below--"frog perspectives," as it were, to borrow an expression current among painters. In spite of all the value which may belong to the true, the positive, and the unselfish, it might be possible that a higher and more fundamental value for life generally should be assigned to pretence, to the will to delusion, to selfishness, and cupidity. It might even be possible that WHAT constitutes the value of those good and respected things, consists precisely in their being insidiously related, knotted, and crocheted to these evil and apparently opposed things--perhaps even in being essentially identical with them. Perhaps! But who wishes to concern himself with such dangerous "Perhapses"! For that investigation one must await the advent of a new order of philosophers, such as will have other tastes and inclinations, the reverse of those hitherto prevalent--philosophers of the dangerous "Perhaps" in every sense of the term. And to speak in all seriousness, I see such new philosophers beginning to appear. | | 2:05 pm |
"We are unknown to ourselves, we men of knowledge - and with good reason. We have never sought ourselves - how could it happen that we should ever find ourselves? It has rightly been said: "Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also"; our treasure is where the beehives of our knowledge are. We are constantly making for them, being by nature winged creatures and honey-gatherers of the spirit; there is one thing alone we really care about from the heart - "bringing something home." Whatever else there is in life, so-called "experiences" - which of us has sufficient earnestness for them? Or sufficient time? Present experience has, I am afraid, always found us "absent-minded": we cannot give our hearts to it - not even our ears! Rather, as one divinely preoccupied and immersed in himself into whose ear the bell has just boomed asks himself: "what really was that which just struck?" so we sometimes rub our ears afterward and ask, utterly surprised and disconcerted, "what really was that which we have just experienced?" and moreover: "who are we really?" and, afterward as aforesaid, count the twelve trembling bell-strokes of our experience, our life, our being - and alas! miscount them. -So we are necessarily strangers to ourselves, we do not comprehend ourselves, we have to misunderstand ourselves, for us the law "Each is furthest from himself" applies to all eternity - we are not "men of knowledge" with respect to ourselves." | | Monday, September 21st, 2009 | | 10:44 am |
No comment.
According to Wikipedia, Camden, NJ, is the sister city of.....Gaza City, Palestinian Authority. | | Friday, June 12th, 2009 | | 1:38 pm |
| | Friday, January 9th, 2009 | | 10:34 pm |
But I keep trying. I'm a real go-getter. It's why I'm never wrong. | | 10:29 pm |
Drinking doesn't work anymore because the part of my mind that I've trained to observe and analyze stops me almost at point x, x being the mathematical limit to which I can get closer and closer but never reach. | | Thursday, January 1st, 2009 | | 11:42 am |
When keepin' it real goes wrong...
"Roses are red; Violets are blue. That's what they tell me, Because I'm blind." Happy New Year, Chi-Town. Happy New Year, Bootsie. Happy New Year, Bruce Clementine. Current Music: A dog eating french toast. | | Monday, March 17th, 2008 | | 11:56 pm |
| | Wednesday, March 5th, 2008 | | 4:49 pm |
House is inaccurate, not because the title character figures people out too easily, but because in real life no one would believe him. "I have done it," says memory. "I cannot have done it," says pride. Eventually.... memory yields. - Nietzsche, The Gay Science | | 1:37 pm |
It's always nice, I suppose, to have more evidence that I'm a bad person. | | Wednesday, February 13th, 2008 | | 12:30 am |
Highlights from Wicked Faire
1. It was pretty great hanging out in an atmosphere in which one could assume that all present were at least as perverted and debauched as oneself. 2. I beat Sarah with a riding crop, publicly. Considering, I've come pretty far in a short period of time. 3. The riding crop that I beat Sarah with turned out to not be for public use. I'm still horrified by that, although the crop's owner said I could make it up to him by showing him the welts on Sarah's butt. It's been a long time since I fucked up like that, and I was not at all pleased. 4. I also had to snatch a pipe out of the mouth of the riding crop owner's wife, due to a couple of fucking normies wandering in to a party at which they were not welcome. And I thought I could make a good impression with that pipe... Stupid normies. 5. If the two previously mentioned errors failed to sour the hosts' opinion of me, I might make some new and interesting friends. Plus, she really seemed to like Sarah, if you know what I mean, nudge (x2), etc. 6. Sarah and I bought a collar for her; I added a little lock on the buckle. Does this mean I've collared her? I have no idea, and Sarah gave two different answers at two different times, so, yeah... 7. Geoff's set was good, but he forgot to record it. But, it was good. Current Music: Cats, misbehaving. | | Monday, February 4th, 2008 | | 12:33 pm |
| | Thursday, January 24th, 2008 | | 1:18 pm |
| | Monday, January 21st, 2008 | | 10:39 pm |
| | Thursday, November 1st, 2007 | | 10:12 am |
A hellishly boring story...
As a result of child abuse, I find myself ill-suited, in some ways, to engage in BDSM. The most blatant effect that my childhood continues to have on me has to do with aggression. Obviously, in a D/s relationship, if I'm the dom, I need to be able, at the very least, to communicate my desires, if not to take what I want, but this is exactly what my childhood taught me not to do. As anyone who's read the Genealogy of Morals can see, I've been taught to discharge any power I hold against myself, not against others, first by my unwitting parents, and then by myself, consciously, since I never expected to be involved in BDSM. Oddly, S/M causes fewer problems for me, although after being beaten as a child, it's still extraordinarily difficult to strike someone else, particularly a partner. Still, I bought a flogger earlier this week, and I didn't dissociate while using it as I have with previous partners, which I guess is a good sign. None of this should be read as if I don't actually want to dominate my sexual partners. I do, I'll admit that now. I've looked at pictures of ![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif) fragiletruth, taken while she was in the middle of a scene, and I want to do that to her, too. I want her to look at me like she was looking at the guys who were flogging her. I've built up a lot of defenses over the years to stop myself from doing these things. Now that I can't fool myself into thinking I don't want to do them, I don't know where to start dismantling those defenses. Crossposted to ![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/community.gif) male_dom. Current Music: Avenged Sevefold - Waking the Fallen | | Monday, October 29th, 2007 | | 10:57 am |
| | Saturday, October 27th, 2007 | | 10:55 am |
These stereotypes confuse and infuriate me.
I'm not sure what Sarah's vagina has to do with the frequency with which we talk. In fact, if genitals have something to do with it, I'd think my penis was the culprit, what with me initiating the "Let's talk about how we're doing as a couple." conversation 100% of the time so far. Also, since when did posting an entry on a livejournal that Sarah reads become the opposite of communication? In actuality, Sarah and I just hit an Asperger's limit. Sarah saw nothing, literally, beyond me getting all worked up about something she couldn't determine. (This "fight," bizarrely, took the same format as a House episode: problem presents, diagnosis is made and treatment implemented, problem gets much worse, new diagnosis is made and proves correct. As well, it took place without Sarah being aware that it was a "fight.") And that's it. Everything has stabilized now. Current Music: John Cage - 4' 33" | | Friday, October 26th, 2007 | | 3:27 pm |
| | Friday, July 6th, 2007 | | 1:09 pm |
On Ars Memoria
Just did an online tarot reading for myself, with the Thoth deck. The spread (Celtic cross) lay as follows: Card #1: XVI The Tower #2: 6 of Wands "Victory" #3: VIII Adjustment #4: Knight of Disks #5: VI The Lovers #6: 3 of Cups "Abundance" #7: XX The Aeon #8: XI Lust #9: 7 of Disks "Failure" #10: XIII Death #11: XXI The Universe I think it speaks for itself, but if anyone wants to have a go at interpreting it, feel free. Current Music: Hindemith - Various Violin and Viola Sonatas |
[ << Previous 20 ]
|
