Category Archives: ARCHIVE BLOGGERY

No More Mr Nice Guy

9 Replies

A couple of years ago, I wrote a blog post about Nice Guy submissives. The Nice Guys of OK Cupid public humiliation blog has recently brought the “Nice Guy” back to the forefront of some internet discussions, and I’ve seen many an online debate in the past week about exactly why Nice Guys are not nice guys. In short, it comes down to the same thing that most things in BDSM (and relationships in general) do: the enthusiastic consent of all parties involved.

Now I’m not talking about actual nice guys here, but “Nice Guys”. We’ve all met them. We might have been one at one time or another. You might even be one right now without realising it. There has been a lot of confusion over exactly how one would define a Nice Guy as opposed to a nice guy. Here’s a simple way to differentiate:

If the woman you desire as a girlfriend, dominatrix or full-time amateur therapist has specified that she just wants to be friends, nothing more intimate, intense or physical, is this because:

a: she doesn’t fancy you, want BDSM play with you or want to give every bit of her attention to you and, although you might find this painful, you will respect her choices, accept the offer of friendship or move on? 

b: you’re obviously too nice, and she’s just a vindictive, bastard-loving idiot like all women/dommes/humans and therefore ignores nice guys, and anyway, why the hell doesn’t she value your 200 text messages a day telling her how important she is to you and therefore reply to every single one in detail (even if she won’t give you any of the sexy playtime that you clearly deserve for having to put up with her friendship) and if you sulk just enough and express quiet resentment at any attention she gives her other people in her life she will probably change her mind eventually and realise she needs nobody at all except a nice guy like YOU, the stupid bitch?

If you answered a, you’re a nice guy. This is a good thing. If you answered b, you’re a Nice Guy. This is not a good thing.

I’m sure most of us, at some point, have wanted something we couldn’t have. Rejection hurts, but it’s up to all of us not to be an arse about it. I would strongly recommend that you read this brilliantly sympathetic blog post by Girl On The Net about what to do if you think you might be, have been, or know a Nice Guy. Click here to read “On nice guys, hard truths, and the Friend Zone”.

Para Doxies

1 Reply

Brilliant news from The Mirror, via Madam Becky Adams:

“…A former madam is aiming to set up the first brothel exclusively for the disabled.

Becky Adams said Para Doxies – named after an old word for prostitute – will be non-profit-making and fitted with ramps and hoists.

She said: “People have the same sexual urges if they’re disabled or not – everyone deserves to ­experience and enjoy sexual contact.

“A soldier who comes home disabled doesn’t stop being a normal, healthy person with normal, healthy needs.

“For many, disability can get in the way of fulfilling those needs. It can be very frustrating and painful.”

Becky, 44, is coming out of retirement and aims to spend £50,000 on the brothel.

She hopes it will become the first of its kind in the world.

She said she’s had hundreds of requests from disabled people looking for reputable sex workers.

She needs planning permission before she can open in Milton Keynes next year.

It is legal to sell sex as long as it is not through a third party.”

Original article here and find Becky Adams on Twitter here.

Titillating Television

1 Reply

I have long lamented the problems with the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act. If this is the first you’ve heard of the CJIA, it’s the badly-worded 2008 law that makes “extreme” BDSM images illegal, even if what is viewed is enacted by consenting adults and the viewer is well aware that the acts are simulated. One such problem is that smut is subjective. Action movies contain realistic violence and death scenes. Whatever the intention of the actors, directors and producers, If one particular scene in that film depicts a fantasy that specifically matches your kink and you only watch (or, in their words “extract”) that part of the film, then technically your resulting wank is illegal.

There’s a brilliant analysis by Freedom in a Puritan Age involving examples from the BBC’s “Ripper Street”, Channel 4’s “Homeland”, and the gloriously exciting, sweaty chap-on-chap BDSM scene in “Casino Royale” (below). Click the link for the article: “WATCH OUR TITILLATING TV SHOW!* *(But try not to enjoy it.)” by Danny Broderick. Very much recommended.

In the meantime, this: