-
When I submit, I do it from a place of strength. I decide whether my partner is worthy of such a powerful and intimate gift, and I do not give my submission to anyone who does not both understand and appreciate the depths of what I am giving up for them. I value myself highly, and so I submit to people who realize that doing so does not make me less. I accept I am an intelligent, competent, submissive feminist – who sometimes finds her power by choosing to let it go."
-
[Flash 10 is required to watch video]
Gorgeous. Take a few minutes and watch this incredible video from Battalion Armour and Roxanne Roxanne.
(Source: restrainedphoto)
-
There is no sex position or sex act which is inherently dominant, submissive, or neutral. None. The characterization of every single sex act depends on context, a context which comes from a person’s history and the relationship between them and their partner. This is where a number of feminists and BDSM enthusiasts have gone wrong, positioning some things (being the penetrative partner, receiving oral sex) as always dominant, and their complement as always submissive."
-
High-res →
Yes please. To either role!
Skye Shelly and Emmaline, 2011, photographed by COOP.
(Source: photosbycoop)
-
Absolutely!
(via riderskitteh)
-
We know what is offensive and illegal, and images of consensual sex are neither
We know what is offensive and illegal, and images of consensual sex are neither! Don’t be told what should and shouldn’t be in your spank bank!
Currently there is a crime under the offensive publications act which impacts us all.
It is about the act that came in force in 2009
The law makes it an offence punishable by up to three years in prison for someone to possess what it calls “extreme images”.
An “extreme image” is defined as one which portrays in a realistic way any of:
• An act which threatens a person’s life
• An act which results in or is likely to result in serious injury to a person’s anus, breasts or genitals
and the image…
• Is grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character
• Has been produced solely or principally for the purpose of sexual arousal
It is claimed that only a small number of images are intended to be caught by this law (“images” means both still photographs and video but excludes drawings and works of art). Unfortunately many of the terms used in the Act are vague and open to interpretation. So until some unfortunate people end up in court and a jury decides, it is difficult to give absolutely definitive advice on what the Act means and how it will be enforced.
Our friend Sleazy Michael is the unfortunate who is being the test case for this. This impacts any of us who partake of pornography that involves any images that could be interpreted as “Offensive, disgusting or obscene” by the definition above. This includes images of consensual fisting!
Trial starts on the 1st of August at Southwark crown court.
If you can come along and show that we queers, know what is offensive or illegal, and images of consensual sex are neither!
Please be respectful of the court (no need to piss off the judge) and come and show support. -
How does anyone stand in those heels? Still, this image is hot!
Art by John Alexander Scott Coutts.
(via gammax)
-
High-res →
Cuff me, outdoors, leave me to the crowds …
Photographed by Ryan St Germain.
(Source: kneelbegcrawl, via ryanstgermain)
-
High-res →
Sardax has a talent for showing things I fantasise about …
(Source: womenwithwhips, via gammax)
