Alright, so I lied about shutting up...TORCHWOOD RANDOMNESS

[tencrush]

Been reading through some links in my flist, and instead of getting involved in any debates, I'll just post some random stuff here.

• First off, quite a few people have friended me over the past few weeks, I haven't got round to friending everyone back, as I need to set up some filters and I'm just not in the mood at the moment. I'm not ignoring or dissing any of you, I promise, I just need to start organising my friendslist a bit before I get overwhelmed.



• SEXYTHINGS 1: solitary_summer wrote something here about Fragments: Ianto is pushy throughout all three meetings, he can't even diplomatically agree with Jack's pterodactyl catching plan, touches Jack all the time, and even though Jack didn't know why he wanted to work for him so badly, he could hardly have failed to notice that there was a lot of planning and determination involved. Jack can never have seen the formal, coffee-serving, coat-handing, Yes, Sir, perfect butler act as anything but an act, maybe even a bit of a joke between them.
  I AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY. I think the butler thing is where they first got into a spot of roleplaying.


• SEXYTHINGS 2: etharei posted a theory in torch_wood that the reason Jack was so fervently calling for Ianto in Adrift when Ianto was on the phone to Gwen, was that Ianto had cuffed Jack to something. Again, that was also my impression, yes. BAD, NAUGHTY IANTO, though, remember your bondage crash course: NEVER LEAVE THE ROOM, no matter how innocuous the predicament, especially not in the Hub, surely. One of Owen's alien plant experiments could have come to life and be eating Jack's cock by now and you'd still be down there making the perfect cappuccino.


• I said I wouldn't touch this debate with a shitty stick, and I'm not going to throw myself into the one posted at torch_wood for that precise reason, but seriously, guys: DEFININING SOMEONES SEXUALITY AS BI(OMNI)SEXUAL HAS ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THAT PERSON'S CAPACITY OR DESIRE FOR MONOGAMY WITHIN A RELATIONSHIP. NONE. That's all I'm going to say on the subject. Jesus H. Christ on a bike.

Comments

[quinn222.livejournal.com]

DEFININING SOMEONES SEXUALITY AS BI(OMNI)SEXUAL HAS ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THAT PERSON'S CAPACITY OR DESIRE FOR MONOGAMY WITHIN A RELATIONSHIP. NONE.

Thank you. That's all.

[off_coloratura]

Where did all that RIGHT go? Oh, you've got it.

No, keep it. It suits you. And please keep up the very astute Torchwood observations.

[love-jackianto.livejournal.com]

I said I wouldn't touch this debate with a shitty stick, and I'm not going to throw myself into the one posted at torch_wood for that precise reason, but seriously, guys: DEFININING SOMEONES SEXUALITY AS BI(OMNI)SEXUAL HAS ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THAT PERSON'S CAPACITY OR DESIRE FOR MONOGAMY WITHIN A RELATIONSHIP. NONE. That's all I'm going to say on the subject. Jesus H. Christ on a bike.

I saw that post. I'm staying out of it as well.

'DEFININING SOMEONES SEXUALITY AS BI(OMNI)SEXUAL HAS ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THAT PERSON'S CAPACITY OR DESIRE FOR MONOGAMY WITHIN A RELATIONSHIP. NONE.'

That's pretty much my view on the whole thing.

[qthewetsprocket.livejournal.com]

remember your bondage crash course: NEVER LEAVE THE ROOM, no matter how innocuous the predicament

THANK YOU. this bothers me so much i can't begin to tell you. whenever i've seen people doing bondage play in tv shows, they're always and forever walking away and leaving the person alone in the room. NOT COOL. no more play for you, jackass.

DEFININING SOMEONES SEXUALITY AS BI(OMNI)SEXUAL HAS ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THAT PERSON'S CAPACITY OR DESIRE FOR MONOGAMY WITHIN A RELATIONSHIP. NONE.

that, too.

[dividedloyalty.livejournal.com]

Hello there!

So, I ended up around your journal (somehow) and found this a cool place to indulge on my Torchwood vibe (which is quite recent, btw. I know, I lose at life).

Would you mind me friending you? No need of immediate friending back, or back friending or whatever, because I truly have NO ettiquete whatsoever. It'a all a big mistery to me.

Anyway, back friending sounds terrible. :)

Cheers!
Lina.

[cirrocumulus.livejournal.com]

Haha, I'm actually friending you too, if you don't mind being swamped with yet more internet!adoration. I find your analyses of Torchwood very astute and insightful. Also you're hella funny.

remember your bondage crash course: NEVER LEAVE THE ROOM, no matter how innocuous the predicament

Considering that I am 110% ignorant about bondage, I was wondering, why is this? I can't imagine one getting into much more trouble by themselves when handcuffed to something than when not handcuffed, but as said previously I don't know anything about bondage.

[elihice.livejournal.com]

DEFININING SOMEONES SEXUALITY AS BI(OMNI)SEXUAL HAS ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THAT PERSON'S CAPACITY OR DESIRE FOR MONOGAMY WITHIN A RELATIONSHIP. NONE.

Word. The concept of bisexuality + monogamy still seems elusive to so many people.

[phibetafunkay.livejournal.com]

Big fat

WORD

on all bullet points.

[melody2tds.livejournal.com]

I still think I had the most succinct way of phrasing #3. ;D

[bandgeek01.livejournal.com]

I just wanted to say I friended you but I don't expect to be friended back at all, I just friended so I have an easy way to come back and read all your analysis' of TW and whatnot.

Keep up the good work. I love how it makes me think. This fandom has got me thinking on so many deeper levels its great. I just leave it to the better writers to write it all down.

Nicole

[holdingoff.livejournal.com]

"I can't imagine one getting into much more trouble by themselves when handcuffed to something than when not handcuffed"

panic. pure and simple. you never leave someone alone when you are supposed to be in charge. its why i won't play anymore. i had an anxiety attack when i was *left* and now have no use of 2 fingers from nerve damage.

probably too much information; but its something that people who write bad bdsm need to understand- many of them don't understand the trust component.

[holdingoff.livejournal.com]

for the record, never shut up. i have more fun reading your expositions than should be allowed. its kinda like internet heroin.

i have to admit, when jack was yelling for ianto, my mind instantly thought that maybe jack was handcuffed, then i had a personal bad flashback and decided that maybe he locked jack in a cell. that was safer.

the sexuality not lending itself to monogamy is confusing. i mean come on, he's supposed to be over 100 years old, can we all say "serial monogamy?" i think we can. and we can probably also imagine slutty phases too. but right now? i think we've got a monogamy phase going on, or i might have to dig out the cattle prod that's probably in jack's hole somewhere *g*.

total randomness now. in sleeper, the "hockey" reference. i completely went a different way in my head with that because i thought "tonsil hockey". and i thought ice hockey, not field hockey. i've obviously been in the states too long.

[antelope-writes.livejournal.com]

Not only does bi/omnisexuality have no bearing on a person's capacity or desire for a mutually-agreed upon monogamous relationship, polyamory has no bearing on a person's capacity or desire for a mutually-agreed upon monogamous relationship.

While I'm usually the one to spout off that absence of evidence is not equal to evidence of absence, I want to see exactly where, since the moment Jack asked Ianto out in KKBB, is any evidence at all that Jack is sexually or emotionally intimately involved with anybody else. Anybody? Anybody? Bueller? No, he's not involved with Gwen, we get that loud and clear. No, he's not involved with John, either.

[tencrush]

What he said. Being restrained is a state that goes against every primal survival instinct we have. It makes your brain release all sorts of funky fight-or-flight hormones which form the main attraction. It's easy to freak out or panic.

Plus, you tie someone up, they become your reponsibility. While it's no more likely someone will have a heartattack CUFFED to a chair than they will SITTING in a chair, it is FAR more likely they won't reach the phone in time to dial 999 and die. Which would be your fault.

[antelope-writes.livejournal.com]

There is plenty of evidence that Jack is a flirt, he all but admits it himself, but no evidence that S2 Jack is a slut at all. For that matter, there's only Tosh's speculation, and not hard evidence, that Jack is a slut in S1 (he'll shag anything that's gorgeous).

[tencrush]

No, feel free, the more the merrier.

[tencrush]

It bugs me SO MUCH, but I just can't be bothered to argue the point, it's too tiresome.

[tencrush]

*tips hat*
Glad to be of service.

[tencrush]

First off, the 'IN JACK'S HOLE' joke will NEVER get old.

I didn't think anything about the hockey line until Ianto brandished that hockey (yes, field, obviously, Wales isn't that icy) stick around in Dead Man Walking.

[nedeah.livejournal.com]

Yes, thank you, both of you. I was astounded by the conversation of Jack being only poly. I was actually kind of offended by it. Just because he is multisexual does not mean that he can't be monogamous. Grow up people, Jack did.

[antelope-writes.livejournal.com]

The one single thing I keep seeing over and overand over again in Jack and Ianto's relationship is mutual respect and trust. No evidence at all that Ianto is a poor hurt puppy who's going to get abused by Jack, no evidence of Jack screwing around, etc. I get the very distinct feeling, and based on what I've read I'm not the only one, that Ianto is the dominant partner in the relationship. Still makes no difference in terms of their mutual respect and trust and healthy dose of affection. We should all be so lucky.

I'm quite offended myself by the notion that polyamory automatically implies sexual license. Jack can be polyamorous as much as he wants and still stay within the bounds of the relationship he is presently in. I've seen it in action...two friends of mine are married and both polyamorous, but they for various reasons have decided to be mutually monogamous at this time. They discussed the situation, their reasons for choosing what they did, and agreed that if something changed, they would discuss it further. The other thing about polyamorous relationships I've seen is that even where you have a triad or a quartet, they are still faithful within their group. The friends I just used as an example have another set of friends, a triad...one man, two women, and one of the women is the "leading" partner. They are mutually faithful and loyal to one another and would all have been offended had an outsider propositioned one or the other of them.

Okay, end rant.

[antelope-writes.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, I don't see nuances of human sexual behaviour, including safe and ethical emotional intimacy, concepts of polyamory, concepts of omnisexuality, or anything like that being taught anytime soon.

More's the pity.

[furius.livejournal.com]

I adore Jack and Ianto. I adore your posts and you for posting them. I'm friending you because seeing Torchwood meta on my flist will be happiness inducing.

That aside, I thought Jack was fervently calling for Ianto was because he was being a tease in another game of hide&seek- he was fully dressed, which means either he dressed again after the "work" in the greenhouse or there was no undressing involved at all...

[xel1980.livejournal.com]

# I said I wouldn't touch this debate with a shitty stick, and I'm not going to throw myself into the one posted at torch_wood for that precise reason, but seriously, guys: DEFININING SOMEONES SEXUALITY AS BI(OMNI)SEXUAL HAS ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THAT PERSON'S CAPACITY OR DESIRE FOR MONOGAMY WITHIN A RELATIONSHIP. NONE. That's all I'm going to say on the subject. Jesus H. Christ on a bike.

OH GODS, THANKS FOR WRITING THIS LINES! I'm sick tired of all that too!!!

[euphorazine.livejournal.com]

DEFINING SOMEONES SEXUALITY AS BI(OMNI)SEXUAL HAS ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON THAT PERSON'S CAPACITY OR DESIRE FOR MONOGAMY WITHIN A RELATIONSHIP. NONE.

This may be one of the reasons why I am a member of torch_wood but it isn't on my f-list. Skimming through every so often for the good bits is the only way to stay sane.

SEXYTHINGS 1 through 2: YES.

[cirrocumulus.livejournal.com]

Wow. That's pretty intense, I never knew anything about the psychological implications of BDSM (but now that I think about it, what you've said makes perfect sense, of course). Thanks.

[http://users.livejournal.com/m_j_/]

Thank you. Polysexual orientation precludes monogamy no more than heterosexuality creates it. Plenty of heterosexual people are far more polyamorous than many of us who are polysexual.

And what no one's pointed out? Monogamy itself is a flexible concept. There are couples who are emotionally monogamous even though sexually open (the "we always come home" concept), and those who are sexually monogamous but emotionally open (the "emotional affair", the "office wife", etc.) So there's even more than one kind of monogamy, which people just hate to concede.

And yes, whatever they have going is something that Ianto doesn't give signs of having bother him. Ianto's shown he can give as good as he gets. If he weren't happy, I don't think he'd hesitate to make his opinion known. I always have trouble with the fanfics that depict Ianto as sad and nearly emotionally abused by Jack, unless they're AU. Ianto's pretty damned strong emotionally, which is why it makes an impact when he cries.

And re your first point? Right on. I often dislike D/s couples who are seriously lifestyle, but far too many of them are into Gor fandom ("me man, you dogmeat") or really gross power kink (a former-sexworker friend of mine knew an exotic dancer who slept in a collar, on the floor, chained to boyfriend's bed, etc.).

On the other hand, a vaguely "Batman/Alfred" twist to things is humorous, rather cute, and harmless roleplaying -- and if, since they work together, they enjoy playing it out during the day either as a joke or as being partly lifestyle, it, as they say, harms no one else and seems to make them happy. Besides, it certainly indulges Jack's fetish for a man in a perfectly tailored suit.

[tencrush]

Hey, if sleeping on the floor in a collar floats her boat, that's cool by me, it takes all sorts, as long as it's consensual and there's actual power exchange involved and not abuse, go for it. Use the word "Gorean" near me, though, and I'll give you that part pity/part disgust look I normally reserve for Scientologists.

I think the butler thing is a huge joke between them, as in my mind if they have any sort of D/s thing going on in the bedroom (or further), Ianto's definitely the Dom.

[erinnthered.livejournal.com]

Ianto is definitely the Dom. Why else would Jack be interested in Ianto in a UNIT red cap?

Also, I still suck at this lj stuff - I haven't even decided if I want to blog yet - so I hope you don't mind if I friend you too. Maybe I should have asked already? I don't know. I can never tell when the right time is. Anyway, seems like there's a bandwagon, and I'd love be one of the cool kids. ;)

Seriously, I love your metas. If ever I'm feeling frustrated by this fandom I know I can always come here and inhale a deep breath of sanity.

[ceindreadh.livejournal.com]

One of Owen's alien plant experiments could have come to life and be eating Jack's cock by now and you'd still be down there making the perfect cappuccino.

Depending on how good the plant was, Jack might even have been enjoying it ;-)

I agree with you about the not leaving the room thing though. Then again, I've never been able to get a clear picture of the Hub layout in my mind, so my fanwank is that Jack was somewhere where Ianto could see him, but he couldn't see Ianto.