Please send audio files and written reviews to harper (at) itgirlragdoll dot com. Thank you!

Posts about and reviews of Eroticon 2013 are already springing up everywhere and I think it’s safe to say that even if it wasn’t all your cup of tea, everyone had a spectacularly inspiring and thought-provoking weekend. With a year’s build-up, this second round at Eroticon had a lot to live up to, and I’m happy to say it surpassed 2012 in almost every way.

Before I go on to my comments about the sessions I attended, I will say that it was a weekend that showed how much truth there is in that old saying: ‘Nothing worth having comes easy’. Despite how wonderfully inspiring it was, and how overwhelmingly happy I felt throughout the vast majority of the weekend, it was by no means easy. Running on adrenaline for 48 hours plus, I began to feel my armour slipping, and by Sunday night my emotions and my nerves were raw – as if the skin had been peeled from my body and the slightest touch of my red exterior would send me screaming. But the reason I ended up feeling this raw is just too wonderful to ignore and I would – will! – do it again and again, year after year, because I think it is that important: at Eroticon, I found comradeship, new friends, old friends; I realised just how much some people mean to me, and I felt truly accepted. I didn’t need the armour, because no one was there to attack. Everyone was there to learn and share. In essence, I simply opened myself up to something incredible; and the side effects of that, the intense vulnerability as I made my way home, were not easy, in the slightest. But, as I say, I would do it again in a heartbeat, because these experiences are so vital and ultimately nourishing to every part of my life.

Last year, at Eroticon 2012, I don’t think I realised just how much of a novice I was. I felt confident and present, and I wasn’t frightened by the prospect of being there, but I was wide-eyed and innocent; eager to learn and find my way into the larger community. In the year since that shining day in March 2012, my relationships with the people I met, or got to know better, there have flourished and I am no longer trying to find my way in: I am there. That’s not to say that the community is at all exclusive; it’s simply a matter of finding your place. Four people really stand out, as having welcomed me and become the backbone of my place at Eroticon: Molly, Michael, Remittance Girl, and Ruby. My friendships with the first three are extremely close, and in some ways deeply personal, but I will say something about Ruby.

Despite being a volunteer (who got off incredibly lightly!) at Eroticon 2012 and therefore having been in contact with Ru over email for much of 2011, the event itself was, in fact, the first time I met her, and I didn’t spend a great deal of time with her on the day. She struck me as someone to admire, simply by way of the incredible work she had done to pull the event together; she came across as extremely professional and exceptionally experienced. Having, as I’ve said, not spent much time with her on the day, I didn’t feel I knew her all that well, so it was a heartwarming surprise when she invited me to stay with her during the Summer. Over the course of two days, we walked around her hometown, played in her daughter’s ‘ship’, talked about mutual friends, and shared our thoughts on Eroticon (amongst many other things!), and by the time I was getting on the train, I was full of ideas and inspiration, feeling incredibly blessed that I had been allowed a glimpse into her life. And here’s the thing: she is professional, and I think the way she presented herself at Eroticon 2012 gave the impression that this all comes naturally to her; that she is a businesswoman who wears suits every day, and has hoards of people working for her. But she’s not. She is a businesswoman, and she is professional, but she doesn’t have a team at her beck and call. She created Eroticon from nothing! So when, during the run up to the 2013 conference, I saw people complaining about the price of the tickets, I wondered if maybe they had this extraordinarily professional image of Ru in their heads, and assumed that for her, getting sponsors and funding for the event was small fry; easy. Although I think most people know – if they think about it – that this isn’t true for anyone, there is something to be said about those subconscious ideas we get about people; those first, visual impressions can be very striking. But the truth is that it is by no means easy for her. She runs Eroticon out of passion and love and dedication, because she knows that it’s important; because there are those of us who need it. And I don’t think anyone there this weekend can be in any doubt of how their ticket money was spent: it was spent creating a phenomenal two day conference which afforded us all the kind of inspiration and friendships you cannot put a price on.

But onto the weekend itself.

As anyone who listened to IGRD 01: Get me to Coin Street will know, I had my entire weekend pretty much planned out before I got there, and I only made a handful of amendments on the day.

Day 1: Opening plenary: Brook: XES: We can’t go backwards (Brook)
The conference was opened with a talk on sexual health and sex education from a representative of the XES: We can’t go backwards campaign. The talk was interesting and informative, but I was left wondering if a talk about policies and sexual health was really the right way to start a conference for writers.

Myth busting: the submissive woman (Molly Moore)
This was the first of a few sessions which I attended for love of the person leading it. I was there to support my good friend and podcast co-host, but also because I knew a lot of the people attending it would be submissive women, and I very much wanted to be in a room with all of these inspiring people, some of whose exploits I get the benefit of reading about on their blogs. The session was brilliant, and Molly truly covered a lot in her 45 minutes! and very clearly and coherently. A great way to break the ice and get into the full swing of Eroticon.

Editing (Cressida Downing)
Being a firm believer in the editing process – and having read enough badly edited literature to know how often this essential process is done badly, or not at all! – this session was a must for me. Despite being mindful of my own editing, there is always something new to learn. Cressida Downing knows her business, and was an incredibly engaging and funny speaker. A joy and a lesson in one.

Creative Writing: Eroticism and Romanticism (Remittance Girl)
Standing outside the door before this session with Molly, RG looked at us both and asked us what we were doing there, saying we already knew everything she was going to say. And whilst I had already talked to her about a lot of the content of her talk, it was still fascinating; besides which, when we’re having tea in her living room, I don’t get to take notes! Her brilliant session covered the fine distinction between eroticism and romanticism and discussed the importance of transgression in fiction, which anyone who has read my work will know is one of my primary concerns when I write. Oh, and she also claimed that “the Pope is not huggy!”

Writing for the Adult Industry (Ruby Goodnight)
Ruby Goodnight was another person with whom I spent a lot of time during the weekend, and I was thrilled to have the chance to get to know her better, and to attend her brilliant session. Ruby talked openly and frankly about how to get into writing for the Adult Industry, the pitfalls and how to find success. She is a very good presenter, and I sincerely hope she will run another similar seminar, where writers can get an even deeper insight into this world and how we might break into it.

Self-Publishing: Getting started when you go it alone (MK Elliott)
Unfortunately a lot of this session was used up trying to get Guy New York up and running via Google Hangouts and Skype (as he was supposed to co-present). However, once MK started (handling the sudden change to presenting solo with professional grace), it was a very comprehensive look at the difficulties and benefits of self-publishing. I will definitely be contacting her in the future, as and when I make my way into this world.

Day 1: Closing plenary (Ruby Kiddell)
I have heard from several people that they felt this talk was a little too negative and therefore not the best way to close day one, and I do understand where they are coming from in this respect. Perhaps it was badly placed in the schedule; however! what Ruby talked about – that sex blogging does not take itself nearly seriously enough, and is not up to date with policies and copyright and the laws of what it’s doing, and is therefore less able to effect change through the work it produces, – is really important, and I sincerely hope that the audience took what she was saying on board.

Day 2: Opening plenary (Ruby Kiddell)
I have to confess that when it comes to recalling the content of this talk, I am drawing a blank. It was a long weekend! I suppose something was bound to slip. But I do remember it being very interesting, and largely positive. My notes read: ‘About unbelievable things becoming believable by way of very real and natural characters. In favour of indie presses for ‘different’ voices.’

Polyamory 101 (Lori Smith & Amanda Jones)
In my Eroticon 2013 Meet’n’Greet I put this down as my Must Attend session. Having recently begun identifying as non-monogamous, I have done a lot of research on the subject and so I did know a lot of the content of this session. But I have found that all my doubts and fears and worries are very well addressed by being in the company of and listening to the wise words of other non-monogamous people, so being in this room was essential for me. Lori and Amanda presented an exceptionally well timed session with humour and fun, dispelling some hard learned myths about human sexuality, and ending with a quick-fire, timed, Buzzcocks-style question and answer section that had us delegates laughing and rapt. (This session is also available as audio.)

Porn Challenge (Justin Hancock)
This was another session I had been looking forward to very much. I’ve been reading Justin’s work for a few months now, and was thrilled to get the opportunity to attend his session. We were all taken back to school days, split into groups and asked to address the problems in porn today. With big pieces of paper and felt-tip pens we began solving issues such as race, disability, and identity. It was refreshing to be in a session that was a little bit more interactive and great fun to work with the other delegates.

Storytelling and Sex (Alison Robert, Justin Hancock & Emily Dubberley)
Unfortunately this was the one session of the weekend with which I did not get on. The session covered the idea of writing safer sex practices into erotic fiction. Whilst it is an admirable idea, and it has (apparently) been shown to increase the use of protection amongst young people, it bore no relevance to my writing, as what I write is transgressive. Safe sex would not only undermine the story but be completely superfluous. When you write about rape and beastiality, condoms are not the problem. So, I will confess, I left this session early and skipped upstairs to…

SEO Love (Michael Knight)
Although I have pretty much had this session one-to-one with Michael – as have many other lucky people! – it was a joy to watch him gleeful with nerdy joy as he took the delegates through the minutiae of self-hosting, running, and promoting websites. This man knows what he’s talking about!

BDSM Tools of the Trade (Molly Moore & Michael Knight)
By this point in the weekend I was feeling understandably overwhelmed and so, although I had not planned to attend this session, I decided I wanted to spend some time with people I love, and listen to them talking about all the delicious things I crave. It was exceptionally well presented, informative, and fun – I walked out with a lovely red misery stick mark burning on my forearm; aren’t I lucky? If you want to see what it was all about, I made a good effort to live-tweet the session under #ToolsBDSMTrade.

Sex and the Media (Zoe Margolis & Nichi Hodgson)
Last year, the Sex and the Media session was pretty much the highlight of my weekend. I learned an extraordinary amount about what it really means to be a sex writer, and upped my anonymity ten-fold whilst I decided whether or not to come out. Unfortunately, this year, the session was repetitive and very negative. Whilst I understand that sex is not well represented in the mainstream media, Zoe and Nichi offered very few ways to get round the problems and fix it, which I found disappointing. There were, however, some good comments and questions from the other delegates.

Day 2: Closing plenary (Cindy Gallop)

Having become aware of Cindy Gallop relatively recently, I have been watching her work carefully and, in fact, she was the person who – through a tweet of encouragement – pushed me to my final decision to come out as Stella. I’ve heard a lot of her talk before on the Savage Lovecast and Sex Out Loud, but it was a joy to have her address us directly, and to get to listen to her once again. She is a very money-motivated person, which I think some people find troublesome, but I actually really admire her ethos and I think her ideas are exceptionally well presented. She left the conference on a positive, but important note. In addition, due to the fact that she couldn’t attend the conference itself, she was streamed in on the big screen, but apologised for her absence, saying she would never usually give the closing plenary to a conference she had not attended and I greatly appreciated that she addressed this. It seemed to show a great deal of awareness and understanding. (This talk is available to watch online.)

And there you have it. Overall a wonderful weekend! My deepest love, appreciation and respect to Ruby Kiddell for creating this spectacular conference. TWICE.

If you’ve written about Eroticon 2013, don’t forget to link up on the Write Sex Right site. Also, I will write about Saturday night’s reading event, Aural Sex, in the next few days, so watch for that post. AND… don’t forget to send us your soundbites and mini-reviews for the podcast!

Edit: I’ve noticed, on twitter and Facebook, that a lot of people are experiencing what I identify as ‘drop’ in the wake of Eroticon. So just in case it’s helpful to anyone, I’m adding a link to my article on how to survive drop alone. ‘Drop’ is a BDSM term, but I do also address other forms of drop as well.

The post Eroticon 2013, in review appeared first on (It Girl. Rag Doll).

So what is it about being too mentally conscious that I dislike?

I have a theory, which I have presented it to a handful of people, all of whom – thus far – have agreed: there is something about being human that causes a longing to escape the individual, to be outside the confines of one single body. I suppose you could link this back to loneliness, which is all too common an issue: there can be something deeply lonely about existing in a single, detached skin – which of course, almost everyone does. But whatever the reason for this strong, singular, sense of self, sex seems like the perfect answer. Sex is as close as a person can get to merging with another. It connects bodies – and in many cases feelings too – and allows an individual to immerse himself in shared sensations. I have come across those who would describe sex as ‘two becoming one’. However, I don’t quite buy this idealism.

First of all, unless the two people having sex know each other extremely well, there is bound to be some awkwardness, and that kind of discomfort is felt in the skin: in writing we often come across phrases like “skin crawling” or descriptions of the hairs on the back of the neck, things that are very much to do with personal exteriors. Therefore, unless one or both of the people involved are intoxicated – in which case I would argue that they aren’t really present – it can’t be possible to lose oneself in a stranger.

Despite my skepticism when it comes to merging with someone else, I do believe it is possible to get extremely close. There are times when the soul of a partner seems close enough to touch, when that connection is tangible. But being that close can also have a “so near and yet so far” sense to it. For a person to be able to feel how invested he is in his partner, whilst simultaneously knowing that he can’t ever really touch or become that feeling can make him feel even lonelier; and even if he can invest in that moment and believe it heart and soul, at some point it has to end, and the separation of bodies, the severing of that connection can be devastating.

But let’s consider for a moment: sex is not always such a terrible, lonely experience. For one thing, this deindividualisation cannot possibly be the aim of every person who has ever had sex. Perhaps, for some, it is about asserting their individualism, about touching that edge, safe in the knowledge that on the other side they will still be their particular, whole self. For others, perhaps the connection they feel in that moment lasts: perhaps it spills over into daily life through the security and love they share with their partner. And, surely, there must also be those who find the loneliness and the desperation arousing. Furthermore, I believe there is a good argument to be made for the prevalence of other desires: pain, for example, can have the effect of taking a person outside of their body – or ‘spacing out’ – but the sense of escaping from a singular skin, or at least becoming less conscious of it, does not necessarily mean the individual feels closer to another person; he may simply feel – and want to feel – a lessened sense of self. Then, of course, there are power dynamics where the division between the two may be key to their entire relationship.

But yes – I believe that the desire to lose oneself completely in another human being during sex, is, ultimately, unattainable, and there is a sense of tragedy in the longing and the impossibility.

However, if the desire to reach that moment of deindividualisation actually stems from a state of human loneliness, then it is not, in fact, a sexual issue, but simply something which people may have unwisely chosen to resolve with sex. Therefore it would be remiss of us to not consider answers outside of sex.

As many of you may know, I am a huge fan of opera, and when I am at an opera house, sitting comfortably in my seat as the lights go down and the curtain rises, one of my favourite places to look is into the orchestra pit. There is something so magical, and so beautiful about seeing twenty, thirty, forty musicians all working together, with one goal; one task. Instruments call and answer one another, and ten bows move in perfect harmony. When an orchestra is working well, there is also a sense of sacrifice: by being part of it, these musicians have given up their individual fame in order to offer something to the greater purpose, to an opera or a ballet or a concerto, whatever it may be. It would certainly be rare, but it may be possible that these are the instances which offer human beings the chance to become one with others.

However, I do not wish to put this forward based on that ‘sense of sacrifice’. I do not mean to say that human beings can only be enlightened by giving to the greater good. The impossibility of losing oneself in another during sex does not exist because sex is sinful! And orchestras are not the perfect answer to human loneliness because they are grand, and beautiful, and a symbol of high art. No. There is something selfish about sex, and I don’t mean that in a bad way. When people don’t take some responsibility for their own pleasure, it often leads to very joyless sex lives. Therefore it could be argued that being conscious of personal pleasure – or, in fact, any personal sensation – is actually very wise, and I’m not sure how sex would work if at least one partner wasn’t interested in him- or herself. However, of course, focusing on the self stands as a barrier to losing the self. If a person is interested in his own pleasure, then he cannot forget his own individual experience and existence. But when a group of people are, together, creating something, the focus is not on the individual: it is on the creation. And that could easily be conducive to defeating that sense of individualism.

Of course, it’s just a theory – and a rather convoluted one at that – but I still think it’s something worth considering. And one thing seems certain, to me: with loneliness so rife, there must be, in some part of human existence, a desire to escape the individual.

The post Escaping the Individual appeared first on (It Girl. Rag Doll).

Sex sells. There are no two ways about it. It’s why Bond girls adorn the opening credits in, at most, skintight catsuits. It’s why Sophie Dahl caused such a stir posing for YSL (above). It’s (at least in part) why The Sun is Britain’s biggest selling paper. It’s why this blog – at it’s highpoint – got 32 comments per piece, and my other blogs are lucky to get 100 views in total. Per month! I have hugely benefitted from this simple human truth. In fact, when I was starting out as an erotic fiction writer a good friend suggested I take part in HNT to boost my readership – and it worked like a charm.

But my consciousness of this fact has changed. Where at eighteen I was keen to take advantage of eroticism as a selling point, feeling that taking control of my sexuality empowered me, and that I was somehow more evolved than my peers, it is now obscuring my intentions.

Within the fact that sex sells there is also another problem, which I would like to touch upon briefly. When it comes to Bond girls, and Sophie Dahl, and The Sun, and, well, me, there is a painful imbalance. It would seem that our only recognised sex symbol is female. Whilst I can appreciate the beauty of the YSL advert – as a photographer and as a designer – and may have found it intriguing as the naïve 10-year-old I was when it appeared on a billboard near my house, being a (mostly) straight female it is not actually a sex symbol that appeals to me. This is an extremely important point, and as I make the move into publishing my work, I will certainly be fighting for covers that don’t perpetuate this imbalance. But for now I will leave it to others to expose and discuss: Zoe Margolis expounded upon this with her talk Under Cover: Erotica and Sexism at The Lost Lectures (which you can watch in full – and I highly recommend that you do – by clicking the link).

But I digress.

It is widely accepted that mainstream publishers, and film production companies, etc. look down upon erotic art. Every day I read about erotic artists struggling against these attitudes, but rarely do I see a discussion that talks about why this is. Elsewhere in the world this may have much to do with religion and the stronghold it has on so many nations, but in the UK that is far less true. Whilst many people living in the UK are religious, it is not so pervasive that we won’t elect an atheist Prime Minister, or that we swarm to church every Sunday. It’s different here. Perhaps our prejudices are still based in a religious background, spanning thousands of years, but I believe a large part of the reason we reject sexuality from the mainstream now is that there is an idea that an aroused mind is a less cognitive mind. And to a certain extent, I agree.

When we seek to indulge our arousal, we are rarely looking for something that will stimulate us intellectually. In fact, I can speak to this from personal experience: I’ve been known to visit Literotica (which holds possibly the worst sex writing available) because it is easy to find the subject I want there, and when I’m aroused I don’t care as much about the quality of the writing. When we have sex and when we masturbate very few of us – I believe – are using this time to consider the financial crisis, or the state of the music industry. And why should we? Part of what makes sex so wonderful is the fact that it allows us to escape from the humdrum of our daily lives. The fact that this state of arousal is looked down upon by so many is utterly unfair. It is a large and important part of human experience, which ought to be explored with open minds.

But what happens when we do actually want to deal with sex critically? More often than not it is sold as titillation, taking us right back to where we started: setting up reader/viewer expectations to no more than material for sexual arousal, and if arousal makes it hard to think objectively, then that puts erotica amongst the most difficult arts to view critically. This then becomes a whole other issue, seeping into the huge problem we have with the vast amount of poorly written erotica and badly made pornography. People rarely complain about something that makes them come. (Additionally, even when sex is discussed by the media in cases of rape or abduction it is often done with a tone of sick fascination, playing to a similar type of arousal, which really displays the worst in human nature.)

It is an argument I have with myself at this time every year. With less than 30 days until National Novel Writing Month I am story plotting and character building and part of the NaNoWriMo form asks you to choose a genre for your novel. For the past three years I have used NaNoWriMo to write fiction that involves a lot of eroticism and for this reason I have felt compelled to put my novels into the Erotic Fiction category. However, the public perception that erotica is written to arouse makes this genre seem rather exclusive, and when I am writing novel-length fiction, eroticism is not the only thing I want to explore. Given that my plans for this year’s NaNoWriMo appear to be in a similar vein, the debate continues.

But my problem runs deeper: I do not write erotic fiction to arouse and it does not arouse me to write erotic fiction. For me, writing erotica is a way of exploring sexuality through my chosen media – literature. I long ago embraced the fact that my writing arouses people. I am not unhappy with the fact that people enjoy my work as something to get off to. However, nothing pleases me more than a response to my work that is reasoned and intellectual and opens up a discussion. It is through those conversations that I feel we learn the most about sexuality. In fact, I would go so far as to say that often I write pieces that push people’s boundaries in the hope that they will be too much for my readers’ arousal and force them to consider it critically rather than sexually.

In the extreme, the fact that sex sells not only pervades my work as an erotic author, but also me as a human being. Via email, in comments, on twitter, I am bombarded with sexual innuendo and come-ons as though the fact that I write about sex makes me available and eager to take part in others’ sex lives. Of course, I am the only one who can control the way I present myself, and I am the only one who can take action against the way I am perceived – and I won’t deny that I do on occasion provoke those reactions. But even when I don’t do it directly I am still subject to these kinds of responses and so I think it bears mentioning.

There is nothing wrong in creating with the intention to arouse. In fact, with more and more marriages ending due to a lack of sexual fulfillment I feel we now, more than ever, need porn and erotica that opens people up sexually. On the other hand, this trend makes it very difficult to engage critically with the erotic arts and for me, at least, this is a real problem. The one thing that everyone seems to be able to agree on when it comes to Fifty Shades of Grey (and, actually Twilight as well) is that the cover (above, right) is brilliant. It is not at all explicit, but if you know anything about the book – and everyone now does – it is still appropriately erotic. Whilst we cannot dictate what will arouse people and what will not, covers and promotion and advertising do play a huge part in setting up consumer expectations, and so perhaps this is the first step in creating a sub-category of erotic fiction which deals with its subject critically, rather than using it to arouse. Because I cannot be the only one who feels this way.

The post Erotic Fiction Without Sexual Arousal: Attempting the Impossible appeared first on (It Girl. Rag Doll).

For those of you who still think ‘rinsing’ is something you do after lathering up your hair – and a part of me wishes it still was just that, – I’ll explain: rinsing is an act wherein (young), sexually attractive girls get as much money out of rich (older) men without offering anything more than conversation and company in return. And in some cases, not even that.

The show centered around glamour model Danica Thrall, experienced rinser Jeanette Worthington, and erotic dancer Hollie Capper (pictured). At the beginning of the show all three girls (but Hollie in particular) argued their rinsing pursuits as a necessary and easy way to pay their bills at a time of national financial difficulty. With this thought in mind I watched openly, trying to consider rinsing as a kind of re-distribution of wealth; the 1% vs. the 99%. But as the show continued, it seemed to raise numerous moral and ethical issues.

One of the first things that came to mind was a question of feminism. Although these women do not have sex with their wealthy benefactors, they are selling themselves as an aesthetic product. Make-up, sex appeal and flirtation all seem to be important factors in this. Danica in particular makes the most of her image, posting photographs and setting up her own site of glamour shots. On the one hand they are selling a very particular and almost idealised, Barbie-like image of women, which could be viewed as anti-feminist; it could be argued that these girls are selling a fantasy, pandering to assumed male expectations of beauty, which might be considered counterproductive to feminism as a movement for gender equality. However, there is also a good argument to be made for the view that these women are strengthened in their gender by using their femininity as a power.

This also raises a question of exploitation. Are these women being exploited for their appearance, or are they in fact using their looks to exploit rich men? If the rules of these transactions are clearly laid on the table before any money or gifts change hands, then perhaps everyone is simply in charge of their own well-being. Perhaps exploitation doesn’t even factor into it. Personally I couldn’t help but feel that these girls are exploiting a baser part of the men willing to give them money; although I felt more strongly that these girls are exploiting themselves.

What really left a sour taste in my mouth was what the girls got in return for their beauty. Although at the beginning of the show there was talk of bill-paying and a simple need to survive in a difficult world, the vast majority of what the girls asked for and received were designer handbags, shoes and jewelry, which the girls showed no sign of exchanging for that apparently much needed cash. (Except for Hollie, who asked her mother to put gifts she didn’t particularly like and which weren’t worth much, on eBay.) What became increasingly clear as the show proceeded was that these girls are not in it because they have children to take care of, or because the mortgage needs paying, they are in it because they want men to buy them expensive gifts. When asked what the ultimate gift would be, Hollie – who initially talked about her bills a lot – answered “a lot of surgery”. I’ll leave you to draw your own conclusions from that. Personally I have no problem with wealthy people buying beautiful things for those they deem worthy, particularly in cases where they want to give these gifts, but the pure amount of good these girls are being sent is a little sickening, and their attitude towards the men giving them gifts made me feel quite nauseous. Jeanette in particular seemed affronted when someone wouldn’t buy her something, as though it was her right to receive gifts from rich men simply because she was willing to spend time with them.

The other point to be made is that these girls are perpetuating not only a horrible and largely unrealistic ideal of beauty, but also an unhealthy consumer society. There is a huge difference between appreciating and purchasing beautiful things, allowing yourself some luxury, and being obsessed with the status certain labels and price tags apparently give. In a particularly disgusting moment Jeanette openly admitted that without these designer pieces she would feel “dead inside”.

In essence, rinsing is about making a commodity of conversation and company: both Hollie and Jeanette date men in order to receive the gifts and money they feel they are entitled to. Neither seems at all interested in the men she rinses. Danica deals with things a little differently. She never meets anyone, doing everything online. In the case of some of her benefactors she hasn’t even spoken to them, they simply shower her with gifts from her amazon wish-list. However, in the program there was a scene in which she used Skype to chat with someone who I assume was simply lonely and in need of some fun, flirtatious conversation to make him smile. Danica also has strict rules about never letting the conversation move into ‘adult content’. Unlike the other two girls, she was friendly, chatty and engaging with the other person. This seemed to me to be far more genuine. Although her approach is more businesslike, Danica actually seems to provide something worth paying for, whereas the other two were downright unappreciative of the benefits they received.

Despite my opening paragraph and my slight skepticism over the word “sex” in the title of the program, sex is something that must be discussed when it comes to this topic – despite the fact that the channel four show chose to ignore it, aside from mentioning the lack of sex numerous times. I was surprised to see the topic of financial domination come up on the show. As well as dating men who buy her gifts, Hollie is an online financial dominatrix. The concept of financial domination is one I was introduced to whilst listening to the Savage Lovecast; it is basically a kink wherein rich people (mostly men) get off on having people (mostly women) demand large sums of money from them. It links in with humiliation, where the person receiving the money will verbally degrade their benefactor by telling him/her how pathetic he/she is, having to pay someone for sex or for their company. Something about the fact that this is named and recognised as a kink or a fetish makes me feel better about it. Provided a person does not get into serious financial difficulty, this is a sexual act between two consenting adults who know the rules of the game. Everyone should be allowed the freedom to express their sexuality. And there is of course another side to that: I think we can say with almost complete certainty that there are men who find it sexually arousing to buy things for women. Whether it’s a status and power thing, or a matter of seeing girls wearing the beautiful things he has bought for her, it’s not hard to see why this would be appealing. And for this reason I’m finding it difficult to condemn rinsing.

The other sexual topic that simply has to be discussed is prostitution. Obviously, there is a difference between what these girls do and what prostitutes do, but I also think there is some line blurring. In the case of girls like Danica I think the line is very clear, because she doesn’t meet these people and because she says, outright, that sexual conversation is off the table. However, there is a place in between where girls will flirt and suggest sex in return for gifts, but then not deliver. This seems far more dishonest than either of the extremes. I suppose the main difference between rinsing and prostitution is the intention and the contract. When you hire a prostitute it is very clear what you want and price is something to be discussed as a business transaction. However, in places where prostitution is illegal, many people do not charge for sex but for the pleasure of their company, and sex is a fair assumption within that time. This is where the line blurs for me. This isn’t particularly a problem for me, as I am in favour of prostitution for many reasons, provided it is consensual, fair and safe – perhaps a topic for another article. But I do think these girls are kidding themselves if they believe they are above prostitutes simply because they do not have sex with their benefactors.

Overall what really bothered me about the program and about the act of ‘rinsing’ was the attitude of these girls towards the men, and the obsession with materialism. There have been times when I looked at my bank statement and my course reading list and wished against wish that someone would help me out financially or kindly offer to buy my books for me; or times when I considered publishing an amazon wish-list to people other than my friends and family, just on the off-chance that someone might want to indulge a part of me that is too poor to enjoy luxury; but I can’t imagine feeling okay accepting something from someone I have neither provided a service for nor someone I do not feel genuine affection for.

At the end of the day there are two different sides to the “art” of rinsing: on the one hand it is a business transaction, comparable with but dissimilar to prostitution, and for this reason I feel more comfortable with the way Danica conducts herself. On the other hand, and this is what really bothered me in the cases of Jeanette and Hollie, these girls are taking advantage of someone’s kindness. And with so little gratitude. In fact, they display an extremely distasteful sense of entitlement. And that is what really made me feel cold; the way ‘rinsing’ manipulates organic human interaction and distorts the idea of kindness.

The post Lather, Rinse, Repeat. appeared first on (It Girl. Rag Doll).

Having read Fifty Shades of Grey, Remittance Girl concluded that the D/s aspect of writing, perhaps comes through not so much in the acts portrayed, as in the language used to describe them. I came to a similar conclusion when I reviewed the book. Based on this theory, RG set a challenge: write the same piece of erotic fiction twice, the first time as a vanilla scene, and the second time as a D/s scene. Challenge accepted.

Vanilla
They stumbled out of the bar, beer bubbles still tickling their nostrils, giggling into each other’s slung arms as they made their way down the glistening street. The air was brisk, nipping at her exposed shoulders, but she didn’t notice, through her alcohol-warm haze. One hand on her hip, he led her back to his flat and helped her over the threshold, still giggling.

Ten minutes later they were towel dried and a little subdued on the sofa. She let him kiss her brow and her jawline, and he reached into her top to run the tips of his fingers over her hardening nipple.

“I’d like to fuck you” He murmured, kissing her neck, trailing his tongue behind her ear.

She smiled, biting her lip, and nodded carefully.

Pressing together, she grew wet against him and he pulled her up, peeling the clothes off her body and holding her in his firm hands. As his lips traced patterns along her neck and across her shoulders, she was bent over the back of the sofa, hands exploring the convex of her arse. Breathless with need, he parted her thighs and pressed the heated head of his cock against her soaked sex.

• • • • •

Kinked
They stumbled out of the bar, beer bubbles still tickling their nostrils, giggling into each other’s slung arms as they made their way down the glistening street. The air was brisk, nipping at her exposed shoulders, but she didn’t notice, through her alcohol-warm haze. One hand on her hip, he steered her back to his flat and guided her over the threshold, still giggling.

Ten minutes later they were towel dried and a little subdued on the sofa. He kissed her brow and her jawline, and reached into her top to tease her hardening nipple between the tips of his deft fingers.

“I’m going to fuck you,” He said, biting her neck, trailing his pointed tongue behind her ear.

She shivered, catching her lip between her teeth, and nodded understanding.

Pulling her against him, he felt her grow wet and sat her up on her knees, ripping the clothes from her body and holding her in his firm hands. As his nails traced patterns along her neck and across her shoulders, he bent her over the back of the sofa, fingers pressing into the soft flesh of her arse. Growling with need, he parted her thighs and forced the heated head of his cock against her dripping cunt.

The post Vanilla/Kinked appeared first on (It Girl. Rag Doll).

All human beings are born free and equal (in dignity and rights).

This opening line is, of course, extremely important. The question of freedom is one that I have discussed here at great length, on several occasions, and it is something that many people devote many hours to in consideration, particularly as concerns situations where the expression of one person’s freedom impedes another’s. Which is why what follows this first line is so important:

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

The latter sentence suggests to me a particular kind of responsibility, and to my mind, nowhere is this responsibility so apt as in freedom of speech. When I’m writing articles (rather than fiction) I spend a lot of time considering how best to express what I have to say in a way that is neutral and discussable rather than offensive and provocative. Of course, this is something I do out of choice; I have the freedom to choose how to write and how to express myself.

With that in mind, do we, in fact, have any right to censor or condemn those who choose to express themselves with less care?

Just before the weekend Discerning Dom wrote a piece called ‘No Limits‘ which earned him a barrage of comments from disgruntled and offended readers, myself included. Generally speaking I am an avid reader of his blog; it is regularly insightful, oftentimes exciting, and DD himself is an elusive man which lends a sense of mystery to his writing. But I, as a reader, a submissive, a masochist and a writer, have also come to rely on a certain amount of level-headed good sense in his articles.

As a writer I feel that DD is particularly good at blurring the lines between his fantasies, his memoirs and his thoughts on BDSM. For the most part this is done quite seamlessly and it simply makes the reading experience richer. However, with ‘No Limits’ I felt this line blurring became less elusive and more irresponsible.

In the first paragraph he writes:

And while she was suffering, whimpering and wriggling, we had a most interesting conversation about safe words. I haven’t got one, she said (‘Can I take the clamps off now? Please?’ ‘No.’)

From the moment I read this, I felt uneasy. Of course it is completely up to DD and his partner how they choose to play; if it’s consensual then, to my mind, it is their decision. However, the way that sentence is constructed – “And while she was suffering […] we had a […] conversation about safe words” – hit a nerve with me. It seems to suggest that the question of safe words had never come up before. Again, everyone has the right to play in whatever way they want to, but as the piece goes on and the pair discuss limits, DD begins to draw some pretty clear boundaries, and lay them down as though they are absolute truths:

Let me explain, I said, being a reasonable man. You are my submissive, right? Yes. That means you will always do what I say. You have agreed never to say no to me. OK, she said. Submission that draws a line and says no further isn’t really submission at all, I said.

At this point, as someone who engages in dominance and submission, I felt my freedom had been somewhat impinged upon. DD is clearly a seasoned dominant as well as a knowledgeable writer, and personally I feel that these two things give him a voice or, at the very least, a tone of authority; so when I read his ideas and his thoughts on D/s, I take notice because I feel fairly sure he knows what he’s talking about. I think for a blog that does very little self-promotion, he is very well read; his pieces get a fair few comments and he seems to have a group of ardent followers. This suggests to me that I am not the only one who trusts his words, nor the only one who promotes his blog. So you can imagine how these words, coming from someone whose authority I usually trust, felt like an attack on my freedom to submit in whatever way my partners and I choose. The closest simile I can get is this: imagine you fall in love and then you go and see your therapist and s/he tells you you’re not in love.

Furthermore, reading the above section I couldn’t help but feel worried; had I read it two years ago, maybe even a year ago, I would probably have been far less skeptical and perhaps even adopted his apparent devil-may-care attitude towards safe words. To me that is a frightening idea, particularly when followed by sentences like:

That’s what submission is all about. It’s about giving in, not about negotiating.

And:

A submissive who isn’t a little bit scared isn’t really a submissive at all.

I find his ‘this is the only way to do kink’ use of language deeply unsettling. Not only is it irresponsible in regards to his readers, but it is also disrespectful to dominants and submissives who choose to play or interact differently. If he had simply taken the time and forethought to premise these sentences with “the way I play” or “in my personal opinion” (for example) none of what he wrote would have offended me.

As I mentioned, I am not the only one who commented on DD’s piece negatively, and I have discussed it with others as well; different people had slightly different takes on it, and I’d urge you to go and read their comments as well. But I also think it is important that I direct you to DD’s rebuttal. Reaffirming his own sanity and level-headedness, DD wrote a second piece – in response to our comments – which did allay several of my own fears:

I think that if you read the blog as a whole it’s pretty clear I am not a psycho and that I don’t advocate abusing women, no matter how submissive.

This is true. I have read his blog for a long time and this is the first time I have ever felt uneasy about something he has written. He also mentioned that his partner was not in the room with him in the scene he describes in ‘No Limits’ which, I’ll agree, does make a difference; I have played a lot online but have never felt the need to use safe words in that setting due to the fact that there is only a limited amount of power you can give up over the internet. However I don’t think that was made explicitly clear in his original piece. He goes on to explain the level of trust he and his partner share:

And because she trusts me she is willing to dispense with various props like safe words.

Recently someone described consent to me as something that can evolve into trust; where you might first have a list of things you consent to, over time, as the relationship you share with the other person evolves, the list gives over to your trust that the other person won’t hurt you. Although it is perhaps worth mentioning that I still felt a little irritated by his careless use of the word “props” to describe safe words. I know for a fact that many people don’t consider safe words “props” so much as they do essential foundations. But again, that is really up to the discretion of whoever is playing.

In this second piece DD also defended himself on the basis that he does not, nor has he ever claimed to, write an instructional BDSM blog; in fact, his blog has the word “memoirs” in the title. Whilst that is unequivocally true, I think the following comment, posted on DD’s rebuttal, illustrates pretty well that his blurred non-fiction style does sometimes read like advice or guidance on BDSM:

I have just read you last posting and as a very new sub I agree with what you have said it is your views and anyone reading should either go away if they don’t like what they see and read or like me read and say thank you because reading your blog is what has helped me with what for me was a very difficult time and transition. so thank you for your help.

Personally I think this comment speaks for itself, so I’ll let it do just that.

But I have hugely digressed. Whilst DD’s piece does beg discussion, is for me only one example of what might be considered ‘careless’ writing, and when I come back to this point, I have real trouble justifying my complaints. After all, what I would like to champion overall is everyone’s freedom to make their own choices. What is most important to me is that DD – and all other writers for that matter – has the freedom to write his blog, be it fantasy, memoir, or advice, in whatever way he likes.

However, blogging and commenting are communal activities, so while he has the right to write what he chooses, if the comments are left open, we, the readers, have the right to comment as well, and I have said many times that, for me, discussion and debate are the most rewarding parts of blogging.

So perhaps it is just that; whilst each writer has the right to publish whatever s/he chooses, s/he also has a responsibility to do so consciously, and if the author chooses to waive that responsibility or genuinely doesn’t see what in their writing might be offensive, the responsibility then falls to us, the readers, to respond.

Which is exactly what I have done.

The post Safe Words and Responsible Authorship appeared first on (It Girl. Rag Doll).