A Politically-Incorrect Sexuality

Want to know how to clear a room? As a woman all I have to do is to explain the dynamic of my freely chosen romantic relationship. The result is variously:

  1. Disbelief
  2. Shock
  3. Outrage
  4. Pity
  5. Acceptance
  6. Envy

Sometimes, it is all of the above.

Putting aside Acceptance and Envy for the moment, the usual result from the other quarters generally precedes something like “damage control”. Obviously, I must be wholly uneducated about the plight of womanhood throughout the ages, feminism, my “rights”, and all the “empowering” alternatives out there.

For example, an exceptionally open-minded person might suggest that I need to start dominating men sexually and thereby discover my “inner goddess”.

How about this? What if I’m the kind of “goddess” who likes being “degraded”? Am I not of sufficient adult agency to make that choice?

Hear me out here. What if I’m the Persephone-type of goddess who likes spending half the year doing the nasty with the God of the underworld, emerging unscathed to soak up the sun and soothe my hysterical Mom who starts madly making flowers bloom in her excitement and relief, for the other half?

As for the historical mindset of women like me, I honestly don’t know. It is not my area of expertise. Furthermore, I wouldn’t imagine that it would be particularly well-received throughout the modern age, except of course in the case of erotica staged and enacted by well-compensated professionals or plucky exhibitionist amateurs, or as “legitimate” punishment for heresy such as the horrible things that occurred in the Inquisition, or as civil punishment as described in places like this: http://www.history-of-germany.com/?scid=rothenburg_torture&.

From what I can gather, masochism may be acceptable albeit derided in men but wholly unacceptable in women except within minority factions of supposedly misogynistic religious orders as evidenced by the outrage of fine Muslim women at the existence of “The Obedient Wives Club“. It upsets the balance of society. A known masochist woman is about as welcome at a modern Western dinner party as a nymphomaniac—depends on the dinner party. Of course a lovely young woman given to Standing and Modeling (S&M) is welcome anywhere. It turns out, to many women, BDSM is merely a fashion statement.

I understand that my desires are not normal in a society which fetishizes “the sacred feminine.” I believe that whereas the connection to mother is a primal one that forms the basis of all future primal attractions, mothers are becoming scarce in children’s lives as more mothers take after careers. Whereas maternity leave is an option for many, the price paid in terms of career ambition is costly. Scarcity elevates value. Perversely, feminism has made a woman who likes cooking, cleaning, serving, and otherwise making a man feel like a king a valuable commodity. Hooray for me.

Meanwhile, the monotheistic traditions degrade the feminine which only serves to make the yearning for the sacred feminine more pronounced—with the exception of some parts of Judaism which do indeed celebrate the feminine side of God and the joining of masculine with feminine. Combine that degradation with “victim culture,” the fetishization of the feminine victim as in need of protection and feats of valor, and the deep magnetism to the sacred feminine becomes overriding. Even that is not the end of it because as society and the human condition degrades under conditions of scarcity of nonrenewable resources, the fetishization of children and the feminine is the last “sacred” as a tool of advertisers, beggars, and any cause celeb whatsoever (“for the children!”) with the female body a potent marketing tool. Why is it any wonder that some of us would be repelled by this excess and desire a reprieve from it—sexually, emotionally, spiritually, and romantically?

Part of the stigma of female masochism has got to be the imbalanced view of domestic abuse as something that men do to women. However, with me in any case, there is a broad distinction between raw, primal, intimate dominance and a man out of control with rage having experienced both situations many times as a consequence of my forced adventurousness. There’s nothing quite like caring, responsible, intimate sadomasochism as being both invigorating and soothing. To be the absolute center of attention is a heady experience that “vanilla” just can’t touch. I get to live out a fair number of romance novels. It is an erotic experience that is impossible to quantify even if practices can be from tame to extreme along with risk and therefore highly individual as negotiated between risk-aware consenting adults.

As a former teenaged runaway, I rebelled against my family by—at first subconsciously—embracing masculinity in all of its forms. I was deprived of a father figure growing up, as it were. My underemployed father spent more energy sexually, physically, and emotionally abusing his daughters as some sort of compensation for the abuse that was put on him (by his parents) than actually being a contributing member of society. He performed this abuse not as some worldly, powerful alpha man, but as a social loser who finally had humans weaker than him under “his” own roof (paid for by his abusive parents and then by my histrionic, narcissistic mother who went off to work helping other people’s children while neglecting her own and meanwhile feathering her own nest).

As horrible as my childhood was on so many levels and as crude and sadistic the attentions of my father, his actions did not contribute to the enrichment of his own environment—quite the contary—and therefore, perversely, contributed to his own misery. In other words, he was himself a masochist, desperately searching for validation of his own need to punish himself. He put me in that uncomfortable role as his “validator” when I was supposed to be a child (and still does) and for that I choose to not be the Dominatrix it would seem that most facets of society demand that I be. I choose to not let materialism define the path of my heart. I choose instead to be a sex slave—which, at my age (52)—is quite a mean feat! You, the reader, will hopefully forgive my hubris when properly I should be repentant and ashamed. However, since you the reader are not my Dominant, I have complete carte blanche to be proud and in-your-face.

As for the masochism part of me, that was clearly a result of the early “training” I suffered under my father—and older sister who, incidentally, took the abuse to a more intense sexual and sensation-driven level.

Like any gay person can tell you, my sexuality is part of what makes me me. Shaming me, on the other hand, is not something I countenance except from someone I am intimate with and trust. In other words, BDSM has made me more empowered and less likely to take any nonconsensual abuse (a redundancy) lying down.

Back to the sacred feminine: In a society which requires marriage as a construct of social stability, pretty much any guy can find himself his own little goddess to honor and protect until death do they part. If he were to abuse her, however, there would be Hell to pay–from the law, society, other men, etc.

As for her, well, here’s how one columnist in 1937 looks at a woman who would allow any sort of abuse to occur: “A lovelorn female, with a masochistic turn would rather receive a good sock in the jaw than a box of orchids.” Here’s the full column: Source.


In our enlightened age however, the theoretical woman described in the column would be more likely to be referred to as a “sufferer of Battered Wife Syndrome” which apparently is a license to murder: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battered_woman_defense.

For the record, I’d rather get a well-placed slap to the face by an intimate and well-vetted partner than to be put on a pedestal. Like any healthy relationship, my happiness is very important to my Dominant and I hope it goes without saying that I live for his approval. He likes it when I’m happy and my job is to make him happy. I love my job.

Here’s part of what Wikipedia has to say on both sadism and masochism a.k.a. sadomasochism:

Sadomasochism is not considered a clinical paraphilia unless such practices lead to clinically significant distress or impairment for a diagnosis.[1] Similarly, sexual sadism within the context of mutual consent should not be mistaken for acts of sexual violence or aggression.[2]


Of course, the internet and Fifty Shades of Gray add additional wrinkles to the phenomenon.

FetLife is a fetish and BDSM social networking site in which Caprizchka as an entity was born about three years ago. Although FetLife is free to users, I chose to become a paid member out of appreciation for meeting my Dominant there. I’ve been out and proud in the public BDSM scene for over 20 years albeit that doesn’t comprise my entire experience with BDSM practices which started at a much younger age as I’ve intimated above. Right or wrong, well or sick, it is how I’m wired. Naturally, I thought that FetLife would be a warm and welcoming place for the likes of someone like me. I was wrong! I get hit with hate mail on a regular basis! But hey, it’s only the internet, and I’m a big girl.

In addition to profiles which contain photos and writing, and even videos, there are forums, known as “groups” in which one can discuss pretty well anything including mundane topics of the day. If the point of groups is to connect with like-minded individuals, the topics discussed in these groups tend to be issues of ethics, morality, philosophy, and politics as ways of basically strutting our highly-socially-desirable or at least rhetorically-gifted stuff. Depending on the language used, it is fairly easy to ascertain who has finished high school or not and who has gone on to higher education. Since education is the moral guidepost of a secular society, respondents tend to compete on that basis but without going so far as to reveal vanilla-world credentials and thereby “out” themselves to the entire FetLife community, their friends, and neighbors, etc.

Since BDSM is largely about trust, it would seem obvious that desirable partners are somehow thought of as trustworthy.

However, as an atmosphere of acceptance and tolerance for varying points of view, the FetLife groups fall short. Yours truly is regularly a target of the first four reactions listed at the top of this post to my existence: an anti-feminist, submissive, masochist, heterosexual female in service to a Dominant heterosexual man in an overtly open relationship; and less so of the second two. However, not only do I have a fairly thick hide, metaphorically speaking, I feel that it is partly my duty to assist in making FetLife safer for others like me who are perhaps not quite so confident and in-your-face as I am. In short, I have broad shoulders to bear young women into the scene who do not want to be targets of the man-hating harpies and losers who want to blame somebody for their own unhappiness.

The subtext for all the rage and invective that comes in my direction, in my opinion, is that so many feminist women are angry that Prince Charming Sadist or Prince Charming Masochist didn’t come to give them the happily-ever-after that they deserved simply by being submissive starfishes bleating “do me” or obedient fashion plates bearing whips. Hell hath no fury like a female sadomasochist scorned!

Since society does plenty of scorning already, why add to it? Sour grapes, of course. Why don’t older, bitter submissive men similarly scorn young submissive men? Because, what’s the use? Whereas there are plenty of sadistic white knights out there ensuring that they are considered to be the “safe” Dominants of record thereby monopolizing the market of submissive feminist ingenues. It’s not rocket science really figuring out the gender and age dynamics that are rarely voiced and that simply add to a more dimensional “high school” atmosphere of sexual and social competition.

By the way, I think that feminist Dominant male and feminist submissive female are oxymorons, with anti-feminists being truer to the integrity of their dynamic—whatever it may be—because they are not poisoned with illogical ideology.

Due to my prolific posting from the standpoint of an anti-feminist woman who is a heterosexual submissive to a Dominant man, with clearly both maturity and thoughtfulness in my rhetorical command, I tend to attract people to me who desire the protection my overlarge profile provides. These include shy, young, submissive women trying to get the bitter old harpies off their backs, and anti-feminist men of all stripes who want to know how they can approach women without getting tarred as “abusive” by the old biddies and hysterics of all ages. These last include Dominant men who are tired of being tarred as villains in an atmosphere that should welcome them considering their rarity in a society that has basically made their conduct illegal in many places. Dominant men, however, who describe themselves as “feminist” and are otherwise doling out chivalry are not targets of the same invective.

How does a Dominant man align with feminism? Probably a case of cognitive-dissonance meets practiced appeal to one’s intended quarry–the female feminist submissive. How does a submissive female align with feminism? Probably a case of having one’s cake and eating it too as well as a defensive mechanism against the abuse which any sort of masochistic person is more likely to encounter simply by virtue of being less adverse to risk. If testosterone has been found to increase one’s tolerance to risk, the female submissive who seeks her own punishment is a high-testosterone (a healthy) creature with a high sex drive in comparison to her more risk-adverse sisters who get their masochism on by reading hot romance novels.

Of course, a Dominant man in today’s social climate would also have to have a huge tolerance for risk being that “the loaded gun” (the false rape accusation) is that much more lethal in the hands of a masochist woman.

I herewith unload mine.


Choosing the Love of a Man over All Other Causes is Rational

Inspired by:

Preventative Medicine – Part IV


The more an Alpha man actualizes his SMV [Sexual market value] potential – through maintained (or improved)  looks, career, maturity, affluence, status, etc. – the more a woman’s need for enduring security becomes threatened as her SMV consistently decays in comparison. A woman’s logical response to this new form of competition anxiety usually manifests in two ways.

The first being an intense motivation to domineer and control her relationship by placing herself in a dominant role. She assumes (or attempts to assume) headship of the marriage / relationship by way of convenient conviction or from a self-created sense of her husband’s (really all men’s) untrustworthiness bolstered by social conventions that insist women need to be the head of the house (i.e. “she’s the real boss, heheh”). Her insecurity about her own comparative SMV manifests in her demanding he ‘do the right thing’ and limit his SMV potential for the sake of a more important role as her (and their family’s) dutiful provider.

Of course the problem with this is that a man acquiescing to such dominance not only loses out on his capacity to maximize his SMV peak potential, but also confirms for his wife that his status isn’t as Alpha as he’s confident it is. This Alpha disenfranchisement will play a significant part in a woman’s Redevelopment phase.

The second logical response is apathy and resentment. A disconnect from her SMV peaking mate may seem like a woman’s resigning herself to her non-competitive SMV fate, but it serves the same purpose as a woman’s insistence for relational dominance – an assurance of continued security and provisioning as the result of his limiting his SMV potential. This apathy is, by design, paired with the guilt that her mate is more focused on his own self-development than the importance he should be applying to her and any family. The result becomes one of a man chasing his own tail in order to satisfy this passive insecurity and failing passive shit tests.

In either instance the seeds of a man’s decline are rooted in his ability to identify this schism in relation to how it aligns with his SMV potential at the same time it affects his long term partner. The problem with the schism is that for all the limitations a woman would emplace against a man actualizing his SMV potential, the same limitations will also constitute a significant part of her justification for being dissatisfied with him during her Redevelopment phase.

The remainder of the article explains the various ways her Redevelopment phase will cause her to either divorce or “settle”, etc. in familiar unflattering terms which are painfully accurate in describing most Western women, in my opinion. However, since most Western women are miserable, I wouldn’t call this article an actual prescription for the cure.

Rather, it would seem that the author’s cure is best described (and he links to it) here, in an approach that Tomassi calls “Game” but which turns out to be “Sexual Dominance”: http://therationalmale.com/2012/08/22/just-get-it/

In any case, whether one is using Game/Dominance alone in conjunction with its more mature partner, “Authority”, any measure of this attitude may well inspire a woman to act in her own interest which includes his—or actually puts his first. In fact, my advice for women lucky enough to be in a relationship with a Dominant man is to put his needs first. That is also how I define love. Any pairing or partnership which eliminates love will be by definition unsatisfying to that woman. Meanwhile, caring for the needs of another is how love generates—it is not solely a spontaneous or irrational thing signified by chemical attraction. Western women need to relearn this in the wake of the modern decline of romance brought about by feminist ideology.

If he is happy, she’s happy. If she’s happy, he’s happy. That’s my observation and advice in brief. Happiness normally includes acceptance, romance, desire, excitement, and living life to its fullest as well as self-love which comes from character and sacrifice not self-gratification. Whereas, for the typical Westerner, social conventions, security, wealth, and fame take precedence, with the need for sexual variety—or even just sexual acceptance from multiple sources being a social taboo to discuss.

As I suppose is to be expected from a blog called, “The Rational Male,” there is very little mention in the article about love. Rollo Tomassi has in previous articles attested that women are simply unable to love (http://therationalmale.com/2011/12/27/women-in-love/). I have to agree that this fits the majority, who would rather have “security” than “love” or who believe that they would rather have longevity and wealth than love, or to even prefer “celebrity”.

However, I suggest that not all actions in a human being need come from the logic of self-preservation—and besides, being alone and without love (but rich and famous) is paradoxically not self-preservation. I believe that love is more important than self-preservation and there’s no prize awaiting for he or she who breaks all longevity records, but that love is necessary for all transcendence regardless of metaphysical or irrational beliefs.

Sometimes the paradoxical opposite of self-preservation is necessary to transcend pathology or codependence. I assert that a woman who puts love and sex before materialism, security, or conformity to community is a better bet as a partner/mate/spouse/submissive and a man who puts love and protectiveness before sexual variety is a better bet as a partner/mate/spouse/dominant—but putting those priorities “first” doesn’t mean exclusivity, it’s about relative weight. In Western thought it would seem that “rationality” often has primacy over balance. In a modern couple it would seem that achieving balance and mastery over one’s own nemesis are more rewarding objectives than succumbing to one’s weaknesses. Putting that balancing act into play is a matter of analyzing feedback, trends, and indications—required by both parties in a relationship but with the greater burden of responsibility for the analysis on the Dominant partner’s shoulders with the greater burden of communication on the submissive partner’s shoulders.

Taking state-sanctioned gynocentric marriage out of the equation however may result in more clarity in terms of that balance because it forces the woman to be a player in the balancing act rather than resting on the safety net of the state.

Therefore, in the achievement of balance and mastery, I would advise a woman to balance her perceived decreased SMV with contributing to an atmosphere of comfort, enrichment, and acceptance in her home as a first priority which, paradoxically, allows that man to go ahead and sow his wild oats. Only if you set someone free can a man (or wild woman) see that only you allow him (her) that freedom and that returning home is a place of comfort, acceptance, and security in that knowledge. This basically forces all sexual competition to the back burner where it belongs with no risk to the security of the relationship—and if it doesn’t, no big loss—you’re better off without him (or her).

The Home Bar/Smoke-Easy Den of Vices

Inspired by http://observer.com/2014/04/why-home-bars-are-hot-with-new-yorkers-now/

Not only do city dwellers know how to enjoy a cocktail, they are keener than ever to make them at home. According to many of the city’s higher-end interior designers, AMC’s Mad Men, returning on April 13, has played a big part in the resurgence of the home bar. The smoking ban has also curtailed the going-out habits of some of the city’s sophisticates, who, while not necessarily actually wanting to smoke in bars and restaurants, hate the fact that they cannot.

In addition to smoking and drinking at the same time, I wonder what other goings-on are tolerated in these private smoke-easies favored by adults who like to enjoy themselves.

Let me guess:

  • Blatant carnivorous consumption as well as consumption of any other fine traditional food which is supposedly “a vice”.
  • Appreciation of firearms.
  • Games of skill and chance.
  • Liberal conversational license.
  • “Sexist” seduction tactics to include the following:
    • clothing that accentuates gender differences
    • no-time-limit “leering” allowance
    • ribald jokes and absence of language censors/political correctness nannies
    • atmosphere of “permissiveness” in general, with limited reliance on social dampers such as “consent culture” in favor of respect for individual agency.
    • Filthy accoutrements such as art, pornography, paraphernalia, and conversation pieces of all sorts
    • Chaise lounges, setees, and other suspiciously “bed-like” pieces of furniture, or—even worse—dungeon equipment!
  • The freedom to associate with those who share your values and the freedom from association with annoying people who impose their values on you.
  • Legal waivers to sign upon entry and exit.
  • Hidden cameras just to keep everyone honest in our litigious and “rape culture” society along with a posted pledge to use them only for defensive purposes.

Where do I sign up? I want to come! Invite me! I’m a whole lot of laughs. I would be delighted to assist in serving, emptying ashtrays, and cleaning up. What shall I bring? How about some sinful hors d’oeuvres? luxury cigarettes? personal lubricant? 😉



I’m a Victim and a Survivor but I’m not a Liberal

Since I defy the liberal narrative, I don’t exist.

Since I don’t believe that feminism is the right ideology to reduce the victimhood of men, women, or children, I don’t exist.

Since I am an incest survivor but don’t run to the feminists for “support” and “empowerment” (provided that I agree to permanently remain a victim), I don’t exist.

Since I eat meat, smoke, and engage in exotic sexual practices but yet appear to be at least 10 years younger than my biological age, I don’t exist.

Since I chose not to reproduce and continue the cycle of abuse in my family, or to otherwise use children for sociopathic utilitarian purposes–such as to be a panderer of children (to men, the state, or anyone else) I don’t exist.

Since I am tall, strong, physically healthy, educated, an historian, a nutritional researcher, and I love a man, but yet don’t need a “support group” to do these things, I don’t exist.

Since I don’t exist, I can say whatever I want!

As for you, dear reader, if you’d like to “Like” or Comment, then you are a very brave soul indeed. If you choose not to do either, I understand. Not everyone is prepared or available to take the risk of letting in a nonexistent person into their lives.

If you’d care to insult me, that’s OK too. I’m used to it. Go ahead and “gang shame” me. I’ve survived worse. I’m still here!

Besides, now is the time to welcome in the disappearing man into the fold, the “nonexistent victim”, the “unknown soldier”, the tireless, thankless blue-collar worker, the MGTOW, because my generation is over. My generation did nothing to benefit the victims they purport to succor. Rather, my generation created victims by giving them fame and awards (and loads of plastic surgery).

I’m not a role model. Therefore, I do not exist. I can live with that.