Hello, Horny Readers!
It seems to me that the proper protocol for discussing, and, hopefully, refuting the idea that the desire for and practice of long-term orgasm denial is both pathological and devoid of erotic content is to first make a point about bias, then to isolate some pertinent terms, and express why these terms do or do not apply to extended chastity play. After some thought, the terms I’ve isolated are “erotic”, “pleasure”, “harm”, and “illness”. My discussion of those terms will come in future posts.
In this post, I will make a point about bias.
Let’s be clear about the fact that people often claim that a practice is universally unhealthy when what they really mean is that it doesn’t appeal to them, or that they can’t imagine what someone else gets out of it. It gives them a sort of nebulous feeling of unease, and frequently they confuse their personal distaste with concern for the healthfulness of the practice in general.
Those who are homophobic, for example, often focus on how “unnatural” it is to have anal sex, since the anus, rectum, and prostate were designed for other purposes. This is clearly nonsense. If all body parts were restricted in sex play according to their biological function, a lot of men with a breast obsession would find themselves disappointed, since the biological function of breasts is to provide nourishment for offspring.
Further, I would wager that a healthy number of males who castigate gay men for having anal sex have or would like to have anal sex with the women in their lives, or at least don’t think about what the ass is “for” when they watch male/female porn that includes anal penetration by the male. It probably goes without saying that not all gay men engage in anal play or anal sex, but that’s irrelevant anyway, because the point is that it’s not the anal sex that bothers homophobes, but the fact that it’s occurring between men.
So, following that example, when considering the sexual tastes of others, intellectually and sexually mature people should scrutinize themselves to be sure that it isn’t bigotry on their part that causes them to cast judgement on tastes they don’t share. And if they do find that it is their own irrational bias that causes their distaste for a sexual practice or identity, I believe that kink community ethics should dictate that the observation of good manners would encourage them to keep it to themselves.
You’ve made your case perfectly on this post, Miss Rachel, I couldn’t agree more!
Thank you for taking the time to read and reply, jemmie!
First, I am sorry it has taken me a while to get here to comment, Rachel. I read a reference to your series somewhere and I said this is for me to read, but I have been traveling a lot and this is the first chance I have had. Thank you for writing this. You are so right, this is the one place we can go to talk about, explore, and even admit we are interested in, fetishes that we simply cannot discuss in the rest of our lives. For me that has been such a boost, because, contrary to judging others, I judge myself too much. I struggle with some of the fetishes/kinks I have because so much of society has judged them unnatural. I try very hard not to judge others even when I see they have fetishes I’m not into because I am sensitive to the issue myself. I hope I succeed; I don’t think I have ever publicly criticized another’s interests. That would be wrong. We’re supposed to be here (I think) to support each other. Thank you for writing this.
I’m extremely flattered that reading my blog is something on your must-get-around-to list!
And I am also glad, so glad, that my thoughts about kink community ethics resonate with you!
Always a pleasure to hear from you!
I do enjoy your view and it goes so much deeper