Jun 212012
 

A while back, Liza asked me about “distant buddies,” how we meet, how we get to know one another, and how we develop trust.  I wrote a bit about one of those here, and I’ll write about the three others that have endured for any length of time in coming days.  In this post?  I’d like to write a bit about the ones that don’t take, that don’t endure.  Because they have some commonalities.

Apparently I give off the impression that a) I have sex every day with someone new, and b) I have a gazillion “distant buddies.”  Neither is remotely true.  I’m a big flirt – I flirt with lots of people, in real life, on Twitter, in my comments, everywhere.  And I have had sex with people other than my wife.  But as I wrote in this post, I don’t think I really am that profligate.

I am often approached virtually by women who seem to imagine that I’ll simply become a “distant buddy” of theirs, that I’ll trade sexts, and pictures, and instructions, and play, and all that.  They think I’m easy.  And to an extent, that’s fair enough:  I like getting teasing pictures of women, of getting to know women’s bodies and personalities at a distance slowly.

But….  I have a friend who occasionally has sex with people other than her husband who was recently bothered by a guy who seemed to presume that he didn’t have to “work” to bed her, that she was “easy.”  I’m a bit the same.  While, on the one hand, I am easy, I actually want a connection, I want a relationship that evolves, that builds, that has a trajectory.

Sometimes, I know, I seem to speak out of both sides of my mouth on this:  I tweeted just this morning, basically, “Send me your orgasms!”  But the truth is, I don’t just want orgasms (like that of DangerousLilly that I posted some weeks ago).  I want orgasms that are produced with me in mind, for me.  I want to hear my name, to have an image of the woman producing the orgasm, for her to have an image of me.

This doesn’t happen overnight.  In each of the cases where there’s been anything like longevity, there’s been a virtual getting-to-know-one-another process that mirrors what we do in real-life dating.  Sure, it’s heavy on the sex, but it’s structurally similar.  A gradual process of revealing, of disclosure, of discovery.  And mystery.

One commenter the other day asked if I don’t feel jealousy about “A Thousand Miles Away”’s other relationships because I’ve seen her face.  The answer is, no.  It’s not.  It is because I don’t find her very mysterious, but the mystery that she lacks for me is motivational, not visual.  With the two distant buddies other than her who are active today, I have a ton of mystery.  Not just visual (one of them has shown me her face).  But with respect to their own desire.  I’m curious about how their desire works, they’re curious about mine.

Most often, when I’m approached by those who think I’m easy, there’s a decided lack of mystery.  This can come in many forms:  it can be as simple as photographic style:  one woman introduced herself to me by sending me a picture of her vagina (I assume it was hers), splayed open for me, wet, in close-up.  Um. Thanks, but no thanks.

It can be relational – a way of interacting that simply presumes knowledge of me (based, I imagine, on having read a lot of my words) without allowing me the opportunity to be discovered, to reveal myself in a personal, individual way.  Never mind the deprivation – revealing myself to someone new is fun, and if I can’t do that, I’ve lost something – it’s also presumptuous:  it presumes that the “me” that I reveal on the blog is, in fact, indistinguishable from the “me” that would be revealed in interactions.  But, of course, there’s much more to me than is on this blog.  There’s me the professional, me the family guy, me the intellectual, me the student, me the friend….  And someone who thinks they know me before we’ve spoken?  Well, that’s someone who doesn’t want to know me.  And what’s less appealing than someone who doesn’t want to know you, who thinks they know you?

And, it can be amorphous, visceral.  There are things that excite me, that engage me:  responsiveness, engagement, compliance, yielding.  There are things that repel me:  sporadic-ness, withholding, judgment, refusal.  L recently wrote a great post on how she likes it when people say “yes” to her.  I’m the same way.  If you say “no” to me, my interest immediately wanes just a bit.  If you keep saying it?  I’m gonna walk away.  That’s just how it goes for me.  And if you answer “yes” to my requests, if you do so instantly, comprehensively?

Well, that’s a great way to start building trust.  Is this “fair”?  Hell, no.  But it is how it works.  I’m most interested in women who find yielding to my desires to be fulfilling.  This is, in part, how my species of dominance works.  I just don’t have a lot of interest in negotiating the parameters of a relationship.  I want what I want, and I want you to want it, too.

  3 Responses to “Trust and distant buddies (II)”

  1. Thank you for writing this, so I don’t have to. I LOVE THIS! I love your words. I concur with so many pieces of your post. The assumption that I’m easy turns me off although in many respects I am. The need for something akin to courtship yet with blatant sexual aspects…you said it beautifully. sigh…thank you.

    Nikki (my blogging bff) and I have loved your blog from the get-go, and we’ve nominated you for an award. Thank you for sharing your experiences. We’re riveted readers. 🙂 http://vaginaantics.com/?p=526

  2. I’m enjoying this series very much. Lots of interesting insights into how this process works (or doesn’t) for you.

Say something! (I just did....)