Happy Wednesday. Misc. Stuff.
Hiya. It’s hard to think of things to post about when you’re distracted with big stuff you can’t post about. But I am. And no, I’m not sharing, at least not for now. And I’ve been pretty busy. Still…I found time to check through all my stats. WordPress has some new stats plugins that are simply amazing. Wassup and Counterize II are two good ones, there’s another more complex mapping stats program I’m messing with but it’s not working yet. Counterize lets you look at the IP locations of your users.
So it seems I’m a big hit in the middle east. Honestly! I had no idea, but apparently ‘cuckold’ is a popular search term….and several visitors have ended up here from various faraway lands. So howdy and a big wet kiss from Texas to the Republic of Muldova, Greece, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Japan, Israel and Jordan…and yes, to you too Germany, Canada, France, Belgium, and all the northern and midwestern states. But to the first group- I see your hits and wonder how you got here and what you think. Feel free to comment…Should I add a translator plugin?
And -at least today, I’m hit #1 on google blogsearch for the term “Cuckold”. Wow. Really? I had to check, and yep. So, where are all these cuckies, anyway? I’d love to hear from some. I need some adoration from men who will never have me. 
 That’s always such an upper. But this will do in a pinch. I’ll try and post some more for you guys.
I decided to stop posting my monthly stats because of some referrer spammers who found me. Kinda funny though, google reduces your page rank for linking to adult sites, so I just laugh at them. And hack around with my .htaccess. Besides, it gets kinda creepy some months. I think that just encourages them.
I found a great online store with fabulous man panties, some really great stuff. Kudos to Bodyaware for a great product line. And their sister store, XDress, has some pretty hot lingerie made for men’s bodies, like this garter set I think I am going to have to buy, just to have on hand for you know- whoever. I am really impressed, and it’s very tastefully and tastily represented. I may share it with my gay stepdad and his partner. For sure, chance should go take a look. Cute skirts. They should make matching lingerie for women. That would be rather awesome in a twisted way. I’m not sure feminization of straight subs is their aim, but I really like the lingerie line. Wouldn’t it be sweet to match your Mistress??
My credit card company first made me call them to verify that I was indeed purchasing panties from a gay man’s underwear site. Actually, not panties, and the site isn’t overtly gay, except that it’s men in panties. I bought a hot leather chastisty belt for when I want to look at it in something yummy. CBT#000’s are hot but in a different way. This is just eye candy for me. And on sale. I hope it arrives soon. I’m also going to have to save for this one before the sale is over…Very Nice. I am going to have to go shower now.
Pssst … actions speak louder than words
**note, because I’ve not completed changing my site’s theme to my liking, and because the original CSS (or theme for the non-techies) removes any underline or indication for links in the body of my articles, I’ve applied a strike-through to all the links in the following article.**
The problem with picking out a public label for someone you don’t know is – just that. You don’t know them.
That is really all I was trying to say when I started out explaining why Fauxdom wasn’t really how I wanted to be defined by others in the public realm without having the opportunity to first add my own perspective to my own label.
The last thing I expected was to be publicly and personally attacked and insulted by a personality purported to be intelligent, reasonable, open minded, and friendly by others in the community. Particularly since my article didn’t attack or insult anyone.
But that’s how Susan’s comment :
…felt to me. And the smiley face didn’t make it all nicey-nice.
It came across as a baseless personal insult and attack on my character and personal integrity; clearly meant to publicly embarrass and shame me – on my own turf.
By someone I’d never spoken with.
After I had exposed some very personal thoughts, and gone out of my way to complement her and the whole ‘fauxdom’ group.
This followed by her not-so-subtly injecting the subject into her comments at other blogs (bitchy’s- and yes, I started that one, tom’s, I didn’t bother looking for more) throughout the following days left me feeling quite pushed into a corner by someone much more well known in the community than I, without many options to defend myself or my own reputation.
So admittedly, my reaction was to reciprocate (notice a theme yet?). I made it personal because I felt Susan made it personal.
And (as I’ve stated on Susan’s newly enabled blog comments) I’ll be the first to say that my initial reaction and comment to her was ungracious at best, and I came out of that corner fighting. Who wouldn’t, though? While I do sincerely apologize (again), I also think it’s understandable in its context. And I suspect what I said here originally or since wasn’t read very closely by many.
I’ve spoken with Tom, who also posted an article clarifying his view of fauxdom (which in fact I HAD misunderstood- see, I DID have a good point) and his thoughts on what I said. Quoting Tom:
Let me make it clear that I was not offended by anything written in the last week or so. Ms. Reciprocity, in the course of venting a bit, wrote things that might have been misconstrued. I was surprised, but I realize that she may not have caught the humor in the way that it was intended. Likewise, I have written and said things in the past that seemed funny or witty – to me – but the message was somehow lost in translation.
Yes, clearly what I’ve said was misconstrued about one hundred different ways. I wish rather than putting me in the position of having been pronounced ‘way too condescending’ on my own blog and poked fun at in commentary elsewhere by a well respected community personality, that Susan had at least first tried to discuss the matter with me. That’s what I’d been led to believe was the norm in this community of people, what ‘fauxdom’ was about- and since Susan was the Original fauxdomme, I thought she would embody that concept in her reaction to what I’d said. Which is why her comment really cut to the quick and left me, honestly, flabbergasted. I understood the humor and irony with which Tom’s comment and compliment were meant. I simply wanted to point out that NOT EVERYONE would, and I’d appreciate having the chance to choose my own definitions. As I said, and it wasn’t any sort of insult, not all of my readers will have been familiar with the wonderful group of people in which Tom and Susan are generally included, and their views and private jokes. My article was my own attempt at exploring this more, and the explaining the reasons I’d questioned and been (only slightly) bothered Tom’s pronouncement of my fauxdom-ness. Mainly because I’d told Tom I would explain my comment to him when I made it. Check the comments.
I’ve attempted to put out this unintentional fire in a number of ways, and at this point there’s not much more I can do. Aside from my initial reply to Susan, I feel I’ve been very measured, civil, and have tried to communicate myself in a responsible manner. I won’t pretend that I don’t feel Susan’s actions haven’t been childish. A comment in her post this morning (psst, is she gone yet?), enabling comments to her blog post “I don’t think she likes me“ , in addition to some injecting somewhat subtle but definite snide remarks into her comments on more than one other blog just seem, to me, to want to perpetuate and antagonize the situation- and don’t ring true with the reputation I’d heard she had, which is sad. But that’s MY perception. This article, yesterday’s, a message to Tom privately explaining I had not intended to offend anyone, my comments to Susan’s article, and a private note to Susan before posting this were mine.
You can draw your own conclusions.
Of course I could toss off a condescending “I could care less what you think”; but that’s not true. And I don’t have anything to hide; I have already admitted where I went wrong and publicly apologized, and I’ve been civil -other than my initial reply comment to Susan- throughout. I DO care what you think, otherwise I’d just think these thoughts to myself and not try to engage in any sort of community at all. Which is all I was trying to do in the first place; but I’m certainly reconsidering heavily. Boy did I get some welcome wagon.
I’m sure I’ll explore some of the subjects this brings up more in the future; but I’d really prefer to just move on. I am saddened by Susan’s continuing antagonism and un-subtle pokes at the subject; I don’t feel it’s warranted or helpful at all, to anyone. I had originally written this post before reading her blog for today, and had started out with a much more optimistic outlook. Now I’m pretty much just – well, I’ll not say that because it just isn’t nice.
Maybe that’s condescending of me. Whatever.
What my grandparents said, or Let’s Clean Up this Mess Part I
Now then. This isn’t how I wanted to start off my blog. But we don’t always get things the way we plan them. I don’t, at least. That’s just fine, I am well versed. But the events of the last few days do require some clean up work before we can get back to the original plan, which was a lot more fun and pleasant. Trust me.
I have this thingie- as Tom might say, about integrity.
It affects everything I do; and it means that what people say and think about me does matter to me, personally, because it reflects on my integrity.( I don’t think that makes me less dominant, by the way, but that’s another subject.) I blame my grandparents and the residents of a tiny, dusty West Texas plains town that influence(d) much of who I am. So in thinking about this really awful situation (and it really is awful , all around), naturally I fell back on the things they might have told me, were they here to ask for advice. It was an interesting imaginary conversation since I was able to pull all 8 of them (divorced/split family) around my dining room table, with all their very different perspectives on life. Because that is really all this hubub is about, perspectives- different ones. And I’ll get to that, but in the meantime, this is what culling all the wisdom of the elders of my family told me I should do:
- Act right, be polite.
- Clean up your own messes.
- Be gracious, even with someone you don’t think deserves it.
- Stand up for yourself without standing on anyone else to do it.
So, Susan first.
Susan, I really and truly never intended to sound condescending towards you – or anyone- in my post, and I’m sorry for obviously offending you. I did say how much I loved Fauxdom, did you miss that? Should I maybe have said it about 14 more times just in case? I would have if I’d known you were going to come over here and say something like that. I’m pretty sure I didn’t make any personal attacks or cast aspersions upon you or anything you do (or anyone else)- or even voice any judgment on anyone else’s standpoint. I thought I did my best to not step on any toes, and clearly I did not do a very good job of that, again, I apologize. I just wanted to make it clear before other people- not you (and I think I made that clear too)- misunderstood who I am and got too carried away with very well intended friendly promotions of my site as one to be added to the Fauxdom rolls. It had nothing to do with you. I apologize for clearly offending you; but I also stand by the fact that doing so wasn’t my intent at all.
When you did make your comment, and didn’t add your link, it really picked at that integrity thing in my head. Why? Not adding your link left it open to discussion in the public realm as to who really might have posted (we all have ’s’, ‘u’, ‘a’, and ‘n’ on our keyboards, and anyone who knows it can type in your email addy), leaving me in the position of not really being able to defend myself without looking bad. Actually, that’s the case even if you linked it, and I’m positive you know that; which is another reason I was flabbergasted at your response. And, you did make your opinion public, and ugly at that. That wasn’t necessary. I have an e-mail address; I’m a member at the same forum you are, where there is a private message system. I’d have been so happy to adjust my wording if you’d privately told me I’d offended you, or offered any reasoning for your comment. Honestly, I had no idea it would come across that way. I went to your site to find an address to discuss this with you in a measured manner, (as in the midst of working on some wordpress upgrades and maintenance I lost my back-end records temporarily) and didn’t find any means to contact you or leave a comment on your site. I could have messaged you at the forums, but that’s not the place for this. But, neither was my blog. And your picking at me over at Bitchy’s wasn’t as subtle as you may have thought, either- but I shouldn’t have brought this over there in the first place. And that’s why I felt it necessary to reply as I did. What I said wasn’t very gracious or polite of me, which isn’t who I am at all, and I truly am sorry. I do like your writing. Although there is some truth to the part about people who protect themselves from public opinion while dispensing theirs like so much wisdom. I don’t claim to be an expert on any thing. I add my opinion when I can do so in a positive manner. I try my best to not insult people in public. And I figure that if I am going to make myself available to the public on the web, and make my opinions about what other people say known; it’s only right that I allow people a way to reciprocate. It’s silly to expect that of others, but, really. That was terribly rude of you, and I know I wasn’t rude to you.
Now, Tom
I want to say right now, that while I have not heard from Tom since his last comment here, in retrospective, I would completely understand if he’s also offended about any number of things I’ve said. And I humbly apologize. I admire you Tom, and never intended this to become such a mess. Not much more to say about that subject, except that I know his calling me a Fauxdomme was a great compliment and surprised me, and I thank him. And I apologize one more time just in case.
And Elizabeth
What a great lady of integrity. Thanks, for the original article, for feeling (unduly) responsible, and for making the point to say so here when no one else would say a word. But really, lady. Don’t edit yourself because of me (that applies to anyone), I told you that the first time, too. I’m a big girl. Please. I am a strong enough personality to define myself; and any honor others want to bestow on me is SO welcome. And I did feel quite honored to be announced as ‘in the house’ in your article; because the silly cut-outs were just me being silly, and not any ulterior motive for traffic or attention other than the girly banter we were all enjoying.
Which, by the way, is the hardest I’ve laughed in a long time, and I think we should resume that real soon. That is the point, after all. FUN.
And the rest of you, readers and community
Sorry. Really. This isn’t why any of us are here. Although I know it’s entertaining, my stats say so. And, uh, thanks (imagine air quotes around that) for just sitting back and watching. I feel the love. But I also know not many of you know me, and are forming your opinions just now. So am I.
I plan on a part two to this. But for now the vanilla world calls, as does lunch and a long to-do list. I felt it was necessary to go ahead and put this up fairly quickly before things got any further out of control.
I haven’t edited this too closely, so if you’re offended- just say so and I’ll catch you in part two.
Faux Me
Chronology of faux-ness
In order to fully understand the following post and really, the last several as well as the recent comment action here, a little chronology is important. Links are provided to the various places, but the important bits are also pasted here:
Me: bored, frustrated by a sub, cruising the internet while waiting to pick up a very late kid on Saturday night. No one online after reading my daily requirements, so I set about a project I’d had in mind since reading earlier about Bitchy making her own sex partners in frustration.
Then I linked it to Bitchy’s post for the day, with a comment dedicating my first cut-out to Bitchy (since it was her idea). And headed off to Elizabeth’s blog, which is always good for a grin when you’re bored, and I knew had a post about Jeremy Piven- and photos, which I needed for my next doll, which was meant for myself. Here’s where the real trouble started. I found the “Hot or Not – the soy latte version” post. And I made this comment:
- Well, I know I’m late in chiming in. But I just had to add that while I’m not generally into feminization (but not at all against it); I do think that Charlie Rose would be totally hot in nothing but a pair of fishnet stockings and court heels, something tells me he has hot legs. While interviewing Bob Scheiffer in full body lacing (cause I really only wanna see his head). While I reigned court in the middle with a crop in on hand and whip in the other. *NOW* we are having FUN.
Of course, Elizabeth had to come back here and egg me on…
“… after that, can you do Bob Scheiffer in full body lacing? (I about peed myself when I read your comment a few minutes ago.)
So of course, I had to.
And since the kid didn’t get home until 3 am, I did. Linking the dolls to all the appropriate places. Which was hilarious and fun, and yes, gained me some traffic.
So then Tom comes over and posts this:
Well, this should be totally interesting now. The Fauxdomme blogroll is suddenly taking off, which should scare the hell out of the rest of the subs.
To which I respond:
Uh. Hmm. I wouldn\’t really consider myself a Fauxdomme, or Faux anything, really. Why exactly do you? No offense or anything; just think I might rather choose that label on my own, or not at all.
And then I started a post to explain why I wanted a caveat with that title- but had been up until past 3 am the night before and was too lazy to do in full. To which Tom commented:
*ahem*
Er… you do know that it’s like, you know, a compliment thingie, right?
Indeed, I do.
So here we are. Now I have to get all serious and explain stuff. And without my sock puppets.
I guess mainly, I find it disturbing to be so quickly categorized into a nice neato little slot by the same group of people who convinced me to come out of hiding by talking about how we should stop telling everyone else how to do their own kink, and sharing their own differences openly.
It took me a long, LONG time to feel comfortable sharing myself in the BDSM communty; despite the fact that I’ve been a popular adult ‘net personality on and off for a period coming close to a decade. A big reason certainly was the fact that I didn’t always fit the mold, didn’t always find things as seemingly black/white, this/that, one/the other as those speaking within the community did; and found that those into BDSM were particularly prone to needing to categorize and put people in their places.
Uh, duh…I know. A or B, I get it.
My (admittedly curt) point in my comment to Tom was …. suddenly I’m Fauxdomme because I made some silly cut-out dolls and commented on a FauxDomme’s blog? Huh? I started my blog commenting and entry into this particular gaggle of people by posting on Alexandra’s and then Richard’s blogs; and following the logic that enjoying a Saturday night with Bitchy and Elizabeth makes me a Fauxdomme, this would also put me into the Transgendered and polyfetishists categories. Are you following me?
I don’t see, or recall posting, any real detail here about my thoughts, beliefs, and practices in D/s, Femdom, dommery, etcetera. Tom and I don’t know each other, in fact I’ve only been to his blog once or twice. I’ve posted a little over at Fetishlore that might have shed some light on where I stand in the BDSM spectrum, but …. not really.
And yes – the Fauxdomme concept, article, and ladies who gladly don the title are fabulous. I love it, and the various faux-players, who each regularly cause me to spout various liquids from my nose as I laugh hysterically when reading their tomes. And I espouse many of the same views. But I also disagree sometimes. I often practice many of the things the people in Tom’s ‘Beyond the Edge’ blogroll do, and things that are just my own kinks, not just ‘fauxdom’, and so on…
Probably more related to my feeling icky about being sorted out so quickly,is that this is the first time I’ve chosen to adopt an online persona that is completely un-commercial, not business, but personal, and it’s unfamiliar ground to me to not have that veil of commercialism to separate myself from what people have to say and think about me. In my little about blurb I tell you all that I come to everything through the back door, BDSM included. And I have yet to put all of that into writing, but suffice to say accepting and enjoying my dominant side and exploring BDSM has been a long time coming that I’ve consciously put off because of the respect for and depth of emotions I have about it. I’ve been playing and peeking in for many years now; but only recently chose to throw that door wide open in my personal life, and to share that journey with the online BDSM world. And I feel my place and identity as a dominant woman is mine to define. I appreciate and respect that others in the community have just as much right to define me for themselves. I’ve been in and out of enough online (adult) communities to know that how I conduct my self, not how I define myself, is how I will appear to others. I know that Tom’s comment, as well as those from others I’ve received so early in my blog’s lifespan and the trust placed in me by other ‘big names’ in the blogosphere so early on, all mean that I am on the right track.
And I’m relatively sure I know how Tom views ‘Fauxdom’- it’s a tongue in cheek of saying ‘Phew! A real person in that latex corset whipping her initials into my ass!’. That is such a humbling honor(our for all the rest of the world), particularly because I’ve really only been ‘on the scene’ publicly for a little over a month; and he and I have never conversed, at all. So in considering who Tom is, and what Fauxdom appears to mean to Tom, I do take it as he meant- a ‘compliment thingie’. But then, Tom is looking at the distinct possibility of a year and a half in a chastity device- and just how long is unknown to him; but he calls himself ‘on the edge of vanilla’… I just don’t know how many people are paying close enough attention to make the ironic connection there and follow it through to how Tom categorizes me.
Thing is, I also remember how things appeared when I didn’t know who all these people were (look at the various blogrolls on the sites linked in this post) or totally understand what they meant by ‘Fauxdom’, or ‘The One True Way’- and not following it, or why they didn’t all C/capitalize A/all the R/right L/letters Like I’d Seen O/others D/do. When I was still wandering Some Sites and thinking..”Really? Do I HAVE to? THAT is dominance? Huh.”.
And, having come here (the online part) via the commercial route, I also know that as many, if not more people will end up finding my blog through random searches, personal ads, forum posts, and so on than those who come here through the blogrolls of these awesome people who think the way I do. And I’d like those people to stick around too. I’m all inclusive like that. I fear that seeing ‘faux’ attatched to my name might mislead those who haven’t unlearned all the real faux-lessons of kink yet, those with deep and unmet needs to be under the heel of a truly dominant woman, those like me who are afraid to jump into the fray for fear of being sorted, stamped, and placed neatly in a box that doesn’t fit them; those who just don’t get it yet.
I’m also more than a little grossed out by the fact that even when making the point that we are all welcome to be ourselves here, those of us that fall into the more balanced point of view feel we have to define ourselves using words like ‘faux’ because the labeling has become so ridiculous and sophomoric. I happen to love- no adore- irony and satire. But I don’t always like to use it outside of a personal context because otherwise it’s easily misunderstood. Calling someone who hasn’t done so themselves a FauxDomme- it’s sort of like that really great private joke that – when shared in the wrong context – leaves those not privy to the whole event misunderstanding the real meaning. When presenting myself to a general public, I like to use general terms, understood from any perspective without back story. When my friends choose to use such a witty and sardonic way to say the same thing, I love it- but I like to keep it personal. So I’ve decided not to be one bit upset about being labeled a FauxDomme; I really never was.
I did want to point out a few things though, now that I’ve made it clear I don’t mind the title.
Bitchy and I are the only ladies put in this category that I’ve seen complain about the ‘faux’ part (See the comments here at Elizabeth’s article “Funny is the New Stern”. And, Bitchy and I are also the only single (and looking) ladies in Tom’s list of Fauxdommes. Coincidence? I think not.
Here’s why.
Tom, Elizabeth, Susan, and even Richard and Alexandra (although not in that list), all have the luxury of knowing that no matter what they say here in the blogosphere, that it won’t kill an opportunity in their love lives. They have found their match and are in long term stable relationships, mostly married. If something said online is misunderstood by their lover (slave, husband, Mistress, wife) they can explain it in person; and if the public misunderstands, it might bother them but it won’t affect them too much.
But I (and I won’t speak for Bitchy, but it appears she too) am here not just to share my journey -and silliness- but to also find a partner, or three. I don’t know how long it’s been since any of you had to try and DO the singles thing, much less the kinky singles thing, but I have a secret. Come closer. Closer still…
IT SUCKS ASS and IT’S FUCKING HARD.
The tiniest thing can undo an online beginning, or cause someone who was interested to change their mind. Particularly when dealing with deeply driven needs and desires. Singles are a fickle bunch. We have a list and it will be checked off, damnit!
Fauxdom is never on that list. It’s something you come to recognize after you get past those porn inspired things some people like to call fantasies. It creeps in and you look up and see that ‘lifestyle’ is just what you make of it. That perhaps your Domme is more dominant in her flip flops and jeans than stillettos, whispering instead of yelling. Until she surprises you, that is. And, I want someone to surprise.
Another point is this. Google the word fauxdom. Follow the links. The closest thing to a real explanation of Fauxdome that appears in the first ten results is a cut from Susan’s blog on another of Richard’s websites:
Susan says about FauxDom:
“It’s true I’m not naturally dominant and my knowledge of the lifestyle is quite limited. That’s why I developed Fauxdom. Now I can tease, tickle, torment, kiss, nibble and yes, even spank my lover to my heart’s content without being lectured to by anyone.”
Ok. Now, I’m concerned again. Maybe I should’ve googled before I started writing this. Because my knowledge of the lifestyle is NOT quite limited; only my verbal and public participation in the online community is. And, I like to do quite a bit more than just tease, tickle, torment, and -oooh- spank. Quite a bit more.
So you see my dilemma. I’m a faux fauxdomme. Un-Faux-Domme. FauxDumb. Faux Pas. Foi gras.
Wait, what?
on March 27th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
Don’t worry. You’re way too condescending to be a faux anything:)