A Dyke’s sexual preferences over heterosexuality? What an absurd insanity!
By Stanley Collymore
How could you be so churlish and insensitive towards me to act
as you’re doing now in relation to us having sex together and
regularly as was customary between the two of us knowing
perfectly well as you do that I’m exceedingly partial to
sexual intercourse, which is an obsession with me
when it relates to you, and as you’ve constantly
known, and no less so from the very start of
our mutually engaged in - both physically
and emotionally– sexually reciprocal,
turbulently hot blooded, no holds
barred and a most thoroughly
rewarding, carnal liaison?
You who from the very beginning of this sexual tryst that’s
been happening reciprocally between the two of us and
entirely enlivened by what we were jointly embarked
upon and joyfully experiencing; and what is more
most stimulatingly and delightfully with your
enthusiastic encouragement, unbridled and
comprehensive furtherance physically as
well as emotionally in relation to what
we were cooperatively doing while
additionally on your part you in your responsive
excitement knowingly and appreciatively but
also humorously dubbing me “Mr Semen”,
teasingly, in the process, saying that you
seriously couldn’t think of any better or
more appropriate way for two entirely
compos mentis, thoroughly sexually
willing and distinctly heterosexual
human beings to beyond all doubt
permanently cement a searingly
hot and ardent physical union
as that which was obviously
and naturally occurring in
analogous circumstances
relating to you and me.
All that, then to now completely out of the blue and most
irrationally after all the several years that you’ve been
voluntarily and reassuringly telling me and matching
your words with unstinting wantonness and wholly
unrestrained lust that you’ve become a dedicated
feminist and consequently in the process of this
theoretically enlightened transformation earnestly feel that
it’s both incumbent on you, and also imperative too, that
you switch to being a lesbian? No rational explanation
that I can see for this, far less so any consultation or
any deemed necessary with me, pertaining to this
oversight it would seem - and at this juncture in
your life of you being a mother and a wife
of you wanting to and furthermore patently
desirous of turning into a bloody Dyke; a
done and thoroughly dusted finalization
on your egocentric part of a stringently
unilateral situation which leaves me
with an inconsolable broken heart,
and that’s supposed to be alright?
Stanley V. Collymore
14 February 2017.
Author’s Remarks:
Doubtlessly there will be many who’ll sanctimoniously and viciously say and even actually firmly believe that it’s a woman’s inalienable and God-given right as well as her undoubted privilege to have a complete and absolutely unchallenged say and control not only over her body but also her legitimately implemented sexual relations and I wholeheartedly agree and fully endorse that statement, although doing so on thoroughly objective and logical grounds rather than absolutely and wholly implausibly, for me, of ever jumping gratuitously on any populous or irrationally unthinking bandwagon which expediently and supportably fits into the self-serving agendas and self-centred ends of the vociferous fraternity of inured Queers and Dykes with their own individual and/or collective axes to grind.
That said, however, when that identical even though hypothetically aforementioned woman voluntarily, knowingly, enthusiastically and avidly enters and subsequently wholeheartedly engages in what from the outset of that personal relationship was always intended to be and accordingly was energetically transformed into a reciprocally harmonious understanding of how they both seriously intended and keenly required for their shared association with each other to be, only for one half of that relationship to subjectively and without any foreknowledge to their partner of what they were contemplating, saw no requirement to acquaint their partner of what they were actually thinking far less so engage with them in any conversation or discussion over the matter now dividing them, but instead rather arbitrarily and unilaterally adopted a most determined and inflexible position over an issue with decidedly transforming consequences and even a profoundly detrimental character in relation to what had always previously and unquestionably been thought of and firmly acknowledged on both sides as an enduring and highly beneficial relationship.
Now this! Coming completely and most shockingly out of the blue and from someone who is a biological mother, always wanted to be, and most crucially within the conventional bounds as it was self-confidently emphasized and quite unambiguously understood at the time of a relationship founded entirely on the principles of heterosexuality. So why should treachery, for that’s what it is, and particularly in such circumstances be rewarded with submissive indulgence?
