Taking the Sexy out of Chastity

There seems to be a rather common misconception out there that chastity devices are designed or intended to prevent erections.  I don’t understand why this way of thinking is still around.  If you get a cock cage that actually fits properly, there isn’t any trouble with that.  You can get hard frequently; you just can’t orgasm.  The point of chastity is to prevent orgasm, not erections.  Why is this so hard for some people to grasp?  It’s called “orgasm control” for a reason.

If you’re locked up, and it hurts when you get hard, there’s something wrong.  Most likely, your cage is too small or you’re using the wrong size ring.  Having a secure fit doesn’t mean it should strangle all the blood out of your cock.

Besides, why would you want to prevent your sub from getting hard?  Why would you condition someone to stay flaccid all the time?  Hard cocks are sexy.  Just because he’s hard doesn’t mean you have to let him orgasm. Do you want to condition him to not have other normal biological functions as well?

It’s sort of like saying that underwear is designed to squeeze your balls until you wince.  If you buy them three sizes too small, then yes, they’ll do that.  But if you buy the right size, they fit well and function normally.  Cock cages are no different.

Chastity has nothing to do with suppressing sex drive or erections.  In fact, it’s just the opposite.  It’s about driving someone crazy, it’s about power, it’s about control, it’s about ownership.  All very sexy things.

Changing Perspective

For about as long as I’ve been in the bdsm community, I’ve had an adverse reaction to the term “slave”.  I realize that it’s used in a different sense than the nonconsensual human-trafficking type slavery, so that’s not the problem.  A conversation with T a while back made me start to think a little deeper as to where that negative connotation comes from.

I eventually came to realize that my aversion to the word came not from the word itself, but from many of  the self-identified slaves I’d interacted with locally and online.  The majority were self-important, pompous fuckbuckets who looked down on “mere” subs.  They often tried to knock subs for not being submissive enough; this was simply a ploy to make themselves look good at the expense of others.  (I also see subs doing the same to bottoms on occasion.)  The desire to look good in front of others is nearly universal, but that kind of behavior is unacceptable.  So I distanced myself from these people, and over time I built a link between people who called themselves slaves and these abhorrent actions.  Once I realized that my problem wasn’t with “slave” but rather with the individuals themselves (regardless of how they identify) that was a big step toward disentangling the two.

Assbags come in all orientations and d/s positions.  It doesn’t matter how someone identifies; what matters is that person’s behavior and how they treat others.

The word “slave” is growing on me, as is the increased level of d/s that comes with it.  It draws me in, pulls me toward it, yet at the same time, it creates a little loopy feeling in my stomach.  I yearn to experience a deeper level of d/s, to fully feel owned.  Not to be a puppet or yes-man, but to be immersed in a higher intensity of d/s dynamics.

The Real World Intervenes

Much of the advice some people give is blatantly biased to fit their own prejudices.  For example, if one person in a relationship doesn’t have much of a sex drive, the advice changes with gender. If it’s the man who has low drive, it means he’s either cheating or has a medical or psychological problem.  If it’s the woman who doesn’t have much drive, it’s still the man’s fault;  he’s not doing enough housework or spending enough money on her.

Even among some in the femdom community, there’s still this belief that the man doing more than his share of the housework will magically cause the woman to become a raging nympho.  This is another one of those ideas that’s very popular online but not so much in real life; every d/s couple I know who live together split the housework evenly (barring situations like college, working overtime, sick relatives, etc.)

So if both people are working full-time, there’s a certain amount of housework to be done when they get home.  If he does most of it, she may be free to be sexual, but that won’t do them any good as a couple since he’ll be busy doing housework.  Or there’s the “too tired” excuse: She’s too tired to be sexual after working all day.  But somehow she expects him to work all day, do all of the housework, and still have the energy?  How much rock do you have to smoke before that makes any sense?

If both people start on what needs done at the same time and split it up, they’ll both have free time when it’s over.  Obviously most couples don’t have sex (or scenes) every single day.  But if you can’t handle the responsibilities of being an adult and maintain your relationship, then I would question whether you should even be in one.  And yes, a d/s relationship is a relationship.  As such, it involves compromise and real-world responsibilities.  D/s is not an excuse to say, “I don’t like doing the things that need done in my life, so I’m going to pass my responsibilities off on someone else.”  If that’s what d/s was about, I would most definitely be dominant so that I could live a life of leisure without ever doing anything unpleasant again.