Things disconcerting

Something bad is happening in my neighborhood. There were police cars parked in front of my neighbor’s door all evening, and now the crime scene unit is there as well.


Shelly is learning to florentine–use a flogger in each hand. She’s gotten quite good in a very short time. She’s practiced on kellyv and I… as well as on a number of pillows that, as near as I can tell, committed no offense save for being in the wrong (right?) place at the wrong time.


Had an argument with someone at PolyTampa last weekend. He maintains that love does not expose one to vulnerability, and there is no way to be “hurt” by love–it’s only the loss of someone you see as property that’s painful.

I don’t buy it for even half a second. Indeed, on my less charitable days I’m inclined to think that anyone who believes love and intimacy do not go hand-in-hand with vulnerability has never been in love.

Sometimes, love exposes you to a great deal of pain. Sometimes, it hurts like hell to lose someone you love.

I haven’t been having a good week.

4 thoughts on “Things disconcerting

  1. Property? yeah right!

    Franklin, I have only briefly met you and yours at the last polyC meeting. So I thank you in advance for allowing me to voyeur (and participate in) your journal (and thank those of your V (bandage and kellyv) as well).

    What is the fundamental purpose of love?

    To (of course) bond tightly enough to procreate and rear offspring…together.

    So what happens when you are fully in love and you get hurt?

    It it a feeling of rejection and breakage of that (all important) procreate bond thus formed.

    Loss can hurt equally from losing your wallet, car, income, house, health, spouse, or control.

    But procreate REJECTION. Whew! now that’s heavy.

    Property as love loss? BS

    So, I agree with you. Now this post opens many other assumptions such as love=offspring, says nothing about homosexual love, infers that not everyone actually uses flagellation=hurt=love (evil grin), etc., etc. but those are all other issues for other chats.

    Mike in Dunnellon

  2. Property? yeah right!

    Franklin, I have only briefly met you and yours at the last polyC meeting. So I thank you in advance for allowing me to voyeur (and participate in) your journal (and thank those of your V (bandage and kellyv) as well).

    What is the fundamental purpose of love?

    To (of course) bond tightly enough to procreate and rear offspring…together.

    So what happens when you are fully in love and you get hurt?

    It it a feeling of rejection and breakage of that (all important) procreate bond thus formed.

    Loss can hurt equally from losing your wallet, car, income, house, health, spouse, or control.

    But procreate REJECTION. Whew! now that’s heavy.

    Property as love loss? BS

    So, I agree with you. Now this post opens many other assumptions such as love=offspring, says nothing about homosexual love, infers that not everyone actually uses flagellation=hurt=love (evil grin), etc., etc. but those are all other issues for other chats.

    Mike in Dunnellon

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.