Thorn Wilde

Thank you so much, Sasha! You know, it's weird. While I was writing it, I was going, 'This is shit. This is the worst story I've ever written. Fuck!' And then, after I'd edited and posted and read through it, suddenly it wasn't so shit at all. Thanks for reviewing, and I'm really, really happy you liked it!!

GA seems to have decided that 5 am is really 10 am, so my story isn't live yet, but it should be in about three hours, and since I'm about to hop into a car for a six hour drive, I'll post the link now: Sleeping With Ghosts Edit: Weird, the link seems to be working, but it still looks like it's unpublished, i.e. all green, and it doesn't appear to be showing up in Stories yet. This is all exceedingly odd. 'Tis a Halloween Mystery!

He's not. Physically, he looks a bit like an otter. But he is a marvellous actor, and I dare you to watch him in a proper dramatic role, such as Sherlock, and not fall instantly in love with him. He is also very charismatic, open and frequently goofy in interviews and on chat shows. He was wonderful on Graham Norton a couple of weeks ago, along with Jack Whitehall and Harrison Ford (who for the first time in his life actually seemed to kind of enjoy the PR bit).

For almost a whole day, Jonah doesn’t really believe it. This isn’t the way people die. Not in real life. Not in suburban Greater London. People get hit by buses, they die in car crashes, they get sick—cancer, liver failure, heart disease. They don’t get stabbed walking home from a party with their lover.

For the first couple of weeks he can’t even return to the house. He stays with his brother Aidan, putting off going back because everything in that bloody place reminds Jonah of him. Jonah has always been meticulously tidy, so every mess in there is his mess. And his scent is still everywhere. All over. For almost a whole day, Jonah doesn’t really believe it. This isn’t the way people die. Not in real life. Not in suburban Greater London. People get hit by buses, they die in car crashes, they g

Happy Birthday, my wee Bee!! Welcome to the world of alcohol and supposed responsibility.

Well, everyone knows his real name is Bendydick Cucumberpatch. Or was it Benadryl Cumberbund? Or maybe Bagginsdefeat Cunningdragon... It's so hard to keep up.

As they should, considering the subject. Awesome stuff! Loved this. Just shared it on Tumblr.

I've always been the monogamous sort. Since I was 15, I've been in three long term relationships. I've been with Magpie for four and a half years. I've never cheated. Magpie and I sometimes kiss other people at parties, for fun. Just kissing. That's part of our dynamic. And we see playful flirting as perfectly innocent, so we both do that too. I think we both draw the line at any kind of sexual contact, though the prospect of threesomes or even partner swapping has been discussed. Magpie used to be in an open relationship, though that was his ex's idea and not his, and it caused all kinds of trouble for them. I suspect that my ex may have cheated on me, though I have no proof other than his general behaviour, and I didn't really start to suspect it properly until after we'd broken up. I too think, as many others have stated, that fidelity is relative. It all depends on the dynamics of the relationship. For certain couples, fidelity means complete and utter monogamy, while to others it simply means trust and honestly. And some people are polyamorous and that works for them. I don't think fidelity is old fashioned or out dated; I think it's being redefined. I completely disagree with this. Where straight couples are concerned, in my experience and as far as people I know, the guys are far more monogamous on average, while the girls are much more sexually adventurous, more likely to want open relationships and more likely to stray. Women and men have just as much potential for 'roaming' and 'nesting', to use your choice of words. Whether they do one or the other is largely cultural, and historically married women have been just as likely to take lovers as married men have been to take mistresses, it just hasn't been as widely talked about because women were meant to be so 'pure' and 'sweet' and weren't really supposed to have a sexuality anyway. It's the same with promiscuity as a cultural stereotype for gay men. It's not biological, it's nothing to do with 'what men are like' or 'what gay men are like'. It stems from a culture that began at a time when secrecy was extremely important, for reasons of legality, and forming lasting attachments is bad for secrecy. There is nothing immoral or wrong about casual sex, but nor is it somehow a default setting.

That article won't load for me, but I agree with the sentiment and I think 'love after death' is a true and correct expression for what W_L has been talking about. Such love can certainly be a motivation for necrophilia, when it goes too far, as it were, but on its own is something else entirely.

I'm not saying that sexual attraction and arousal is the same as sexual activity, but that necrophilia is defined as sexual attraction to corpses, arousal caused by the thought of or presence of corpses, and/or desire to perform sexual acts with corpses, NOT as wanking over the memory of a dead lover. Necrophilia is to do with corpses. What you are describing is NOT necrophilia. Wiktionary states: My copy of the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary reads: Merriam-Webster Online defines it as 'obsession with and usually erotic interest in or stimulation by corpses' In other words, there's a difference between sleeping with ghosts and sleeping with corpses, and the former is NOT defined as necrophilia. I'm sorry, I'm not trying to drag this out, it's just that this is a simple matter of definition, and there are no opinions to talk about here. It's not about opinion, it's about fact, and the fact of the matter is that you are not operating with a proper definition of the word necrophilia. We are literally having two different conversations and not talking about the same thing.

If you want to make it neat and pretty, like this, you copy the url of your story, high-light the text you want to turn into a link, and press the button in the text editor called 'link' (looks like a couple of links of chain with a plus sign in a green circle next to it, and is positioned next to the numbered list button).

My point exactly. The summary of the study published by Drs Rosman and Resnick states as follows: I doubt it can be said any clearer than that. While it can be a motivation, love for a dead loved one alone is not defined as necrophilia. Necrophilia has to do with sexual attraction and sexual desire, as well as behaviour.

I am simply giving you the dictionary and psychology definition of the word necrophilia. You are, of course, free to ascribe other meaning to this word if you so will, but if you do you are likely to be misunderstood, for you will be quite alone in your interpretation most of the time. It is perfectly natural and normal to continue loving people who have passed away. I haven't seen my dad alive since I was 11, and I still love him. I'd do anything to crawl into his lap and inhale the scent of stale smoke and coffee one more time, or sit on the floor and play with circuit boards while he taps away on his computer, or listen to him play guitar and sing. That doesn't mean I ever wanted to dig up his corpse, and it does not make me a necrophile. The elderly lady who outlived her husband and still wears her wedding ring and talks to him every night and keeps his ashes on the mantle isn't a necrophile either. Nor is the young man whose lover dies and who chooses to remain celibate and visit his grave every weekend for the rest of his life rather than find a new partner, even if he does still dream of or fantasise about sex with his lover, assuming that the lover is in fact alive in those fantasies. That is not the definition of necrophilia. EDIT: If you do not believe me, you can read the full extent of Rosman and Resnick's study here. You'll find that the full title of the study is Sexual Attraction to Corpses: A Psychiatric Review of Necrophilia. And there are plenty of examples of what they consider sexual, including but not limited to full on penetrative intercourse, being aroused while cutting up a dead body, masturbation over a corpse, and sexual arousal caused by the act of murder or mutilation.

Thank you for reading! I'm so happy you've enjoyed this series enough to read through all the stories, and to review them all. It means the world!

Aren't they just? It was only meant to be one little short story, and look at what they made me do, the wankers. They're obviously made for each other (well, yeah, cause I made them). Thank you for your kind words!

I love it when I get people to swear in their reviews. Thanks! <3

Favourite? Aww! That means a lot. Yeah, they're a stubborn pair. Thanks once again for reviewing!

No, that is incorrect. Necrophilia is defined as being sexual. It is not necrophilia to remain in love with a dead lover unless you express that love through sexual contact with your lover's dead body, or desire for such. Attachment to a dead lover is not necrophilia, it is a possible motivation for necrophilia. Necrophilia is a behaviour. 'Rosman and Resnick (1989) reviewed information from 34 cases of necrophilia describing the individuals' motivations for their behaviors: these individuals reported the desire to possess an unresisting and unrejecting partner (68%), reunions with a romantic partner (21%), sexual attraction to corpses (15%), comfort or overcoming feelings of isolation (15%), or seeking self-esteem by expressing power over a homicide victim (12%).' --- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necrophilia I can also bring your attention to the fact that 21% out of 34 people is 7 people.

I'm glad you can relate to Marcus. I have a feeling not everyone could. Personally, while we come from completely different backgrounds and had completely different childhoods, I empathise a lot with Marcus, who had the potential to be such a compassionate, romantic person and had all that ripped away from him. Thank you so much!

I might take a moment to tell Ollie's story one day. We'll see. Thank you for reviewing!

They're such singular people. What are the odds that they'd ever find anybody else who'd get them the way they get each other? Thank you for reviewing!

Thank you! I'm glad you're seeing improvement.

Thanks! Marcus's dad is a dick.

Thank you so much for reviewing!