The 3lack 3ox.

 Part 1 On stepping backwards through time - as one does if one takes Tibetan Buddhism seriously - I shifted my thinking out of a 20th century education in science, into an 11th century view that corresponds very neatly with both contemporary esoteric concepts, and the Platonic version of perceived reality as simply a projection. But what is projected? The answer is - spoiler alert -  memory. But, let's go back - Buddhism 101. The material world is an undivided field of chaotic activity, an ocean of ripples, a sea of electrons, protons and neutrons and as everything is at least to some extent connected; changing one thing affects another. Everything is only where it is because of everything else. I create you create me...our perception is our interpretation. And from this thought we get the notion (well - I say 'we' but to be honest, please leave me out of this!) s ome people maintain that the world is an image of the condition of our own souls. Actually I encounter this be...

I was reading posts in a discussion about erotic transfer where someone suggested that it would be wholly unethical to continue with therapy sessions once a person discloses their feelings for the therapist, for the following reasons: A possibility of an unintentional leveraging of the client's emotions to elicit compliance. The client wont engage in therapeutic exploration. The client will keep presenting the same problem and not make any change. Underpinning 2 and 3, it was suggested that the client may be delusional. That the client might be 'deep in the fantasy' and 'their psychosis' might need to be treated by a psychiatrist. I understand exactly why therapy should end if a client doesn't wish to use the feelings as part of therapy. But ending therapy with nothing in place is cruel. To be honest I'm appalled that anyone would consider it ethical, better by far to negotiate a re-contracting. Regardless of how deep a person is into 'the fantasy', ...

It is beginning to occur to me again, as I write this blog, that there is quite a lot of difference in my mind at least, between the vanilla and non-vanilla world; it prevented me being able to explain exactly to Kit why my husband's choice to be in a relationship with someone else wasn't the problem. My husband broke our contract for a contracted 'non-monogamy'. And it felt like an act of deliberate violence to our partnership. Open communication between us after this was never going to be easy. But, I was willing, because I'd promised that I was his partner, and I don't break my word unless something is way beyond...and other people's way beyond, is for me, just one more challenge, and not automatically responded to as a threat. When I first spoke to Kit, I couldn't explain what happened from the the non-vanilla perspective. Nor could I easily identify with that role. I had told myself that I'd failed as a submissive, and that no one vanilla unders...