this year my challenge for everyone is to unlearn the association between love and morality. love is not something that is inherently morally good, and the absence of love is not something that is inherently bad. sex without love isn't morally bankrupt, it's just an action. people without love aren't less kind or less good, they're just people. when we can get past this false (and often unnoticed) dichotomy of good love/evil lovelessness then i think we are going to be able to take leaps and bounds in sex positivity, aro advocacy, certain discussions of mental health...
Because of you I’m constantly thinking about cowboy!ghost and cowboy!konig’s thick waists. Hmmm I bet my papi price has one too. It makes me salivate. It haunts and follows me everywhere. Thank you for these divine depictions my deity 🙇🏻♀️🙇🏻♀️
(I’m such a slut for how plush these dirty men are) (Also sorry I keep letting these horny thoughts out in your asks..it’s a disease now I think)
God, yeah. You know Price is eating good, best fed man in Texas by his account, previously the best fed man in England and he had to WORK to keep from showing it, but now?? Oh he is enjoying the strong man physique, he's got that soft around the middle padding that just makes him looks stronger. Standing in front of the bathroom mirror and inspecting the layer of fat over his pecs, over what used to be abs, leaning closer to check the sprinkling of grey starting to make its way through his beard. Price thinks he looks pretty good. He doesn't miss the hard lines, feels like he's got more fuel in the tank to do the heavy lifting.
He especially likes settling you on his stomach, moving your hips back and forth, back and forth, grinding your pretty pussy against his happy trail, slicking the coarse dark hair with your wetness. He loves the way your fingers squeeze his pecs, the way you grip at his soft edges for purchase as he pleasures you. It feels an awfully masturbatory if he's being honest, making his pretty wife grind against his hairy stomach, watching your hips buck as your clit is teased by his curls, the rough hair dragging against your soft folds. Oh he can almost feel that sweet cunt clenching around nothing as he grinds your hips down against him. Price may say this is for you, but it's not, it's for him.
He just wants to watch you fall apart and know that he's the one who made that happen. He wants to hear your whimpers as you work up the courage to beg for his cock, or he wants to force you to come without it. Either way he gets a show, so why shouldn't he move you like a toy? That's what you are, isn't it? A toy? Brainless and shuddering with your eyes rolling back as he makes each little zap of pleasure roll through your clit and up your spine. He rocks you back, inches you grind by grind towards his cock until you're desperately trying to follow the motion of his hands, you pretty pussy drooling as it rubs against his fat cock. You try to lift your hips and he pulls them back down, shushing you. He knows baby, Daddy know you want him to fuck you, but he can't right now, you have to earn it. You can do that, right? Of course you can, smart girl.
You just have to let him keep doing what he was doing, bringing you to the edge of pleasure like a toy, building all that tight delicious heat in the pit of your stomach until you can't take it anymore and start to beg. And you will beg. Then he'll pull you back to his stomach, and make you come all over it. Come all over the body you helped build with all your wonderful cooking, and then he'll thank you properly. Just let him have his fun for now, and fall apart.
I mean, I have to say that until I started doing this work, I just wasn't dialed into the level of hostility that exists. It's so woven into our fabric and normalised.
I was in a major museum in London the other day, and in their greeting card section, they had a card that says, "I like everyone," and then underneath it in brackets, "even men." And that's like a mainstream London museum. And I thought if I went in there and I saw a card that said, "I like everyone", and then in brackets, "even lesbians", you're just never going to be, you're never going to be allowed to sell that kind of card, in that environment. But we can make those kind of jokes about men.
And it's really interesting to me, I am a gay woman, and I often when people are speaking about men in certain situations, or I am reading posts online, I think if I took out "men" from what's being said, and put in "lesbians", what would I be feeling?
Would that be acceptable? Yeah.
Would I feel safe now if in one hand you were telling me something kind of dismissive and stigmatising and shaming about myself, and then also telling me that I need to speak the things that I'm most vulnerable about, having been probably potentially kept those things to myself all my life.
So, the idea, I think when you've kept things so suppressed, the idea then of being vulnerable about it, about speaking it aloud, is so disorientating.
So of course you're just going to send me further away from feeling the psychological safety that I can actually articulate my pain and have it heard with compassion.
So, I think for me, like one of the most fundamental critical aspects of this, that I think it's incumbent on every single person to sit with, because I know how transformative it has been for myself, sitting with it, so the psychologist I mentioned earlier, Martin Seager and a colleague, John Barry, have come up with these ideas about how our empathy is socialised. So how in our societies, our empathy is socialised to see men as causing harm, more readily than we are to see men as being harmed. So, we're more easy to see men as privileged than to see men as being victims of things.
And when that happens, the landscape is no longer like this in terms of our compassion, it's like this. And that is so dangerous then. That's such a fundamental thing that I think every single human being can start engaging with the work of thinking: how is my empathy being socialised? How am I responding when I'm hearing things about men? How might I be listening to the men in my life differently than I might be listening to the women? And start to reflect on our own kind of behaviors around that.
==
If you're the demographic that can be mocked, belittled and demonized with absolute impunity and no repercussions, you're not "privileged."
There's this song called "Bruno is orange" which is about a secret love shared between a Black man & a White Woman during the segregation era (or earlier), which includes explicit references to the way Black men, including young Black boys, are hypermasculinized & treated as inherently dangerous to White women while also being called "boys" & denied manhood, with the White woman desperately trying to hide her lover from jail because they were caught & facing targeted abuse. Towards the end of the song, the singing gets more desperate and erratic with chains banging to the beat, indicating that the Black man in the story was going to be jailed.
The top comment of the audio of that song is a White person saying "I know it's about a man and a lady but I'm going to pretend it's about lesbians". I hate White people.
There’s lots of “Arthur was totally oblivious to Merlin’s magic the entire time because he’s just that dense” and the flipside “what if Arthur had figured out Merlin had magic ages ago and just didn’t say anything” but quite frankly I think there should be more “consciously Arthur refuses to entertain the idea of Merlin being a sorcerer, but his subconscious has been picking up on all the weird coincidences and it’s getting harder and harder for him to ignore”
Like Arthur isn’t always the smartest but I do think there’s a difference between obliviousness and willful ignorance. Arthur has some very obvious reasons not to want to believe Merlin could be a sorcerer. Namely that he cares about Merlin and thinks Merlin is Good, whereas he’s always believed and been taught that sorcery is an absolute Evil. Therefore Merlin cannot be a sorcerer, because he’s not evil.
There’s also the fact that he’s convinced Merlin is incompetent— Arthur’s idea of magic is not just malicious, but intentional. It’s something you do, on purpose, and it requires effort. If Merlin’s incompetent, then he couldn’t be doing any of those things. And Arthur, frankly, throughout most of the show, kind of needs to be able to think of Merlin as incompetent, because if Merlin wasn’t incompetent, it would mean Arthur had been unjustly insulting him and treating him poorly for years.
So Arthur, very willfully, refuses to even entertain the idea of Merlin having magic. It’s just so silly! Except, of course; it’s kind of hard not to notice how suspicious Merlin is. Like. He’s not very good at hiding it. Luckily Arthur is very good at repression, and so he can just kind of ignore that; but that also is only going to work for so long.
And I think there’s so much to be explored about the process of Arthur’s repression starting to fail, and his subconscious finally starting to break through to his conscious mind and call attention to everything about Merlin that Arthur has been willfully ignoring.
And when you add things like Arthur’s daddy issues and internalized homophobia— Merlin can’t be one of them, but also Arthur can’t be attracted to one of them, but also Arthur can’t be attracted to a man, but also men are people who take action, and sorcerers are people who do intentional evil, and Merlin isn’t like that— But he is? And what does it say about Arthur that he— That he could want—
And in all of that Arthur is just sitting there while he mentally fights his psychosexual demons. And Loses. Big time.