Purest Male Chastity

Ever since I decided to try a 1 inch long chastity device, and shared my interest with others, lots of new and interesting issues have come up. For one thing, everybody who has tried the Nub comments on how it looks. That might not seem odd, but if you look at reviews of other devices the discussion centers around comfort, security, and ease of cleaning. Aesthetics, if mentioned at all, are very small part of the discussion.

This changes when 1 inch devices are worn. Wearers note that their penises seem to have disappeared. The tone of the writing doesn’t show the erotic excitement usually accompanying penis-crunching conversation. Instead, there appears to be a genuine sense of confusion about the disappearing weenie.

I think this is the tip of the iceberg. In a very odd-but-genuine sense, these very short devices look as though the penis is gone. I would think that this disappearing act would be very welcome. It’s fulfilling the wish of removing the penis as a sexual object until unlocked by its owner.

It’s as though our keyholders can remove our penises and store them away until they have some use for them. That, for me at least, is a pretty disturbing fantasy. But I have to admit that it is the logical extension of the enforced male chastity story.

The Nub in particular, even when purchased in clear plastic, does an excellent job of hiding the presence of the penis. Mine is clear and all you can really see is flesh-colored penis head with the urethra poking out of the hole in the tip. There is no evidence that head is attached to anything more substantial.

My 1 inch Jail Bird has a similar effect. However, since I’ve been wearing it for some time I’ve grown used to the penis disappearing act. The Nub refreshes the memory vividly. I’ve read some people wondering how their keyholder will react to the missing penis. In fairness, most of us want keyholder approval of any device we ask to wear.

When you join the one-inch club, the question of appearance takes on much more importance. I admit I spent some time looking in a mirror studying the disappeared penis. I also felt a bit uncomfortable looking at my disembodied urethra.

The more I think about it the more I realize that aside from the practical advantages of wearing a 1 inch cage, there is a new and profound emotional reaction to my male chastity. When I wear the Nub in particular, I don’t like what I see. I don’t like having to move my balls out of the way when I want to urinate. It just emphasizes a new order between my legs.

Every other chastity device I’ve worn showcases my penis in one way or another. It’s a pretty sort of bondage. Even the 1 inch Jail Bird feels good to look at. The Nub is an entirely different story. It’s all business. It’s not pretty. It’s unmistakably telling me that the penis it hides isn’t available in any way for my pleasure.

Ironically, it’s absolutely comfortable to wear. In fact, I can easily forget I’m locked into anything. The combination of lightweight plastic and very good ergonomic design take away any real opportunity to feel the confinement. It’s exactly as though Mrs. Lion has disconnected my penis and locked it away in her safe.

In the brief time I had to test the device, I don’t recall any spontaneous attempts at erection. Since the device shouldn’t perform very differently from the Jail Bird, I’m pretty sure it will be almost unnoticeable when I try to get hard.

Is the purpose of enforced male chastity to effectively disconnect my penis from any function beyond urination? In other words, is it a violation of being chaste to get visual pleasure looking at my cock locked in its little cage? Since a fascination with my penis set me on the road to chastity, it makes sense to think about removing all possibility of enjoying it on my own. This extends far past jerking off or other unauthorized sexual activity.

I’m not talking about depersonalization of my penis. It is attached to me and serves several important functions. Instead, it’s about following through on my request to surrender sexual control to my lioness. You could argue that there is nothing sexual about enjoying the sight of the penis locked helpless in its cage. I have to disagree.

It’s a sexual thrill to witness bondage that renders sexual pleasure just out of reach. It’s not nearly as much fun to look down and see a tiny box with my urethra poking out. That doesn’t look like bondage to me. Of course I know it is. But it doesn’t ring any sexual bells.

In a way wondering how the keyholder will like the sight of a new, 1 inch device, is an indirect plea to get or give pleasure at the site of your locked penis. Since Mrs. Lion can easily free her weenie when she wants access, even if it is just to look at the flaccid penis, there is no reason for concern about how she likes its appearance when locked away.

It’s a kind of topping from the bottom. It may be that my partner does prefer one device over another. That’s fine. She can lock me in the one she likes best. From my perspective, the one that is most effective is the one that completely takes away any sexual pleasure; visual or tactile.

All this is pretty new to me. I wonder if it’s new to you too. What started out as a way to improve the convenience of long-term lockup is developing into a more profound form of enforced chastity. For me at least, being locked in the Nub, removes any visual sexual pleasure I might have gotten from my lockup. Does that make it a purer form of male chastity?