Trust, In Response To My Prompt

In my prompt, I said that to me trust is both given and earned.

In the beginning, I would take what @ahplanez said:

We have to trust people to some extent in order for us to interact with them in the first place.

This is the start. We trust that the person we are greeting at our place of work is not about to take out a gun and shoot us.

We trust that the other car coming in the opposite direction will stay in their lane, as we plan to stay in ours.

We trust that courtesy will be matched with courtesy.

In response to my prompt, @usfixerspet said:

in my opinion, trust is the act of believing in someone and believing that they will act or behave in the manner they have said or implied they would.

And the next step. Someone says something about who they are, about what they will do (either in direct contact, or in writing—a profile, a journal entry), and I take them on faith.

For example, in my work, I lead a lot of teams made of up of disparate individuals. What makes it work is trust that they will do their jobs, so others can get their parts done as well.

I often ask, “When can you get this done, and what do you need for it?” In the beginning, I double both, until I know how accurate they are of assessing their own skills from experience.

I trust them to make a good faith effort.

@Just_Louise said:

I think how much you trust another person can vary on what knowledge you have of someone because who you trust determines who may have power over you. You can trust different people to different degrees. For example, you may give a lot of trust to someone who is a medical doctor to the point that you may trust this person with your life without having much other knowledge of who they are.

Which adds to the equation. I will trust someone who presents as a developer on what to do with my code over someone who presents as a kindergarten teacher.

@RouxFaraHara said:

I wish I could be like you and just easily give it and then have it earned, but my past does not allow that sadly.

And my response is best summed up by what @NaturesChild wrote in their response:

Self Trust: No matter how many times trust has been proven, one is only capable of trusting as much as one trusts oneself. We can trust someone less (due to experience and perspective) but not more as doubt and insecurity will win every time.

It’s as much about trusting ourselves to make the right decisions when it comes to trust as it is about them being deserving of our trust.

It’s easy to doubt ourselves when we are blindsided by a betrayal or dishonesty we didn’t see coming. It’s up to us to pick ourselves up and look for all of the times we have been right, and start all over again.

For ourselves, as much as for other people.

@belovedpet said:

Trust is a leap of faith, every time.

And _smash_ delved into the differences between faith and trust in her response piece.

@TeddybearSpanks touched on something that I find incredibly hot:

What is the point when one has enough evidence the other person is trustworthy? Maybe this is a kind of an edgeplay for me.

That’s part of what D/s is about for me. Part of why I’m exploring the ideas and concepts of trust right now. I’m looking deeply into what we do, and why we do it. What makes it so powerful a bond to me.

@jbravo469 said:

I read something the other day that rang true to me: you don’t know who you can trust until you do.

Which, after thinking about it, rings true to me as well.

Distrust breeds distrust. It is a deep cycle, and very hard to break free.

Trust breeds trust. Same cycle in a different direction.

Sure, I may be wrong sometimes. Of course. No one is infallible. But I give the trust to everyone that I can afford to lose, and enjoy the ride.

And the last part of trust as we’ve discussed it so far is from @BambiBlue, who said:

A small mistake can be forgiven and forgotten, a purposeful breach of trust though means a loss of a play partner, a friendship, the end of a marriage perhaps.

And this is the key, right? As I said, no one is infallible. Mistakes will happen.

We trust that someone will not break our trust intentionally, and if they break it by mistake, they will do their best to make amends.


Such a simple, innate thing. And yet, so much goes into it from every side.

Thank you all for participating with your thoughts, your writings, and your reading. I’ve enjoyed this.

I have another writing in me about trust. It’ll be coming soon.

Read More

Discussion: Is Poly “Sharing” To You?

So, the set up:

I’m in a poly group on another site, and a young man was finally going to meet his girlfriend’s husband after a year. He was very excited, because he’d wanted to for a while, but also nervous, and was looking for suggestions on what to do/say.

One of the things he said was something like, “Maybe I’ll shake his hand and thank him for sharing her…”

Which immediately caused an uproar.

The upshot of the hysteria was that using the word “sharing” implies that her husband owns her, and is deigning to “loan” her out to the OP.

This confused me, so I typed “define share” into google, and go the following definitions.


gerund or present participle: sharing

  • have a portion of (something) with another or others.
  • give a portion of (something) to another or others.
  • use, occupy, or enjoy (something) jointly with another or others.
  • (of a number of people or organizations) have a part in (something, especially an activity).
  • tell someone about (something), especially something personal.
  • post or repost (something) on a social media website or application.

So, from what I see, the word share is appropriate within an ‘ownership’ context and without one.

For example, I see the definition use, occupy, or enjoy (something) jointly with another or others as a perfect example. Like sharing a love of cute animals, sharing a park bench, or sharing this Earth (the Earth on is one of his examples in defending himself), as we don’t OWN any of those things or concepts.

As an owner of my Pet, I do share him from the ownership perspective, but I do not own his love, even if I share it (use it and enjoy it jointly) with others.

So, what do you think?

Is poly “sharing” for you? Why or why not? What other words do you use/prefer and why?

Read More

A Key Point We Often Miss When Discussing Consent

Kiba sent me a link yesterday to An Essay On Consent, From A Woman Who Hosts Huge Sex Parties.

It’s an excellent piece of work on consent, covering many bases. Here are a few of my favorite points:

“Even if you previously granted consent, if you lose the ability to revoke that consent, from that moment on, there is no consent. And if someone takes that control over your consent from you, or ignores that you have lost your control over your consent, that is rape. You must be in control of, and able to revoke, your consent at all times for that consent to remain valid.”

“Only act on enthusiastic consent: ‘Yes!’ not ‘Maybe…’ Consent is binary. You have enthusiastic consent or you do not have consent.”

“If you want to be really, really sure someone is enthusiastically consenting, ask them to say yes a few times before you do that kinky thing to them. Make them beg for you to do that kinky thing to them. Consent for the win!”

“Consent for one activity (i.e. drinking earl grey tea) does not mean you also have consented to another activity (i.e. drinking english breakfast tea with milk and honey.) “Consenting to sex” is not some catchall for having suddenly consented to every imaginable type of sexual activity, and losing control over your limits.”

There is more. A lot more. And I recommend reading it. For everyone. Even those who understand consent. Not because it will necessarily teach you more, but because it may give you more words and more ways of explaining and more ways of doing consent than you had before you read it.

However, there is something missing in every major consent piece I’ve read, and even those that mention it seems to gloss it over, as they are focused primarily on the physical, rather than the mental results of consent.

Consent is only valid when they know what they are getting into.

In the medical world, this is called informed consent, and it is defined as permission granted in the knowledge of the possible consequences.

The important part here is the “knowledge of the possible consequences” part.

In other words, a person cannot give consent if they don’t fully understand what they are consenting to and what may happen as a result.

I often tell people that I have two rules in consent:

1. It has to be enthusiastic.

2. It has to be informed.

My partners have to know what I’m asking, or what they are asking to be able to give consent, or for me to consent to their requests.

In practice, enthusiasm is very easy to recognize. Begging, pleading, kissing my feet—all very clear indications of enthusiastic consent.

Informed consent, though, maybe not so much.

The first night I met my Pet, a friend wanted him about me:

“Watch out for her, she plays in boy’s heads.”

He immediately turned to me, and gave consent. In fact, said, “You may play in my head anytime.”

I laughed, because he had NO idea what he was consenting to. But, I took it for what it was, and engaged.

Now, after 3 years (today, actually) of my playing in his head, and his seeing the results and having my tactics and reasoning explained to him, he has a MUCH better idea of my behavior modification kinks, and he still consents.

Still consents.

I know this because I ask him.


To consent again to me playing in his mind. Because each time he discovers a new way I’ve played with him and modified him, he is more able to fully consent.

And, to be fair, I’m not always sure where I will take him. I had no idea three years ago where we would be today, anymore than he did.

So, getting consent as I go is important to me.

And, I love consent… it’s sexy and hot and all sorts of yummy good things, and getting a “Yes, My Queen” from that boy is better than Viagra for me.

But, regardless of my own personal consent perversions, I do it because it’s not just about consent.

It’s about INFORMED consent.

Read More

Behavior Modification: When Letting Others Be Themselves Is Freedom, Exercise 8

Today’s writing is about changing ourselves, our behavior and how we react (rather than respond) to others in negative places.

One of the greatest negative cycles in and out of personal relationships is the cycle of trying to control those around us, especially those we love.

It’s a familiar pattern, and a destructive one, that is worth the ongoing process of rooting out.

1. Partner has a negative thought.

2. Partner has a negative feeling associated with that thought.

3. Partner reacts to the thought with undesireable behavior.

4. You experience the undesireable behavior.

With strangers, this is where you typically come in. You don’t see their thoughts or feelings. You simply see the results.

This does not change the process.

5. You add your own negative thoughts and meanings

You also now remember other bad things that you have experienced, with your partner or with others, related. You remember negative things you have thought or heard.

6. You experience negative emotions and confusion and uncertainty.

Your thoughts about your relationship are affected. Your self-image may be affected.

You try to change them, you try to show them why their feelings are not valid, or their thoughts are not correct. And you invalidate them.

You may say hurtful things from this state that you wouldn’t otherwise, in defense of your own wounds.

So, how do we break this cycle for the good of ourselves and for others?

Let’s start by focusing on Step 5.

Say to yourself, “I realize that their thoughts are their thoughts. Their feeling are their feelings.

“If I had their same background and upbringing I very well could have those same thoughts and feelings.

“I choose to love and accept them even when they experience those negative thoughts and feelings, and I choose to emanate from my being love, compassion, strength, and acceptance; to be the person/friend/lover that I know in my heart that I am during those times.”

This will automatically give you a much better step 6. It will totally change step 6 for you, in fact. Your thoughts will be focused outward, on others, giving them your compassion, rather than turning inwards, and bullying yourself.

When this becomes a habit, you will be free.

Free from the knee jerk emotional reactions, confusion, self-doubt and othe negative feelings that are enslaving you.

Free to love people for who they are, and communicate with them from a position of love and compassion.

Free to reclaim your personal power.

Now, I’m not saying you are not already personally powerful. I’m saying that until you gain control of your own reactions of trying to control and mold other’s thoughts and feelings, you unconsciously give up your personal power in those situations.

We all do this. This is why we should all keep striving to learn and grow, and why none of use are ever ‘done.’

Once you have broken the cycle, choose.

The path outlined above is a box, built of confusion and negativity, designed to limit your choices.

Breaking free gives you freedom of choice. You can make decisions from a position of strength and love and true desire for your life and what you really want to do for your best self:

  • Make a personal change.
  • Reassure someone.
  • Challenge their thinking with compassion.
  • Engage in a discussion to understand them more deeply.
  • Choose to disengage/not respond.
  • Choose to not have them in your life.

Another thing that this freedom allows is to focus.

Especially in relationships, interactions are better when you focus on the other person’s inherent goodness.

It’s too easy when in a row to focus on everything that is bad and negative and annoying and cranky and just plain wrong about them.

But that just makes things worse for you both.

If it’s a partner you’re engaging, focus on why they are your chosen partner to begin with. You will see that person in their personal struggle, and it will fuel your love and compassion.

If it’s a friend, think of why you’re friends.

If you don’t know the person at all, giving them the benefit of the doubt hurts them less, and removes the pain (or much of it) from you as well.


Practice this in the past, present, and future.


Look over conversations (with partners, with strangers, online or off) that have vexed you in the past. Replay them, stopping at step 5 to change your thought processes. Go back over the way you reacted, and imagine how you would have reacted differently, if you’d freed yourself then.

Feel good about how you have learned.


This is important. Feel really good, knowing you are learning something amazing for yourself, and you are freeing yourself and giving yourself the tools and know-how to make others feel better, too.


Imagine having conversations similar to those in your past. Imagine freeing yourself and how you will be able to respond to those as they come up in your life.

Feel good about it.


When the negative cycle begins, pause for a moment to free yourself. You may be deep into the argument by then, but still take the time to breathe and disengage from the negativity.

It’s not too late. It may be later than you would have hoped, but it’s earlier than if you’d put in no effort at all.

And feel good about it. Pat yourself on the back. And look forward to doing better next time.

Feeling good is important.

I’ll say it again: Feeling good is important. This is your personal self-praise.This is how you change your own behavior.

So feel mad good. Silly good. Goofy good. Like 14-orgasms-without-attendant-oversensitivity-good. Allow yourself to feel downright giddy for doing a good thing.

Because it is a damned awesome thing.

Going to try it? Have tried it, or something similar?

I’d love to hear your experiences.

Read More

Yes, You Are The Problem!

When yet another relationship ends in disappointment, it’s easy to point fingers and blame others.

You think “If only they would…” or “Why can’t they just…”

You tell yourself you haven’t met the “right person” yet. The truth is that you haven’t been the right person, yet.

Until you change how you create and maintain relationships, you’ll keep repeating the same patterns over and over again.

None of your relationship problems are caused by the other person.

Not one.

As long as you keep putting the blame on others, you’ll keep struggling in love.

Any pattern you see in your life, any fight you have again and again, any jerk you date over and over, any fear or problem or disappointment, all of these things start with YOU.

They come from your own fears, insecurities, beliefs and emotions that are running your life and behaviors without your conscious understanding.

Until you learn how to spot those behaviors, and turn them from unconscious habits into conscious choices, you cannot make a permanent change.

They won’t let you. They’ll pop up again and again. In the guise of a deadbeat partner, an unrepentant liar, or a manipulative schemer. They’ll show up when you get angry about unemptied dishwashers and unwashed children, instead of the real problems facing you.

They will run your life… until you refuse to let them.

And that’s the good news.

Because being the problem can be daunting and depressing. It’s easy to beat yourself up, and feel like there is no hope, or that you just aren’t worth it.

You are the problem AND the solution.

But being the problem also means that you are the solution. You have control over who you are and how you choose to treat the people around you.

That is power.

Read More

‘I Think’ Vs. ‘I Feel’: My Response

In response to this original writing prompt.

I did some research on low context/’I think’ versus high context/’I feel’ speakers, and I learned something very interesting.

They are representative of different cultures.

Low context— ‘I Think’—people

Low context people tend to be from varied cultures. Large cities, moving a lot, smaller family units, multiple nationalities and languages represented.

High context— ‘I Feel’—people

High context people tend to be from more homogeneous cultures. Smaller towns, growing up in one place, larger close-knit family units, and one-language type cultures.

Which I find fascinating.

While I did not spend a lot of my time in Large cities growing up, my life was very multicultural:

  • Small family unit: I was the only child of two only children.
  • University towns (my father is a professor): Many different cultures and languages.
  • Multiple nationalities: Not only did my grandparents host exchange students, we hosted traveling professors and had many exchange students over (Dad’s grad student from China convinced me to try chopsticks at the age of 6).
  • Multiple languages: I learned four languages when I was younger (I can barely speak them now, but I could pick them back up quickly, I believe).
  • I grew up around gays, poly, cross-dressers, trans, theater people, and philosophers, LOL!

I am primarily low-context/’I think’. I learned that not everybody thinks and feels the same way I do early on, and realized the assumptions made in high-context/’I feel’ speaking and listening do not translate well to other cultures.

And that’s exactly it.

The challenge is translation.

A high context speaking from an Italian family with a deep-rooted culture of dramatism and joviality will confuse the heck out of a high-context speaker from an Asian country where reserve and respect are the primary signs of love and affection.

Because they might be saying the same words but the assumptions are different.

So, I tend towards low context.

Does that mean I think high-context/’I feel’ is a bad thing?

Not at all.

I think it is incredibly valuable for bonding groups.

Here are a few examples of bonding in high context:

  • Pet names
  • Shared “looks”
  • Training signals
  • Private or “in” jokes
  • Ways to say “I love you” that aren’t “I love you.”
  • Shorthand speech, where all you have to say is that ONE word, and your partner or group knows exactly what you are referring to.

All of these things are very present in my life. I cherish every bit of them.

I do not expect to say “locust,” and have all of you bust out laughing. I do know a small handful of people that will, though, and they know exactly why.

I would not include that joke in trying to make a point, because the majority of people who read what I have to say would have no clue, and I would not be communicating.

So, what is my answer?

Low context/’I think’ is for writing on the internet, communicating with strangers and acquaintances, business transactions.

As I get to know a person better, I learn their language and they learn mine. We grow higher context together, translating when we get confused, popping down into low context when we need to clarify, then back up once we’re on the same page.

Or, we slip in and out, using low-context/’I think’ when speaking in deeply complex or emotional topics, and high context in lovvey-wuvvey stuff.

It’s not perfect.

This does not always work with high-context-all-of-the-time people. And I do my best to work with them, asking what they mean if I am not understanding, and stating exactly what I mean.

I am still not always able to communicate my actual thoughts and feelings clearly, because in many people’s world, it is not possible for a person to say directly what they mean.

And I’ll admit, that bothers me.

And I work on it.

A lot.

I keep an open mind. I say, “Your feelings are valid, and you obviously have a reason for feeling that way. I’m sorry I upset you. Let’s talk about this, because when I said XYZ, I really meant exactly that, not LMNOP. We can figure this out together, and I’m happy to keep working on it.”

And I do.

And sometimes, we manage to translate each other well enough to laugh later over our misunderstandings.

And that’s good enough for me.

Read More

Why I Never Delete Comments On My Writings

You are warned.

There are only two reasons (that I can think of) that I would delete comments:

  • A comment specifically outs another person by name
  • A comment says something that I would consider both illegal and dangerous, and I delete it after I’ve reported it.

Neither of these things have ever happened, so I have never deleted a comment.

Other than those two very specific instances, what you say is what you say, and it’s up there for as long as I have my profile and my writings.

Here are some reasons I’ve been asked to delete comments:

Someone attacked me.

Bah! I can handle it. I’d rather it be out there, in the record for all to see. I’m transparent like that. You get to see my good, bad, and ugly in how I deal with people trying to get a rise out of me for whatever personal reasons they have.

Someone attacked another poster.

You can handle it, too. You’re an adult and you have been called names before by anonymous internet twats. Attack back, or don’t. All your choice.

You attacked me and someone came to my defense, and you want your comments to stand because write and theirs to be removed because mean.

Same as above. Nope. I don’t encourage my friends to defend me. If they do it, it often annoys me, actually, and amuses me. Sometimes in equal parts… But in any case, I won’t delete either one of you. Everyone has a right to their opinions.

You were wrong, and you think it makes you look stupid.

Sorry. I’ve been wrong WAY too many times in my life to have much sympathy. We all say and do stupid shit. Own up to it an apologize, or just slink away. It’s all cool with me.

You emotioned all over, and you think it makes you look bad.

Maybe it does. Maybe other people will totally relate to that emotioning, and you’ll connect. You never know.

Because you made up words.

Have you noticed I do that all that time? Emotioning? Didn’t catch that? Actually, I didn’t get that one. But I have gotten requests because of grammar mistakes. Nope. Not that, either.

Here’s the main reason I won’t:

It’s part of a genuine conversation, on-topic or not, asshole-y or not. You’ve put yourself out there, and life does not have a delete button.

I cherish realness, authenticity. I cherish the mistakes I make and what I learn from them. I cherish the mistakes you make and what I learn from them.

I love life and words and conversation, in all their messiness, oopsies, WTFs and more.

So, be aware when you comment that your comment will stand as long as pixels rule the internet, cat memes are making people smile, and I’m a kinky fucker who likes to share my strong opinions with random freaks everywhere.


Read More

Writing Prompt: ‘I Think’ Vs. ‘I Feel’

This is a longer preamble to a writing prompt than I’ve done before, because I want to be sure that the context is clear.


Two VERY different ways of looking at things. We all do some of both, but some people are much more inclined towards one or the other, and many tend to view their non-dominant processing style as suspect, somehow.

I think…

‘I think’ people are the logicians. The ones who do their research, and look for things like facts, studies, and science.

They prefer to lay things out as orderly as possible, and draw their conclusions based on what they find, intersections of information, and the like.

I feel…

‘I feel’ people are the emotionaries (as I call them) They check their gut, and their feelings about what they see and hear.

They prefer to go with how they feel versus what they might know for sure. Facts don’t necessarily sway them, because their feelings are their priority.

The Challenge

Just yesterday, I was talking with a new friend who has moved to the south from up north, and is in a period of adjustment. We were discussing how different the primary communication styles are in the two areas.

Low Context: Lets their words speak for themselves. Prefers to be more direct, relying on what is explicitly stated in their speech. Low contexters, by nature, tend to be ‘I think’ people. They will say what they mean, wanting to be as clear as possible.

High Context: Recognizes (and routinely uses) implied messages, aware of the verbal and nonverbal cues that let them understand the speaker’s meaning. High contexters, by nature, tend to be ‘I feel’ people. They will rely on people picking up on non-verbal cues, like they do.

The two styles can have a difficult time communicating, because high-contexters say what they mean, and are often baffled when others read so much more into their statements than what is said. Low-contexters are subtle, and get frustrated when what they say is not recieved, when they feel like they have “said it over and over.”

more on high vs. low context communication styles

The Prompt

  • So, which are you?
  • What challenges have you faced?
  • What have you done to make your communication with other styles more effective?

Feel free to write in the comments or in your own journal and link here (so others can read it), or just think on it or write on it and keep it to yourself, if you prefer.

I have already started my piece (just like always) and I’ll post it soon. I don’t want to influence anyone, though, as I love the idea of getting your honest and gut-instinct responses.

Write a sentence. Or a paragraph. Or an essay. Or whatever this is to you. Talk it out. Make it yours.

I’m looking forward to reading your responses!

Read More

Paraphrasing Is An Amazing, Valuable Tool When Used Right (Thoughts On Communication, Part VII)

In my recent “Communication For Couples” workshop, I taught how I like to use paraphrasing in response to stated opinions and needs from my partner:

Partner: I am feeling yadda yadda when you bazinga because Rumplestilskin.

Me (paraphrasing): You feel blah blah when I whoopdeedoo because supercalifragilisticexpialadocious. Am I understanding?

Partner (digesting and thinking for a minute): Not exactly. More like I’m feeling and so on and so forth when you yippee because McDomlypants.

Me (paraphrasing again): Ok. So you feel rah rah when I she bop bop bop bop because ramalamadingdong.

Partner: Yes.

Me: Is there more you can tell me?

And so on. Repeat until my partner feels like I understand and have nothing more to tell me.

This is paraphrasing in a positive way. The goal is to use my own words to re-express what a person says and feels, to deepen and show my personal understanding.

OR… and this is critical… to find out what I’ve misunderstood.

Because NO ADULT in the history of the human race (and most children of verbal age and up) has never been wrong.

No one.

So, paraphrasing ideas and concepts into your own words is useful when you are using it as a tool to actually bridge the communications gap.

Paraphrasing is also manipulative, self-centered, and often wrong.

It can be used as a way to invalid another person’s emotions and position. It allows us (yes, I say us, because I still guard against this behavior) to wrap another person’s statements in our own biases, hurts and assumptions, and set up our own personal windmills for tilting.

The problem is, it hurts them and us. And it hurts trust and communication.

Let’s look at an example:

Partner: I am feeling yadda yadda when you bazinga because Rumplestilskin.

Me (paraphrasing): You mean you want to break up with me?

Partner: No. More I’m feeling and so on and so forth when you yippee because McDomlypants.

Me (paraphrasing): I can’t believe you’re saying this. I thought we’d be together forever.

Partner: I’m not breaking up with you. I’m just trying to express some feelings.

Me: You don’t even know what you’re saying. What you’re really saying is that you want to break up. I can tell. I can hear it in your voice. See it in your face.

Partner: I don’t want to break up with you. I’m just having a hard time…

Me: Why would you want to be with someone who treats you so horribly?

In this case, paraphrasing is used as fact. Not as a tool to communicate, but as a club to beat the other person over the head emotionally for daring to express any negativity.

It invalidates their feelings, and forces other feelings onto them that they had no interest in.

Have you ever…?

Been a victim of paraphrasing by someone who refused to acknowledge your actual thoughts and feelings?

Been the perpetrator, so caught up in your head and your fears and your biases that you unwittingly invalidated a friend’s or loved one’s feelings and thoughts?

I admit: I’ve been both, sadly.

Read More

Dirty Talk, Step I: Some Thoughts On Sexual Fantasies

So, on a dominance forum I participate in (not a kinky site), there has been quite a bit of discussion recently about dirty talk and how to do it, how to get comfortable dirty talking, and so on.

Now, I’ll tell you, dirty talk is a favorite of mine. I really like to bring it into play, but it was not always this way. In fact, I was quite shy of it to start with.

Frankly, I felt like an idiot.


Anyway, these guys are having similar issues, and I suggested the following steps:

Here are the steps I’ve taken:

1. Talk about fantasies and turn-ons with my partner.
2. Ask detailed questions. Find out not just the fantasies, but WHAT about those fantasies is hot.
3. Merge those fantasies with my own desires.
4. Speak.

Because they have always worked for me.

BUT… The issue was:

I’ve asked my wife about her fantasies before (years ago) and I always got a noncommittal answer. “Oh, I don’t know, I don’t think I have any, blah blah blah.”

Have any of you ever asked your partner for sexual fantasies and gotten nada, zilch, zip?


There’s a reason for that.

WARNING: I’m going to generalize here for a bit. And understand that when I generalize, I mean generalize, because it’s easier to make a point with two scenarios that cover 90% of the population than to try to write out 8,000 scenarios that cover 99.9% of the population. You’ve been warned.

Getting Them To Open Up About Their Fantasies

Here’s the thing with fantasies: Ask some people what their fantasies are, they can lay out 129, in order of preference, know what they are willing to do for each, and describe to you what each player is wearing/doing/saying down to the last detail.

Other people’s fantasies tend to be a bit more… amorphous. It’s about how things make us FEEL, rather than what we see in our head.

The visual thing versus the feeling thing. I’m sure you’ve heard that one.

For example, if you were to ask me directly about fantasies, I would pretty much give you a blank. Partially because of that above (although I write them out quite a bit), partially because I’m living my fantasies every day, partially because it’s hard to put what I want to feel into words in a way that my partner will understand… he wants the screenplay, not the synopsis.

So, if you’re trying to elicit fantasies from someone who is a bit more of a feeler (male or female or anything between or outside of that), I’d try another tact.

Ask them about their favorite sexy movies. Have them share their favorite scenes. Ask about sexy books. Read those together.

Another good way to pull out fantasies is to talk about your past experiences together. What have been their favorite experiences with you?

If you’re comfortable, talk about sexual experiences before you got together as well.

Find out what makes these things so hot to your partner. Leverage those things. Those feelings. Those ideas.

We’ll talk more about having that discussion in the next step.

Read More