Male Chastity and the Holy Grail of the 100% Secure Chastity Belt

by Sarah on June 20, 2010

I welcome almost all questions about male chastity and my relationship with John… but the ones I really like are the ones that challenge me and make me stop and actually think.

I get a lot of mail. Dozens every day. I completely ignore a very few, but even though I reply to the rest most are fairly mundane, pedestrian and uninspiring.

And that’s fine. After all, my reason for having the Blog is education. And if everyone knew everything they needed to know there would be no point in having it. Moreover, ignorance is no sin – the real sin is wilful ignorance, a refusal to be educated or to educate oneself (Creationists take note).

Some, though, are really quite irritating, obviously spawned by people who either can’t read, won’t read or feel reading is somehow beneath them because they intuitively “know” what male chastity is and what is clearly must comprise else it’s not being done the Right Way.

So it tickles my fancy no end when I get a question like this:

What would make it closer to 100% secure sans tools? Is it the fit not being spot on, John’s ana­tomy, design flaws, or simply the sad truth that noth­ing is and this is as good as it gets with present mater­i­als and technology?”

Because it opens up more cans of worms than you can possibly even begin to think about the possibility of perhaps asking someone about shaking a stick at.

I am not an engineer. John is, albeit an electronic one (in the sense he has a degree in electronic engineering, not that he’s made out of transistors and shit). And given John’s personality I’m almost reluctant to publish this post, because I fear it’s the kind of thing that might just set him off.

See, John is a genius. No, really. He’s the smartest person I have ever met and while I really hate it sometimes, and for all sorts of reasons, it does mean I can’t help but love him for it. And what worries me is he’ll see the implicit challenge in what I’m about to write about male chastity belts and set about meeting it. It matters not one jot that he knows little of metalwork or machine tools: if he got the bug, he’d simply learn and become a world-class expert in about a week.

But, anyway… the current design of the Tollyboy is not a 100% secure male chastity device simply because the crotch-piece is flexible and the rear cable cannot possibly be made tight enough to prevent escape without making the belt unwearable. I can’t state this as an incontrovertible fact, but I find it hard to believe anyone has an anatomy that would render my statement invalid.

A PA attachment at the far end of the penis tube would prevent pullout, but John took his PA out and I think the likelihood of him getting it done again is similar to that of us “winning” the War on Drugs (clue: it was a waste of time 30 years ago when I first smoked weed, and it’s a waste of time now – leave people alone to make their own choices).

I wouldn’t say it’s a design flaw because every design has parameters and I don’t think the Tollyboy has ever been presented as a 100% secure belt. So, rather, it has limitations as a male chastity belt. John is unusually lean, but even if he wasn’t, body-fat or un-tensed muscle would not be so resilient as to stop him wriggling his hand between the crotch piece and his lower belly and teasing his penis out of the tube.

So, no, without a PA I don’t see how the Tollyboy could ever be 100% secure, even without tools.

Now, to extrapolate from that to other designs of male chastity belt which are similar (like the NeoSteel, LockedInSteel, MySteel, etc.) I might be wrong, but it seems to me they’d all have the same limitation: how to stop the penis being teased out of the top of the tube using a hand slid between the crotch-piece and the belly.

Again, I might be wrong, but it seems to me the only real variables are how much pain are you willing to endure, and how much effort are you determined to put into escaping? I’m not saying it would be easy, not even for John in his Tollyboy, but it wouldn’t be too hard and certainly wouldn’t cause anything more than temporary discomfort or pain.

The only ways I can see of perhaps changing this are to make belt more snug and more encompassing, almost like a pair of metal male chastity shorts – like the Latowski, indeed. But even then, I’m not sure it would be possible to prevent withdrawal if you used mechanical assistance that didn’t damage the belt itself (thin strips of plastic, for instance).

The other side of the coin would be getting the thing back in once you’d had it out to play with. I suspect it wouldn’t be impossible for John to get his penis out of the tube, masturbate, and then get it back in again without my knowing about it (unless his tender nether regions over the following days gave it away).

So… this is the implicit challenge I’m somewhat afraid John will pick up: is it possible to make a secure male chastity belt without a PA attachment?

On the face of it, I think not.

Now, to the next question:

If the optional 100% fool­proof failsafe anti-tampering device exis­ted, you know the sort of thing — high ten­sion steel wire that snaps tight if the belt is tampered with — would you have gone for it?”

I answered this in the comment itself, but I want to answer it more fully now.

In short: yes. Instantly and without a doubt. If I could wave my witch’s wand and have John magically encased in an absolutely 100% inescapable and indestructible device, I’d do it instantly. Kaaa-zaaaaaaam.

Why?

Because I could.

I love having John locked. I love having him horny for me and unable to do anything about it that doesn’t involve severe contortions or machine tools (let’s face it – even your house isn’t 100% secure. Male chastity is a balance between comfort, security and convenience. What’s more, there’s also detectability, which is a subject for another post).

I love knowing that, like a legless dog, I’ll find him exactly where I left him: hot, hard, and horny and ready for whatever I choose to give him.

Now, I know there are lots of men and women out there who think this attitude means I’m a closet Domme. Well, maybe I am. But even if that was true, it doesn’t bespeak D&S in my marriage, because a man who’d let me dominate him wouldn’t be attractive to me in the slightest.

As I’ve said before, one of the many things I love about John is he won’t put up with my girly bullshit. I couldn’t put up with any man who would – any man who’d consent to be my “slave” would be exactly that and nothing more because there would be zero possibility of any kind of sex between us.

So while the “slave” would be utterly chaste – permanent male chastity with permanent orgasm denial – there wouldn’t even be tease and denial. For me, tease and denial is a pleasure because it’s giving John pleasure, over and above the thrill of exercising my feminine power; to do that with a man I didn’t find attractive would be stomach-turning.

I don’t know… maybe I ought to open that training camp I mentioned before. It’d certainly get the neighbours talking, that’s for sure ;-) .

Previous post:

Next post: