![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |||||
Practically Lives Here
How Do You Identify?:
Queer Stone Femme Girl of the Unicorn Variety Preferred Pronoun?:
She, as in 'She's a GEM' Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The roads are narrow here
Posts: 36,631
Thanks: 182,498
Thanked 107,926 Times in 25,667 Posts
Rep Power: 21474887 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]()
I brought that descriptor into the convo because some folks see it as that. Some folks see it as a fetish (see below). Some folks just 'see' it. No adjectives or descriptors needed.
Quote:
Quote:
I haven't said any of this (as opposed to those it is referencing) and I'm offended. Communication is a two way street. The weight of the message does not rest solely on the speaker. Not only must the speaker find a way to get their message across clearly but the listener must make the effort to make sure the message received is the message intended. I feel that that is not happening. Quote:
I guarantee when I am engaging with my partner...whether sex specific or not...I do not think of every person who has come before me and their struggles in this world. Perhaps I am narrowminded or selfish or just not observant outside my own sphere but when I am with someone and I am doing something with that person that says "THIS is US", I'm thinking...strangely enough...of US. Quote:
BUT My panties get into an absolute snarl when it feels like someone is saying 'you are wrong' instead of 'that isn't for me and this is why'. The 'daydreaming' comment feels dismissive to me, like someone's ideal isn't "real enough" for someone else who is not involved in their life at all and not affected by their life choices at all. Why can't that role be someone's REAL world? Why must the weight of history rest on the shoulders of some girl or guy who just wants to make their partner fucking dinner and do it in an apron and maybe in heels and probably with some rouge on? Quote:
Just to be clear, I would love to be able to stay at home. Kids or no kids. Whatever. But the reality is that I have to work, whether I'm in a relationship or not. I don't consider that a "June Cleaver" (Can we please call it something else because I think that name is inflammatory enough on its own?) lifestyle because most of my partners have cooked better than I do and I'm not doing the serving you in heels thing unless it's my choice and then it's going to be ON later that night. So, I take things from this 'pattern' shall I call it and use it as I see fit in my relationships but it does not define me and does not call for a morality lesson every time I engage in it. I really think I've missed something here. I think it was Snowy that mentioned the Nostalgia thread and I think that a lot of hurt and frustration from when this was brought up in that thread didn't get ironed out. I missed out on what transpired there and maybe that's where some of the 'the 50's were the best damn time in the world' stuff came up. I actually didn't see any of that in here. Again, I've obviously missed something because a group said they did see it in here. Or maybe someone said something that was CLOSE to what was said before and everyone got riled up again, expecting the same thing from last time to happen. Guessing here as I wasn't there. I really, really tried to let this go (obviously not enough as I am still typing), but it just feels too damn icky to me to do so. I'll be happy to discuss it further with anyone that would like to pm me though, as I do see that some folks are working hard to get the thread back on track. /derail I'm in the 'energy' group. I like a lot of masculinity, in whatever form it may present itself, to balance out my femininity. It's like salt on my watermelon, really. |
|||||
![]() |
![]() |
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Gemme For This Useful Post: |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|