Conversely, I'm afraid that some conservative will read this and say: "Look how the feminist movement has failed us!" That's not what happened, either. I identify as feminist, and I don't believe that to be at odds with being a submissive masochist. Indeed, I believe that the feminist movement helped my practice of BDSM: it's one of the factors that gave me the strength and self-assurance required to figure out and discuss my sexual needs. Andrew and I did get back together; then we broke up again. Richard and I have had other nights together. I wish this narrative ended cleanly. I wish I could say that I've found a fairy-tale lover, that I'm now with a man who both hurts me till I cry and gives me the relationship I want. (Why stop there? He could be rich and handsome and a great cook, too!) But this is my story, not a fairy tale. Just as well; that means I still have space to learn. I believe I've gotten better at communicating clearly. I believe I've gotten better at sorting out the harsh emotions inspired by BDSM, working with -- and enjoying! -- those feelings in the context of a loving relationship. And I hope I no longer objectify my sadistic partners to the extent that I objectified Richard. Still, I know I've got a ways to go. I see BDSM as a continuum -- similar to the theory that homosexuality is a continuum -- and sometimes I think that everyone's on the continuum to some degree. I don't think Andrew is as far into the continuum as I am, and not as far as Richard, either. But there are reasons I was with Andrew for nearly two years, yet never let myself fall completely into Richard. A certain kind of devoted relationship is important to me. I felt strongly about Richard, and he was a good fit for BDSM, but he couldn't give me the relationship I want. I went back to Andrew, though he was far less into BDSM, because I was able to love him. I wonder, though: if I ever fall for a completely vanilla man, will I be able to compromise that far? It seems unlikel