I'm back, bitches!

And, I dare say, it feels good to be back.

I have had many posts stored and partially stored in my head over the last few days. But I've written exams and managed to convince myself that writing here would be procrastination. (Shame on me!)

But here I am with some more quasi-controversial stuff for my readers.

Let us begin by making a reference to perhaps the best known psychologist ever. No, not the one who played with rats in cages. Yes, the one for whom the unconscious id was capable of mainly two types of thinking - sexual or violent. And surely the first one is better known. The reason I mention our friend Sigmund is because, when you read this, I want you to think like he might have when you read the next paragraph.

Imagine that there were a device that someone could somehow persuade you to wear or use that made your sexuality their exclusive property?

Oh shit, wait, those do exist anyway. They have for a while and most of them are not very pleasant.

But let's say you were opposed to such forcible treatment of people. After all, this should be voluntary. Just difficult to remove in case one had reservations about something like this. Something that you were convinced had great value and therefore should not be trifled with.

And there exists something like this as well! They're so common that almost all people in Western culture want one. Most end up getting one too.

Perhaps I'm going about this the wrong way. Maybe I should just state it more plainly. My question to you is, what do you think the connotations of a wedding ring are in relation to sexual bondage and ownership?