After my post the other day about dipping my dainty toes in the waters of bondage and corporal punishment, I had the inevitable emails and messages about everything from submission to punishment.
The first I’ve written about many, many times in email and on the blog and I don’t propose to repeat myself here.
But the second does perhaps deserve some explanation.
The question I would have to ask myself is what on Earth would I be “punishing” John for? There seems to be a presupposition that whacking someone’s arse with a cane, riding crop or paddle has to be connected with punishment.
But that’s a non-sequitur in the same way as assuming someone who is having sex must be trying for a baby.
In other words, it’s something two people can do simply because they enjoy doing it, and unless their fantasy includes the punishment role-play then it
simply isn’t there. Saying it “must” be is nothing more than mind-reading and projection.
A variation of the “punishment” idea actually crops up a lot in male chastity, where I’m frequently asked about how can you punish a man who comes when he’s not supposed to, is overly needy and whining, masturbates without “permission” and so on. As I’ve said before, I really don’t go in for that kind of thing, partly because it necessarily includes using sex and orgasm as a kind of currency, something I really do think is unhealthy in a relationship. I think much the same about reward, too. I go into this in some detail in Why He Wants You to Say NO because it’s so important in setting the ground rules.
Another thing is the “punishment” he gets is often actually what he wants, so in a sense it’s not punishment at all. For a man who craves denial, making him go an extra week without an orgasm is hardly teaching him a lesson, is it?
Similarly, a man who has a deep need to be restrained and caned is getting what he craves if you treat him to six or a dozen of the best.
The fact both of them will be begging for mercy is beside the point, because that’s part of their pleasure, if you like.
Bottom Line: if your man is really being an arse and you want to make a point, there are a couple of things you can do which don’t play into his hands.
First, you can treat him to a ruined orgasm. I’ve written about this before, but according to every man I’ve discussed this with, including Himself, a ruined orgasm is not fun, is no release to speak of and is far worse than having no orgasm at all. I’m happy to take their word for it. And assuming they are telling the truth, it’s safe to say giving a man a ruined orgasm would be some kind of punishment (disclosure: I sometimes give them to John as a way of milking him).
Or secondly… you have the ultimate sanction of refusing to play the game. I know some women who’ve done this with their men when they have become inordinately pestiferous in their whining to come. They’ve simply assumed a bored expression, handed back the keys, and told their men to get on with it… on the understanding if they do… then the game ends right there, and permanently.
Unsurprisingly, not one of these fellows took the opportunity.
The important point to take away from this message is this: giving a man more of what he craves is not “punishment”, even if in the moment he’s begging and pleading for an end to it. Real punishment is doing something he does NOT truly want at all — such as a ruined orgasm or an end to the game.
Obviously, these “real” punishments are exactly that, and so I can’t help but think if you find yourself having to dish it out, something somewhere has gone awry — and the roots of that are usually in a lack of communication right at the start.