Thursday, August 27, 2015


Wait!  Isn’t that cheating?

The word CHEAT can be defined as:
* to break a rule or law usually to gain an advantage at something
* to take something from (someone) by lying or breaking a rule
* to prevent (someone) from having something that he or she deserves or was expecting to get

Non-Monogamy may not be cheating... If there are rules allowing for more than one partner...

Dan Savage views on monogamy:  

One opinion on open relationships

Here's an example of the rules one might implement to stay out of the realm of cheating:

This video gives another opinion of how to express non-monogamy: POLYAMORY.   
The idea is love is not finite therefore we can have many loves.

My personal opinion:

In general, I shy away from studies/opinions that cling to sexual orientation and gender as the only factors to determine monogamy/non-monogamy. I think to do oversimplifies a very complex subject and devalues our individuality.

When gender and orientation are used as the ONLY factors:

*It increases sexism, homophobia, and transphobia
*Makes assumptions that the labels assigned are correct  (& assumes most people reside in boxes)
*Ignores that people may be on a spectrum which might vary over time.

Shouldn’t we look at the individuals involved? 

I'm truly exhausted by the Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus mindset. Or that ALL people on the rainbow reject heteronormative ideas of fidelity. I need to point out some ideas can be seen as heteronormative only because rights for everyone have been denied for so long…  and with studies reporting 30-70% of married people report having 'cheated' it doesn't look like it's got much to do with being on or off the rainbow.

I would suggest exploring other determining factors: 

*How the individual views sex? Is sex an expression of love? Or is it about getting off?
*Is the participant outside the primary relationship just a fancy masturbatory device or is there a connection giving the person in the relationship something they are lacking?
*Why is the person seeking the outside attention to deal with sexual/emotional needs?
*How does the cuckhold/cuntquean fetish play into this topic?

As a romance writer, I believe in happily ever afters. I think for some people (characters) HEA means a committed 1:1 relationship but for others the configuration might look different. My challenge as a writer if I’m going to have a non-traditional pairing (multiple partners, an open relationship, BDSM contract allowing multiple partners) I need to ensure my readers know it’s a happily ever after for these characters and that for them the non-monogamy reinforces the relationship not devalues it.

Thursday, August 20, 2015

Asexuality & Pansexuality & Trans-oriented


Someone who doesn’t experience sexual attraction.

Different than celibacy which is a choice.

The person who is asexual doesn’t feel desire to make sex part of their relationship with others BUT can decide to have sex.

((Some asexual people masturbate and have sex))

Gray Sexual: Someone who experiences sexual attraction to such a low degree or so rarely they identity within the asexuality spectrum.

Romantic Attraction/Orientation: Someone who is asexual may still want to form romantic relationships to opposite sex, same sex, and/or the entire range of gender. 

This video gives a brief overview and gives you a good basic framework.

Here's another resource:   Asexual101: Questions Answered



No this is not sexual attraction to pans. This means someone who can experience attraction regardless of gender or sex. 

Another short video you might enjoy!


Someone who is attracted to someone who is transgender. 

There's not a lot of information I can share with you because as Ms. Nina Arsenault (an educator in the video below) states most people who are attracted to people who are transgender aren't vocal about it. 

I do see parallels to the gay and lesbian communities of the past. It wasn't a safe option to admit sex same attraction let alone to act openly on it. There was little chance to explore a relationship beyond a quick fuck in the shadows. (Yes there were exceptions to this and my heart happy dances when I think of the odds these couples overcame to find love).  However, the sad truth was most of these men and women were not able to form attachments openly.

This same type of societal taboo affects most trans-oriented attraction. Relationships and marriage were/are discouraged therefore the only expression open to the trans-oriented person was/is sex>>>>> which reinforces the idea that trans-oriented people only want sex from the transgender community. 

I believe there are more people in the transgender stripe of the rainbow than actually identify as transgender (gender queer, non-binary, etc). These are new labels and people who fit into them may not even know they exist so can't/don't self-identify>>>>  therefore the transgender community sees them as THE OTHER (when they might very well be on the transgender spectrum).

At this distance it's easy to see the negative self-fulfilling prophecy that is being played out. Only through understanding and acceptance can we break this pattern. No one should sexualize the transgender community and we need to stop shaming the men and women who find trans-people alluring... to do so it extremely insulting to both parties. ((And I'm not discounting that there are some people who do sexualize transgender people and are only looking for sex... happens in every orientation.)) 
(This video focuses on guys who are attracted to trans women & allow me to warn you she uses some words that I find offensive but overall an interesting discussion)

One of the things I try to do in my writing is explore different expressions of sexuality. In Illusions & Dreams (categorized as a transgender romance) two of my main characters are transgender, someone who is pansexual (Jake O'Neil) and someone (Randy Camster) who thought he might be asexual until he finds he appreciates one of the singers at a club in Thailand.

Thursday, August 13, 2015

Educated In Sex?

Most of us in the USA are not.

Did you know:

*There’s no required standard for sex education in the USA.

*Only 22 states mandate kids receive it… and only 13 states require the instruction to be medically accurate!!!  (Are you saying WTF yet?)

*8 states are considering regulations about what teachers can say about homosexuality… I’d hazard to guess based on the state this might not be a good thing.

*In the USA the average man 6.6 partners & women 4.3 partners (Think this stat might be low) But regardless we’re knocking boots (before marriage) pretending we don't is dangerous and scary.

Why did Congress increase abstinence only education from 50 to 75 million dollars?

The average age of losing one's virginity in the USA is 17  

                                                        DON’T DO IT… isn’t practical

(SIDE NOTE: Bristol Palin was paid $200,000 to be a spokesperson of abstinence… and she’s pregnant again out of wedlock. Abstinence only education de-funds comprehensive programs that would prevent unwanted pregnancies) 

 Yes I let John Oliver do much of the work for me! And keeping with that here's the video his team made for sex education:

Clearly it's up to us to educate ourselves and pass on the information in a responsible manner. If you have kids you might want to see what they are learning and what they are not...

Education & Information is the best defense against ignorance.

                                   Check your sex knowledge: Sex-Fu Challenge 

                                         (Thank you to Lauren Marks for sharing this link with me)

Hugs, Z.

Thursday, August 6, 2015

Telling It Like It Is

((Note: I’ve been hurt by family/friends who feels it is super important to let everyone know how they feel…  so my feathers get ruffled and my own baggage is involved in this topic))

The proud tradition of ignoring how our words impact others… Telling It Like It Is

There’s a fine line between sharing your feelings and verbal vomit. There’s a time and a place for both but let’s not throw up our feelings without filters and suggest we’re just “Telling It Like It Is”…. 

While I believe we should speak our minds I think it’s acceptable in civilized society to use of filters when speaking to others:

1) The person can actually hear what you are saying and isn’t focusing on nonsense and the triggers your unfiltered words call up. If you actually want the person to understand your position you’ll want to do so in a way they can hear and process what you are trying to convey... use filters.

>>> If you believe Telling It Like It Is means you get free license to say anything you want you’re not concerned if it’s heard and processed... and I'd question what your agenda.

2) Hurting people for the sake of getting it off your chest is really just passing your negativity/hurt/pain onto others. So let’s not pretend otherwise. Filters are our friends.

What kind of filters am I suggesting?

You know your audience (or you should if you’re Telling It Like It Is) how can you approach the subject in a way they can process.

An example: When I have a disagreement with my love I start with:  I love you very much but... then I state my issue.  Why?  I want him to understand/remind myself I love him but this issue needs to be addressed. It also gives me perspective (crumbs vs love) so much frustration can be tempered (most times).

One of the speaking your mind checks floating around the internet is:

Is it true?
Is it kind?
Is it necessary?

What you say and how you say it can be an act of kindness... or not.

Words matters. Chose yours with care. Think twice about verbal vomit before you spew.

Hugs, Z.