Another Small Change – My Toy

My-Toy
An immutable truth.

Before I delve into this, I’d like to say that if anyone knows the source of the original image, please let me know. I’ve searched for the creative source without success, and I’ll continue to do so until I can credit it. I’m not a monster. Well, not about that.

The original image that inspired this small change has stayed with me from the moment I saw it, for a single reason: the message is wrong. It is haunting in its inaccuracy. That’s why I had to change it to suit my giant thoughts. Ownership doesn’t require a foreshadowing. It doesn’t announce itself. It doesn’t need birthing pains or bombastic proclamations. None of those things are necessary because when someone owns a tiny sex toy, that proprietorship exists without time constrictions. To say “You’ll be my toy” only asserts that the toy doesn’t belong to the speaker at present. What a bizarre concept.

I’m owner. That means I’ve always owned my toy, and I will always own my toy. My ownership encompasses that small being’s existence. Why should I say that it will come into my possession at some point in the future when that sex toy is already mine? It was mine the moment it came into being. It was born mine. It will never cease to be mine. The smirk in the image is right. The framing to show a looming face is correct. The stark contrast between black and white is pleasing. The message is wrong. The right words are, “you are my toy”. 

Here are some accompanying words (gentle, domination, handheld, 919 words). 

You Are My Toy

8 thoughts on “Another Small Change – My Toy

Add yours

  1. Ownership doesn’t require a foreshadowing.

    This succinctly locates the flaw in too much of size fantasy, IMO. Tiny dudes are too used to having their perspectives and experiences and desires centered. Why should a giant or giantess have to explain themselves to you? This is why “Do you like that, little man?” is so cringey. Whether you like it or not is irrelevant. That’s the point of being giant.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Agreed. The apparent “reverse” (a tiny dude endlessly asking with feigned curiosity and interest, “what would you do to tiny me?”) is just as cringey.

      Probably not as cringey as munchkin voices, though.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply to hopier Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: