#One Penis Policy

[polyamorousmood]

Opinions on "one penis policies" and how to address and deconstruct them?

Oh lawdy.

So I am generally leery of one penis policies. They are both predisposed to and often arise from unhelpful beliefs, which means one penis policies in practice are often a little fucked up.

But❗ I don't think people asking for them are irredeemable assholes, and I think there may even be some ways to do it that are sensible.

Very long post, so

First, for this post from this point forward, OPP is short for "one penis policy"

For those who don't know OPPs are exactly what they sound like. The stereotype is that a cis bisexual woman in a committed relationship with a cis (straight) man will approach him about opening the relationship. He is sympathetic and wants to let her explore her bisexuality, so he allows her to see/fuck/date other women only, figuring that he should be enough to satisfy whatever she'd be interested in doing with men. But it should be noted that the inverse can also be true. This post, while talking about it in terms from this stereotype for simplicity, can apply to a variety of situations with the appropriate swaps of genitalia and pronouns.

Why I'm leery:

As with most things that get into sketchy😬 territory with polyamory (and nonmonogamy more broadly), OPPs almost exclusively arise from insecurity. And the thing about insecurity is that for most people, the more you concede to it, the worse those insecurities get, which can snowball later down the line. Having a rule the protects some of those insecurities can encourage people to neglect working on them through other means, and opens the door for the man to feel betrayed if it later becomes important for the woman to pursue another man for any reason.

In polyamory especially (as opposed to other forms of non-monogamy) where at least one goal is to fall in love, they're really restrictive for the woman -- how many gay women down with polyamory are there? That rarity means it may take years to find a suitable partner. And it puts a heavy burden on the woman not to catch feelings for any other men, which can be really hard and heartbreaking in the same way it can be really hard and heartbreaking to be stuck in a fully monogamous relationship as a poly person.

Its kinda sexist? Often, it arises from the belief that penis-in-vagina is Real Sex and anything the woman does with another woman can be therefore written off. Inversely, sex with another man might "taint her" in his mind more than another woman for the same reason. Here there's an intersection with the insecurities in that a lot of men seem to think their "dick game" is the most important thing to their partners (when most studies show things like foreplay are usually more important), so our example man fears the direct comparison of penis size 🍆 and other masculinity things that could never possibly come up with women (incorrect, but more on that later).

Or, the straight man here could be fetishistic about lesbians and thinks its hot his lady is fucking other women🥵, so that's why its fine.

There are particulars that are ambiguous, and these can often cause problems if encountered. How do trans people factor into this? What if our woman gets with a woman who prefers sex with a big strap? Is that fine cause its still a woman, or will the man still feel betrayed because its "basically a penis"? Does this not call into question the validity of the whole rule to begin with? These things are rarely considered ahead of time.

In short, they often are formed for shitty reasons and put an undue burden on the woman. The consent of it feels less than authentic on both sides -- if he were really okay with it, why would he restrict her and if she only wanted to date other women it wouldn't be a "rule" she had to maintain.

Why then, do I not denounce all OPPs?

Let's consider some examples of pure intentions that could result in an OPP. Or at least, not-fucked intentions like above.

I think its really natural to want to have something special between yourself and your partner. I don't think there's anything wrong with wanting there to be something only you can provide your partner. Its very common to have certain activities, acts, terms of endearment, etc. reserved for a particular partner in non-monogamous relationships! Why should "PiV sex" be treated with such hostility, but "watching our favorite TV show" be seen as a reasonable thing to disallow your partner from doing with someone else?

The man is trying to be supportive and flexible. He genuinely feels he can offer anything she might need sexually/romantically with a man, because polyamory is new to him, and because she's still offering him everything he needs sexually/romantically. The simplest explanation is that its the immutable fact of his gender that's causing the dissatisfaction, and he's very sympathetic to that! In this example, he's a little confused, but he's got the spirit. Non-monogamy is a big thing to most people, and allowing it -- even with restrictions -- should be recognized as the monumental step it generally is.

With that in mind, maybe our man even recognizes this is a big insecurity of his, and wants to work on it. Maybe he plans to address these insecurities, but knows this will take time, and is allowing her as much as he can without it being too much for him. Should he not be allowed some space to adjust, to work on those things? Should we not admire him for trying to broker a compromise🤝 rather than shutting down the woman's desires?

The woman might be okay with it.👍 She may feel she primarily wants to date/fuck other women, so a OPP is a small concession to make for her partner's comfort and reassurance.

There's kink things. I know I said lesbian fetishization was a negative just a moment ago, but even with that there are ways to do it respectfully. I'm not going to kink shame. If our theoretical couple finds it hot for him to put restrictions on what she can do sexually even when he's away -- who am I to stop them? Or any other number of kinks could play a part here! "I'm your only Daddy, but I'll let you go on playdates with other little girls" is not my kink, but I think it should be allowed for the people that are into it. 🤷‍♀️Idk, I admit this is probably my least well explained paragraph but basically it being a kink thing may be a sort of shortcut which circumvents some of the earlier concerns about authentic consent -- maybe they're just freaks who like it like that.

So then. About that question of deconstructing them.

Careful examinations of motives and feelings of all parties is required to know whether any one OPP holds up. There needs to be a lot of work put into the conversation, preferably before the relationship is actually opened. Its going to be personal between those two people, and -- like literally fucking everything with polyamory -- its going to require a lot of introspection🤔 and good communication🗣️.

If you find yourself in a OPP you feel is too constraining, you're gonna have to make a lot of time to talk through it. Be prepared to explain in detail and several times why its problem to you, while reassuring your partner its not because you find him unsatisfactory in some way. Be committed to hearing him out and taking his concerns and insecurities seriously. I recommend making a point to let everyone air their grievances before working on problem solving any of them. As always, avoid blaming.

Then, here are some ideas I think could you could try to help ease some of the insecurities and issues a OPP protects:

Shift the special thing to something other than PiV sex. Make it something else meaningful to you both. It could be some other sex thing😏, it could be the restaurant you went to on your first date🍽️, it could be listening to certain songs🎼, it could be ballroom dancing💃, it could simply be a day of the week 📅you only focus on each other, it could be anything you both value, and it could even be several things!

It may feel more reasonable to allow your partner other guidelines instead of gender. This can fall into many of the same pitfalls of a OPP, but it can also be a good middle ground if negotiations are tough. Maybe she can only date/fuck people shorter than he is, or with a smaller dick, or who makes less money than he does. Maybe she can see other men as long as they don't fuck in the bed he shares with her. Maybe any number of other things would help reassure him while being less burdensome on her.

Offer a lot of reassurance🤗. This is hard and scary! If he is willing to work with you, you better be working with him, too! Tell him you missed him and shit. Tell him how valuable he is to you because he allows you this freedom. Help him see things from a better framework when he's struggling. Do all this even when he doesn't ask for it.

It may help to give him something in return.🎁 Like, don't get me wrong, a very transactional relationship is rarely the most satisfying one. But a simple "I recognize how much work this will be for you, and to show you I also willing to put in work for your sake, I'm willing to try [something important to him]" isn't unreasonable. I think its easy and kinda fair for him to grow resentful if he's asked to accept everything she wants without her giving him anything he values.

If he's trying but still genuinely struggling, put a specific time-delay on when things will take effect. This allows him to prepare for it mentally (without it being something that will maybe happen some day, and thus not soemthing he needs to worry about right now). It gives him time to mull things over, so he can come to her with any concerns before they're already in the thick of it. The length of time will vary based on the situation, but I think something measured in weeks would probably be fair.

Seriously consider anything else he asks for that would make it easier for him.

Best of luck out there! Go live your best, most free lives babes!!

[submissivefeminist]

If your partner is insisting that this is how polyamory is done, I'm gonna insist you find a better partner. The One Penis Policy is misogynistic, transphobic, and fetishizing in all the worst ways. ⛔🍆

[polyamzeal]

[sinc0]

[midnight-roses-candy]

It should go without saying that open relationships with the concept of a “one penis policy” are heteronormative and homophobic (as well as gender essentialist). The whole concept is rooted in the idea that sex between (cis) women isn’t “real sex” compared to penetrative sex with a penis. It’s also a result of the way that straight men fetishize WLW: “you can have sex with women because I find it hot, but no other men.”

[sardonic-simp]

You want to be nonmonogamous so you can fuck multiple women

I want to be nonmonogamous because my partners are amazing and I want them to have the freedom to experience all their relationships in whatever way feels right to them

We are not the same

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

"Derin why don't you ever write NSFW stuff" I literally would not know how. If I wanted to write porn I'd be like "the story is Sex Cruise, where people go on a cruise ship that's sexy and the goal is to have lots of sex. These two characters are gonna kiss lots and then get naked and maybe at least one of them has a penis that'll go in the other I dunno. Before we get to that here's a rundown of the health and safety measures taken by the Sex Cruise company and six thousand words of the passengers getting STI tests and signing liability waivers before the cruise can start. Also there's probably a high risk of sexual assault claims that the company doesn't want to risk so here's a rundown of the various safety features to prevent that, or at least ensure the company is fulfilling its legal duty of care. I wonder what the birth control policy is on Sex Cruise? Oh look those characters I mentioned are actually kissing and yeah I'm bored let's have a murder, this is a murder mystery at sea now. Yeeeah sexy. Sex Cruise."

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Unpersoned

Support me this summer on the Clarion Write-A-Thon and help raise money for the Clarion Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers' Workshop!

My latest Locus Magazine column is "Unpersoned." It's about the implications of putting critical infrastructure into the private, unaccountable hands of tech giants:

https://locusmag.com/2024/07/cory-doctorow-unpersoned/

The column opens with the story of romance writer K Renee, as reported by Madeline Ashby for Wired:

https://www.wired.com/story/what-happens-when-a-romance-author-gets-locked-out-of-google-docs/

Renee is a prolific writer who used Google Docs to compose her books, and share them among early readers for feedback and revisions. Last March, Renee's Google account was locked, and she was no longer able to access ten manuscripts for her unfinished books, totaling over 220,000 words. Google's famously opaque customer service – a mix of indifferently monitored forums, AI chatbots, and buck-passing subcontractors – would not explain to her what rule she had violated, merely that her work had been deemed "inappropriate."

Renee discovered that she wasn't being singled out. Many of her peers had also seen their accounts frozen and their documents locked, and none of them were able to get an explanation out of Google. Renee and her similarly situated victims of Google lockouts were reduced to developing folk-theories of what they had done to be expelled from Google's walled garden; Renee came to believe that she had tripped an anti-spam system by inviting her community of early readers to access the books she was working on.

There's a normal way that these stories resolve themselves: a reporter like Ashby, writing for a widely read publication like Wired, contacts the company and triggers a review by one of the vanishingly small number of people with the authority to undo the determinations of the Kafka-as-a-service systems that underpin the big platforms. The system's victim gets their data back and the company mouths a few empty phrases about how they take something-or-other "very seriously" and so forth.

But in this case, Google broke the script. When Ashby contacted Google about Renee's situation, Google spokesperson Jenny Thomson insisted that the policies for Google accounts were "clear": "we may review and take action on any content that violates our policies." If Renee believed that she'd been wrongly flagged, she could "request an appeal."

But Renee didn't even know what policy she was meant to have broken, and the "appeals" went nowhere.

This is an underappreciated aspect of "software as a service" and "the cloud." As companies from Microsoft to Adobe to Google withdraw the option to use software that runs on your own computer to create files that live on that computer, control over our own lives is quietly slipping away. Sure, it's great to have all your legal documents scanned, encrypted and hosted on GDrive, where they can't be burned up in a house-fire. But if a Google subcontractor decides you've broken some unwritten rule, you can lose access to those docs forever, without appeal or recourse.

That's what happened to "Mark," a San Francisco tech workers whose toddler developed a UTI during the early covid lockdowns. The pediatrician's office told Mark to take a picture of his son's infected penis and transmit it to the practice using a secure medical app. However, Mark's phone was also set up to synch all his pictures to Google Photos (this is a default setting), and when the picture of Mark's son's penis hit Google's cloud, it was automatically scanned and flagged as Child Sex Abuse Material (CSAM, better known as "child porn"):

https://pluralistic.net/2022/08/22/allopathic-risk/#snitches-get-stitches

Without contacting Mark, Google sent a copy of all of his data – searches, emails, photos, cloud files, location history and more – to the SFPD, and then terminated his account. Mark lost his phone number (he was a Google Fi customer), his email archives, all the household and professional files he kept on GDrive, his stored passwords, his two-factor authentication via Google Authenticator, and every photo he'd ever taken of his young son.

The SFPD concluded that Mark hadn't done anything wrong, but it was too late. Google had permanently deleted all of Mark's data. The SFPD had to mail a physical letter to Mark telling him he wasn't in trouble, because he had no email and no phone.

Mark's not the only person this happened to. Writing about Mark for the New York Times, Kashmir Hill described other parents, like a Houston father identified as "Cassio," who also lost their accounts and found themselves blocked from fundamental participation in modern life:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/21/technology/google-surveillance-toddler-photo.html

Note that in none of these cases did the problem arise from the fact that Google services are advertising-supported, and because these people weren't paying for the product, they were the product. Buying a $800 Pixel phone or paying more than $100/year for a Google Drive account means that you're definitely paying for the product, and you're still the product.

What do we do about this? One answer would be to force the platforms to provide service to users who, in their judgment, might be engaged in fraud, or trafficking in CSAM, or arranging terrorist attacks. This is not my preferred solution, for reasons that I hope are obvious!

We can try to improve the decision-making processes at these giant platforms so that they catch fewer dolphins in their tuna-nets. The "first wave" of content moderation appeals focused on the establishment of oversight and review boards that wronged users could appeal their cases to. The idea was to establish these "paradigm cases" that would clarify the tricky aspects of content moderation decisions, like whether uploading a Nazi atrocity video in order to criticize it violated a rule against showing gore, Nazi paraphernalia, etc.

This hasn't worked very well. A proposal for "second wave" moderation oversight based on arms-length semi-employees at the platforms who gather and report statistics on moderation calls and complaints hasn't gelled either:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/03/12/move-slow-and-fix-things/#second-wave

Both the EU and California have privacy rules that allow users to demand their data back from platforms, but neither has proven very useful (yet) in situations where users have their accounts terminated because they are accused of committing gross violations of platform policy. You can see why this would be: if someone is accused of trafficking in child porn or running a pig-butchering scam, it would be perverse to shut down their account but give them all the data they need to go one committing these crimes elsewhere.

But even where you can invoke the EU's GDPR or California's CCPA to get your data, the platforms deliver that data in the most useless, complex blobs imaginable. For example, I recently used the CCPA to force Mailchimp to give me all the data they held on me. Mailchimp – a division of the monopolist and serial fraudster Intuit – is a favored platform for spammers, and I have been added to thousands of Mailchimp lists that bombard me with unsolicited press pitches and come-ons for scam products.

Mailchimp has spent a decade ignoring calls to allow users to see what mailing lists they've been added to, as a prelude to mass unsubscribing from those lists (for Mailchimp, the fact that spammers can pay it to send spam that users can't easily opt out of is a feature, not a bug). I thought that the CCPA might finally let me see the lists I'm on, but instead, Mailchimp sent me more than 5900 files, scattered through which were the internal serial numbers of the lists my name had been added to – but without the names of those lists any contact information for their owners. I can see that I'm on more than 1,000 mailing lists, but I can't do anything about it.

Mailchimp shows how a rule requiring platforms to furnish data-dumps can be easily subverted, and its conduct goes a long way to explaining why a decade of EU policy requiring these dumps has failed to make a dent in the market power of the Big Tech platforms.

The EU has a new solution to this problem. With its 2024 Digital Markets Act, the EU is requiring platforms to furnish APIs – programmatic ways for rivals to connect to their services. With the DMA, we might finally get something parallel to the cellular industry's "number portability" for other kinds of platforms.

If you've ever changed cellular platforms, you know how smooth this can be. When you get sick of your carrier, you set up an account with a new one and get a one-time code. Then you call your old carrier, endure their pathetic begging not to switch, give them that number and within a short time (sometimes only minutes), your phone is now on the new carrier's network, with your old phone-number intact.

This is a much better answer than forcing platforms to provide service to users whom they judge to be criminals or otherwise undesirable, but the platforms hate it. They say they hate it because it makes them complicit in crimes ("if we have to let an accused fraudster transfer their address book to a rival service, we abet the fraud"), but it's obvious that their objection is really about being forced to reduce the pain of switching to a rival.

There's a superficial reasonableness to the platforms' position, but only until you think about Mark, or K Renee, or the other people who've been "unpersonned" by the platforms with no explanation or appeal.

The platforms have rigged things so that you must have an account with them in order to function, but they also want to have the unilateral right to kick people off their systems. The combination of these demands represents more power than any company should have, and Big Tech has repeatedly demonstrated its unfitness to wield this kind of power.

This week, I lost an argument with my accountants about this. They provide me with my tax forms as links to a Microsoft Cloud file, and I need to have a Microsoft login in order to retrieve these files. This policy – and a prohibition on sending customer files as email attachments – came from their IT team, and it was in response to a requirement imposed by their insurer.

The problem here isn't merely that I must now enter into a contractual arrangement with Microsoft in order to do my taxes. It isn't just that Microsoft's terms of service are ghastly. It's not even that they could change those terms at any time, for example, to ingest my sensitive tax documents in order to train a large language model.

It's that Microsoft – like Google, Apple, Facebook and the other giants – routinely disconnects users for reasons it refuses to explain, and offers no meaningful appeal. Microsoft tells its business customers, "force your clients to get a Microsoft account in order to maintain communications security" but also reserves the right to unilaterally ban those clients from having a Microsoft account.

There are examples of this all over. Google recently flipped a switch so that you can't complete a Google Form without being logged into a Google account. Now, my ability to purse all kinds of matters both consequential and trivial turn on Google's good graces, which can change suddenly and arbitrarily. If I was like Mark, permanently banned from Google, I wouldn't have been able to complete Google Forms this week telling a conference organizer what sized t-shirt I wear, but also telling a friend that I could attend their wedding.

Now, perhaps some people really should be locked out of digital life. Maybe people who traffick in CSAM should be locked out of the cloud. But the entity that should make that determination is a court, not a Big Tech content moderator. It's fine for a platform to decide it doesn't want your business – but it shouldn't be up to the platform to decide that no one should be able to provide you with service.

This is especially salient in light of the chaos caused by Crowdstrike's catastrophic software update last week. Crowdstrike demonstrated what happens to users when a cloud provider accidentally terminates their account, but while we're thinking about reducing the likelihood of such accidents, we should really be thinking about what happens when you get Crowdstruck on purpose.

The wholesale chaos that Windows users and their clients, employees, users and stakeholders underwent last week could have been pieced out retail. It could have come as a court order (either by a US court or a foreign court) to disconnect a user and/or brick their computer. It could have come as an insider attack, undertaken by a vengeful employee, or one who was on the take from criminals or a foreign government. The ability to give anyone in the world a Blue Screen of Death could be a feature and not a bug.

It's not that companies are sadistic. When they mistreat us, it's nothing personal. They've just calculated that it would cost them more to run a good process than our business is worth to them. If they know we can't leave for a competitor, if they know we can't sue them, if they know that a tech rival can't give us a tool to get our data out of their silos, then the expected cost of mistreating us goes down. That makes it economically rational to seek out ever-more trivial sources of income that impose ever-more miserable conditions on us. When we can't leave without paying a very steep price, there's practically a fiduciary duty to find ways to upcharge, downgrade, scam, screw and enshittify us, right up to the point where we're so pissed that we quit.

Google could pay competent decision-makers to review every complaint about an account disconnection, but the cost of employing that large, skilled workforce vastly exceeds their expected lifetime revenue from a user like Mark. The fact that this results in the ruination of Mark's life isn't Google's problem – it's Mark's problem.

The cloud is many things, but most of all, it's a trap. When software is delivered as a service, when your data and the programs you use to read and write it live on computers that you don't control, your switching costs skyrocket. Think of Adobe, which no longer lets you buy programs at all, but instead insists that you run its software via the cloud. Adobe used the fact that you no longer own the tools you rely upon to cancel its Pantone color-matching license. One day, every Adobe customer in the world woke up to discover that the colors in their career-spanning file collections had all turned black, and would remain black until they paid an upcharge:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/10/28/fade-to-black/#trust-the-process

The cloud allows the companies whose products you rely on to alter the functioning and cost of those products unilaterally. Like mobile apps – which can't be reverse-engineered and modified without risking legal liability – cloud apps are built for enshittification. They are designed to shift power away from users to software companies. An app is just a web-page wrapped in enough IP to make it a felony to add an ad-blocker to it. A cloud app is some Javascript wrapped in enough terms of service clickthroughs to make it a felony to restore old features that the company now wants to upcharge you for.

Google's defenstration of K Renee, Mark and Cassio may have been accidental, but Google's capacity to defenstrate all of us, and the enormous cost we all bear if Google does so, has been carefully engineered into the system. Same goes for Apple, Microsoft, Adobe and anyone else who traps us in their silos. The lesson of the Crowdstrike catastrophe isn't merely that our IT systems are brittle and riddled with single points of failure: it's that these failure-points can be tripped deliberately, and that doing so could be in a company's best interests, no matter how devastating it would be to you or me.

If you'd like an e ssay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/07/22/degoogled/#kafka-as-a-service

Image: Cryteria (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg

CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

[jame7t]

one of the most frustrating things about halo fans who become indie game devs is that a lotta them want to just remake halo 3. like not spiritually, they just make a fan halo game in the artstyle of halo 3. Microsoft had to explode a few iirc

stop doing that and make an original title that harkens back to cut content from across the series and plays with original ideas.

look at the master Chief from the beta 10 billion years ago. go down this path and make something weird

these fucked up proto-elites are like .2 steps away from being geigeresque. go that route. make penis aliens. fall forever. make more indie games that harken to the shitty aesthetics of yester-millennium because that shit rocks*

*lots of games do this but you see way more games being spiritually doom or wolfy than you see halo-likes. and I think that’s a shame

**it’s only frustrating to me because the time wasted making a halo clone Microsoft will nuke could be spent making a halo clone that makes Microsoft reconsider its moronic employment policies regarding 18-month contracts

***hi

[spicywomenyouwant]

After the stunning success of the “Nude Femininity” and “Open Use” policies, your company doubled down on the use of “feminine relief” to boost employee employee morale and drive sales up. With their productivity figures through the roof, employee retention at an all-time high and more applications per job opening than ever before, it only made sense that executives would seek to solidify their success.

Therefore, it was announced at the most recent annual general shareholder meeting that the company would be replacing the “Human Resources” department with the newly-formed “Female Resources” department, or “FR”.

FR’s main job was to make sure that all male employees were content and satisfied, and that their balls were empty for as much of the day as possible. In the past, the company had hired based on experience, commitment and passion for the job, and they saw no reason to change this approach when staffing the FR department.

Cressida (left) was 26, and had spent 8 years in the porn industry as a nude model and blowjob specialist. She had over 200 videos online of her sucking cocks of all sizes, races and shapes, and she put her skills to good use in the FR-mandated gloryholes installed in the office bathrooms.

Verity (middle) was more of a passionate amateur, studying English at university. She may look shy, but she got her job on the basis that during her time in college she had fucked more men than any other undergraduate student in living memory. She fucked all 150 men who worked in her department, professors and students alike, 5 men from each fraternity (amounting to 90 cocks in her pussy in 18 insane frathouse gangbangs), and even managed to give a handjob to the university president in exchange for a scholarship. She was the shining star in the FR department, insatiably horny and always begging her coworkers to let her eat them out.

Ruby (right) has a thing for large-audience public sex. With the rise in sexual activity, plenty of seminars and presentations had to be arranged, and nobody could present better whilst being spitroasted by her colleagues than Ruby. With a cock up her ass and another one vigorously fucking her mouth, she could choke out plenty of facts about STDs and condoms. However, with all the men in the audience preoccupied with their female coworkers’ holes, or masturbating watching their office crush take dick, it was uncertain how much of an effect Ruby’s words had beyond providing pleasant vibrations on the penis in her throat.

The attached picture is from the company’s most recent marketing brochure, bragging about a top-of-the-line Female Services division that is set to open next year. With the influx in talent, it was a no-brainer that the company would move into the adult industries (porn, sex toys, erotic stories).

You’ve been working there for a while now. Who do you choose to fuck on a daily basis? Do you take one in the morning, one at lunch and one just before you go home? Or do you have another office sweetheart/whore whose pussy is tighter and sweeter than any of these used-up harlots?

(If you have an office whore you want a story about, DM me!)

[iliterallydecepticanteven]

A Guide to Valveplug: Sticky Interfacing Edition

So I made a post yesterday about how I should make a guide for new fans coming into the Transformers fandom regarding valveplug (the term used for 18+ Transformers content) since it can be kind of hard to figure out if you're new. This is that guide.

This post in particular will cover what is called sticky interfacing, which is the most common. There are three other types I am aware of: 1) plug and play, 2) tactile, and 3) sparkplay. This post will just cover sticky.

Obvious warning, everything below the read more is mature content so proceed with your own discretion.

Okay, so, first thing to get out of the way: interfacing means sex in the TF fandom. This is not a canon term, it's a fanon term, so if you are watching or reading official Transformers media and someone uses the word interface/interfacing, no it's not a tongue-in-cheek sex joke. Interface is a real word with real meaning beyond the fanon definition.

As mentioned above, this post will cover sticky interfacing, which is the most human version of TF sex in the fandom. This involves the characters having human like genitalia and experiencing orgasm through physical sexual stimulation akin to the way humans would. This most commonly is shown as penis-in-vagina style sex, but anything that can be done with a penis and vagina can be done here, like blowjobs, cunnilingus, fingering, handjobs, and use of both penetrative and non-penetrative vibrators.

(EDIT: I completely forgot that in Transformers Prime Knock Out does make a joke about two human characters interfacing. So far as I can tell, this is the only instance of the writers being in on the term.)

The word interface/interfacing is used interchangeably and simply despends on context. For example, "Did you two interface?" and "Interfacing can be hard on my joints" are both ways the term can be used.

Let's cover anatomy terms first. A spike is the term for a penis and valve is the term for a vagina. Some fics also make reference to a node or anterior node around the valve, which is the term for clitoris. That's really the biggest hurtle to clear when it comes to getting into reading sticky interfacing.

Additionally, regardless of the character's gender, TFs usually have both a spike and a valve. Gender, and by proxy whether a character is a mech or a femme, is truly a social construct in TF fanon and canon. As such, the character will always have both. For as long as I have been reading sticky interfacing fics (which is way longer than I want to admit), I can count on one hand the number of fics that stuck to a strict one sexual organ policy. So characters will be packing both.

Because of this, the character's role in sticky interfacing really comes down to preference. The character may prefer to penetrate or be penetrated. This is most commonly how the bottom and top tags on AO3 are used.

Now that we've covered anatomy terms, let's get into physiology and how they work. (And apologies for the diagrams incoming, I did my best.)

Both the spike and valve have similar positions on TF characters to where they would be on humans, that being in the groin. It's generally agreed that the organs are covered by retractable plating that can be moved back and forth at will by the character, similar to a human putting their pants on or pulling them off.

The spike is tucked fully into the body and will pressurize outwards when the character becomes aroused (see picture above). The valve is simply covered by plating (see picture below), but arousal does cause the production of lubricant and some swelling in the outer lips (which, so far as I can tell, everyone has just agreed to call the vulva the lips of the valve).

Now you may be wondering, well when are we going to talk about the term for testicles. And the thing is, there isn't because they simply aren't there. Solely the spike expanding outwards is there.

That's not to say there isn't a parallel for semen though. In this case, the term transfluid is often used. It is produced within the body and, like with human ejaculation, is expelled during orgasm. The valve also produces lubricant like with a human vagina, which is produced in abundance when aroused in preparation for penetration. The valve also may need to be gently fingered open prior to penetration, depending on the size of the character penetrating, and is flexible and able to stretch with enough time and lubricant.

As for the color of everything mentioned, it varies. Typically spikes and valves will be similar color schemes to the character's themselves, other times they'll be a plain metal color. One fun thing I see people do that I personally enjoy is when they say that anterior node glows the same color as the character's eyes, but that's just my own personal preference. Transfluid and lubricant are typically translucent and I personally see them as both being a silver sheen.

And I know I will be getting asked this question if I don't include it so I'll just cover it: anal sex isn't really a thing. I believe this stems from the belief that TFs do not produce waste products like humans do and therefore do not a way to get rid of them. I don't know if that's canon, but that's how I have always seen it. But, I have encountered it twice, so from what I have seen, a port is the term for an anus, ports do not lubricate themselves and so some other lubricant source must be used, and again, regardless of the character's gender, they will have a spike, valve, and port.

Finally, to answer a question I'm sure you have bouncing around in your head, yes the robots can get pregnant but only if the author/artist/creator wills it. In instances where the TF character has the equipment to get pregnant, the forge is term for the uterus. And additionally, the term mprg is not used, we use the term mechpreg.

I think that covers the basics. Obviously, everyone has their own spin on things, so you may encounter something you have to use context clues to figure out. But just this knowledge should be good to help you get into sticky interfacing fics, art, etc without being too lost. So go forth and be horny for those giant alien robots!

[dreamteammemes]

Extremely self-indulgent "Shit People Have Said" meme: warning for language and explicit content

"Photosynthesize on the haters."

"I miss ten seconds ago when I didn't see that."

"Why does Freddy Fazbear want you so bad?"

"I don't want to make you uncomfortable, but if you want to make out, let's make out!"

"I went to the museum in Animal Crossing and everyone there knew you."

"The only thing that should be going into your lungs is air????"

"I'm going to name my kids Slim Shady and Draculara."

"Sometimes you just have to do ketamine with a horse."

"What? You're not coming to my tea party? (Name), I made biscuits!"

"72 virgins? Doesn't that seem like a trap to you?"

"You look like you're forlornly reminiscing about a lost lover."

"I pity you fishless fool."

"I just became conscious in the middle of saying this sentence."

"I ordered 37 Baja Blasts to impress the girl at the counter."

"(Name) is a bitch. They're a bitch on wheels."

"Who needs sleep? I've been up for eight days!"

"All birds are ducks but not all shrimp are brownies."

"You may be able to rotate my tires but can you satisfy a woman?"

"I'm married to myself. Why? I'm hot."

"I've created a situation."

"Please, call me by your name."

"I'm two much for these bitches and three much for these hoes."

"Look, the sign says I can refuse service to anyone that violates our policies, and frankly... I just really hate your vibes."

"This isn't a comedy bar; this is a Starbucks. Get your shit and leave."

"I’ve done nice things like not murder you even when I really wanted to, and this is how you repay me?"

"My hobbies include showing up in people's dreams and being dead."

"I may be a dumb bitch but I ain’t fucking stupid."

"I'm alive for two reasons. One, I was born, and two, I haven't died yet."

"No human language can describe the disappointment I’m feeling right now."

"(Name), if you remember, I hit you with my Gucci car and I'm sorry."

"I was possessed by the devil when I said that."

"You are going to die because I'm going to kill you."

"You're nothing but a dip ass shit."

"You blacked out after laughing at your own joke."

"Sometimes you just have to let go of the steering wheel of life and drift for a while."

"My neighbors like this song so much they threw a brick through my window so they could hear it better."

"Ask your doctor if these hands are right for you."

"I'm hiding my penis because people are out of control!"

"Sure, blame the guy who's a huge idiot who causes a lot of problems again."

"You’re a liar, wow I’m getting tired of this!”

"One day I'm going to say "fight me!" and someone's just going to fucking deck me"

[polyamzeal]

How One-Penis Policy guys think 🙄

[peepingcreek]

Oliver head-cannons:

Oliver tracks down every girl and guy Felix ever hooked up with and sleeps with them too.

Right after his triumphant penis dance, he curls up on Felix's bed and cries hot, angry tears.

He makes Duncan do the weirdest and most absurd requests for his own freaky pleasure. "Duncan, decorate the front yard with plastic dildos, wont you?"

Farliegh Head-cannons

He admits defeat in the begining, slinking back to America, but vows revenge. Farliegh and Oliver meet for a passive aggressive esspreso date in Venice, which Oliver pays for.

Felix fingered him LOL

Venetia Head-canons

She's been in and out of ED treatment through high school and finished her education with a tutor.

She never had a good group of school mates, and mostly hangs out with Felix and who he brings around

Felix fufills his savior complex by trying to help her, feeling sorry for her.

Elspeth Head-cannon

She also had bulimia when she was modeling

She is a closeted lesbian and has 0 attraction to sr. James

huge lesbian crush on Oliver

Duncan Headcannons OHHH

His family has been serving the Cattons for generations

He and the servants were all privy to Olivers freaky little escapades, but have a strict no interference policy

Duncan loved Felix, and all the servants thought that Felix was the only decent one of the family, aside from maybe James but idk

[nerdygaymormon]

I heard Mormons don't allow masturbation but soaking is okay?

Hahahahaha, this is such a funny ask.

The LDS Church teaches that Chastity means having sexual relations only with your spouse (and it only recognizes opposite sex spouses🙄).

What does “sexual relations” mean? Google says “sexual behavior between individuals, especially sexual intercourse.” Or put another way, sexual activity involving 2 or more people.

If you’re not involving anyone else, it’s just you alone, I don’t see that masturbation fits into this definition. Masturbation isn’t included on the church’s website about chastity or in the official Handbook of policies. Unfortunately, many leaders think that masturbation is not being chaste, and in the past there was an emphasis put on not masturbating, but we're in one of those eras of a de-emphasis about masturbation (but some leaders haven't figured that out).

As for soaking, I'm sure there's someone out there who'll say they participated in this but mostly it's just funny gossip, a rumor that people tell in order to shock others. For anyone who doesn't know what "soaking" means, it's when a person inserts their penis into someone's vagina, but they don't move because sex means the penis needs to be moving back and forth. And then because this isn't weird enough, they get others to jump on the bed in order to create some motion. Somehow they say this technically isn't sex, but no one actually believes that. If you're gonna go this far, just go ahead and do the deed. Also, soaking would clearly meet the definition of "sexual relations"

[wndaswife]

🥺 please make a drabble 🥺 about Therese 🥺 Raquin x reader 🥺 where Therese is jealous 🥺on the girls that keeps flirting Reader to haberdashery 🥺 and tries to be dominant in bed when she's nothing but a bottom cockwhore lady 🥺🥺🥺

thérèse raquin & gn!reader

tags: smut, fluff, jealousy, possessiveness, degradation, praise, reader has a penis, sub!thérèse raquin, dom!reader. MINORS DNI.

summary: Thérèse is a wild card by nature, but there are some things about her that just can't be changed.

Thérèse peeks over her armful of green satin fabric rolls as she steps down from the staircase, observing the conversation between you and the small flock of girls gathered in front of the counter. She represses a roll of her eyes as she listens to them giggle behind their hands and exchange whispers about you though they’re standing right in front of you.

She wonders if they sincerely intend for their incessant pestering to be charming.

“My mother always told me to bed a tailor,” one of the girls giggle out.

You straighten the sleeve of the silk robe on the table, making quick work of stitching up the loose threads of the hemming. 

“Is that so?” you ask, sounding at least partially-interested.

As Thérèse climbs onto a stepstool and slides the rolls of fabric into the wooden shelf behind you, she listens to the conversation with her back turned.

The girl hums in affirmation. 

“Nimble fingers,” she elaborates.

Heat rises up Thérèse’s neck to her cheeks and she feels hot fury bubbling up in her. She turns her head and looks down at the group of girls in front of the shop’s counter. She comes down from the stepstool and looks over your shoulder to see you finishing up the customer’s sleeve. 

Quickly, Thérèse lays out a paper wrap. She pushes your hands out of the way. She closes up the stitching before cutting the thread and putting the needle and thread to the side. 

“Y/N can do the work on their own, miss,” a girl protests.

Thérèse looks up from the dress and glares at her. “Oh, it’s no trouble at all,” she says. “Either way, I wouldn’t want to strain my partner’s pretty fingers.” 

Both you and Thérèse weren’t overt with your relationship, thus the usage of ‘partner’ was ambiguous and applied to professional partnerships while still certainly implying romance, if not a relationship that was at the very least explicitly carnal with the way her eyes darted over to you.

She folds the dress up carefully then tucks it away in the paper wrap. She tapes it closed then ties it all together with twine. With her eyes still flickering over the girls, each one looking contrite as they lost the opportunity to have you serve them instead of her, Thérèse slides over the packaged dress. 

She reminds, “Formal clothing is meant to be dropped off in the afternoon and picked up at a later time.”

When the girls exchange a look, Thérèse speaks up again. “It’s policy,” she adds sternly. “To be fair to our other customers.” She slides the dress further up the counter and one of the girls finally takes it.

“Good day,” Thérèse dismisses contemptuously.

You’re taking your rings off in front of the vanity mirror when Thérèse steps into the bedroom and closes the door behind her. “Is the shop locked up?” you ask. You look back at her through the mirror and smile at her as she meets your eyes and begins unbuttoning her dress. 

She nods in response then hangs up her crinoline on the hook beside the vanity. Then she steps beside you and leans down to kiss your neck. 

Before you can even begin to take pleasure in her soft kisses, Thérèse whispers, “I did not enjoy seeing you fraternise with our guests earlier, Y/N.”

You turn your head to look at her and she straightens to look down at you. 

“What are you on about?” you inquire and your eyebrows push together.

“I’d bet you stiffened at the sight of them,” she says. She leans down and cups your sex. “Show me how you did.” Her hand tightens around you, fingers pressing through the fabric of your undergarments.

“Thérèse, what has gotten into you?”

She takes your chin in her hand and angles your face up to her.

“Show me,” she insists. “Or it is only other girls that get you stimulated?” Thérèse lifts you from the seat and moves you towards the bed. She sits you down and begins stripping her final layer of clothing until she’s bare whilst you do the same.

You move backwards on the bed, trying to repress your amused grin as Thérèse climbs onto your lap and takes your cock into her hand. Her tongue peeks out from her mouth as she runs its tip across her upper lip at the feeling of how hard you are. 

Thérèse moves onto her knees and lowers herself carefully. Your hands wrap around her waist then rub up and down her back, feeling the gentle slope of her spine with your fingertips. She lowers herself until she can run the tip of your cock through her folds. She shudders and her resolve begins to fracture.

Her fingers squeeze around you gently and her hand pumps you shakily as her hips begin to roll forward, craving more friction. You feel her push you upwards through her folds until she nudges you against the hood of her clit. Her eyes shut and she leans against you, her breasts pressed up against your chest with her cheek against yours.

When she dips you in and out of her opening, finally eliciting trembling whimpers from her, she moves her hips down to lower herself onto your dick. 

You wrap your hands around her waist and push her back up. She attempts to conceal her disappointment at your action but a frustrated exhale through her nose slips out anyways. She reaches to her side and takes hold of your hand to try and swat it away, but you tighten your grip around her waist and Thérèse lifts her head to look at you.

“Beg,” you say simply.

“No,” she answers, shooting you a defiant look. “Just let me—”

You keep her body held upwards, her cunt just inches away from the tip of your cock. “I’m going to bed if you don’t beg,” you tell her.

Her gaze darts up at you, searching your eyes for any sort of hint that you were teasing her. Unfortunately for her, she finds nothing but sincerity. Her lips twitch and she nearly scowls before she comes to her senses and realises that she has a lesser chance of receiving your mercy if she gave you attitude.

With an inquisitive tip of your head, you prompt her further.

“F-Fine,” she forces out. “Fine. P… Please fuck me. Please. I want your cock.”

“I can’t understand you when you mutter, Thérèse.”

“I said, please fuck my pussy,” she begs. “I’m begging. Please, Y/N.”

In the silent stare exchanged between the two of you, Thérèse admits to being nothing but your pathetic pet, a desperate whore ready to take your cock whenever you should feel like fucking her. And in the way you bend her over with her face pressed against the pillow while she drools and moans out like a braindead slut, you reassure her that you could want no other but her. 

You have her say she belongs to you and that her cunt is yours, how wet her pussy gets just thinking of taking your dick into her holes, of having your head between her thighs while you eat her out. You tell her how pretty she looks, how proud you are to own her, and most importantly, how no other could ever take her place as your special girl.

She falls asleep in your arms reassured and confident in the reciprocity of her love for you. Thérèse dozes off with a small smile on her lips for she knows that no one on Earth, let alone in all of France, could ever have you the way she does. You are Thérèse’s as much as she is yours, and that brings her a great amount of pride.