Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
More In
Popular Articles
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Also see about that kink positive therapist. Again, since you are the first person she's told about this, she is at least aware of how much it will squick people out. So having some discussions about that would definitely be in the cards.
That said, I wouldn't want to listen to this more than once or twice, either. I love #1's idea of headphones.
Also, it occurred to me that a lot of us saw this kink exhibited throughout the 70's, 80's, and 90's. Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th, Halloween (the movies), countless other slashers and B movies intertwined sex and bloody violence.
"...and I thought they smelled bad on the outside!"
She's trusted him with a confidence; and there is no sense to me she wants to explore this fantasy in practice, especially the aspect that involves cutting. The LW's problem is that he is perturbed by her fantasy and can't simply share it in the sense of finding it sexy. Well, he can't; I think he needs gently to deflect any talk from her about it, by saying something like 'it must be an expression of your desire for intimacy'---which is true in a way. Then not reveal he is grossed out or actually disturbed, and not move to talking about the fantasy any part of their shared erotic imagination or pillow talk.
Then again, they sell whole lambs at Costco ...
I think @7 is on to something, not to mention the many 'Fannibals' that popped up during the height of that show's popularity.
@12: Lol, spotted right after i’d typed that out...
@7: I grew up with Fangoria and had crushes on plenty of the characters, but the closest it ever came was loving the goth, dead look. Bloody fx makeup can be sexy (and I own some for going out) but there’s a hyooooege airgap between that and what the LW is discussing.
Hannibal really is about the queer love story and pretentious arthouse angles than cannibalism, I don’t think persons’ wires are being crossed beyond the show.
Also, maybe I’m misinterpreting LW’s description of the kink, but LW’s partner’s desires don’t seem super far off from the ideas explored in vore fantasies, which Dan addressed in the letter RE: vore he linked to.
Imagining oneself being eviscerated is squicky, so fair enough that LW wishes to avoid speaking about the details of this fantasy during sex. But since LW is non-judgmental and GGG, perhaps there are safe, less squicky ways to explore the partner’s fantasies, through bondage and/or other safe, simulated acts agreed on by both partners.
To the extent that I have any unease about this fantasy it is that generally we want to act out in some manner our fantasies. While I doubt that LW’s girlfriend would actually seek to live out this fantasy, I wouldn’t bet my life on that assumption. That’s how this fantasy differs from other taboo fantasies or typical D/s scenes in which there are not irreversible consequences.
Saying we don’t choose our fantasies, isn’t an answer, or some sort of safe harbor defense. The genesis of really dark fantasies may be innocuous and be unlikely to be acted upon. However, dark fantasies might be a symptom of an underlying psychological issue. Given that unknown, and the particular fantasy in question, I would also suggest that LW’s girlfriend find a kink-positive therapist to chat about this fantasy. That may only be one session, but repressed kinks have a way of bursting through, and using some talk to act as a release valve seems like a good idea to me.
Lastly, LW, like the wife of a cuckold enthusiast, who has absolutely no interest in this kink or hearing about that kink, you are under no obligation to continue to listen to your girlfriend discuss this kink with you.
Sexualized or non-sexualized fantasies about murdering one's partner through evisceration are a step too far. If I were letter writer, I would have left her earlier, simply as a matter of good risk management.
Some monsters should not be fed.
LW, I think you should go through with it. Let your girlfriend dissect you. You might like it - you'll never know until you try! You're GGG, right?
I concur with the commenters who are puzzled that Dan gives the okay to (non-realised) incest and vore fantasies, but not this.
***
Ms Fan - I think the difference is that this is just a bit too real and doable. Incest, while very doable, will be restricted to role playing when it's a fantasy. From the very little I've seen of it, vore doesn't seem a thousandth time so practicable. This feels just a couple of steps away from becoming an episode of Criminal Minds. Or, take the opening of Agatha's Christie's Five Little Pigs and Carla's vision of married life if she doesn't find out for certain whether or not her mother murdered her father. When the coffee tastes unusually bitter, LW won't be able to help giving GF a fleeting look, and she'll see it. Or, to make it more modern he'll find her hidden copy of the SCUM Manifesto, and catch her guilty look about it...
***
I'd be about equally concerned if the genders were flipped, but for rather different reasons. Would anyone be less concerned, or more? I'll actually avoid looking into the crystal ball on this one, and I'll refrain from guessing who might have gotten a little visceral thrill.
As someone who can (and easily, sorry all) relate to a similar (though perhaps less realistically gory?) fantasy/desire of *knowing* the beloved so completely, but at the same time squicking myself by the dissection-table flavor of a realistic version, I'd also suggest trying to possibly explore it in a more "trippy" and fantastic/unrealistic format. One of my favourite versions involved turning into a vine that grows in and out through the ribcage...
However... if it's a very specific and immediate turn-on for her, and at the same time a very definite turn-on for him, she'll just need to stay vague, I think.
Tbh I'd much rather this (both ways) than anything that involved uttering the word "Daddy", even in entirely imagined, unplayed out fantasy. Squicks vary a lot.
Agreed. It's very unusual for a woman to become a serial killer, or generally to mutilate the bodies of their victims if they do kill, but not unheard of. Still, fantasies this dark aren't your every day things that people dream about (unless you're Lizzie Borden). It would be a VERY accepting partner indeed who could deal with the idea that his girlfriend's secret thrill involves him being drawn and quartered. Who'd want to sleep with one eye open the rest of their life?
BiDan@26 ~ ...I concur with the commenters who are puzzled that Dan gives the okay to (non-realised) incest and vore fantasies, but not this... Incest fantasies are sooo common, but rarely acted upon I think there's an distinction between (accepted) fantasy and (dangerous) obsession. I'm also guessing most fantasies are like watching "incest" porn...Oooo, look at Tim and Suzie fucking - and they're "siblings"! not gee, I actually wanna fuck my sister. Likewise, the most common type of vore is "soft vore", being swallowed or swallowing whole with no bloodshed, an obvious impossibility. I'd feel a lot more uneasy if the vore fetish involved all the gory slicing and dicing, or if Timmie really was thinking about fucking sister Suzie all the time.
Skeen@30 ~ ...there's NOTHING in the letter that suggests LW's gf's fantasy involves killing him... Nooo, only cutting him open, feeling and tasting what's under his skin, and then crawling inside. Who said anything about killing?
And I'm also not sure if she'd like to roleplay a tame version at all. I feel she either wanted to be reassured she's not a monster or, at the most, check if he might like to share imagining the fantasy.
If I was the gf, I'd be happy with "this is ummm pretty cool and also quite disturbing, I love that you told me, even though it's not something that appeals to me at all". Don't encourage but don't judge.
Donny @33 I'm working on the combination of what's in the letter and my own fantasies of not a dissimilar kind. Of course it wouldn't be actually possible without actual killing, but that's how FANTASY works, and that's partially why it's a fantasy. Maybe she ALSO fantasises about murder, idk. It's understandable that this is a connection someone else who doesn't share the fantasy would make but for the fantasiser it doesn't have to be there at all.
Observer @34 I like the sound of the story! And I definitely agree on keeping unorthodox fantasies in one's head if they don't appeal to our partners.
[for the avoidance of all doubt, I'm NOT LW's gf]
That kinda sounds like you do have a problem with this.
She's made it clear she's never been able to talk about this with anyone else, so I think it's pretty awesome that she feels that comfortable with me. . . . I want her to be comfortable sharing, cause it's clearly enjoyable and relieving to her. But good god it freaks me out in that purely gut-reaction kind of way."
I understand the "I-love-you-so-much-I-wish-I-could-get-inside-you" feeling. I understand the level of trust to be able to tell your partner everything and anything. But there's such a thing as too much detail. Sometimes Dan has talked about how oversharing early on demonstrates poor judgement and that's what this reminds me of. Not that it's too early--but you know, sometimes it's okay to have an unexpressed thought. The level of graphic detail is unnecessary and naturally unnerving.
Maybe the lw asked ("so when you think about crawling inside me, do you imagine my viscera?"), in which case, the gf can be forgiven for answering honestly, I supposed. But now it's time for her to pour her thoughts out to her journal and leave the poor victim--I mean loving and supportive partner--alone.
As for the lw, who wants suggestions for how s/he should deal with this, if s/he plans to stay with this woman, how about saying, "Honey, I'm glad you feel so comfortable that you can share this with me, but even though I'm not worried you're actually going to do it, the graphic description freaks me out. Can you please not tell me the details anymore?"
Er, Yeah. Those are opposite, possibly mutually exclusive things. I get the impression that it's not so much that AAH doesn't have a problem with it as that they think they shouldn't have a problem with it, but "utter revulsion" definitely sounds like a problem.
Personally I'm with Dan - I'd probably have run the first time GF told me about this, so bravo AAH I guess. To be honest I'd probably run from anyone who had fantasies that involved seriously "hurting" me (beyond spanking or flogging or the like). For instance, "forced" sex is a fetish too far for me, and yes, I do know some people are into it and deliberately seek it out, and that's fine for them. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't know whether evisceration fantasy may or may not be a fetish too far in the general sense, but it seems to be too far for AAH, and I definitely don't think they're guilty of being not GGG if they reserve the right to a hard no on that particular fetish.
I dunno, personally her inability to read the basic body language coupled with her visceral fantasy (she can say all she likes that it's not about murder or killing him, but that's almost worse because then it becomes about slowly and agonizingly torturing him) would have had me running to the hills.
People have thrown about a list of other kinks that press people's buttons, including Daddy/girl and "incest" themed scenes. But I would note, that these are kinks as practiced are harmless; what you see is what you get. There isn't anything hidden, more graphic, more extreme, or violent. Not so with LW's girlfriend, whose fantasies are founded in graphic thoughts of evisceration and cannibalism. Daddy/girl dynamics may make some people squeamish, but at least those relationships are predicated on creating a safe, nurturing, and loving environment.
He never mentioned "actively getting involved." I assume that would be a much bigger problem if he was actively being eviscerated. But he wants to vomit because she told him about this. So, I suppose, you could say he would not have a problem with her having this fantasy IF she were emotionally intelligent enough to never tell him about it--in other words, he would not have a problem if he never knew the issue existed. Sort of like the dinosaurs did not have a problem with that asteroid because they did not even know asteroids were a thing. But she showed him the asteroid and made it clear that the asteroid was aimed right at him. And, being a bit smarter than the dinosaurs, he understandably does have a problem with that. He can try to pretend he is a dinosaur who does not have a problem with asteroids, but can't stop thinking, "FUCK, THERE IS AN ASTEROID COMING TO KILL ME!"
Yeah...I'd still sleep with one eye open.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMXlrfxO…
The comparison to incest fantasy may even backfire for those in favor of that particular act. Devouring a person and eating them is so extreme and unlikely to happen, while incest fantasy may be viewed as more worrisome to others who may freak out by the possibility of crossing the fantasy line.
That doesn't really address the issue, though. The real question is what percentage of the very very very few people who have this dangerously twisted fetish are likely to act on it. How many active Jeffrey Dahmers are there amongst the fantasizing Jeffrey Dahmers? I'm concerned that the percentage may be high enough that this is a risk the LW might not want to take. I wouldn't.
Even if, as I anticipate, LW's girlfriend fantasizes about delicate cuts, finesse in her bladework, and the slow unveiling of the body within, the fetish is, at its core, violent toward and totally dehumanizing of the individual at which it is directed. That is why I said some monsters should not be fed. The more one immerses oneself in a fantasy which treats others as objects to be vivisected or killed for one's own pleasure, the more one's moral code may be overridden by one's desire.
Anyway, here's a song that strangely mirrors the LW's girlfriend's desires: https://youtu.be/U3gySTE997s
He should break up with her. If she cares about him then I think she picks up on his feelings. Or maybe he's too good at hiding them from her. This pattern is dangerous.