Stone--Personal Definitions

[friskyfemme]

I answered this question sometime back in another forum. It generated some miscommunication. I will try not to offend others . Here goes.

'Stone' for me is who I seek for a sexual partner ('stone' butches or TGs). It's not a gender for me, but it also defines what sexual acts I do and do not find sexual stimulating. I don't enjoy performing oral sex. I don't like feeling or manipulating my partner's chest/breast. Using 'stone', helps cut through, explaining what I expect or need sexually and that I respect my partner's needs, wants, and desires.

I do, however, loved to be licked, suckled, and penetrated (fingers, dildo and cock).

I am also a 'bottom femme' but that's another thread!

[Stoney]

So am I under standing that a stone femme may be

both a top----not wishing touch similar to a stone butch

and also a bottom who is a receiver of touch, but is more comfortable in ''not '' reciprocating the same touch for whatever reason that makes up their preferential dynamic?

Is this right?


thanks for all the responses, this has been great. Very interesting .

Much peace all,

Stoney

[Converse]

Originally Posted by Stoney

So am I under standing that a stone femme may be

both a top----not wishing touch similar to a stone butch

and also a bottom who is a receiver of touch, but is more comfortable in ''not '' reciprocating the same touch for whatever reason that makes up their preferential dynamic?

Is this right?


thanks for all the responses, this has been great. Very interesting .

Much peace all,

Stoney

Borrowing from dark crystals definitions, I seem to recall some dialogue about Stonefemme as one word and Stone Femme as two separate words.

The latter referring to limits on how one was engaged with sexually aka Stone Butch (Stone Femme -a femme who does not wish to be genitally stimulated by her partner during sex) and the former being about ones preferences on how they related to their partners body (Stonefemme- a femme who is attracted to or partnered with masculine or stone butches; who does not wish to sexually touch her partners' genitals, or whose partner does not wish to have her/hys/his biological genitals touched).

I’m one of those that respond well to labelling, I appreciate the ‘short-cut’ introductions and the fact that it enables me not to have to constantly explain how I relate to the world. This of course only works if definitions are agreed to, understood and maintained- but perhaps life isn’t so easily navigated after all. Maybe I’m just getting grumpy in my old age, because while I’m ok with people changing what labels they feel akin to- that makes sense to me, it is when the meanings of the labels themselves change that I get frustrated.

HowSoonIsNow I appreciate you starting this thread and opening the dialogue-, and a thank you to you as well Stoney; your direct questions are how we find agreement and mutual understanding of meanings. While personal definitions are important, to me their value only comes once a universal (as in butch-femme community) understanding is reached.

[CherylNYC]

Originally Posted by Stoney

So am I under standing that a stone femme may be

both a top----not wishing touch similar to a stone butch

and also a bottom who is a receiver of touch, but is more comfortable in ''not '' reciprocating the same touch for whatever reason that makes up their preferential dynamic?

Is this right?


thanks for all the responses, this has been great. Very interesting .

Much peace all,

Stoney

Yes, for better or worse, that's correct. And pretty darned confusing. There are femme women who have the same sexual boundaries typical of a stone butch. They may or may not strap, but they are the 'pitcher'. Those women are stone femmes. I believe Bit once suggested that in order to differentiate we could use 'stone femme' for a femme sexual top who does not want to be penetrated, and 'stonefemme' for a femme sexual bottom who claims the ID we've been dissecting in the above thread.

Yeah, OK, I can do that. Unfortunately the terms are barely distinguishable in print and utterly indistinguishable when spoken. What is more, the word 'stone' simply does not fit the openness and receptivity embodied by a stonefemme. 'Stone' is a wonderful descriptor for any person who does not get penetrated. 'Stone' evokes impenetrability. Which is why it always made me uncomfortable as part of the term that describes me.

Another reason I don't like the term is that using it for both a stone femme sexual top as well as a stonefemme sexual bottom will eventually erase the identity of those who are in the minority, (stone femme sexual tops). If logic prevailed, which it probably won't, 'stone' would be solely the provenance of the impenetrable.

I haven't thought of anything nearly clever enough to replace this term. I wish someone else would. I would adopt it in a heartbeat as long as it doesn't imply 'fragile flower'.

[Bit]

I hear ya, Cheryl, I really hear ya... but so far, "stonefemme" is all we've got. I know it doesn't evoke softness, receptivity, or flexibility in the least, which is utterly ironic since those are terms that seem to apply to so many of us--and that seem to also describe what so many Stone Butches find attractive in us!

I would say "girl" because that fits such a huge number of stonefemmes, but then we would be leaving out all the stonefemmes who don't identify at all as girls--and it would confuse matters horribly with all the girls who are not stonefemmes!

I honestly don't know how to find a word that would fit us all without leaving anyone out and without causing more confusion than it solves.

[CherylNYC]

Originally Posted by Bit

I hear ya, Cheryl, I really hear ya... but so far, "stonefemme" is all we've got. I know it doesn't evoke softness, receptivity, or flexibility in the least, which is utterly ironic since those are terms that seem to apply to so many of us--and that seem to also describe what so many Stone Butches find attractive in us!

I would say "girl" because that fits such a huge number of stonefemmes, but then we would be leaving out all the stonefemmes who don't identify at all as girls--and it would confuse matters horribly with all the girls who are not stonefemmes!

I honestly don't know how to find a word that would fit us all without leaving anyone out and without causing more confusion than it solves.

You're right. 'Girl' has never been my ID, and I know far too many femmes who do ID as girls and who are not stonefemmes.

Where are all the clever coiners of terms?

[friskyfemme]

Originally Posted by Stoney

So am I under standing that a stone femme may be

both a top----not wishing touch similar to a stone butch

and also a bottom who is a receiver of touch, but is more comfortable in ''not '' reciprocating the same touch for whatever reason that makes up their preferential dynamic?

Is this right?


thanks for all the responses, this has been great. Very interesting .

Much peace all,

Stoney

Yep Stoney,

For me... you got it nailed!

[Gemme]

Originally Posted by Stoney

So am I under standing that a stone femme may be

both a top----not wishing touch similar to a stone butch

and also a bottom who is a receiver of touch, but is more comfortable in ''not '' reciprocating the same touch for whatever reason that makes up their preferential dynamic?

Is this right?


thanks for all the responses, this has been great. Very interesting .

Much peace all,

Stoney

This is a actually a pretty good synopsis.

[ravfem]

i've struggled with my "stone femme" side for years, and still have personal issues with calling myself that. i, for whatever silly reasons, am much more comfortable calling myself a pillow princess....go figure. That term has never been a positive thing for me.... it seems to embody laziness....boy do i got issues.

Anyway, i have always been much more comfortable paired with people who are stone. my last gf was not, at all. i told her the first night we hooked up that i was a pillow princess, and after explaining what that meant, she stated she was fine with that. i tried to tell her she wouldn't be for very long, and of course she was adamant that it wouldn't be a problem. Needless to say, it eventually was. i should have known better, lesson soooo learned!

Without getting too personal, i have learned that i can be a bit more able to enjoy...giving...if it is within a Ds context. If i am told to do something, i will do it because i know it pleases them. But left to my own devices, it just isn't something i've ever been focused on. Like some others have mentioned, i too went through a stage of wondering if i was a "bad" lesbian because of my preferences.

i am gonna have to really devote some time to think about all this and process it in my head....

Thanks for the thread and all the great comments, y'all!