In a kind of incestuously male chastity way, I want to put my slant on an excellent blog post by Thumper, ‘Push me, please’.
Apart from the fact he’s absolutely correct in the nice things he says about me (yes, this hubris with my tongue stuck very firmly in my cheek), he raises a very interesting point, which, in my humble way, I’d boil down to the question of does granting control also necessarily involve submission and domination?
I know this is a frequently discussed topic, at least here in the real world where the fantasy of female superiority is clearly seen as just that – a fantasy – but I think some useful perspectives came out of Thumper’s post and from the comments that followed (incidentally,if you really want to yank a true female supremacist’s chain, point out their believing females are superior to males by virtue of their genetic heritage is qualitatively no different from saying white people are superior to black ones, or round-eyed ones superior to slant-eyed ones. It’s amusing to watch them try to rationalise their bigotry with all manner of illogic, stupidity and, finally, ad-hominem attacks).
For Thumper, male chastity necessarily involves submission, because that’s how he’s feeling. You can’t argue with feelings. If someone says, “I’m feeling this, that, and the other” you can’t refute them, because feelings are internal, personal and entirely subjective.
Note this is not the same as saying your feeling about something is necessarily correct. So, for example, if you say,“I just feel the Earth is flat”, your feeling is inarguable; but your conclusion is demonstrably wrong. It’s the same for those silly female supremacists, too: you can’t argue with the fact they feel women are “superior”, but when it comes to demonstrating it as fact, or even providing evidence for it, they simply fail (oh, and how).
An interesting question, then, and I don’t know the answer so I’m not being rhetorical, is can submission and domination occur independently? Meaning, if Thumper feels he’s submitting in his male chastity, but his lady doesn’t feel she’s dominating, where are they? My guess is both are true, since both are just feelings and ‘twixt the ears.
This is an important point, because, if both can be true, it shows quite convincingly neither is necessary for male chastity, not in any objective sense, at any rate.
Someone also asked the other day, how do I reconcile my claims of equality with my consensual control of John’s orgasms and his male chastity? I’ve never actually made this claim so far as I remember, in any case. And if I have, I’ve been sloppy with my language, because proving equality would be equivalent to disproving inequality, and that’s not possible, just like it’s not possible to disprove Russell’s Teapot.
I merely ask the female supremacists to produce evidence to support the claims they’re making – they make the claims and it’s incumbent on them to support them if they expect to be taken seriously. What we do know empirically is societies tend to be more peaceful, successful and just when we assume equality in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
In any case, where is the contradiction in the notion of consensual control and equality?
I used an analogy with Thumper yesterday to explain how, for us, male chastity doesn’t have to involve submission and domination. And the same analogy also addresses the point about control and equality.
John and I work out. We have a well-equipped gym in our garage. John works out alone, but I get him to “spot” me and help me along.
And he makes me work hard. I get tired and hot and cranky and try all my usual girly-bullshit tricks to try to get him to let me off lightly.
But he won’t. He doesn’t take my shit and he “makes” me lift heavy. He gives no quarter, and really, I know that’s best for me and he’s being an uncompromising bastard in the interests of my long-term happiness with my shape, weight and health.
Yet at the time, I really do want him to be nice, fluffy and kind, just like men do with their women when male chastity really starts to bite.
And it’s entirely consensual. John has been quite clear in saying if I don’t obey the “rules” and lift like I’m told and eat like I’m told, he won’t do it with me. If I want the benefits, I have to obey the “rules”.
Thisis not dominance and submission, though. This is John helping me do something for my long term benefit and pleasure that I’d find difficult or impossible to do by myself.
Submission, domination and equality simply don’t come into it. They’re irrelevant.
And with us it’s very much the same with male chastity.
I’d be very surprised to find we were alone in this.
P.S. Today sees the first issue of “Something for the Weekend” going out, a weekly newsletter available to everyone who’s elected to receive my free Chastity Guide. So if you’re not on the list, I recommend you get on it now.
P.P.S. A plug for the recently resurrected Male Chastity Forum. To quote Thumper a second time:
“One of the things I especially liked about MCF back in the day (before it was hacked or whatever) was the seemingly large number of gay device wearers who were there. Maybe that’s what kept the French maids out. Anyway, it was a great place and, hopefully, it will be one again. I encourage you to go check it out and, if you’re so inclined, create an account and add your two bits. Unless you’re wearing a device and a dress right now. In which case, there’s already a large and vibrant community out there for you (and you know where it is)
Not, of course, that there’s anything wrong with that….”