From: cowgirl [cowgirl_stupid@excite.com]
Sent: March11ÈÕ2001ÄêSunday 12:16 AM
To: webmaster@bdsmlibrary.com
Subject: Professor Pamela (pt.3 of 5)
Professor Pamela Panty Sniffer (3 of 5)
(F/F, humil., professor/ student, panty fetish)
By Professor Christina
(edited and proofed, by cowgirl)
The story of a university professor who manages to rationalize her bizarre
repressed sexual obsession with one of her female students underwear. This
story was written by a woman who I believe was a real professor. She
provided me with these letters, asking me to help her edit them, then
unfortunately disappeared before we were finished. I have shaped them as
best I can into a sex story as she asked, adding a beginning and ending, but
the letters more or less stand on their own. It starts slow, but is worth
it.
- cowgirl
****
Professor Pamela Panty Sniffer
By Professor Christina
Miss Margolis,
As you can see, I will continue to respect your wishes and refer to you
formally, as you have clearly indicated that you prefer. I make it a point
to stick by the rules I set, including deference to students' preference in
the formality my reference to them. This is simply a matter of professional
courtesy and personal respect, and is in line with my general rule of
treating students as adults, even under the most trying circumstances.
Of course, circumstances can become especially trying when students do not
return that courtesy and respect, and feel free to ignore and even
flagrantly
flout the rules themselves. As deplorable as these circumstances are, they
become virtually intolerable when students feel compelled to flaunt their
contempt for authority through actions that demonstrate not merely their
immaturity and impatience with formality and decorum, but also their utter
lack of concern for even matters of simple civility.
Yes, I received your message, Miss Margolis. It is still sitting right here
on my desk, next to my keyboard, just where you left it--precisely where it
will stay until we have this matter resolved. As you might imagine, and no
doubt intended, with the densely encoded layers of moist, yet increasingly
encrusted, "meaning" so intensely emanating from your cogent (one might say
pungent) message, as I write, I not only get the "drift" of your message(s)
loud and clear, but find it rather difficult to consistently sustain my own
attention to formality and decorum--and, yes, at particular moments of
ocular
and olfactory acuity, if I look or lean too much to that side, to even
maintain simple civility.
Certainly, nearly anyone in receipt of such a foul, offensive "message"
would
be enraged, and feel fully justified in taking firm, if not extreme,
measures
to deal with the outrage. A well-considered and decisive response might
well
include resisting the natural urge to hastily dispose of the message, and,
instead, promptly dispense with the student by conveying the vile message to
the dean, to be used as incontestable, detestable evidence in a disciplinary
hearing to consider immediate suspension of the student. And I have
certainly considered such a response.
But, as detestable as the message is, I do not consider students
dispensable,
and I have resisted the urge to treat the message itself, as foul and
offensive as it is, as simply disposable. Rather, I am leaving your message
where you left it, and writing this to you now, to demonstrate to you that,
no matter how beset we feel by the actions of others, and how upset they
make
us feel, we can still respond, even to the most negative provocations, in a
reasonable, constructive manner that can, at some insistence and with
persistence, ultimately turn the negative into a positive.
Now, before you took the liberty to liberally annotate it with your own
inimitable, unmistakable "commentary," the document at issue here was a
written negative evaluation by Miss Stern, our department's administrative
assistant, of your performance as her student assistant in the work-study
program. Her evaluation emphasizes particularly your "inappropriate attire"
and "insubordinate atitude"--the very same matters Miss Stern had expressly
spoken to you about earlier, and precisely what you came to me to complain
about as, to paraphrase, none of her business.
As I explained to you in any earlier email correspondence, I did, in fact,
take up the issue with Miss Stern, indicating I had spoken to you, and
suggesting perhaps more sensitivity to your feelings, and flexibility and
patience on her part. And, as I explained in some detail in my email to
you,
as your faculty advisor, encouraging a similar approach to Miss Stern from
you, in an overall spirit of constructive, mutual respect, as your
supervisor, Miss Stern has the professional authority to enforce office
decorum, including appropriate attitude and attire at work, and has some
personal sensitivity to matters of formality and authority, for reasons I
clarified at some length. Evidently, nevertheless, you have not taken
sufficient care to correct your attire and attitude, at least in the
estimation, and to the satisfaction, Miss Stern.
Now, standard procedure in such formal, written evaluations of the
performance of students in the work-study program is for the work supervisor
(Miss Stern) to directly deliver the evaluation to the student in question
and to that student's faculty advisor (me), which is what Miss Stern did.
Thereafter, the faculty advisor is to consult with the supervisor and
student, and, if there is a consensus and no dispute, simply sign off on the
(usually positive) evaluation and forward a copy of the evaluation, endorsed
by the supervisor, advisor and the student, to the director of the
work-study
program.
In this case, of course, there was a negative evaluation in dispute.
However, before I had a chance to consult further with either Miss Stern or
you, Miss Margolis, and schedule a formal conference with both of you to
discuss the evaluation--a conference that is always called for when the
evaluation is in dispute---you delivered your comments and expressed your
sentiments on the matter in the manner described below.
On what I presume is your copy of Miss Stern's written evaluation of your
work performance, Miss Margolis, you apparently urinated on the left top
corner and defecated on the right top corner of the document. I say
apparently in so far as I did not actually see you do it personally.
Nevertheless, the sensory evidence, if I may say so, is quite persuasive to
both the eye and nose from the wrinkled yellow stain in one corner, the
brown
stain and particles of fecal matter on the other, and the particular
combination of unpleasantly familiar odors, still unmistakable even now,
from
two feet away, as I write.
As if for further confirmation and clarification--perhaps unnecessary at
this
point on such an extraordinary document, but noteworthy here
nonetheless--you
write at the bottom (not with your bottom, apparently and fortunately, but
rather with unremarkably conventional ink) some pithy remarks,
characterizing
the document and me in rather unflattering ways. On the chance someone may
fail to file the original document as it otherwise should be, Miss Margolis,
I quote you here in all your eloquence,
"Rather than write my evaluation of you and your evaluation of me, I thought
I'd wipe it instead. As fond as you are of words, Actions do indeed speak
louder
don't you think? As long as you're so busy sticking your nose into my
business, I
thought I'd smear you some of my business to stick your nose into any time
you
like. Now I know it's only on a piece of paper, and not my panties, which
is
what you're really sniffing around about, and wish I'd left you instead.
But
I'll sign this pissy, piece of shit evaluation for you when you knock off
all the
wordy phony bullshit you pass off as insight, come clean, and sign off on
this report as the pathetic panty-sniffer you really are. We both know you
want to.
Imagine, signing your *new name*, for all to see. Can you do that
for me, Professor Panty-Sniffer, PH.D. (Panties Hardly Dry)?"
Well of course I could do that, Miss Margolis. I'm almost tempted to do so,
to indulge your childish little game, just to get us on the same page, so to
speak, speaking the same language, if it would get you to at least formally
acknowledge your real problems, at least with your signature, so we can
actually begin to genuinely deal with them. But, as concerned as I am about
you, and as much as I sincerely want to help, lowering myself to your
level--especially doing something you could construe as groveling or
submitting--would be neither very professionally careful of me, nor
personally helpful to you. So, thank you for the offer, but I'm afraid that
I must respectfully decline to adopt my *new name*.
In lieu of a more formal conference with you, to which you seem to evidence
some resistance, I'll offer some professional analysis and personal advice
about this situation. I noted the layers of meaning in your message here
above, and have explained some of the intricacies and complexities of
symbolic communication to you before in an earlier email. So, it would be
with considerable redundance, no doubt try your patience, to go through all
that again here--other than to note the redundance of your own seemingly
limited means of expressing yourself--both the medium and the message--and
the salience of these for understanding what's troubling you and dealing
with
it.
Whether you think it's "bullshit" or not, it hardly takes an authority in
psychology to recognize that hostility to authority is evident in your
problems with Miss Stern and your messages to me. And you may think you
have
nothing to learn from me poking my nose into your business, as you put it,
but we can always learn, if we're receptive. And perhaps you can learn from
something I've learned from you--something that I was not receptive to
learning about until recently, in my encounters with you, or, rather, your
messages.
After years of dismissing Freudian psychology wholesale, resisting any ideas
associated with Freud as hopelessly sexist, recently I have come to reassess
this rigidly doctrinaire stance, and develop a new appreciation for Freud's
ideas, in my experience and interpretation of the symbolic significance of
your messages. Not simply the symbolic displacement of your resentment of
authority, whatever its source, onto me. But also, in the specific symbolic
form and content of your more imaginative messages to me--the medium or
material you choose to convey your messages, as well as the message itself;
the substantive content of the messages, literally and figuratively.
Although I once presumptively dismissed this as simply preposterous, Freud
thought that long-lasting childhood traumas--initially associated with
toilet-training, but repressed, symbolically extrapolated and subconsciously
expressed later in life in other forms--result when parents hadn't
appreciated how "accidents" of urination and defecation were, from the
child's viewpoint, actually gifts or presents to the parents. Parents are
typically, of course, the child's first, most emotionally resonant and
causally salient encounter with authority figures, so that such early
childhood traumas can have troublesome consequences later in life, unless
they are confronted and resolved.
Whatever the childhood sources of your hostility toward authority--and I
cannot presume to understand their specifics without you sharing your
experiences with me--as a current authority figure toward whom you've shown
hostility, I do not intend to impose further consequences on you for your
messages that would only compound the damage already done to your self-image
and self-esteem, self-respect and, thereby, the respect you show for others,
especially those in authority. I think to impose any further negative
consequences on you now would only exacerbate the problem, hasten the
regression and aggression involved in your hostility to authority, and
further retard your already traumatic transition from childhood to
adulthood.
Instead, I'm offering you patience, acceptance and guidance, with an
opportunity to let me help you resolve your negativity and the underlying
issues involved in your hostility to authority. Of course, I've already
offered this in earlier emails, to which you have not responded except, in
the most troubled and troubling ways. And, if these kinds of disrespectful
responses continue, as an authority figure who recognizes the importance of
respect and my responsibility as a teacher and advisor, for your own good, I
shall be compelled to impose the kinds of negative consequences you can
expect from other authority figures in the future for truculent, defiant,
retaliatory behavior in adulthood, whatever its traumatic childhood sources.
So, for perhaps the last, best time you'll have to deal with your hostility
to authority, I am offering you a window of opportunity that is narrowing,
and you'd be well-advised to take it before it closes.
You keep this window of opportunity open by simply opening yourself up and
sharing experiences with me, being trustful of how helpful I can be. But,
lest you view this opportunity as simply a threat, and close the window
yourself, allow me to show you by example how to share even very troubling
experiences, and throw the window open wider.
You accuse me of sticking my nose in your business, and abuse me by accusing
me further of having ulterior sexual motives in offering to help you,
alluding to blatant, or perhaps latent, lesbian desires and intentions.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Do not get me wrong. On a personal level, I am saddened and hurt to hear
you
say these things, of course, and they get me angry. But I'm offended
professionally by what you say, not personally, out of humiliation or some
shameful or fearful response to your accusations and homosexual imputations.
To the contrary, it is the homophobia and the shameful, fearful projections
and rigid judgementalism that I hear in you that dishearten me--without, I
should emphasize, feeling threatened in the least, in my authority,
sexuality
or morality.
Although I am not a lesbian, in or out of the closet, as a feminist, I have
no problems with the homosexuality, with its morality, or with others'
sexuality in general, and I oppose the authority of anyone to impose their
own sexuality and sense of morality on others. While, as you can see, I
have
my own hostility to this kind of presumptuous authority, based on
sanctimonious morality, how I express my opposition to this imposition of
authority is constrained by civility, and my own strong sense of morality,
based on being respectful and helpful to others, and not hurtful. By having
a clear sense of my own morality, based on being respectful and helpful, not
hurtful, to others, and handling things in this way, my hostility to even
strongly established institutional authority, and its masculine hierarchical
forms, has opened, not closed, my professional and personal windows of
opportunity.
I do not mean to sound smug or arrogant here. To the contrary, my view of
morality, authority, and even sexuality, is based on modesty and humility--a
reverence for modesty and humility based on my own past experience of
authority, morality and sexuality, and how to open windows of opportunity.
Those who are rebellious toward authority have typically experienced
capricious authorities, parental or otherwise, who exploited and/or
neglected
them, abused and/or abandoned them. And those who are sanctimonious about
their own morality and others sexuality have had similar experiences, and
can
only resist and suppress being promiscuous themselves through shameful and
fearful attempts to express their (self-)righteous cause and enlist others
in
their crusade. If they were really sincere and secure in their morality and
sexuality, without shameful and fearful distress, they could express their
morality and sexuality with more modesty and humility, and repose in that,
rather than attempt to impose their deceitful, counterfeit authority on
others.
As a child, I was not exploited or neglected, abused or abandoned, by my
parents, at least in any blatant ways or by intent. Nevertheless, in
retrospect, I can now see that my childhood experience was characterized by
a
corrosive emotional distance, at first of my parents from me, and
thereafter,
modeling them, and unsure and insecure about myself, the emotional distance
of me from others, especially my peers. If I cannot say I felt entirely
unloved, I did feel any and every love was conditional, selective, insincere
if unreserved, and always subject to disapproval and withdrawal. Not
knowing
or trusting less reserved or restricted love, I felt less unloved than
unappreciated, perpetually poised against being humiliated, should I become
too infatuated with anyone or them too infatuated with me. So, I kept my
emotional distance from others as my parents had from me, less shameful and
fearful than I was simply unsure and insecure--for the most part, that is,
while left to myself, unless or until other people and events intervened.
I'm not clear on whether I experienced any particular toilet-training
traumas
in early childhood. In fact, as indicated, until very recently, I dismissed
such concerns as nonsense. Freud would say, I suspect, that I repressed the
traumas. In any case, in addition to feeling unappreciated, I do recall
problems being constipated, along with the recurrent laxatives and
occasional
enemas that were required, which, if not traumatically distressing, were
certainly embarrassing and unpleasant. So, in addition to bladder problems,
I also had bowel problems, I might as well say now, which I handled by
distancing myself from my physicality just as I distanced myself from my
emotionality, in favor of an emphasis on intellectuality and rationality.
My bladder and bowel problems were essentially, whatever their source,
problems of urinating too much and not defecating enough, and in either
case,
when they occurred, doing so "accidentally," without conscious control, at
many
of the wrong times. This, of course, exacerbated my problems feeling
unappreciated, as I knew my parents were exasperated and I worried about
being humiliated. Already insecure and unsure of myself, I did become,
occasionally, when I let myself, shameful and fearful about losing bladder
or
bowel control and thereby losing respect. As worries about bed-wetting and
panty-wetting kept me from slumber parties and many social activities at
school, and this, along with worries about bowel movements, encouraged
dieting and dating restrictions, I repressed my distressed physicality and
emotionality in favor of expressed intellectuality and rationality, which,
given prevailing gender stereotypes and relations, removed me even further,
emotionally and sexually, from both other girls and boys my age.
Already, given my problems and inclinations, reserved and fastidious in my
attitude and attire, I became even more self-conscious about my libidinous
desires and mode of dress under the strictly watchful eye and sternly
shameful voice of my mother. While still emotionally distant, she became
very
vigilant and emotionally stringent when I became an adolescent. Although
she considered slacks unfeminine, skirts and tops that were too short or too
tight, in her very restrictive, conservative view, were "slut-wear" designed
for lewd self-display and therefore totally inappropriate attire for any
"self-respecting girl." Of course, given the fashions of the day--which
included mini-skirts and halter-tops--my mother's rules for what to wear
ruled out wearing virtually anything my peers considered stylish or
attractive, inviting scorn and ridicule, while any attempt to even remotely
approximate the fashions of the day, even in a more reserved way, invited my
mother's withering wrath. Either way, from both ends, parents and peers,
shame and humiliation was, it seemed, an inevitability
But, it was precisely that seeming inevitability of shame and humiliation
that became my window of opportunity. I deliberately shut out my shameful,
fearful vulnerability in matters of sexuality, physicality and emotionality,
in favor of intellectuality and rationality, and my ability to desire and
accomplish things academically and professionally with those in authority I
could not aquire socially and personally among my clothes-conscious,
sex-obsessed peers.
This is not to say that I had an easy or happy time turning my negatives
into
positives, my vulnerabilities into opportunities. Especially during
adolescence, as serious and studious as I was determined to be--and as
disdainful as I was of my peers' frivolity and sexual rivalry--I could not
help, on occasion, being curious and even envious about them. Careful and
distant, but watchful and observant, more intellectual and rational than a
"normal girl should be," with no sexual or emotional ties to any boys, as an
adolescent, I acquired from my peers the title of an "ice queen" and was
considered unquestionably "queer," with any stray glances at other girls,
envious or otherwise, quickly interpreted and reported to others as further
proof of my lesbian label.
While this pushed me even further from my peers, personally and emotionally,
it also pushed me further in my career, professionally and intellectually.
In ways I am just now beginning to fully consider and understand, all the
incentives and abilities for pursuing the positives of my academic and
professional career--including my particular feminist interests, even
passions, for issues of gender and sexuality--stem from negatives and
vulnerability that I turned into windows of opportunity.
I am not saying all this to you, Miss Margolis, to impress my personal
superiority or impose my professional authority on you. To the contrary, I
disclosed the personal vulnerabilities that became professional
opportunities, turning negatives into positives, not simply to model this
for
you in some ideal way, but in a spirit of modesty and humility, and out of a
special empathy I feel for you. Professional and personal boundaries, age
discrepancies, and hostility to authority notwithstanding, I am hopeful we
can become friends--even close friends--if you are trustful enough to let me
be helpful.
If you are not comfortable with a formal conference, or with putting things
in writing, feel free to contact me anytime and anywhere. As vulnerable as
you may feel, I am available to you, in whatever way is most viable and
preferable for you. But, if you are trustful that I'll be sensitive, I
think
that you'll find expressive face-to-face communication more helpful and
effective than contemptful messages, no matter how clever and imaginative.
Truely and Sincerely Yours,
In Reflection and Affection,
Pam
_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/
