“What healthful reason could there possibly be to give up orgasms in the long term?”
This isn’t a direct statement from the exchange that precipitated the writing of this series, but one that came to me as I played devil’s advocate with myself when giving the concept of “illness” as it relates to extended chastity some thought. It’s a consolidation of the many smaller misconceptions that might make up the point of view of those who are skeptical about the healthfulness of prolonged orgasm denial and chastity training, which may lead to the condemnation of the fetish as only appealing to those who are somehow “sick in the head”. Presumably, the reply to that question on the part of the skeptic is, “none”.
If you remove the word “healthful” from the devil’s advocate question, a few possible replies come to mind readily:
- religious conviction, in which the believer posits that chastity and celibacy facilitates the turning away from corporeal “lusts of the flesh” and toward contemplation of and service to whatever deity or driving principle they worship or believe in
- a means of addressing chronic masturbation , or a dependence on porn and masturbation for orgasm that adversely affects flesh-and-blood intimate relationships
- a philosophical exploration of the concept of self-control
- the redirection of a male undergoing feminization, whether self-imposed or with encouragement, away from phallocentric consciousness
- a male submissive giving up control of his orgasms to his chastity Mistress, wherein she may withhold them as a means of proof of devotion, or of imposing punishment
Now that a list of possible scenarios in which extended chastity might occur has been laid out in a neutral manner, we can see more easily whether or not the term “healthful” does or does not apply. To my mind, the only way to test this is to look back on previous installments of this series, and ask the question, do any of these options intrinsically involve harm to the body or the mind?
I defy anyone to make a case that any of them do. The only way they might try to do so would be to posit that religious devotion, philosophical exploration, the desire for self-control or the breaking of compulsion, the desire to move away from the gender binary both physically and consciously, or the sexual orientation of submissive or dominant, or any of its manifestations, in and of themselves, are sick. And to do so would be, at the very least, a matter of opinion, and not fact.
Next: Finally, I address the eroticism of extended chastity.
Those who condemn the practice as “sick” are usually not qualified to make any kind of a diagnosis of anyone else. When they don’t understand why someone would participate in the practice, their own discomfort with the unknown causes them to grasp at any excuse for a reason to make them feel like they are in control of the situation. There are a million other practices that are far more damaging to your mental health than this one. Another great post, Miss Rachel! 🙂
I couldn’t agree more, jemmie!
Whether one agrees or disagrees with what you’ve written without a doubt it has been well thought out. Your conviction and willingness to take the time to explore different reasons for this kink have made me think of my own denial, mental chastity practices over the past few years. Thank you for writing for this series 🙂
You’re welcome, Wessypoo! Glad it’s given you food for thought!
I just don’t see this as a health or illness issue, and I’m surprised at the people who do. This goes back to your bias post. People who condemn this as sick or an illness have no idea what they are talking about. It may not be for them, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t for others. And I echo what Wes said.
I agree, bfla, but it’s so easy for people to look at things they dislike or that turn them off or that they don’t understand and confuse that with there being something wrong with it, or with the person who seeks it.