hierophany | INBOX (noctium)

Only if the conversation you were having was worthwhile enough to require your full attention. Consider it an incentive for both parties to be more interesting.

And thereby compete for

[And then, about forty-five seconds later: ]

Mm, where was I? Oh, yes. For my attention?

Yes, precisely.

Congratulations on your text-based sexual encounter.

You're less irritated than I would've imagined you'd be.

That I'm ignoring you, that is. Not that I'm having the encounter to begin with.

I'm considering it constructive criticism. I'm not being interesting enough.

Or possibly commentary on how interesting the encounter is.

I don't precisely understand the allure of it. Which is strange, because I would've assumed an encounter with that level of personal removal — and thus, lack of vulnerability — would be ideal.

I should clarify that there is no current encounter, right now. I'm speaking in hypotheticals.

I assumed so. Though now I am forced to consider whether I would, in fact, find it appealing to be ignored because my conversation partner was sexting. I suppose it would only work if I knew about it, and I can't exactly ask everyone to disclose that information to me every time they stop talking.

Hmm. Do you find the idea of anonymous sex appealing?

I should add that I am going somewhere with that question, not just asking inappropriate questions to get a reaction out of you.

I am, however, leaving the purpose of the question vague when I could easily disclose it, in order to give the impression of asking inappropriate questions for no reason to get a reaction out of you.

Ah. Then in the interest of rewarding your attempts at getting a reaction, I'll play along: and just what makes you think that's any of your business?

I don't know, though. It's intriguing, but I think I would ultimately like it less than objective reasoning would have me believe.

Thank you for providing an appropriate reaction to my impression of asking an inappropriate question.

I ask because you mentioned personal removal. The two seem like opposites, in that way. Both involve removing a part of yourself from the encounter. Your body itself in the former, and your identity in the latter. It's interesting that that removal is what would interest you, but that neither seem like they would be genuinely appealing.

Perhaps the sticking point is the lack of vulnerability. Or rather, that you're thinking of it in terms of a lack of vulnerability rather than precise control over how much vulnerability you want to subject yourself to.

(It is, of course, entirely possible that you are just into what you are into and that there's no deeper pattern to analyse. But I'm not here to possess the humility to recognise that there are things I can't possibly know.)

No, I think you're probably correct. Consider also that the key difference between a fantasy and a reality lies precisely in the level of control one has over it. It's not unusual for a person to find something appealing in fantasy that they would be uncomfortable with in reality.

Or so I'm told.

Fantasies don't inherently come with the consequences of reducing myself by removing myself. Whereas, in the case of anonymous sex, for example, I think I would ultimately come away from it feeling unfulfilled. My partner would have used me just as much as I used them; I doubt I would enjoy that, after the fact.

Ah. So it's not the anonymity itself that's the problem but the consequence that it would, in reality, encourage both you and the other party to see each other as a means to an end. Precisely because both you and the other party would be striving to minimise your own vulnerability.

I should probably ask before I offer unsolicited and unwelcome sexting suggestions and pretend I have any authority on the matter - do you want to see the appeal of sexting? Because I am, of course, approaching this as a problem to be solved.

How are you proposing to solve the problem, exactly?

By implying that you're bad at sexting.

I am not.

I present you your prior quote - 'lack of vulnerability'.

If we were working through the problem of you wanting to find sexting appealing - we are not, I am just answering your question on how I would go about it - I would suggest that the problem is that you are approaching sexting as a way to engage in a sexual encounter without having to demonstrate vulnerability.

And that's what makes me bad at it, my refusal to demonstrate vulnerability?

Or, that's what makes me bad at it, I'm focusing on it for the wrong reasons altogether?

The latter. If you're approaching it as a way to avoid vulnerability instead of a way to manage the kinds of vulnerability you're showing, then I can't imagine you'd get a lot out of the experience.

The thing that strikes me most immediately about sexting is the opportunity to be very deliberate in the information you are giving to your partner. There are no tells that you are unaware of for them to read to understand what you might find appealing. If you want your partner to know what it is you might enjoy, you have to choose to let them know in some way, even if you script it in such a way as to be incidental within the conceit of the messages. Everything your partner knows, they know because you have made a choice to ensure that they know. And because they are choices, they're open to judgment in a way that unconscious tells would not be.

It's a different kind of vulnerability, but it is still very much vulnerability. It's communicating things about yourself, and trusting that you won't be judged. And without it, you would be unable to communicate anything that might allow your partner to respond to you, as a person. You would encounter the same problem that you foresee with anonymous sex - you as a person would not be involved, and so and your partner would essentially just be using each other as producers of amateur smut fiction.

[This response doesn't come for a long time, comparatively speaking.]

I can't decide whether I'm impressed or annoyed with how concisely you've summed up all the reasons why I would dislike it.

But you're the same, aren't you? You were looking for someone to have relations with that you could immediately cut out of your life, so as not to be exposed to their judgment afterward.

You are more impressed than annoyed, but being more impressed than annoyed makes you annoyed with yourself, because you'd prefer to be annoyed. So there is, technically, more annoyance than awe. But a not-insignificant amount of that annoyance is with yourself.

That was just an incredibly specific guess. But I've weighed the risks of humiliation for being wrong over how funny it would be to be correct.

I am the same. It's very inconvenient, being aware that you can minimise your vulnerability. Because then you always do it, and then you assume that your partner is always doing it and now you have a version of the prisoners' dilemma where both parties choosing the objectively correct option leads to unsatisfying sex.

If you're going to narrate my perspective in that manner, you could at least indicate the directions of the available exits and what I have in my inventory.

It also annoys me that you're more brave than I am. Even now you don't even know my name. I'm still just like Hierophant-kun, hiding behind identities and characters that suit me because I don't want to be seen.

I can't even enjoy the satisfaction of being melodramatic about safeguarding my feelings with a desire for anonymity, or anything like that. I don't know why I'm like this. I just don't want to.

You are COMMUNICATING WITH A FRIEND. In your phone's contact list, they are listed as '🌺', chosen for no particular symbolic meaning, just for being a cute symbol that is not a cherry blossom. This places them at the top, as symbols are sorted above alphanumerical characters.

You possess PROFILE DATA on 🌺.

In your inventory, you have:

-UNSOLICITED PSYCHOANALYSIS
-INCREDIBLY INAPPROPRIATE QUESTION, FOLLOWED BY UNSOLICITED ADVICE
-SERIES OF PICTURES OF CATS CAPTIONNED WITH PHRASES THAT HUMANISE THEM IN ENTERTAINING WAYS BUT THAT PROBABLY DO NOT REFLECT THE TRUE FEELINGS OF THE CATS

Exits are OFF BUTTON and TURN OFF MESSENGER AND PLAY GAMES INSTEAD

I examine the PROFILE DATA.

Following that, I use the INCREDIBLY INAPPROPRIATE QUESTION.

PROFILE DATA: 🌺

🌺 is a female who you assume to be in her late teens. Her favourite tarot card is the Star.

She values the truth above all else, and in her dedication to keep it sacrosanct she will not allow herself to accept even her own preconceptions as truth in the face of opposing evidence. As a result of her willingness to doubt anything that is not proven the the standard that she demands of anything claiming to be truth, she is capable of faith in things that many would never believe in.

She possesses an unfortunate nostalgia for processed foods. You are deeply concerned, but their existence makes her feel safe in her independence. You suspect that by taking the initiative to eat better, she would be forcing herself to admit that someone should have cared enough to do so for her.

Theoretically, she likes the idea of being both the subject and the actor of traditional romantic gestures, the kind that are carefully planned and prepared. In practice, performing these actions leaves her in a state where she can be easily hurt. You are certain that she would enjoy a grand gesture of thoughtfulness or romance but suspect that she may prefer to be the subject of smaller, spontaneous gestures that carry the implication that the actor is keeping her somewhere in their thoughts at all times.

Once, someone decided that they did not want her. This is a fact that has stuck with her, and one which has turned her instinct to seek out evidence against her, as she is saddled with evidence that she was once a thing that was discarded. She is waiting for the people around her to realise this fact and sort her back into the appropriate place. At present, she is looking through a her own profile data to find any evidence that you might realise it so that she can protect herself appropriately. You know that she is thorough and thus that you can subject her to whatever nonsense you please.

For example you could use this time to inform her that when you kissed the boy who you will spend your life protecting, and perhaps you should have informed her of that earlier but you are sometimes bad at sharing information about your personal life, you did so on one condition. This condition was that, no matter what, you would not discard a girl who does not exist before you discarded him.

You do not think that you need to know her name. It would only make her harder to find in your contact list.

[ ... ]

Also, you ask 🌺 if there was a person she was thinking of sexting with. You do not need to know who, only if it would be something she would like to do with them in an ideal world.

Edited 2021-09-18 00:18 (UTC)

I PAUSE the game. I can't escape the fact that participating in this conversation is itself a text-based medium and therefore involves conscious and deliberate choices about the information that I offer. I might as well be honest about it.

I was raised to do one thing very well to the exclusion of all else. I was given limitless freedom and resources so long as I was acting in pursuit of that goal. I was not allowed to have my own phone growing up and was encouraged to isolate myself from others. I was six years old the first time I saw what a murder looked like and I was expected to determine who was responsible and why.

No one ever taught me how to be a person.

I know how to achieve goals. I don't feel things when I am pursuing a goal. Treating sex as a goal creates a catch-22 wherein the only way I can do it involves doing it in a way that eliminates the purpose of doing it to begin with.

I feel like you're the only person who stands a chance of comprehending how I feel when I say that sometimes I don't know how to be a person. It has nothing to do with you drawing on any personal experiences of your own but rather just that you have a tendency to understand the complicated things I say in ways that most people don't.

I want to delete this entire text but I refuse to be a coward and that in and of itself is an example of how I'm capable of achieving goals without being influenced by emotion.

I'm bad at sexting because sexting involves an inherent awareness of the aspects of oneself that the other party finds attractive and desirable and i don't

i hate being the object of people's pity because i don't want to have to consider whether i deserve it

I think I understand.

[ There's a fairly long pause. ]

I want to say more. But you're correct. I don't have a situation I can use to relate. I don't have a real solution. I don't have any insight at all. But I think I understand.

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject