Wednesday, March 12, 2008

What "gets your goat" about passion in marriage or the lack, thereof?


Some things just "get my goat" and this is one of them. It is *part* of the reason why I was a refusing dw for over 25 years. What is this thing in some Christian churches where young dw's are never given "permission" or encouraged to go sexually wild with their dh's? I understand and agree that single girls and single guys should remain sexually pure before marriage.

And before anybody gets on my case for being sexist, I do realize that the attitudes of dh's and dw's can be in a reversed order with the dw's dragging their kicking and screaming dh's towards the marriage bed. So I know it goes both ways. For the purpose of this post, I am only bringing up the example of the dw's being too much "good girl" to enjoy sex in their marriage.

This is what I keep hearing---

Young couples prepare to marry. The guys know or learn to anticipate and enjoy marital sex. The girls are kept sexually clueless, shy and inhibited. They marry and then the girls continue to sexually hold back in the marriage while the guys are eager and ready to bust lose.... only they can't because... their dw's are too busy being "good girls". When are we going to wake up and realize the damage we're doing to young marriages right from the "get-go"?

Recently, on one of my favorite marriage forums, someone asked help for a friend who had this same issue going on in her marriage. Being a "good girl" was causing the friend to refuse sex to her dh. He was already at the point of sleeping on the couch because sharing the bed with his "good girl" dw was too painful when she often told him "no" to sex.

Basically, this is what I told the poster---

There is NOTHING good or "holy" about withholding sex from your spouse. I used to think I was a good Christian dw because I did all the right things outwardly... you know, the things that everyone from my church could see. But in my heart and behind closed bedroom doors, I sinned against my dh and I sinned against my God. Withholding or refusing sex is "sin".

Don't get me wrong-- If her dh is asking her to engage in immoral sex practices then, no, she shouldn't engage in them. But if he simply desires to enjoy the dw of his youth and she's never in the mood so she often says "no", then that is "sin". God designed and desired for dh's and dw's to thoroughly enjoy each others' bodies and to keep each other sexually satisfied. It is 'sin' to go against that and tell God, "Thanks for the gift but 'no thanks'. I'd rather do other things than satisfy my dh in bed."

15 months ago I made a decision to never say "no" to sex. The "good girl" left the house and my dh's "whore" moved in, figuratively speaking. I was the "good girl" turned "dh's whore". This is what totally turned my marriage around. Now GR and I enjoy frequent, passionate sex AND an affectionate relationship outside the bedroom as well. This is as a passionate marriage should be.

On Christian marriage forums I've had more than a few dw's become rattled and a couple of them even verbally abusive when I say "I am my dh's whore", like as if I'm having sex my dh without any love involved or that he disrespects me. Think about it-- When you're in bed and totally pleasing your dh and he's totally pleasing you, aren't you offering/using your body in a similar fashion to what a whore would do? I often wonder if those dh's would be asked if they'd like their dw's to be as whores in their marriage bed, would the dh's encourage or DIScourage it? Is it only about the dw's self-image (ie- wanting to seem like a "good girl") or is the dh's opinion (ie- uninhibited, hot babe in bed) taken into account at all? Hmmmmm.....

Anyway, back to that poster and her friend. She asked if she should recommend that her friend go talk to her religious leader and I told her:

Absolutely not! Your friend is already suffering from too much *wifely goodness*. What if her pastor is a refusing spouse? What good could he possibly do for your friend's marriage? None! If she needs outside help, recommend she see a professional sex therapist. Four books I would recommend for this "good girl" issue.

For the dw's to read:

The Proper Care & Feeding of Husbands
Dr. Laura Schlessinger
ISBN: 0-06-052061-2
http://www.drlaura.com/main/

Intimate Issues
Dillow & Pintus
ISBN: 1-57856-149-3
http://www.intimateissues.com/

For them to read as a married couple:

The Proper Care & Feeding of Marriage
Dr. Schlessinger
ISBN: 978-0-06-114284-0

Love & Respect
Dr. Emerson Eggerichs
ISBN: 1-59145-417-4
http://www.loveandrespect.com/

That "good girl" concept really needs to be knocked off its pedestal! Try replacing it with this thought---

Dw's, be that 'good girl' in the living room and when you are away from home. But when you and dh are in your bedroom, allow yourself the freedom to be his whore. As a dw, enjoy the sexual, God-given gift that you possess.
Dh's, encourage your dw to be your whore when you're in the bedroom. Never, ever make her feel ashamed or embarrassed for letting lose while making love." Now go enjoy your marriage bed!

Comments? Questions?

Gemma, GR's whore!

39 comments:

Gemma said...

This is only a test. I am Gemma and this is my blog. It doesn't belong to "About Me". (My bad!) Cut me some slack as I learn the ropes of blogging. So, all the comments where it says "About Me said...", it is really me, Gemma, speaking.

Cocotte said...

What really gets my goat are the stereotypes of marriage.......that men are always hounding their wives for sex and the wives are just "putting up with it" and just laying there, getting nothing out of it. Or that the wives "reward" their husbands by giving in. What rubbish! Gemma - I hope your new blog cuts through these stereotypes and helps couples reclaim their marriage beds!

Gemma said...

Oh, PLEASE!!!!!! I know exactly what you mean, cocotte. In a healthy marriage, our bodies belong to our dh's. My body belongs to GR and his body is all mine... yummo! If dw's (or dh's) don't enjoy "the playground" then it's time for marriage counseling. "Reclaim" is exactly the word. More Christian couples than we care to acknowledge, have handed over claims to their MB because of apathy regarding their sex lives.

Later today, I'll be posting a real, true confession about something that GR and I were able to reclaim.

Eleutheros said...

Hi Gemma!

SW's link led me to your blog.

You go girl! I am so happy that you discovered the God given power in your sexuality for awakening it to become your GR's loving, expressive whore! Only a woman secure in her husbands love and with herself can do this. I'm glad you are friends with both.

And I'm also glad to see that you still read Pablo Neruda as well as finding other erotic poetry.
You should try writing your own. I'd be gald to offer good critiques, just ask SW!

You said:

"15 months ago I made a decision to never say "no" to sex. The "good girl" left the house and my dh's "whore" moved in, figuratively speaking. I was the "good girl" turned "dh's whore". This is what totally turned my marriage around. Now GR and I enjoy frequent, passionate sex AND an affectionate relationship outside the bedroom as well. This is as a passionate marriage should be."

Yes it is.

I have found that Jehovah designed sex to be the nourishment, the food, if you will, for affection and fondness.

In other words, Eros- sexual desire- feeds Agape- fondness and affection- making the two of you fecund in producing the flourish of Agape that satisfies the needs of the human soul in an elegant cycle that begins with Eros, not Agape.

And of course that means Agape will eventually fade to nothing when Eros ends.

In other words, Agape will die a slow death of starvation in a marriage where Eros is denied.

Which both ideas have been expressed well in your posts.

I'm very glad to read that you and your Precious One are no longer starving each other but are instead reveling often in the Feast's of Eros built into your bodies, minds and souls for being created as Male and Female; a realtionship inspired by Jehovah's realtionship among Himself so that, in the marriage of ourselves, we resemble our Creator Father.

May He continue to bless your's and GR's sexuality with mind-altering orgasms and thus bless your blog to encourage other women to know the power of a whore to please herself (not just her husband) with her husband's love.

Something that I personally know men love in thier wives. (Insert Big Grin for recalling fond memories)

Be good then Gemma, It's what you're Father re-sired you to be.

Eleutheros

Gemma said...

Hello there, Eleutheros!

Good to see you here. I've been trying to create some space to devote to erotic poetry writing. When the time is right, when I'm not rushed, I'll be able to relax and work on it the way I enjoy writing. It will be soon and I will be sure to ask you for critiques.

You're not kidding .... how Agape slowly dies when Eros is starved. It's kind of odd- On TMB forums whenever I say "GR's whore", some of the dw's just freak out. [I've received more than one tongue-lashing from them.]
You understand what I mean, I know that. I just don't 'get it' why those TMB women get so uptight when I use that phrase.

You said: "May He continue to bless your's and GR's sexuality with mind-altering orgasms and thus bless your blog to encourage other women to know the power of a whore to please herself (not just her husband) with her husband's love."

Thank you for your encouraging words. "the power of a whore".... that's my calling in life from here on. Please come by often.

Eleutheros said...

"On TMB forums whenever I say "GR's whore", some of the dw's just freak out. [I've received more than one tongue-lashing from them.]
You understand what I mean, I know that. I just don't 'get it' why those TMB women get so uptight when I use that phrase."

Interesting. This is what I understand. As your awakening progressed, begining with your decision to not refuse sex to your husband, it likely struck something positive in your core to find that you enjoyed submitting yourself to your husband's sexuality. It tickled you inside, didn't it, to find yourself not just enjoying sex wantonly with him but craving it!
And in delivering yourself over to this wantoness, to this craving, like you might have imagined a whore does, you found the power in your sexuality to pleasure yourself with your husband's love. And I'm sure, when you saw the delight in your husbands positive responses to your wantoness, your beautiful feminine soul felt a deep fullfillment that you never expected to find you were capable of experiencing.

If this is true, then why do you think 'they' freak out when you introduce them to the idea of being your husband's whore?

Think about that and see if your thoughts don't give you a good answer to these unenlightened ones who berate you for discovering and daring to enjoy the God- given power in your sexuality; the power that it seems, in this age, only a whore and a small percentage of married humans and those re-sired of Jehovah can become familiar with!

I love being human! Don't you?

Eleutheros.

P.S. perhaps you could use a TMB PM to alert me when you decide to start writing poems inspired by the delight you are discovering in your sexuality.
The humans lost to sin- the ones Jehovah wants us to reach with the Good News that Jesus has accomplished the forgivness of sins with the promise that He will re-sire them through the Holy Spirit, to be the good humans they were created to be- need to hear from more Believers, like SW and yourself, that Jehovah inspires and awakens human sexuality to find in it that proper satisfaction He designed it to deliver. That Jehovah is the Father Creator of human beings and that enjoying being human is not a sin, but a delight!
And erotic poetry about the holy sex enjoined between a husband and wife who get God, is one good way of doing just that!

After all, do you really think the ones who don't understand what you now do and express metaphorically as, 'being your husband's whore', have something useful to say, from their own sexual experience with their husbands, after being a re-sired human, that those lost to sin would find enlightning about our God?

Gemma, may affection and fondness, which leads to peace and satisfaction, be the norm for you and GR discovering sex the God way.

Gemma said...

Thanks for the lovely comment, Eleutheros. And I will PM at TMB when my time gets freed up some more. I'm busy learning how to manage this blog and I still don't know how to access my "gmail" account. (I'm woefully computer illiterate.)

Eleutheros said: "If this is true, then why do you think 'they' freak out when you introduce them to the idea of being your husband's whore?"

I've thought about this some and the only things I come up with:

*jealousy
*fear of stepping into waters (ie- fear of 'bad girl' mentality)
*one or both spouses refusing to end sinful habits which prevent doing the dance required to live together in marital bliss

But then, I may be waaay off, dunno :shrug: .

The Aestheticist said...

Rather than amuse myself over the irony that part whore's etymology is hora (Old Norse for Adulteress), I have a question.

This idea of calling wives the whores of their husbands rather makes me think of the BDSM lifestyle - particularly Dominant/submissive with humiliation play. Would it be too much to ask what you think of such lifestyles - Dominant/submissive ones, I mean?

If you'd rather post a lengthy response (and there's a chance I'll actually forget to check in here, again), I can be reached at: t.aestheticist@hotmail.com.

I look foreward to your response, madam.

Gemma said...

The Aestheticist said: "Would it be too much to ask what you think of such lifestyles - Dominant/submissive ones, I mean?"

Not too much to ask, Aestheticist. We do not practice the BDSM lifestyle at all, not even D/S. GR is one of the most gentlest people I know and neither am I dominant with him. To be honest, the use of the affectionate name "whore" for me was something that *I* initially brought up with him.

So truly, you are waaay off in your assumption here unless you consider it D/S lifestyle for a dh to occasionally make love to his dw while she's cuffed to the bed with restraints... and I mean occasionally.

Just so you know--- My answer is in line with the article that wiki gives for D/S:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominance_and_submission#D.2Fs_relationship_styles

Please feel free to ask questions anytime, as long as you are friendly and polite about it :-). Now, what do you think about my reply?

The Aestheticist said...

I believe you misunderstood me (or you're "waaay off in your assumption".

I said that the usage of the term whore reminded me of the lifestyle. I actually know quite a bit more than you might assume about BDSM and D/s, and I honestly wouldn't trust wikipedia as a source for anything in the BDSM community. If you were going to cite a source, I'd suggest the London Fetish Scene's "wipi." I'd post a link, but I don't know if that would bother you, or not.

I was asking what you believe, in general, about the BDSM lifestyle and the D/s lifestyle, not how the lifestyle necessarily pertained to you. Your words merely inspired me to ask.

Gemma said...

The Aestheticist,

It was obvious from the first comment you posted here that you do know about BDSM and D/S to some degree. My reason for citing wiki as a source was to offer a quick, general idea of what BDSM and D/S mean to most of us who do not participate in those lifestyles... not so much to debate with you in a scholarly manner. Wiki offers comments and opinions of its readers; I realize that.

Those lifestyles are way to edgy for my taste and certainly for GR's so we put it in the "do not pursue" category. Even the thought of it is not appealing for us. From the outside looking in, it seems that folks who practice this are *overall* stuck in relationships which are not conducive to healthy marriages. Anything goes as long as it gives them the required rush, with fetishes ruling in all sex play.

It's especially not healthy when married couples pull others into the sex play either as spectators or to actively participate in it, which is certainly not compatible to the Christian lifestyle. And there you have it; that's my opinion.

I am curious--- Why did you ask my opinion of something that I have not yet written about here? Are YOU into BDSM OR D/S? Please forgive my "tone" earlier. I picked up an insulting tone from your first post and I guess I got on the defense. My apologies. It won't bother me at all for you to post your link for London Fetish Scene's "wipi."

The Aestheticist said...

Very well, the link: http://www.londonfetishscene.com/wipi/index.php/Main_Page

The link comes with a warning: some of the sexual natures discussed are not advocated activities (at least, not in the right-minded thinking of Consent). It's a much better site for a general overview, but I have much better sources for a finer, more experienced look at BDSM and D/s.

I am not actively into the BDSM lifestyle. I don't love my wife, for one thing, and it would be highly wrong of me to bring that into our relationship. However, I have dabbled in the shallows of the lifestyle, and I have friends of many different tastes.

I asked for your opinion on it because, many times, I see Christians write and tell of sex with activities right on the edge of the lifestyle, yet they condemn the lifestyle. Often, I think, without having any real knowledge of it at all.

The issues of a deep seated need for trust, respect, and consent are ignored. The finer details and beauty of it are blocked from one's mind.

It is barbarous, it is unhealthy, or it is even evil, so I've heard sexual-minded Christians say.

As you might assume, I am not Christian. My wife is, though, but she's one of the annoying Christians.

You may have heard this story before (she's the reason I found this site, anyway, and the Marriage Bed): we don't love each other. Love is not a part of our marriage.

By the way, anything doesn't go. One of the first things I learned about the BDSM lifestyle is this phrase: "YKINOK" - "Your kink is not okay."

I'm not surprised, though, to read such opinions in your response. I've learned to expect as much.

I get the feeling that my and my friends' views on sex - in committed relationships - would be outrageous to you.

It's not for everyone, though - sexual matters are never blanket statements. If you don't want it, then my only advice is to never do it.

I'd like to end this comment with a quote by a fantastic man by the name of J. Mikael Togneri:

"A dominant receives, but never takes.
But receiving requires giving, and giving requires humility."
~One of his Seven Pillars of Dominance

Gemma said...

Aestheticist, I will check out your link as I have time. If you're not a Christian and you defend that lifestyle, why would it even matter to you if a Christian such as myself would turn my back on it?

:::I get the feeling that my and my friends' views on sex - in committed relationships - would be outrageous to you.

No, not outrageous... just not my cup of tea, from what I've seen of it. To me, refusing sex with GR for over 25 years is outrageous ;-), esp when it's now obvious that we're both very high-SD. We get a little crazy if we don't fuck within 1-3 days, although it happens sometimes when he's away on short business trips.

What GR and I have had together for the last almost 16 months, is working really well for us. I'm not here judging you but tell me--- Given your stated view on sex in committed relationships, how is that working for you? You don't have to answer my questions but I am genuinely curious. Please understand, I'm not being sarcastic.

Where does your view on sex leave you in regard to your marriage where neither of you love each other? If that's true that you're living in a loveless marriage and you find your wife so annoying, why don't you either push to get professional counseling or else end it so you both can move on with your lives? Are you content living in a loveless marriage or are you simply waiting for a good time to exit? What are your relationship goals in life? Do you even have any?

I don't know if you've ever heard me say this here or at TMB board but it's worth repeating again--- It takes healthy spiritual, emotional and physical intimacy for a marriage to last. If any 1 or 2 of the 3 is lacking to any degree, the lack is felt in all 3 areas.

As always, thanks for posting.

The Aestheticist said...

"If you're not a Christian and you defend that lifestyle, why would it even matter to you if a Christian such as myself would turn my back on it?"

Turn your back on it? No, that doesn't matter to me. However, my defense of it is a defense against the broad misconceptions of the BDSM lifestyle. When you spoke of your outside-view looking in, I saw some of the misconceptions I generally see in the people I defend this lifestyle against. Were you an atheist with the same misconceptions, I'd still - in essence - respond the same.

My view of sex in my marriage is for the best, really. Why would I introduce a highly intimate lifestyle into our sexual life when we don't love each other? It would only cause strife and unnecessary conflict.

Sex still exists, it just doesn't contain any BDSM elements - intentionally, anyway. It isn't hard to have sex, it's just all physical. Sex only means what you allow it to mean, you know.

Apparently, you haven't heard my wife's story. I suppose that just makes it a little more fun for me. We intentionally entered a loveless marriage. I could speak for an eternity of marriage, love, and sex, actually. However, I doubt you'd want to hear it at length, so I'll give the abridged version: marriage is a secular legal contract, love is a spiritual and poetical marval, and sex is a bestial desire.

I have no desire to divorce her. I can put up with her mild annoyances now that she's ceased trying to speak to me about her religion. Moreover, she does not believe in divorce. Even if I wanted to, our agreement (and I am a man of my word) prohibits such action.

"No, not outrageous... just not my cup of tea, from what I've seen of it."

My friends are, numbered among them, polyamorists, homosexuals and bisexuals, as well as members of the BDSM community of varying depths (not all at once, mind you). And those are the more normal ones. I'm not merely refering to Dominance and submission.

Lastly, you asked about my relationship goals. Well, I intend to be a good friend to my friends and a good relative to my relatives. In regards to romance, my goal is only to love. And I do. Albeit, the woman I love is not my wife, but I believe in Courtly Love - I believe in "look, don't touch."

Gemma said...

I looked at your link some. In all honesty, I'll admit that a few activities which GR and I practice in our marriage could fall under the BDSM heading according to the definition given on this page: http://www.londonfetishscene.com/wipi/index.php/BDSM

If other readers don't want to go there, here's the definition given: "BDSM is a catch all phase used to describe an interest in a number of related patterns of human sexual behaviour including sadomasochism, power exchange or bondage."

WARNING: The page linked above has no photos or illustrations of any type but there are some elsewhere if you wander around the site.

Some of the lighter activities listed at the site are things regularly discussed in a positive way on TMB forum. Maybe where the difference lies between what I practice and what is practiced by those who are heavy into BDSM is that we don't feel that we have to keep going deeper and deeper into what I'd consider the darker side of of BDSM to experience heightened eroticism when we're intimate. The other thing- Our religious convictions keep us from wanting to participate in any activities, BDSM or otherwise to any degree, with anyone but our spouse.

One could almost see the attraction (for others) to the darker activities but it doesn't mean we have to want it for ourselves. In the 3 areas of BDSM interest listed in the site's definition, I did find a few activities that we enjoy but they are only what I'd consider to be the very mild ones.

OK, I wasn't initially going to do this but I will list the activities I've enjoyed in marriage that are considered BDSM at the site. It doesn't mean that what I list is anything GR and I must do to enjoy sex or even that we do it often. These are activities that we've done at least once... or more.

-non-sinful roleplay. This means no roles that would be sinful IRL.

-friendly ravishing. We both do this.

-I get blindfolded.

-bondage. When we use them, I'm the one who ends up cuffed to the bed with our Liberator cuffs and restraints. Some of the time I enjoy being submissive in our MB. Other times we stay on equal grounds. GR isn't into being submissive in bed at all and we both like it this way.

-I receive light ass spanking for fun. No serious discipline/punishment stuff.

:::It isn't hard to have sex, it's just all physical. Sex only means what you allow it to mean, you know.

You mean there is no emotional pleasure from having sex with your dw? Gosh, that's half the fun you're missing but then if you don't desire emotional intimacy with your dw....

:::However, I doubt you'd want to hear it at length, so I'll give the abridged version: marriage is a secular legal contract, love is a spiritual and poetical marval, and sex is a bestial desire.

If those are your definitions, no small wonder that you are in a loveless marriage. That wouldn't work for me.

:::Albeit, the woman I love is not my wife, but I believe in Courtly Love - I believe in "look, don't touch."

Courtly Love??? Look, don't touch??? Can you elaborate?

OK, I'm going to ask you. I'm happy to see you here but what possessed you to comment on my blog? You know I love passionate sex but only with my dh and you know I'm a Christian so why are you here? I'm having problems wrapping my brain around your reasons. If you care to explain...

Gemma said...

Oh and I forgot to add this one to my personal list of activities mentioned at the site:

GR knows that I'm up for sex anytime day or night, as many times a day as we want and as many days of the week as we want. We both enjoy the high frequency as well as well as the high passion.

The Aestheticist said...

"Maybe where the difference lies between what I practice and what is practiced by those who are heavy into BDSM is that we don't feel that we have to keep going deeper and deeper into what I'd consider the darker side of of BDSM to experience heightened eroticism when we're intimate.

[...]

One could almost see the attraction (for others) to the darker activities but it doesn't mean we have to want it for ourselves."

I feel both personal insult and insult-by-proxy by the usage of the adjective "darker," as if these actions are somehow tinted with sinister intent and depravity. Though, I try not to be insulted by peoples' perceptions of the lifestyle, anymore. I find such people are either misinformed or simply happily mired in their false perceptions.

"If those are your definitions, no small wonder that you are in a loveless marriage. That wouldn't work for me."

Don't mistake my words, madam. I could have married for love. When words are condensed, true meaning a person would have implanted in them are lost as well. Therefore, you do me wrong by presuming anything about me and my marriage based on my abridged definitions. A vow is a vow, after all, and a vow that holds no meaning in a secular opinion would hold no meaning in a religious one.

My point on the importance of love as opposed to the importance of marriage or sex seems lost on you, in such an instance, but I am hesitant to state so, definitively, as I do not wish to judge by so few words - only speculate.

"Courtly Love??? Look, don't touch??? Can you elaborate?"

The woman I love has since married another. I, myself, have made my own vows. By the dictates of chivalry - of virtue and high principles - I am not to steal away a woman that is not mine, nor betray oaths I made to another. However, through courtly love, I am free to continue to love the one I love from afar, dedicate my undertakings to her name, and uphold her honor and virtue. Though I do not love my wife, I am not an adulterous man.

"I'm happy to see you here but what possessed you to comment on my blog? You know I love passionate sex but only with my dh and you know I'm a Christian so why are you here? I'm having problems wrapping my brain around your reasons."

Then you may be over thinking my reasons. I am a man of few hobbies, and my inspiration for art has momentarily left me. My desire for interesting conversation is rarely sated, and through my wife (inadvertently so), I came across the Marriage Bed forum and, subsequently, your weblog. I am not content to simply not do anything, and this is something to occupy a portion of my time, and help sharpen my own ideas. Moreover, there is no risk of the same bickering that could easily plague a conversation with my wife, who is thankfully content to ignore me when her services (most of which, by the way, are nonsexual) are not required of her.

Gemma said...

Pardon me, TA, but I believe I am entitled to my own opinion about BDSM for my life. Perhaps I am one who is happily mired in my false perception. (I am not always the sharpest knife in the drawer.) My apologies if you are insulted by my words as I never meant to sound judgmental. Knowing that opinion is subjective, I'm trying to be as fair-minded as possible with yours. May I also be entitled to my opinion for what is good and healthy for *my* life? Thank you for sharing your reasons for coming here. Have a good evening.

The Aestheticist said...

My oh my, Mrs. Gemma. You seem to have preemptively raised yourself on the defensive. I did not make any comment on your sex life. I make comments on your comment about the general lifestyle, not how they pertain to you. How they pertain to you did not color my words at all, and I'll thank you not to presume as much.

If I may quote an earlier comment of mine about how BDSM's lifestyle pertains to people as well as you?

"It's not for everyone, though - sexual matters are never blanket statements. If you don't want it, then my only advice is to never do it."

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean I'm so willing to accept your perceptions on other people behaving in ways you called "dark."

Yes, this is your blog, but kindly accept the fact that not everything I say revolves directly around you. It doesn't. It revolves around an idea and the people under that idea which are far, far more numerous than you and your husband.

You are free to decide what is good for you and your husband to do in your private life. I will not condemn that or advocate that you interweave elements into it that you aren't interested in.

However, as I've said, I'm not going to blatantly ignore what I see as passing judgement on the lifestyle and, subsequently, the people in that lifestyle whom I know are decent people not deserving of being referenced, in any way, as "dark" or the "darker side" of things.

Cocotte said...

TA,

Who said people who do "dark" things aren't decent people? I don't know why you are taking such offense to the term, "dark." Edgar Allen Poe wrote "dark" literature which is generally acceptable high school reading material. I could give countless examples of people labeled "dark" who are thought of in a positive light by many. Gemma has been very accomodating to you in this blog (which is about passion within marriage, BTW). Are you just here to argue??

Gemma said...

The Aestheticist,

Aren't *you* the one who is being defensive with the BDSM lifestyle? All I'm asking is that you please allow me to have my own opinion. If I'm truly being rude, insulting, judgmental with my opinion then, fine, call me on it but maybe you can be polite about it? I am here to enjoy friendly discussions with others, not bicker with them. So far, all you've seemed to want to do here is bicker. Do you have ANYTHING nice to say to me? Again, my apologies if I am coming across in a rude or insulting way. It is not my intent to offend.

:::However, as I've said, I'm not going to blatantly ignore what I see as passing judgement on the lifestyle and, subsequently, the people in that lifestyle whom I know are decent people not deserving of being referenced, in any way, as "dark" or the "darker side" of things.

We each are entitled to our own perceptions, TA. The perception that my dh and I have of much of the BDSM lifestyle is that the *practices*, not the people, are too dark for our taste. Think about practices that you don't find appealing such as, and I'm only assuming, Christianity. If you would never want to practice Christianity does that mean that you are passing judgment on Christians or on the practice of Christianity? To have no desire to practice a lifestyle merely means that you aren't attracted to it for one or more reasons.

Did you read somewhere in my writing where I was passing judgment on people involved in BDSM? I don't know them or your friends any more than you know my Christian friends.

Btw TA- If you plan to continue posting here, do you think you could just call me "Gemma"? Not Mrs. Gemma, not madam.... just plain old "Gemma". I would so appreciate it.

Enjoy your afternoon and evening.

The Aestheticist said...

"Gemma has been very accomodating to you in this blog (which is about passion within marriage, BTW). Are you just here to argue??"

argue

• verb (argues, argued, arguing) 1 exchange diverging or opposite views heatedly. 2 give reasons or cite evidence in support of something.

passion

• noun 1 very strong emotion. 2 intense sexual love. 3 an outburst of very strong emotion. 4 an intense enthusiasm for something. 4 (the Passion) the suffering and death of Jesus.

— DERIVATIVES passionless adjective.

— ORIGIN Latin, from pati ‘suffer’.

As a note, I am passionate in my marriage. However, it is not under definition two, or involving Yeshua de Nazarene. Furthermore, one more definition.

dark

• adjective 1 with little or no light. 2 of a deep or sombre colour. 3 (of skin, hair, or eyes) brown or black. 4 secret or mysterious. 5 (darkest) humorous most remote or uncivilized. 6 depressing or cheerless. 7 evil.

"Aren't *you* the one who is being defensive with the BDSM lifestyle?"

Perhaps. However, you are being defensive over a matter I have not raised.

"All I'm asking is that you please allow me to have my own opinion."

I didn't tell you to change it or tell you to do anything. I'm not disallowing you to have it, I'm voicing my own.

"but maybe you can be polite about it?"

I wasn't aware that I was being any more impolite than you. Please, do not take that to mean I find you rude in any sense. I find that my words and my tone are beind misconstrued.

"Do you have ANYTHING nice to say to me?"

I am glad that you are sexually secure in a loving marriage and that you are endeavoring to help others on the same path as you.

"It is not my intent to offend."

To speak from my aspect of things, it was never and is not my intent to revoke your opinion or make you involve aspects of BDSM in your life. I ask you to please remember that when you read my words.

"Think about practices that you don't find appealing such as, and I'm only assuming, Christianity. If you would never want to practice Christianity does that mean that you are passing judgment on Christians or on the practice of Christianity?"

Think of this, if you would: If I say I do not wish to practice Christianity, I am not passing judgement on Christianity or the practice of it, this much is true. However, if I were to call Christianity dark (depressing, cheerless, evil, or otherwise), I would be in the wrong, as that would be passing judgement on Christianity and/or the practice of Christianity.

"Did you read somewhere in my writing where I was passing judgment on people involved in BDSM?"

I ask you (I ask, I do not command, I am not forcing anything, and I feel I have to stress that after a couple of your responses): could you think of the connotations of the word dark, and how it is used?

The Dark Ages. A label given to an era people traditionally believe as representing a step backward in development when compared to other labeled eras, such as the Roman ages, or the later Italian Reneissance.
Dark Art. A style of art defined as being unsettling, disturbing in nature.
The Dark Arts: Such a form of the paranormal and the occult commonly called "black magic", and percieved as the realm of magic used to cause harm or for malevolent acts.

In popular culture, like Star Wars, the Dark Side is a part of aggression and is used to cause, most often, an unprovoked assault.

Dark Elves (Drow, from Dungeons and Dragons, Forgotten Realms, for example) are portrayed as majorly, or even exclusively, evil, self-serving, selfish, and often violent.

In music, when something is dark, it is often tragic, sorrowful - not good, by any measure.

If something is a dark day for man, then that's not a good time to be in - in fact, it implies quite the opposite. If something is a dark deed, then that implies that it is a sinister deed.

The word "dark" widely has a negative connotation. If I say that a practice is a dark one, I would mean that it is an ignorant, sinister, foul, or hatefilled one - a maligned one. If I were to call a practice dark, then I would not obviously approve of others undertaking such a practice, for only the ignorant or maligned would do an ignorant or maligned deed.

"Btw TA- If you plan to continue posting here, do you think you could just call me "Gemma"? Not Mrs. Gemma, not madam.... just plain old "Gemma". I would so appreciate it."

As you wish. I merely felt it more polite to address you with titles I view as respectful.

Gemma said...

Gemma said: "Do you have ANYTHING nice to say to me?"

The Aestheticist said: "I am glad that you are sexually secure in a loving marriage and that you are endeavoring to help others on the same path as you."

TA, I was beginning to wonder if you even had one kind thought to say to me. Thank you for sharing that. You know, when you share a kind thought every so often it becomes easier for others like myself to hear your words.

The Aestheticist said: "Think of this, if you would: If I say I do not wish to practice Christianity, I am not passing judgement on Christianity or the practice of it, this much is true. However, if I were to call Christianity dark (depressing, cheerless, evil, or otherwise), I would be in the wrong, as that would be passing judgement on Christianity and/or the practice of Christianity.

I ask you (I ask, I do not command, I am not forcing anything, and I feel I have to stress that after a couple of your responses): could you think of the connotations of the word dark, and how it is used?"

OK, obviously you don't like my use of the word "dark" so I'll try not to use it with you, although I don't think it means the same to me as it does you. When I say "the heavy lifestyle seems dark to me" I mean that it seems too scary for my use. That's all, nothing more. I don't mean it in an insulting way and I am not referring at all to the people involved in it. The heavy lifestyle is just too intense for my taste and GR feels the same. I could use the word "lovely" and use it to mean that the lifestyle is horrible and that nobody should enjoy it. Words can have totally different meanings for each person.

The Aestheticist said: "As you wish. I merely felt it more polite to address you with titles I view as respectful."

And I appreciate that but the titles of "Mrs. Gemma" and "Madame" make me feel much older than what I am.

Have a good evening, TA.

The Aestheticist said...

"TA, I was beginning to wonder if you even had one kind thought to say to me."

I did not think I was required to say anything directly nice, so long as I conducted myself with civility. It is wise to remember, though, that simply because a kind thing is not uttered does not mean a kind thought does not exist. Had I no kind words or thoughts, then my words would be harsh and I would lose a good measure of my civility and manners.

"although I don't think it means the same to me as it does you."

It mostly means to me as it is, and has been, used and defined to mean in both the figurative and literal sense.

"I could use the word "lovely" and use it to mean that the lifestyle is horrible and that nobody should enjoy it. Words can have totally different meanings for each person."

I'm inclined to disagree - particularly on such an extreme measure. Words mean what they are meant to mean, and though meanings may change over time (the word "wife", after all, literally means "woman"), they do have a standard of meaning in a current culture. However, as far as word usage is concerned, one must be wise to be clear in one's word usage. You could have corrected me at any time in the past - as several of my comments concerned a sinister tone to the word "dark" that I did not appreciate - but you did not, allowing me some measure of sureness that I was right in my thinking.

Though there are some words that have debated meanings (as, I will say it again, words do change over time and some words are less concrete than others), dark is not typically considered one of them. As a point of interest, marriage is. Though, I probably don't need to tell anyone as much.

"And I appreciate that but the titles of "Mrs. Gemma" and "Madame" make me feel much older than what I am."

I find that whenever a woman has a complaint of my deference, that it concerns age. Rest assured, I call women as young as twenty by "madame" (or "milady," or "ladyship," or simply "lady" depending upon my relation with the woman in question) and any married woman by "Mrs."

Gemma said...

:::I did not think I was required to say anything directly nice, so long as I conducted myself with civility. It is wise to remember, though, that simply because a kind thing is not uttered does not mean a kind thought does not exist.

No, TA, you are not *required* to be pleasant or friendly ::sigh:: .

:::I find that whenever a woman has a complaint of my deference, that it concerns age. Rest assured, I call women as young as twenty by "madame" (or "milady," or "ladyship," or simply "lady" depending upon my relation with the woman in question) and any married woman by "Mrs."

Openly admitting to be in my early 50's and being comfortable with my age, I make no claims to be young or single. But especially since I feel that I've lost 25+ years of my younger married life, I'm more comfortable without the "Mrs." or "madame" titles. I'm not offended by the titles, mind you, but would just rather these two not be used on me. Thanks.

Have to run. A good day to you.

The Aestheticist said...

"No, TA, you are not *required* to be pleasant or friendly ::sigh:: ."

I feel as if you are wrongfully twisting my words again.

If I may be quite honest for a moment, then let me say it is painfully difficult to be respectful and civil when my words are consistently misinterpreted and wrongfully twisted. I could support my argument against your use of the word "dark," but I cannot fathom why my saying that I didn't think it was required to say anything nice, as long as I conducted myself in an appropriate fashion.

That is to say, I did not think it was necessary to verbalize my thoughts so long as I conducted myself in a civil and respectful fashion. After all, why would an ill-thinking individual try so hard to be absolutely civil and respectful?

I even said that just because a kind word is not SPOKEN (as in, OPENLY VERBALIZED) does NOT mean it is NOT thought.

Either you are purposefully twisting my words to frustrate me into leaving, or you do not find my words important enough to read them as I write them. I can find no other reason why a woman who seems so sound of mind and intelligent would consistently misinterpret my words despite my repeated corrections. I found your words to show you smarter than that, after all, so I can not honestly attribute it to a mistake.

After all, such would only insult your intelligence, I think.

Gemma said...

The Aestheticist said: "I feel as if you are wrongfully twisting my words again."

Enough already, TA! Life is too short to live in constant bickering mode. If you'd like to post again, how about you bring up a different topic, perhaps one in which we can agree, so that we can move away from the bickering. It's up to you.

Good afternoon.

The Aestheticist said...

All right, then. A topic you'll agree with:

Old Judaic Law: Babylonian Talmud, Order Nashim, Tractate Kethuboth, section 61b.

Independent men are to uphold their conjugal duties by having sex with their wives once a day, if all circumstances are normal.

The implication of this Judaic Law, of course, is that women are also duty-bound to pay this marriage-debt. So, you are absolutely correct in your actions.

Gemma said...

TA, I am not familiar at all with the topics you mentioned. Were you raised in or do you currently practice Judaism? Briefly, I tried to google the words you posted but was not too successful.

Daily sex duties-- yes, I can go along with that.

The Aestheticist said...

No, I was not raised in a Jewish family - my family was Protestant to the extent that my grandfather firmly believes that Catholics are not Christian (much to my anger). However, reading a book written in a Christian aspect (The Art of Courtly Love, which I fundamentally disagree with on a number of points), recently, a footnote mentioned the Law.

When I searched for - in the Google search engine - the babylonic Talmud, and so on, it came right up.

The Babylonian Talmud, Order Nashim, Tractate Kethuboth, section 61b.

Down a bit, under the heading "Mishnah." Oddly, on my computer, the very law I referenced is highlighted in an obnoxious shade of aqua.

Gemma said...

TA, your grandfather would probably say that GR and I have never been Christians. We were raised Roman Catholic, became Protestant and stayed that way for 20 years until we became Christian Orthodox 8 years ago.

Thank you for sending the link.

The Aestheticist said...

My grandfather says a good deal many imbecilic things. Which is a shame, as my own brother is considering converting to Catholicism.

I've no kind words to say about, or to for that matter, my grandfather.

Gemma said...

:::Which is a shame, as my own brother is considering converting to Catholicism.

Oh, how so? For your grandfather, for you or for your brother?

The Aestheticist said...

To be certain, both of them suffer for it. One unjustly, and one justly so.

My brother does not deserve scorn from our grandfather for this.

My grandfather will suffer doubly so. Once-over which is self inflicted for being ashamed of a grandson interested in Catholicism, and Twice-over because I intend to shame him as much as possible and assail him with my words whenever possible.

No one will chastise him as I think he ought to be chastised for how he treats my brother. So, the task falls to me. It is a task I will relish.

Gemma said...

There are people who are mean spirited their entire lives. I had an uncle who never had a kind word. For years his entire family would either take his crap or they would lock horns with him. GR and I had the personalities where we'd take any negative comment from him and turn it around to something positive. My uncle never understood our kind words until he was nearly on his deathbed.

Shortly before he died we visited him in the hospital. GR and I were amazed as we watched Uncle enjoy a baseball game on tv and pleasantly chatted with us all. When the medical staff kicked us out of the hospital Uncle couldn't have been more loving. Not once in our lives did he utter the words "I love you" but that day he couldn't say it enough. I walked out of the hospital wearing tears, knowing we would not see him again. What a shame that it took all his life before he learned the value of love. A week later he died.

Now, I have at least a few fond memories of Uncle. A couple years after his death, while going through old photos that my mom had, I stumbled upon a letter that Uncle sent to his parents and sister (my mom) back in the 40's when he was oversees in the navy. In the letter, Uncle gushed about how much he loved and appreciated his parents and sister and how grateful he was for all that they had done for him. He went on to say how much he loved his dw and that she was so much like his mom and how much he loved his first born dc, a newborn baby girl that he had not yet seen. Then, he addressed his dad and said how he hoped he could even half fill his dad's shoes as a husband and father.

The letter was another sign to me that Uncle really did have a heart. The baby girl, my cousin, was in her 60's when I found the letter. Immediately I told her about it; she had never seen it. We set up a meeting so I could give it to her. While growing up my cousins never saw much affection from their dad so this was a first for her, to be able to read what her dad was thinking and saying at the time she was born.

People can change from being rotten to being kind and even go back to being rotten again. Why? We don't always know but often if you dig around in their past, you'll find a "trigger" that messed with their head. For my uncle it was the war. He used to be a jolly person to be around but everyone said that when he returned home from the war he was never the same, at least not until he was much older.

Nobody deserves to be scorned by a mean spirited family member but sometimes it only takes the mean person getting professional help to turn their thinking around. Back in the 40's they didn't even have the counseling in place like today for those returning from war. My uncle could have had a much better quality of life had he gotten help sooner. I'm not saying that my uncle's story is like your grandfather but your comment reminded me of him.

(((I love you, Uncle!)))

The Aestheticist said...

I am glad your uncle was able to turn around such an aspect of his nature.

My grandfather, though, is hardly alone in his perceptions. I've seen statements on Christian forums calling Catholics non-Christian. To my knowledge, many parts of the United States were particularly anti-Catholic until around the 1960's.

I know that the hatred of the Catholic faith was why Irish Immigrants had a difficult time in the past.

Some people (unfortunately) just never see past their prejudices and whether or not my grandfather would otherwise be a good man, I will not tolerate his prejudices. One might state that I, mildly ironically so, am prejudice against prejudice.

Gemma said...

TA, I've seen the same sort of statements directed towards our Christian Orthodox Faith since we are (little c) catholic in doctrinal beliefs. However, no matter what I'd say to them, I'd hear, "But you don't believe "Scripture Only".

My response---- No, I don't. I believe the scriptures but I don't discount the writings of the Early Church Fathers who were the ones that determined which books would make it into the Bible and which ones wouldn't.

How can anyone believe in "Scripture Only" when they choose to discount the words of the very men who put those books of scripture together in order for them to become what we know today as the Bible?

Sorry, didn't mean to go off on a rabbit trail in bringing up Early Church History. That's my little ECH rant. Oh, and for anyone who would like to read up on a scholarly version of the Church Fathers' writings:

Early Christian Fathers
Translated & edited by Cyril C. Richardson
Published by Simon & Schuster
ISBN: 0-684-82951-7

Prejudices are so often but not always, founded on lack of knowledge.

tractor said...

I have heard of Greek Orthox, but what is Christian Orthodox.

Gemma said...

Tractor, I'm posting a few links here that might help explain things to you. Feel free to email me if you have questions about what you read at the links.

The Greek Orthodox and our church, the Antiochian Orthodox, are both Christian churches that commune together; there are many others.

I tried to post a wiki link for an article that explains "Eastern Orthodox Church" but the link was too long. If you go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page and then do a search for "Eastern Orthodox Church", it'll take you right to the article. I didn't read the entire article so I can't guarantee that it is totally accurate.

The archdiocese site for our church: http://www.antiochian.org/ . We are under the ruling of the Patriarchate of Antioch, as shown in the wiki link above.

The basics of faith & life of the Orthodox Church:
http://www.oca.org/OCorthfaith.asp?SID=2 . We have this series "The Orthodox Faith" but the entire 4 volumes can be read online here.