Quote:
Originally Posted by LaneyDoll
Ok, I am curious now. And I want to get a few thoughts on this (please be nice, I am simply curious-not trying to start anything).
I am femme but not stone femme. I have never had a problem with dating a stone butch and have dated more than one. I do not mind that someone identifes as stone and has personal preferences about how/if/where they are touched. I have always been of the mindset that if my needs are met then I am happy; it is actually a good fit because I tend to "crash" if those needs are met well. However, if I am dating someone that enjoys being touched, I am good there too. I think I am flexible based on my partner. I believe that if everything is good out of the bedroom and I get what I need in it, then the rest (ie, their personal choices) is 100% negotiable.
So, I want to know, does this make me seem that I "tolerate" someone's stoneness or does it show that I "accept" it?
|
Good point. I am glad you asked because it gives me the opportunity to clarify. I think that if someone feels completely satisfied with either a stone or non-stone partner, than acceptance would be a better word.
For me, in thinking about it, if I was with someone who could go either way, I think there would be a part of me that would always wonder if they were getting their needs met...or if they could get their needs met long term.
Granted, I am a "no touch", stone butch. Maybe if I were a "no penetration, but everything else is fine", stone butch, or a "don't touch me up top, but touch me everywhere else", stone butch, I would struggle less with understanding how one could go either way. Get what I am saying? If one enjoys touching/licking/sucking female genitals/breasts, then how could they possibly be able to get all of their sexual needs met without being able to have at least some contact with their partner's breasts/genitals? Is it analogous to the bisexual person who can be satisfied with only dating one sex (rather than the bisexual person who needs to have both sexes in order to be satisfied)?
Interesting subject, thanks for raising it.
