Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Labels: Slave/slut/pet/submissive/bottom

Greetings all,

I was asked a question concerning different labels that are used in the BDSM community. Everyone seems to have their own take on what they mean. To make things easier for those of you who read my blog, here are the ones I use:

Defines one’s nature. A submissive is someone whose natural inclination is to obey and serve. Some submissives feel this inclination more intensely than others.

Bottom: Used to define a particular role of a player in a scene. The Bottom is on the receiving end of things. While this may involve the physical, it can also refer to being obedient for the duration of the scene. It is a temporary role and ends when the scene is done.

Pet: A status of an individual. To be a pet means that one has an owner and one is treated, handled, cared for in the form and manner that one might use to look after any animal.

A status of an individual. To be a slave is to be owned. Since this legally can not be done it becomes a consensual agreement on the part of the slave. That being said, it is the duty of the slave to obey at all times. Slavery should be considered a permanent state of affairs. Much like marriage. And, much like marriage, its permanence is often an illusion.

Slut: A catch all phrase to define a particular craving or need on the part of an individual. May also be used as a piece of flattery. Is normally prefaced by the particular attribute being referenced (i.e. pain-slut, humiliation slut, etc, except in the case of sex. The word “slut” on its own implies sex slut).

Be seeing you,

Love and Dominance

Greetings all,

Here is something I posted recently on FetLife in response to a question concerning any issues of being a Dominant in a romantic love relationship with their submissive. It is another variant of what I have written about earlier on this topic.



I shall take a somewhat contrary position.

It is my belief that the integration of romantic love into the D/s lifestyle relationship is challenging and fraught with dangers. I say D/s lifestyle in particular because I do not think there is the same problems for those who only play or scene, for those who do S&M, or for those who explore B&D.

But for the D/s lifestyler, and the Dominant in particular, the situation is more difficult. I have noted with interest that many of the females who have responded in this thread have spoken of the love for their Master, even how they could not be his slave if they did not love him. While there are certain aspects of this that I would refute (if I had the time or inclination) in general I think this is all to the good for them, but actually makes the situation even more complex for the Dominant.

Let us consider a maledom/femsub pairing where the couple is also deeply in love, perhaps even married. The girl makes an error which requires punishment. In order for the punishment to be effective it must be harsh, but the man loves this woman. How can he hurt that which he loves? For the Dominant with no romantic ties this is not a problem, but between lovers there will be many potential conflicts of interest.

Now let us take a more challenging example. Same couple, but with a different problem. A new female has got the attention of our man. She has been provoked by his power and caught up in the heat of virginal sub-fever. It is the natural inclination of the Dominant to respond to this sort of thing. He would find great pleasure in handling, developing, enhancing this new girl. But too, he may have made vows and oaths to his wife (and submissive). Or, even if he has not, he knows/suspects that doing such a thing will wound his lover. How does he resolve this ethical issue? Again, for the Dominant who is not in love there is no issue. In all probability he has told his submissive well in advance what his intentions are concerning other girls. But for the husband/lover/friend/dominant/Master the answers are much less clear.

All is not lost though. There are many many cases of success in combing love and D/s. In my own experience the key is courageous honesty, unfailing trust, personal integrity, and the ability to balance between maintaining the framework of control for the submissive, and focusing on the happiness of his lover which now has become essential to his own sense of well being.


Be seeing you,

Monday, May 18, 2009

Narcissistic Humour

Greetings all,

What with all the heavy talk of rage, I thought something a bit lighter was in order. The following is an ancient bit of humour that I first received around 1992. It is university admission letter attributed to one Hugh Gallagher from 1990.

According to the legend, he did get accepted. Perhaps being a narcissist does have its pros as well as it cons?

This is an actual essay written by a college applicant to NYU in response to this question:


I am a dynamic figure, often seen scaling walls and crushing ice. I have been known to remodel train stations on my lunch breaks, making them more efficient in the area of heat retention. I translate ethnic slurs for Cuban refugees, I write award-winning operas, I manage time efficiently.

Occasionally, I tread water for three days in a row. I woo women with my sensuous and godlike trombone playing, I can pilot bicycles up severe inclines with unflagging speed, and I cook Thirty-Minute Brownies in twenty minutes. I am an expert in stucco, a veteran in love, and an outlaw in Peru.

Using only a hoe and a large glass of water, I once single-handedly defended a small village in the Amazon Basin from a horde of ferocious army ants. I play bluegrass cello, I was scouted by the Mets, I am the subject of numerous documentaries. When I'm bored, I build large suspension bridges in my yard. I enjoy urban hang gliding. On Wednesdays, after school, I repair electrical appliances free of charge.

I am an abstract artist, a concrete analyst, and a ruthless bookie. Critics worldwide swoon over my original line of corduroy evening wear. I don't perspire. I am a private citizen, yet I receive fan mail. I have been caller number nine and have won the weekend passes. Last summer I toured New Jersey with a traveling centrifugal-force demonstration. I bat 400.

My deft floral arrangements have earned me fame in international botany circles. Children trust me. I can hurl tennis rackets at small moving objects with deadly accuracy. I once read Paradise Lost, Moby Dick, and David Copperfield in one day and still had time to refurbish an entire dining room that evening. I know the exact location of every food item in the supermarket. I have performed several covert operations with the CIA.

I sleep once a week; when I do sleep, I sleep in a chair. While on vacation in Canada, I successfully negotiated with a group of terrorists who had seized a small bakery. I balance, I weave, I dodge, I frolic, and my bills are all paid.

On weekends, to let off steam, I participate in full-contact origami. Years ago I discovered the meaning of life but forgot to write it down. I have made extraordinary four course meals using only a mouli and a toaster oven. I breed prize-winning clams. I have won bullfights in San Juan, cliff-diving competitions in Sri Lanka, and spelling bees at the Kremlin.

I have played Hamlet, I have performed open-heart surgery, and I have spoken with Elvis.

But I have not yet gone to college.

(The author was accepted and is now attending NYU.)

Of Cyberpaths, Pathological Narcissists, Narcissistic Rage, and Jane

Greetings all,

This was going to be a long post concerning the events that have transpired since I posted my note on Jane. Happily, events have developed that will allow me to make it somewhat shorter although still longer than I would have wished.

So, first a brief history of what has been going on (for those who are interested) since my last posting. Jane did not allow me to post my comments on her blog. She said if I had anything to say I could say it on my blog. Of course, this makes it rather difficult to have a debate on the subject, but I suspect that debate is not what she wishes. It is so very much easier to convince others of your point when no one is arguing against you, eh? No wonder she moderates her list.

At least two other people have written to me saying that she prevented them from posting as well.

It did not stop both her, and her husband, from posting some additional self-congratulatory comments on how brave Jane was for "coming out". These can be read here.

In addition, Jane wrote me a private email, filled with all sorts of interesting, if somewhat bizarre notions. It was my intent to post it here for public view, and then comment directly, but other events now makes this unnecessary. Why bother defending oneself when one's opponent has provided all the information necessary to make one's case? Besides, if I had to post her long rambling and inconsistent set of comments my response to it would have been equally as long. And two longs don't make a fight. They simply consume valuable time. Still, given all the words she has posted in the last few days it appears that she has a great deal of time (or perhaps nervous energy?) on her hands.

In short order three more entries appeared on Jane's Blog. The first was on the topic of cyberpaths. It appears that (according to Jane) Cyberpaths are Narcissists who are also Predators and who are also very Common. Girls beware, these emotion sucking vampires are out there, waiting for you.

Who knew?

Ironically, someone by the name of Smotp, left a comment after her note reminding everyone that a Cyberpath could be a dominant or a submissive. Good point Smotp. Actually, I don't think those who are dominant or submissive have a stranglehold on bizarre behaviours. At a guess, I would say that anyone who is seriously out of balance probably will find some way to deal with their problems, even if that way is maladaptive. Besides, it is so much easier to blame another for your problem, rather than accepting responsibility for yourself, yes? Blame is such an easy path compared to personal responsibility and accountability.

Her post was rapidly followed by another on the topic of Narcissistic Rage. A quick search of the authoritative DSM-IV lists no such condition. OTOH - Wikipedia does have an article on the topic. However, since Jane gives no references as to the source of all the various symptoms and behaviours associated with this condition I must assume she has some advanced degree in psychology and perhaps has not as yet published her work in any formal journal. I, otoh, lacking any such degrees, was forced to try and actually research the topic. The results of my admittedly cursory research was rather at odds with many of Jane's supposed facts, which read rather more like a laundry list of accusations she would like to level at me, covered in a duvet of seemingly authoritative statements. And fwiw, some of her paragraphs seemed to have been culled from other web pages such as


- It appears that one Heinz Kohut coined the term first around 1972 in his book "The Analysis of the Self"


But why bother doing research when it is so much fun, and easier, to make it up as you go along?

BTW - if you are going to take the time to read this post of Jane's (it is quite long) my suggestion is that you mentally change every occurrence of the words "he" and "him" to "she" and "her". I find it reads much better, and makes a great deal more sense.

Or in the words of the bard himself: "I think the lady doth protest too much"

Jane concluded this week's missives with a curious and vague piece on the topic of "Psychos on the Internet". It appears that someone (a woman of all things) who knew Jane for less that a week got into her head to cause Jane all sorts of mental pain and anguish by revealing all sorts of personal facts from emails she has been sending around. Something about jealousy, perjury, the fabrication of false documentation, etc. Why anyone would wish to do this is never quite explained, only that this evil individual really seemed to have it in for Jane. For myself, I use Occam's Razor which tells us that given a set of possible reasons to explain a mystery, that the simplest is probably the right one. So, what do you think is simpler, that someone who has known Jane for less than a week set out on a campaign of strange vengeance or that perhaps Jane is seeking to cover what actually occurred?

Hmmm... I hope no one ever targets me for a campaign of slander, libel, lies and deceit. OTOH... maybe someone has?

Frankly, I don't think I could have made my case any better than Jane has in her notes. Why anyone would devote this much time, effort, and words to something that she supposedly had put behind her is a true paradox. Or, in the words of my wife, after having read these recent posts: "she is one weird girl".

I'm going to go out here on the limb of an assumption and take a wild guess that all of her recent posting have been aimed at me. A series of attempts to denigrate my character by layering all sorts of nefarious disorders as a foundation to my seemingly calm and balanced exterior. A complex ranting of innuendos and ulterior motivations which seek to explain how I am the root cause for so many of her current problems, plus painting me as a rather insecure, angry, unbalanced and perhaps even dangerous... Pathological Narcissist.

Not bad for a fellow who, back in her April post, was nothing more than a silly little man with an inflated ego, and some petty anger. In less than 30 days I have been elevated to a serious heavyweight in the world of personality disorders. Stay tuned, who knows what I will achieve by next month!

In the meantime, I really don't have much more to say on the topic except the following conclusions:

- I was the one who introduced Jane to both John Ralston Saul, and the writings of John Norman (i.e. Gor).

- I have had over 1000 email exchanges with Jane since our beginning. If I am such a bad fellow why did she keep writing me?

- I don't know who Phil is (a common poster on Jane's blog who is often quoted) but, like Jane, he has some rather curious ideas and concepts when it comes to D/s. I would be interested to meet him in debate one day.

- While it is certainly someone's right to choose who they will, or will not, allow to post comments on their blog, it is wrong to open a contentious topic and then selectively choose only those who support your position. This is self-serving.

- If you are going to create a tale, at least get your facts to add up to a cohesive picture. According to Jane's own blog entries she described her time with me as follows:

06SEP: "I want to say here that he isn’t a monster, and I am no victim. It just was a situation that went wanting at a particular time, and I didn’t have the ability then to sumup and end it gracefully."
- NB: A reference to her mentoring time with me.

29 JAN: "I won’t go into details here, but I just went through a marvelous experience of rope work, shibari."
- The day of her return from Montreal.

30JAN: "Oh course this egotistical, narcissistic binder wants to take all the credit for this questionable binding, but it’s again…a very many layered issue. He is NOT this all powerful Dominant. He is just a man who has many, many issues of self worth. However, something there did happen. It was many layered."
- Tell me, is it just me, or do you detect a subtle fluctuation in mood here?

02FEB: "I hold in my heart the results. Regardless all the other things swirling around this experience, the questions, the naysayers, the doubters and those that are queered by the totality of it…. I have gratitude for it happening at all."
- This comment about her binding experience with me.

So, according to her, I started out as a "not monster" and have ended up as a Pathological Narcissist, prone to vague Narcissistic Rages, which I implement as a Predatory Cyberpath, because of my need to hide all of my self-esteem and self-worth issues. And somehow I managed to do all of this in about 6 months. Strangely, I can't seem to find my name mentioned too often on her blog though supposedly many people knew of our relationship (according to her own words again).

- If one wishes to divorce oneself from a situation, then do so. If one wishes to confront a situation then do so. Either option is valid imo as a path to healing. What makes no sense to me is to harp, dwell, gossip, complain, agonize, and prod at the thing so that it continues to bleed. But most importantly, if you are going to accuse someone of something do it to their face, not behind their back. Gossip is evil.

- If you think someone is evil, then don't ask to visit with them! I mean... really. How does one reconcile words and actions if they are not consistent?

Sadly, I must conclude that my time with Jane has not been a good investment of my efforts.

I wish Phil, and the others, good luck with her. Hopefully their investments will pay better dividends than mine.

Once again, I encourage any questions or comments anyone might have. Hopefully, no more postings on this topic will be required.

Finally, I would like to thank those who have offered their words of support both via private emails, by their comments, and by the efforts they have made to help out. They were much appreciated.

Be seeing you,

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

I am pushed past my limit and rise to a challenge - Jane (aka teela)

Greetings all,

For about a 2 year period during 2007/2008 I had interactions with a woman known as Jane. For about 6 months during that period I was her formal Mentor. She was not one of my success stories, in fact she is the only woman who I regret to say was one of my failures. These things happen. I have thought the matter was over between us, but clearly it is not.

Back in April she wrote an entry in her blog (where she calls herself Lady Nyo) about a particular experience with me. It can be read here. While she did not mention me by name she speaks of me as a "rope top" with "petty anger" and an "enormous ego". The comments section also made certain references to the experience of being bound by me. Later she wrote a second blog entry which can be read here. It speaks even more about her experience with me, and not in the most positive of terms.

Still I would have left the thing alone, since my name was not directly mentioned. However, since then some additional information about how she speaks of me has come to light and I believe I must say something to protect my reputation. I have posted a copy of the following note on Lady Nyo's blog as a comment. Since I believe there is a chance she may delete it, I am placing a copy here as well.

Be seeing you,

Greetings all,

My name is Mackenzie Cross. I have been motivated to write this note in order to set the record straight on a number of points concerning my relationship with Lady Nyo.

I should begin by saying that I am the fellow who Lady Nyo (whom I once called teela but will now call Jane) is referring to when she speaks of her second binding. The fellow with the "silly ego", with whom she supposedly shared a "nasty dance of anger". The "rope top" who has "well practiced mind control" and who "claimed the power of his dominance as to the ’success’ of this binding". Etc.

When I first read her blog entries last month my initial response was to leave the matter alone, even though it appeared she had changed her mind a great deal concerning me. Only a few months ago she had been filled with gratitude and thanks. Now she seemed to think somewhat less of me. Obviously something had changed in her thinking. This did not surprise me, since I have seen her do it before. Still, I was not overly concerned since my name was not mentioned. Jane is certainly allowed to think about me any way she wishes.

However, since that time, it has come to my attention that Jane has now started mentioning my name directly in some of her correspondences, and further, that she is portraying our history together as being something that it was not, something wrongful and unethical, something that portrays me at being at the best, pathetic, and at the worse, evil.

I am therefore writing to give my accounting of what transpired between us, so that I may clear my name of any smear which it may now carry because of her actions.

One more point before I begin. Jane claims that I have been, or perhaps still am, angry with her. I am not. In fact, up until a few days ago I haven't been feeling much of one thing or another about her for quite some time. The last emotion I felt was sadness since she still had not accepted her nature, and a certain remorse at my own failure to assist her. But that was back in August of last year. I was well content to leave the past in the past, but clearly she is not. I take umbrage with her comments, and take this action as my response.


I was first contacted by Jane in January of 2007. She had posted comments about a story of mine and I sent her a private email of thanks. In response she wrote back saying she was very new to the entire subject of Dominant/submissive (D/s) relationships. She asked if I could provide any references for additional reading materials.

Thus began a rather lengthy series of correspondences with Jane on a range of topics centered around my own ideas, philosophies, and ethics about D/s-based relationships. Over the course of our discussions I informed her that besides being a writer, I was also an occasional mentor and trainer of female submissives, as well as couples, who wished to explore this form of interaction model. I also made sure that Jane's husband was fully informed of our interactions, and even provided him with some suggestions.FWIW - I have lived a D/s lifestyle for close to 30 years now, and have had the good fortune to mentor/train more than a few females of quality, and a handful of couples as well.

Jane had a great number of questions. On any given day she could easily send me 4-6 emails. Too, our discussions were not solely focused on D/s topics. We corresponded at length on a wide range of subjects from John Ralston Saul, to the Holocaust, to genres of erotica, and John Norman's books of Gor. She showed great admiration for my perspective on these topics.

In short order, Jane revealed herself as a latent submissive who craved a dominant hand. She asked me to mentor her. I refused. It was not for another 4-6 months, after she had time to learn exactly what would be required from her in a formal relationship, that I would accept her request.

I should also mention that fairly early on in our email correspondences, and certainly before we ever spoke on the phone, Jane was provoked into a well known, and well documented, submissive condition known as sub-fever. This was brought about by her contact with me, and her latent nature. To help ease some of her tensions I provided her with some small trivial disciplines which helped. On more than one occasion she asked for more disciplines which I also refused since I did not wish her bonding more tightly to me.

Sometime early in 2008, I accepted Jane as my mentored girl. She was grateful for my acceptance.

I must now digress for a moment while I explain one or two items. Firstly: I consider mentoring to be a formal relationship, which is created for a specific purpose. It has a beginning and an ending. Any girl who wishes to enter into such a relationship with me is allowed two choices. The first is when she requests to be mentored. The second it when she requests to leave. In between, she acknowledges that all choices will be mine. I may refuse a girl who asks to enter into such a relationship with me, but I am duty bound never to refuse a girl's request to leave.

Also, I have three primary requirements, conditions if you will, on any such relationship. These are honesty, trust, and obedience.

Jane's mentoring was a time consuming challenge for me. She made many errors and mistakes. Each time she begged me to forgive her, showing great remorse, and promising it would not happen again. Each time I did forgive her (after she had been suitably punished). There was a pattern to her behaviour. First she would misbehave, and then she would be ashamed of her behaviour and beg forgiveness. She did not make a great deal of progress, despite my best efforts. Jane showed an ongoing pattern of extreme fluctuations of both mood and behaviour.

In June of 2008 Jane demanded to be released. I gave her 24 hours to think it over. Within 12 she had changed her mind.

In August 2008 I assigned a task to Jane. Her performance did not meet my expectations and I told her so. She became angry with me for not recognizing the amount of time she had devoted to this project. She sent me a note saying goodbye, and another of thanks. At which point I formally released her.

That should have been the end of it. For me, when a girl demands to be released in such a manner I see no point in any further communications.

Jane did contact me again a a few days, and continued to contact me on a variety of topics. By and large we did not discuss her mentoring.

Another brief digression. While Jane and I did not physically meet prior to Jan/2009 we did speak on the phone a number of times. Certainly less than ten times. Each call was on average 30-45 mins long. A fair amount of this talking could be described as phone sex. This too was part of her mentoring. On each occasion she expressed her gratitude. Her husband also expressed his thanks, saying that I had really helped her to blossom into a wonderful sexual creature.

Around Oct/2008 I was contacted by Jane's husband who told me they were intending to be in Montreal in January, and that they wished to invite my wife, sandra, and myself to a gala event they were attending. While I found this a somewhat unusual invitation (given that no relationship existed between Jane and myself any longer) I felt it was good manners to accept. Too, Jane's husband suggested that this might be an opportunity for me to bind Jane. Jane's first experience at bondage had not gone well, and she longed for the freedom of the ropes, and the discovery of another well known, and well documented condition, known as sub-space. On numerous occasions during her mentoring she said that she was waiting for my ropes.

While they were here, the four of us went for dinner, attended the gala, and spent a day and a night at my home in the country. They were excellent and gracious guests. They were also overly generous in the gifts they brought. sandra and I were good hosts. I even considered offering Jane's husband the use of sandra. I mentioned the thought to him, but in the end decided against it. I did not ask for, nor was I offered, the use of Jane. This did not bother me in the least. I had no interest at all in any personal use of Jane. Why would I? She was no longer my mentored girl, and more, she did not exhibit those qualities I find attractive in a female.

In the evening time I asked Jane's husband if he wished to see me binding his wife. He agreed, but Jane wished to see me binding my wife. I agreed to this condition. I first bound sandra in front of both of them, displaying her responses. Then, in front of her husband, I bound Jane. It only took 2-3 coils of rope before Jane could no longer stand on her own. I was not surprised. As she herself admits, she was well prepared for the moment. I ended up laying her at her husband's feet. She stayed like that for quite some time.

The next morning both of them had rather large smiles. Jane wore a string on her wrist and her husband held the other end. They called it her leash.

A number of further emails of thank followed, both from Jane and her husband. In addition, Jane contacted my wife on more than one occasion asking for additional advice on how to behave as a submissive. She replied and received emails of thanks from both Jane and her husband.

Jane's last email to me was in March of this year. I told her I would respond to it when I had the time. I have not yet had the time.

Throughout my time with her Jane displayed, presented, and responded as a submissive female on numerous occasions. Too, she responded to me in a manner and to an intensity that surprised her, even perhaps worried her. OTOH - she certainly tried her best to cover her nature when interacting with others. As part of preparing her for mentoring I gave her a number of references of other girls to contact, girls whom I have mentored, trained, or owned. In each case these girls contacted me saying they found Jane's behaviour and attitude to be contradictory and a poor reflection on how she was being developed. Later, when she was being mentored, this sort of disturbing feedback continued. I was told that she had an attitude that was neither appropriate nor respectful. I was told that she spoke of me, behind my back, in ways that I would not approve. I allowed these things to pass since I felt that she was still developing and learning. I felt that in time, with enough examples, she would come to understand and accept herself. Perhaps someday she will, but she certainly did not with me.

On many occasions Jane would get involved in situations where she was over her head, found herself in a state of emotional turmoil, and required my help to calm down and achieve balance again. Too, she contacted many people in her local BDSM group. From these people she received a great deal of advice that was in direct opposition to my own. I encouraged her to follow these advices as she wished. Each time it ended badly.

Jane is, imo, a classic case of a female who was not ready, or able, to accept her nature. Too, her self-centric view of the world made it almost impossible for her to focus on being pleasing, which is the primary motivation for a submissive. Unable to satisfy this need, she attempted to find other avenues of expression, or to blame others (including myself) for her state of mind. In part, it was something I was prepared for, since all the mentoring I do is intense and deeply personal, and therefore there is always the potential for periods of high emotions.

Jane was (and perhaps still is) a highly emotional female.

As to the binding of Jane, well, it was neither complex, erotic, or lengthy. Firstly, because my sole intent in doing this binding was to show Jane (and her husband) how easily she could placed in sub-space, and secondly because I simply was not that motivated. Certainly she may claim any reason she wishes for why she so quickly dived deep into sub-space. Certainly she may claim that she was trying to run away from me. Yet, even the most cursory review of the facts hardly backs up her claims. She contacted me. Her husband asked me to bind her. She wanted to be bound. She even turned the binding in a ritual of sorts wearing a special robe, charms, etc. I took no advantage of her. I did not touch her in a sexual manner. I was in every respect a gentleman in how I treated her.

I do not mentor and train for compensation. I do it, because it is my nature.

Frankly, I was more than willing to put the entire period behind me, and chalk it up to a misjudgment on my part. However, it has now become clear to me that she is not. She now claims I am some sort of predator or hunter, trying to lure other females to some sort of unclear doom. She does not have the courage to say these words to my face. She does not have the honesty to admit to the true facts of what occurred. She finds it easier to fabricate her own reality to explain her condition, than accept her own nature. She now seeks to use me as the scapegoat for her own tensions, and more, seeks to promote this view with others, who do not know me, as a way to gain sympathy for having been my "victim".

BTW - this is the same woman who dedicated one of the stories in her book to me. This is the same woman who wrote me countless emails of gratitude and thanks. This is the same woman who begged my protection. This is the same woman who credited me with transforming her life into something much more positive. So much so, that she even introduced me to her son, with the hope I might have some positive affect on him as well.

Those who spread gossip and rumours are the evil ones. Those who speak behind the back, sowing seeds of malice and discord are the ones filled with malice. Those who are unwilling to stand in public forum and lay out the facts, so that all may judge them, including the accused, are the ones who are behaving without an ethic.

I invite any of you who wish to come to my blog and read my writings. There you will find all the information you require to learn about my ethics, my character, and my beliefs. For those of you who belong to FetLife, you are most certainly welcome to check out my numerous postings there as well. I have no secrets about who I am, or what I do. I believe that it is only in the glare of the harsh cold light of honesty that meaningful dialog can take place. To my way of thinking, Jane has abrogated her right to such dialog by her actions. This is why I have posted in public.

Assuming this post is not deleted, I will continue to monitor this thread and responded to any and all questions. I have cross posted a copy of this note on my own blog, with a link back here, for those who might prefer to hold the discussion there. My blog can be found at http://mackenziecross.blogspot.com/

Thank you.

Be seeing you,

Mackenzie Cross

P.S. An update: 10AM 13MAY

I have tried twice to leave this comment at Jane's blog. Each time it has been accepted, but not published. I suspect I have been blocked. I have written an email directly to Jane asking her why I cannot post.

I would ask any of you who are interested to leave a brief comment on her blog asking why my comments have been blocked. Thank you.

More news as it happens.

Being pushed past the limit

Greetings all,

Recently I was asked by a submissive how she could test her sexual and masochistic limits. On one hand, she has had many dark thoughts filled with screams and pain. These thoughts excite her very much. OTOH - she is very fearful of going to these places because they scare her.

She wants to test her limits, to be pushed to the very edge, and wondered how this could be done. She wondered if she could do it herself via masturbation, fantasies, or the watching of extreme BDSM movies. Perhaps she could test her limits by reading of the limits of others and see what excites her. However, this confuses her since on one hand she finds it very exciting to read about, but otoh the back of her mind is saying there is no way she would ever do such things.


To begin, I don't think this is something one can do on their own. Like trying to hold your breath until you die, it simply won't work. Fantasies, masturbation, and the limits of others are all very interesting, and may even inspire us as times, but they hardly test us. Rather, they may point us in directions which should be examined, but they can't tell us how we would react in the real situation. Too, if one is doing these things to themselves, it is hard to really feel pushed. For that, another is required.

I see two possible solutions for finding the "other". First, if one has a dominant partner, they could be the one to do the pushing. Obviously the submissive would have to open up and reveal their desires, so that their partner could craft a proper session to test their limit. This would be the easiest solution. But it might not be the best, or the safest. A second idea is to find someone who is an expert and have them do the pushing. Certain edge play activities, (pins, suspensions, single tails, blades, etc) are best done by someone with experience. This expert would not only help push the submissive to her limit, but could also help train the dominant partner. As such, both would benefit.

There is, imo, only one way to find out one's limits and that is to test oneself. Only by doing this can real experience, and therefore knowledge, be obtained. My suggestion is to select a particular area for investigation (wet play, hard sex, stimulation, etc) and decide how to best explore it. If one has a partner try and use them if possible. Otherwise find someone who knows what they are doing.

Be safe, and have fun.

Be seeing you,

Dealing with limit failures

Greetings all,

I was asked the other day about how a submissive should deal with failure. Upon further questioning it became clear that in this case it was not a failure in performance of task or discipline (which can be easily handled through punishment/forgiveness) but rather a failure in ability, in this case the ability to handle the pain that she was feeling at the hands of her dominant partner.

She had to ask him to stop what he was doing, because she was simply to uncomfortable and in too much pain to continue.

Now to most of us this doesn't appear to be a problem. After all, when a limit is reached it makes sense to stop. But for the deeply submissive female this is not so cut and dry. After all, it is their nature to want to be pleasing. This very much includes being able to offer their dominant all the pleasures he desires. Not being able to do so is therefore seen as a failure. IOW - she feels that she wasn't good enough to satisfy her partner. No amount of punishment will correct this state of mind. Even her partner saying that he didn't mind, will not help re-balance the girl. In her own mind she has decided that she has been a failure. Therefore she is the only one who can forgive herself and move on.

But how can she do this thing?

The first idea that suggests itself is logical rationale thinking. It makes sense that all people have limits. It makes sense that everyone has their own threshold of pain. It makes sense that there are certain things that some people simply cannot do. For example, I know one girl (an extreme masochist) who loves the idea of being sutured, either at the mouth or the cunt. She also has fantasies of nails being used to pin her to a board. Does this mean that other girls should think of themselves as a failure simply because they could not handle such sensations? Hardly. Therefore, one can conclude that one one is not a failure simply because one has reached a limit.

Sadly, I do not think that the logical argument works well. For the female submissive the need to serve runs far below logical thought. Their need to serve often goes beyond the borders of rationale thinking. So, trying to solve thisdilemma via deductive logic probably won't do.

Another option might be via a self-imposed act of contrition. Even though they have not been punished they may choose to make some act of punishment and offer it to their dominant as a way of asking for forgiveness. The problem with this is twofold. First, the dominant partner may not really understand what is going on, since from theirpov nothing is wrong. Secondly, it is not the forgiveness of their partner that they need, but rather they must forgive themselves.

My suggestion is that they make sure this really is a limit, and having discovered that it is, they determine how they are going to deal with it. What I mean is that they test this limit more than once, until they are really sure it is real, and not something brought about by fear or circumstances. After all, the failure may have been caused by the current situation, not anything that is permanent. Perhaps there is a way for them to break through their limit. After all, people do this all the time in many area of training (i.e. the concept of "personal best"). Why not in BDSM play as well?

Still, regardless of how many times they try it may simply not be possible for them to push past the limit. When this happens, the only solution I can see is discussion with one's partner and a determination of what can be done. In some cases, if it is not that big a deal for the dominant partner, perhaps they simply decide not to experiment in that particular area. If the dominant partner really wishes to explore this area, perhaps asurrogate can be found who could be used instead. While not fully open, the BDSM community tends to be a lot more open than the vanilla world when it comes to the sharing of partners. Or perhaps the submissive can find an alternativeactivity that would be just as pleasing to her dominant.

The key, imo, is not to allow the matter to fester inside. It must be brought, examined, and dealt with. Otherwise the submissive will start getting into a head space of constant "not good enough" and be unable to perform well at all.

Dominants should always be on the lookout for signs of this going on. Remember, submissive require maintenance.

Be seeing you,

Cross Purposes via RSS. Subscribe now!

Lijit Search