One of the terms I have in my lexicon but also something that I could expound upon for quite some time. I was talking with someone recently about my idea of the gender galaxy and she said something about liking femininity, not wanting to give it up. I kind of balked at her and asked how that was what I was saying at all. I find it so ridiculous that people assume that taking gender off of a binary means that femininity must go away.

On one hand, it makes sense, because a lot of the work of the feminist movement has been, basically, to do the same work as patriarchy and discredit femininity only from the other side of it, discrediting it from the inside, because it’s constructed. One thing I love about the idea of performativity is that it names everything as a performance, the constructed nature about the way we think about gender, but it doesn’t mean that we all don’t have some sort of pull toward one or many types of gender expression.

But, I digress. The term “gender galaxy” first appeared in Expanding Gender and Expanding the Law: Toward a Social and Legal Conceptualization of Gender that is More Inclusive of Transgender People by Dylan Vade, published in 2005 in the Michigan Journal of Gender and Law. He says:

I suggest a non-linear alternative conceptualization, which I call the gender galaxy. The gender galaxy is a three-dimensional non-linear space in which every gender has a location that may or may not be fixed. For instance, butch woman is one particular gender location. Feminine FTM is another gender location. These are two different valid gender locations that are not linearly related.

The article is fascinating, and I highly encourage you to read it as well, for further information of his explanations. He mentions that generally when we try to go away from the two options of (he uses male and female but to me those are sex categories rather than gender, and so I would say masculine and feminine) gender we move it onto a spectrum instead of just a one-or-the-other option. However, moving it onto a spectrum means it is still grounded in that binary, and his idea of a gender galaxy is moving away from that, as mentioned in the quote above.

Gender galaxy is a term that Sinclair of SugarButch has written about and defines, and I highly encourage all you who haven’t to look at his brilliant writings on the subject. One of the best examples of his writing about the gender galaxy comes from his telling of his journey of learning how to navigate within the gender galaxy and finding his identity as butch:

It took such a long time for me to come to comfortably sit in this butch identity, for me to (if we’ll continue the metaphor) navigate the gender galaxy, and find a comfortable orbit around an identity label. Some of us don’t ever settle into that – some of us are radical little spaceships that explore treasures from all sorts of different worlds and words that we orbit. I guess the trick is, in my opinion, to simply find the routes that are the best to navigate (not necessarily the easiest, but the most satisfying), the orbits where there is plenty of oxygen, the alliances that create treaties and share resources and have excellent adventures.

We basically have to make our own gender galaxy maps. And while some gender mapmaking tools – queer theory, gender theory, postmodern theory, queer literature, smut and the language of lesbian desires – while some tools help immensely, I still couldn’t quite escape the praxis, the application of the theory, because of the ways that the social constraints and social policing affected my own process deeply.

I’m working on a post of my own personal galaxy map to femme, how I’ve gotten here, what it means to me, and I’m hoping to be done with that soon. In the meantime, you have Sinclair’s to reference and my ideas of gender galaxy to ponder, as follows.

Basically I see the gender galaxy as having lots of little solar systems, with the sun or focal point of that solar system being a certain gender identity. There are some people who stay in orbit around one sun. Some are closer than others, like the difference between Mercury and Jupiter, and some are farther away and have irregular courses like Neptune. Still others are asteroids or comets, moving around multiple solar systems, moving through the gender galaxy itself without one focal point or another. Some people may inhabit two planets or three or four. The beauty of the gender galaxy is the limitless amount of possibilities.

Obviously, as my own gender identity includes femme and therefore includes femininity (or, femmeininity) I am not anti-femininity, nor do I believe that gender should be abolished or that the gender galaxy is getting rid of gender, on the contrary. Gender is even more emphasized in some ways in the gender galaxy, except instead of confining it the gender galaxy makes gender overly available. Opening up gender from a gender binary or even a gender continuum to a gender galaxy makes it so that there are no expressions of gender that are considered incorrect. We would no longer be able to fail at gender, either, as there is no set limits as to what gender is or could be.

So I, basically, shun the word “slave” as many of you may know, and yet I still use the term Master. I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately, and the more I think about it the less I like the term “Master.” It implies some of the same things that “slave” does, only from the other end of it, my problem thus far as been the lack of a better term.

The terms Sir and Lord just are not that appealing to me either. I can appreciate the appeal, but I just don’t have a strong tie to either of them, so they don’t do much for me. While I can understand the desire for either, neither of them click with me, they don’t seem quite fitting. I hear Sir flung around like crazy online, and Lord just seems like a little much.

I like the term Owner, it’s a little more neutral than Master, though has similar connotations, not all of them bad, however. Owner is closer to what I want than Master is, but it’s still not quite right. It sounds strange to call someone Owner, such as “Owner just said something funny,” it doesn’t quite work the same way Master does, it just sounds a little funny.

I like the term Dominus as well, technically it means both Lord and Master, and doesn’t have all the same connotations as Master or even Owner does. I talked extensively about my use of the term Domina just last Sunday, and I feel similarly with the term Dominus, it’s regal and delicious. I left the post by asking about why people don’t use the term Dominus, and maybe I will begin to. The problem with Dominus is similar to Owner, “Dominus just said something funny,” sounds strange as well. Perhaps I just need to either shift my perspective on it, or choose one.

The biggest component of this, really, is how Master/Owner/Dominus feels about it. I haven’t really talked to him about it, but I plan on it. I like referring to him by a title, as he is the only one which I do call by a title. It takes a lot for me to call someone by a title, just as it takes a lot for me to say anything which I mean and which could make me in the least bit vulnerable. He is one of the few people that I have ever called Master, and possibly the last.

Semantics Sunday is the day for me to write my own definition of a word, how I feel about a word, and how it relates to me personally and my own identities. This could be anything sexual, gender, bdsm, and poly/relationship oriented, or anything else I feel like throwing in. This is simply my definition and understanding of the word, and not meant to be the only definition that is or could be. If you have an alternate definition, if you agree with my interpretation, or if you have something to add which I left out or which needs correcting, feel free to let me know in the comments!

For my first Semantics Sunday I figured I should use a word that is near and dear to my heart. Since I have already given my lengthy definition of cuntpet I decided I should focus on the other of my identities: Domina.

I recently created a new channel on irc.bondage.com, where I am quite frequently, called #Fiery_Dominas. This is the first channel with Domina in the channel name, which is part of the reason why I started it, however it has inspired comments such as “What is dominas? Dommes plural?” which is relatively ridiculous considering for one thing, Dommes is Domme plural, and for another thing Domina is a fantastic and real Latin word, unlike Domme, which is a slang term.

Now, on one hand, I feel there is nothing wrong with slang terms, and think that they should be used and incorporated, and Domme basically incorporates Dom and Femme (as in french for female, not queer femme), which is not horrible in general, and is rather logical. However, now that I have discovered and embraced Domina, Domme sounds silly to me, it is nowhere near as linguistically luscious or regal-sounding as Domina is, and it doesn’t inspire the same awe. I also feel that Domina is a much more feminine term than Domme, which is partly why I’m so partial to it as well.

Basically, Domina comes from the Latin root dom- found in other such words as dominate, domify, domicile, and domestic, as well as domin- such as dominant and dominus. From various sources I find that “dom-” actually relates to a household or realm, and the actual Latin translation of Domina or Dominus (the male counterpart), is “Lady or Lord of the house/realm.” This makes sense, considering dom- relating also to words such as domicile and domestic. The prefix domin- alone (supposedly) indicates regal status, such as Lady/Lord, or Mistress/Master, which is why Domina is the feminine and Dominus is the masculine (the suffix -a being feminine, and the suffix -us being masculine).

This brings us to the question, if we use Dom and not Dominus, why should we use Domina and not Domme? Well, I’m not saying that we shouldn’t ever use Domme, I’m just saying that I don’t want to use Domme, and furthermore, we could use Dominus as well, should a male dominant desire to be called that. I’m not going to condemn others for using the term Domme, but I do not identify with the term and will not be using it for myself or for others unless specifically requested.

I dissected my submissive desires back in June with my Cuntpet Revisited post, and I’ve been exploring this Domina side of myself for quite some time, so I’ve come to some realizations. Nothing quite as profound or in-depth as the cuntpet analysis, but some interesting discoveries, nonetheless.

I’ve found that this journey of discovery has been difficult because I don’t feel like it’s something I can easily share with Master. I don’t have any desire to dominate him, and even if I did I doubt he would have any desire for me to dominate him. But, because of this, our relationship has suffered a little bit. We’ve talked about it, which has helped, but I know he still feels like it’s something that’s pulling us apart rather than bringing us together, and he’s right, but at this point there’s little I can do to change that.

That said, primarily this journey of mine has been internal, and a small amount has been online, on irc.bondage.com, a server I have frequented for many years. I have enjoyed the last few weeks, and my new Domina personae, although I want more. While I do believe that online is a fantastic place to explore new desires and fantasies, this needs to move beyond it. However, I would have to find a sub nearby to play with, and that could be tricky. I deeply enjoyed meeting new people at the play party last weekend, but entering in any relationship is going to be tricky. For now, my explorations will be primarily internal, and partially online.

Even though I have the desire to dominate someone, which is getting stronger all the time really, I’m extremely picky. This isn’t anything new, of course, it’s something I’ve known for quite some time, but it’s something that I am often amazed at. Even at my most horny, most desirous, most dominant states I am still picky as hell. It’s annoying, sometimes, because there are times when I just want to say “fuck it” and pick up the first sub I interact with and play, but I won’t allow myself to do that. I prefer to be picky, but sometimes I wish I wasn’t.

I am an extremely mental dominant. Unfortunately, I haven’t had much of a chance to play with these desires (see above, re: picky), but I can’t imagine playing with anyone without knowing all the intricate details about their desires. Without knowing those it would be difficult for me to weave them around my little finger. While purely physical domination has it’s perks and appeals, there is something delicious about being able to implant yourself deeply into someone else’s mind.

Perhaps it steams from my knowledge and love of psychology, or perhaps my love of psychology stems from my mental domination desires. I’m not sure, really, it’s like the chicken or egg question. I do know, however, that my knowledge of psychology will come in handy for all future mental endeavors. I love the idea of delving into the mind of another and planting all sorts of fun ideas for use later. Playing and toying with someone until all they can think about is me… that brings me to my next point.

I’ve talked many times about my own control freak nature, and I believe this is deeply rooted within my mental domination. I highly enjoy control, both having none and having all, and it’s difficult for me to have anything else. I love total power exchange, regardless of the side I’m on. I am a control addict as well as a control freak, though maybe in some ways they are the same thing.

I am also a rather sadistic dominant. This, too, is not a surprise, really. I’ve had sadistic impulses for a long time, although I haven’t always embraced the term. I’ve always loved biting others for the reaction it gets, I’ve loved spanking and hair pulling, and all sorts of other pain-inflicting things. I curbed these desires, or attempted to, while I was trying to be a “good sub” (whatever that means). I found them coming out in little ways, biting Master being the majority of them.

Within the online realm, I can’t stand when people have “Master” “Mistress” “Lord” etc. as part of their usernames/handles. “Miss” is a little mixed for me, but that’s pretty much the only one. Why do some dominants feel the need to add a title to thier nick? I don’t really understand it. I’ve thought of using the nick MissScarlet, but only for humor purposes (makes me think of Clue, of course). Perhaps this is a little point, and I’m sure it ties in with my ideas of honorifics in general, but it’s rather annoying. It just screams that someone isn’t secure in their role, so they have to shout it to the world instead of exuding it from themselves.

I also can’t stand a large amount of submissives. I knew this already, but now I can’t stand them from a different perspective. I hate what I call “yes subs” by which I mean, submissives who can’t give a straight answer, who answer “whatever Lady wants” or “whatever pleases You” when you ask them a direct question. I understand the reason for it, to an extent, but when I ask a sub what they enjoy, I don’t want to hear “whatever You would like to do to me, Miss” or something like that. The reason for it is to help reinforce submission. I believe it can be a useful tool in training, but not when you first meet someone. It’s ridiculous to tell someone that you don’t know very well “I like what you like” because, well, you don’t know what they like!

I also can’t stand being called Ma’am, but, that’s another issue all together.

I want a real human being. I don’t want a doormat, and I don’t want a “yes sub,” and I don’t want someone who won’t state their own opinions and their own desires. I want someone… well, like me, isn’t it?

Being part of the queer community has been something extremely important to me since I was in high school, though I came out in middle school. I have always been queer in one way or another. I was the fat kid growing up, always the largest in my class, always the one made fun of. I was the outcast. I embraced my queerness, my freakhood, by difference. I wanted to be different, it made me special. I enjoyed it, and I still do.

It was easier to be queer when I didn’t have a partner, or when I had a female partner. Now that I’m with a male, and specifically living with a male and being submissive to a male it is very difficult for me, and difficult to maintain my queerness when in many ways I look very heterosexual. This isn’t necessarily a negative thing, but for me it kind of is. I feel washed over, I feel like my queerness isn’t as easily recognized as I’d like it to be.

Sometimes even those who know my orientation do not credit it because of my current partner. I am forgotten about as queer, and it’s really something that hurts me when it comes from those close to me. I may be with a man, but that doesn’t mean I’m still not queer.

What comes into my queer identity? What makes it up? Kink and poly definitely inform my queerness, because they inform my sexuality and no aspect of my sexuality can be analyzed without the addition of all the other aspects. Really, no aspect of my sexuality can be analyzed without all other aspects of my identity taken into account, including gender and size, which is part of the reason why all those identities are subtitles to this blog, because it’s nearly impossible to understand me without understanding all those identities first.

It’s difficult to be femme gendered and partnered with a biologically male and masculine person and to still be labeled as queer. I can embrace the label all I want, and I can try to make that label known to the rest of the world, but that doesn’t always mean I will come off that way.

I can view the plus side of it, as it means I can walk in the heterosexual world and use terms like “partner” which is the primary way I refer to Master as to new people I meet, and which confuses people or makes people assume that my partner is female. This allows me to get into a dialogue about the term partner, about bi/pan/queer sexualities if I so choose.

Now, this is all well and good, and I do try to use it to my advantage as much as possible. I try to sneak in comments like “Just because I’m with a man doesn’t mean I’m straight” or “doesn’t mean I’m not queer.” There are ways that I can subtly influence those around me, but I often wonder if it is enough. If I constantly have to assert my identity, is it really worth it? But, then again, I have the same issue with my gender identity. Perhaps my identity fetish is just too advanced for easy identification.

I’ve read about similar experiences with other bi/pan/omni-sexuals and queers, and people with FtM lovers, and I know that I am not alone in this, but that doesn’t make it any less frustrating. I know that this problem will not change any time soon, but maybe I can figure out a better way to deal with it.

I’m going to add my definitions of femmeinist and fucktoy to the masthead shortly, and I pondering adding “femmeinist” to the Urban Dictionary, so, of course, I took a look at how feminist is defined in there.

At this point in my life I really should not have been surprised at the definitions which were posted, which basically call all feminists sexist, hypocritical, mean, man-haters, etc. all those wonderful negative stereotypes. I really should not have been saddened or surprised, or have thought that it might be any different.

At least the #2 entry reads:

someone who believes the radical notion that women are people.
if you believe that women and men should have equal rights, you are a feminist. there’s nothing “extreme” about it.

That’s something, right? I urge you all to go to the definition of feminist in the Urban Dictionary and vote for that entry and vote down all the other entries which perpetuate negative stereotypes. While, yes, there are those feminists out there, they are not the majority (at least, not in my experience), they are just the ones which get the most coverage.

*Sigh* So, look for my definitions of femmeinist and fucktoy on the new masthead, should be coming within the hour. Also, I may add femmeinist to the Urban Dictionary, but I wonder if people would bash it as well? I definitely will add my definition of fucktoy (on UD as both fucktoy and fuck toy) however, since the definitions there are all degrading. I’m definitely not using it in a degrading manner.

Also, as a note since I’m mentioning site changes as well, I recently added a weekly poll to the top left sidebar, as well as links to my various wishlists (Amazon, VibeReview, Eden Fantasys, JT’s Stockroom, and Extreme Restraints) on the right sidebar under the buttons to my various profiles on other sites. I also added a list of affiliate links on the left sidebar (such as VibeReview, Eden Fantasys, Babeland, JT’s Stockroom, Extreme Restraints, and Amazon) which look rather similar to the wishlist links, of course, as these are the sites I often frequent and also highly recommend. I will shortly add a paypal donate link, just in case anyone feels generous.

I posted much of this (though not all of it) on my BDSM Theory group on FetLife last night. The post is here though I believe you have to be logged in to read it. On to the ideas.

I believe that labels are like nearly everything else: they have a purpose, but they are often used incorrectly. When thought of as finite and static they lose their purpose. The purpose of labels is to define someone at one particular moment in time.

We are ever-changing and ever-growing creatures. As is said: the only thing constant is change. Most contemporary psychological personality theory centers around the fact that personality changes over time and through different experiences and situations. There may or may not be some basic tenets to the personality and there may or may not be a biological component (as is debated often ad nauseam). However, just about everyone agrees that there are significant changes which happen over time in personality.

So, why would we want to think of ourselves in static finite terms? We wouldn’t! What fun would that be, to box ourselves in to one term or another, and yet we do it all the time. What are labels but nouns and adjectives? What are roles that we subscribe to but labels? The trap of labels is to believe that they are finite and never-changing, this is true of nearly any label.

The idea that we so often miss is that labels are a category, but not a be all and end all of what one person is or is not.

An example: you order a burger at a restaurant. While this is a burger, it could be made of beef, turkey, chicken, soy, vegetables, black beans, or something else entirely. It could come with: lettuce, tomato, onion, mushrooms, pickles, garlic, pastrami, bacon, swiss cheese, cheddar, pepper jack, provolone, smoked gouda, or any number of toppings. It could also have: mayo, mustard, ketchup, ranch, hummus, barbecue sauce, or any number of sauces. It could be served on: whole wheat, white, sesame seed, rosetta… I think you get my point. These combinations create an almost infinite number of variations under the common label of “burger.” So it is with any label.

Just because someone adopts the label of “queer,” for instance, or “slave” it does not mean that anyone else who inhabits these labels looks at all like this person. This queer slave could be male, female, transgendered, transsexual, masculine, feminine, genderqueer, etc. and may be a service slave, a sexual slave, both service and sexual, a brat, part-time, 24/7, a pro slave, live-in, or some combination thereof. This person could have various fetishes such as humiliation, force, objectification, boots, heels, non-sexual service, rope bondage, metal bondage, pain, or anything else. This person in other aspects of life could be a CEO, an artist, an auto mechanic, a teacher, a writer, a sys admin, a starship captain, or anything else.

I think you see my point with that as well. Labels are good for describing generic categories which someone is part of or embraces, but are not good for getting a specific idea of what the person is like, or even what they think, do, or feel. They give a general idea about one general area of a person, but everything else is up for grabs.

While I think we all know this to an extent, it is hard to get away from automatic categorization and stereotyping. I will be the first to admit that I often fall prey to stereotypes, though I have been working to train myself to ignore them, they are so ingrained in us that it is nearly impossible to get out of them. If we were to see someone was a 20 year old straight female slave, for example, I’m sure just from those four descriptors most everyone who read them formed an idea of the person. Even I did.

I think that labels are useful and necessary, and I definitely have a sort of OCD tendency to nitpick my own labels (so far as I have created my own label for myself as well) in order to best explain and express myself to the world, just as you said.

My point is that labels are often attached to other labels, when that may not always be the case, such as the thinking that if someone is x, y, and z, therefore they must also be a, b, and c.

I recently changed my role on FetLife to switch. In some ways this is a minor change, I’ve called myself a “cuntpet who Tops on occasion” for quite a while, but these desires are moving from occasional to more frequent.

As Master said when I mentioned that I was thinking about embracing this new identity: now that I have a better idea of my submissive side it’s time to delve into another aspect of myself. He said it half-jokingly, but I know in some ways he’s right. My way of delving into myself is much like my way of delving into relationships: one thing must be solid before I can move on to the next. He didn’t seem surprised when I mentioned it to him, and I have a feeling many of you won’t be either.

Now that I’ve had some major changes in how I express my submissive side, and have a more solid mental base for our relationship I am able to explore that other side of myself, the Top side, the (dare I say it?) Domme side. I’ve never suppressed or denied this aspect of myself exactly, I was just focused on another aspect at the time. I’ve been told by many friends whenever I “came out” as kinky that they expected me to inhabit a dominant role, and I’ve been told by a few friends that they thought I have more Domme in me than I would admit to.

Well, that was true. I’ve struggled with my Top side for many reasons, but especially because it would come poking out when Master and I were having troubles, at least I think that’s what it was. I would get so frustrated that I would try to Top him into dominating me and, really, it didn’t work out that well. Topping from the bottom, yes, but not because I’m not also a bottom but because I wasn’t getting what I needed.

That’s all changed, of course, but I do find myself craving more. Not just a woman, though I’ve been craving that for quite some time, but another partner to play with, to explore this other side of myself. I would not want to switch with Master. I can’t see myself Topping him, nor do I want to Top him. I can’t see myself switching with one person, perhaps because my desire and love of power exchange is that it is constant and stable, not changing, but consistent. This isn’t to say that those who do switch with one partner are bad or doing it wrong or not stable or not consistent. Heavens no! I’m just saying that, for me, that’s how I view it.

Perhaps it has to do with the level of power exchange which I desire, though I’m not sure on that. I know that if I was to take on a sub it would have to be casual at first, but I would end up wanting a rather high level of control in the end. Remember, I’m a control freak, and basically want all or nothing. There would have to be some negotiating and figuring out how me having someone would work into Master’s and my relationship, but I can definitely see myself owning someone at some point in time. This is something I’ve thought a lot about, actually, although it’s jumping the gun quite a bit at this point.

I also think “switch” has a lot of the same (negative) connotations that “bisexual” does, such as fence-sitting, not committing, unsure of what they want, not able to commit to anything long-term, really one way and pretending to be the other, things like that. This is part of the reason why I have chosen to start embracing the term.

Switches are misunderstood in many ways as well, I think. Hell, I’ve had many misconceptions and misinterpretations of what switch means, but only before I started training myself to not view labels as fixed identities but as helpful hints to one of many aspects of a person (though I don’t achieve this all the time, I’m working on it).

I may have to change the subtitle to add “and Top” at the end of it. Maybe after I get more settled into this new identity. I need to try it on in a very real way first, not just in my head.

This is something I’ve been meaning to post on for a while now, but I just haven’t been able to get around to it. Some of you may have noticed that I took cuntpet out of the title of this blog as well as out of the nick I was using (scarlet lotus cuntpet–now scarlet lotus sexgeek). Cuntpet.com still forwards to this site, and will for quite some time until/unless I choose to do something else with it, and I do still embrace my cuntpet-hood, it was not for that reason that I have taken it out, for it is still in the subtitle “24/7 submissive cuntpet” because that’s how I identify.

Cuntpet has come to be an identity for me, not just a name. This was also it’s original intention but I didn’t realize what that meant at the time. Another original intention of cuntpet was simply to get away from the term “slave.”

I dislike “slave” as my personal identity, and although I used to embrace it, I did not do so wholeheartedly. There has always been something not quite right about it for me, which brought me to the search for something different. I don’t like the historical connotations, or the indication that as a slave I would have no choice whatsoever. While I do think that is one thing which distinguishes slave from sub I also did not (and do not) embrace sub (though I embrace submissive, but that’s for another post). I believe that all consensual slaves have a choice, as they are choosing to be a slave, otherwise it cannot be consensual.

I also dislike the “I’m a slave, therefore somehow better than just a sub” mentality, though it’s nearly impossible to get away from. Not everyone feels like this, of course, and not everyone thinks there’s that sort of hierarchy within different BDSM roles. I don’t believe that someone who is a bedroom-only submissive is any more or less of a submissive than someone who is submissive in a 24/7 M/s relationship.

I didn’t realize how much I have started to dislike the identity of slave for me (not for others who choose to embrace it, just for me personally) until Master and I were talking earlier this week and he mentioned that I signed up to be his slave (which therefore has certain requirements along with it, that too is another post). It wasn’t appropriate at the time to correct him, though I mentioned it roundaboutly later, but inside my head I screamed “not slave! Cuntpet!” Though in some ways they mean the same thing. I even went through and changed all the references to me as “slave” in our contract, protocols, etc. to read “cuntpet” as you can see.

My idea of what it means to be a cuntpet has changed slightly since my original conception of it:

My use of the term “cuntpet” incorporates four dynamics within it: Owner/cunt, Owner/servant, Owner/fucktoy, and Owner/pet. All of these are similar and different in their own ways, some overlap to an extent, some are almost contradictory, and all of which I identify with and either have or am striving to have in my current relationship.

Owner/cunt is an identity which I have lifted from a post by cunt of Under His Hand, which I take to mean as a way of having fun with bratting and force fetishism within an Owner/owned framework. As she said: “I get to have my “force fetish” scratched without it having hidden meanings of anything bad. I get to dance out of reach and sing “make me” and then run like hell, because he will make me and it will hurt.” Basically I see this aspect as the ability to be stubborn and strong-willed at times, the ability to not be the “perfect slave,” and to play with force, bratting, but also not being able to get away with it, and being completely overpowered in the end.

The cunt aspect of my submissiveness is almost directly opposed to many ideas of what a “slave” or even a 24/7 submissive “should” be. I don’t subscribe to “should”s and think that everyone is able to embrace whatever label they so choose, because labels are not boxes, but categories, and nothing is confined to just one category (my complete view of labels will be another post).

Owner/servant is slightly more self-explanatory. I have come to think of this in some ways as being his personal assistant. I am here to assist him in any way he needs/desires, be that maintaining the cleanliness of the house, fetching him drinks, preparing meals, and all those other daily little things. This aspect of my submission to him does not come as easily to me as the other three aspects do, but mostly that is due to inherent procrastination and not the desire not to serve him.

I love doing things for him, don’t get me wrong. I love the look of happiness he gets on his face when I do something for him, and I love the warm feeling I get from serving him, but sometimes (like when I’m sore and have trouble moving, or when I’m in the middle of something else) it is difficult for me to do for him as quickly as he or I would like. I believe that servant/personal assistant (pa) is the weakest aspect of my submission, and something which I need to work more on, both for him and for me as well.

Owner/fucktoy incorporates the sexual aspects of my submission to him. This aspect represents my sexual willingness and desires, not encompassed by the other aspects. This is my having given over my body to him as his property, my willingness and desire to be used by him in any way he desires. Different from the cunt aspect which craves force, this aspect is the one which simply craves to be used like a whore, like a toy.

Willingness is a big part of this aspect. It’s about embracing and releasing my inner harlot, it’s about being an eager and shameless fucktoy for his (and my own) pleasure. It’s about giving in to all those sexual desires quaking within me. It’s about being able to be free in my sexuality. The ability to be fucked hard and thoroughly without any thought to my own pleasure, but deriving pleasure simply from being used exactly as we desire.

Owner/pet is also somewhat self-explanatory, though also has a bit of the servant and fucktoy aspects in it as well, which is part of why I chose cuntpet (though mostly because it was the best sounding and cuntservanttoypet is too long and doesn’t sound nearly as good). I have always said that I love to be fucked like a dirty whore but also pampered like a prized pet, depending on my mood and the mood of my Owner. Also, one of Master’s favorite terms for me is to call me his pet, it has been for a very long time.

This is the aspect which in some ways covers all the rest, but only with explanation, I think. If I was just to consider myself a pet the other aspects would not come through the same way as they do with cuntpet, though As I said in my first definition of cuntpet: pets can be strong and willful, independent, stubborn, and spirited, while at the same time being able to be tamed.

My darling Kat had a saying “A wild horse doesn’t need to be broken. If she is tamed properly she will still have fire in her eyes while eating out of the palm of your hand.” This quote, in some ways, encompasses the cunt, pet, and servant aspects. I am looking to be tamed, while still retaining everything about me. I desire to be overpowered, tamed, and trained into the mental mindset of each of the other aspects.

Cunt and fucktoy come the easiest to me, then pet, and servant. Even though I have the desire to serve and to do for him I have become jaded over the ten plus years I have been exploring and playing with aspects of my submission, not to mention it’s difficult to work up the desire to clean when it is way too hot outside and in (we lack air conditioning) and when I have things I want to write, and when… the list of excuses goes on. I do have the desire, but inertia is so much easier to give into rather than fight.

We are making massive steps forward, however. I am closer to the mindset I desire than I have been ever before, and we are working better than we have ever before. I constantly marvel at the fact that despite living together for two years, being together for three, I still elate when he comes home from work, or when I know I will see him after being apart for hours. I still ache for his touch, and desire to explore more with him.

One of our major downfalls was that our relationship started as completely sexual-based when I (we?) desired to have a mental D/s connection. Due to lots of hard work, however, we are closer to Owner and cuntpet than we have been before.

I’ve been thinking a lot about BDSM in general, as well as the way gender plays out within BDSM roles, and I’ve come to some discoveries. I’ve been thinking about writing Eros in Leather as I mentioned earlier which would be a M/f spinoff of Venus in Furs, which is F/m. However, there arises a problem, which is partly where my discoveries came from. Venus in Furs (VIF) has very servant-centered submission within it, and this is more difficult to create in a M/f relationship in some ways. The obvious choices are cooking and cleaning and otherwise tending to the Master for the fem submissive, but I’m not sure if they are comparable… though perhaps they are, as they are highly gendered just like Severin’s boy servant position in VIF is.

One discovery: submissives often are given directives which go against cultural gender expectations in regards to sex, that is, (in my experience) many more males than females are put into chastity, and chastity is rather a huge topic, while many more females than males are thought of as sex slaves or desired to be sexual nearly all the time. While both males and females engage in orgasm control to an extent, I would wager that the amount and frequency each is allowed to cum is vastly different. This isn’t true for everyone, of course, this is a general statement. I think a lot of this is due to our cultural expectations and stereotypes, and going beyond or the opposite of them adds to the taboo of the situation in general, but I’m sure there is more to this.

Back to VIF (in some ways): Secretary is in some ways the M/f VIF, though with distinct differences. VIF is completely lead by the masochist, Severin, with Wanda going along with it as per his wishes, and not the other way around. While Edward is the first to initiate, Lee ends up being the one to initiate an ongoing relationship past the one they had at work, so there are similarities, but it’s not exact, though I don’t expect it to be. Although, Secretary fixes my issue of how to make the woman more servant-centered, bringing in roles of labor, as VIF had in a very different way.

My Queer Theory Prof. has mentioned many times about her idea that labor and masochism/submission are related somehow, though she has yet to go into detail, and I think this is part of it. A large part of submission is labor, as doing for the Other is part of submission, which can extend to chores and other such things, like doing laundry, cooking, cleaning, tending the garden, fetching drinks, etc. etc. etc. There is a tie between labor and submission, and I may have just hit it on the head, though, again, I think there’s more to it, and there’s more that can be said and explored regarding it.

A side note: I was talking with someone today who mentioned that, regardless of consent, many people think that BDSM is wrong. I also mentioned the sex-positive movement, and he said that he didn’t think it was very widespread. I know that people think both of these things logically, and I know that they vary depending on your circles and such, but I often forget this. I tend to live in a land where I’m accepted for who I am (a big factor of this is probably because I choose to not associate with many people, and this may also be why I don’t feel like venturing out into the land of Utah to make new friends). Sometimes it’s a harsh wakeup call to remember that there are still bigoted, racist, homophobic, sex-negative, anti-feminist, anti-poly, anti-bdsm, anti-queer, anti-genderfucking people out there who would probably hate me on principle if they got to know me. I feel pretty blessed by the people I have in my life, but I also realize a little more where my aversion to new people comes from. I need some sort of formal interviewing process to figure out new friends.