I noticed that people on the Internet are obsessed with the need to create labels and definitions for everything. In its earliest infancy, online newsgroups fretted for months on end to come up with a label that would describe a female dominant person. People felt that the word “Dom” referred to a male. They also rejected dominatrix in the same general sense that people lately reject the word actress. Apparently assigning gender to nouns can denote lesser or greater status. I must be missing something. Is a lioness inferior to a lion? Obviously not!
The origin of “male chastity device” comes from the hardware. Before all the emotional and sexual baggage was loaded onto it, chastity devices were nothing more than objects designed to prevent men from masturbating. I’m sure this derived from the older term “chastity belt” the origins of that are lost in the mists of time. For the record, there were no female chastity belts during the Crusades. The first known chastity devices originated in Victorian times when it was believed that mental illness and feeblemindedness in men were both attributable to male masturbation. Chastity devices were created to keep boys and men from spilling their seed.
Up until quite recently, chastity devices of the male variety, of course, had nothing to do with orgasm denial. Their application was self-imposed. Obviously, wearing a chastity device makes having an orgasm problematic. It’s certainly possible to accomplish with sufficient effort, but it is a lot of work. In all the years I’ve been reading and writing about male chastity, I’ve yet to see anyone claim its use is to prevent a male from having sex with anyone other than his keyholder.
I know that the reason I enjoy wearing a chastity device is that I like the loss of sexual control it provides. It’s a unique form of bondage that turns me on. From the very start, wearing a chastity device didn’t mean that I wouldn’t get opportunities to ejaculate. Mrs. Lion likes making me come. She has no problem unlocking me quite frequently for the express purpose of making me produce semen. I have no problem with it because my love of male chastity is based on the fact that I lose the ability to decide when I get a chance to ejaculate. I don’t interpret frequent opportunities as loss of control for my keyholder. I get to come when she decides she wants me to. The chastity device, while not strictly necessary, helps reinforce her position.
I suppose it was inevitable that men would associate being locked in a chastity device with orgasm denial. After all, one could reason that if the penis is safely locked in a flaccid state, achieving orgasm ranges from impossible to very difficult. However, there is some faulty logic at work. The assumption is that if the penis is wild the owner can have orgasms anytime he wants. If it’s locked in a chastity device only the person with the key gets to decide when or if he gets to come. I don’t think that the vast majority of people who practice male orgasm denial use chastity devices to enforce it. Mrs. Lion practices orgasm control with me and doesn’t feel any need at all to lock my penis in a chastity device to enforce her control. Over the years, I’ve known lots of people who practice orgasm denial and control. None of them used hardware to enforce it.
In fact, without ever discussing it, I think Mrs. Lion believed she was the sole source of my ejaculations for many years before we even talked about locking me into a chastity device. She was genuinely surprised when she learned that I masturbated on my own when I was horny. She thought that she was the only source of ejaculation I had. That was naïve of her, I suppose. As soon as she learned about my secret masturbation, she put an immediate end to it.
I suppose it’s necessary to start looking at terminology. Let’s start with the easiest term: orgasm denial. It’s commonly believed that this is a practice where one person by force of will or hardware, denies another sexual release. Does that mean someone being denied orgasms can never have one?
In the dubious tradition of Internet terminology creation, let me suggest that there are really two different terms needed to cover what is now “orgasm denial”. I would suggest that if you practice orgasm denial, it means that while you are practicing it one person is denied having any orgasms. If Mrs. Lion practices orgasm denial with me, it means that I never have an opportunity to ejaculate so long as she is practicing it. The second term is “orgasm control”. Mrs. Lion practices orgasm control with me. That means I don’t get to decide when I am permitted to ejaculate. She and she alone determines when I can do that.
I think these two terms are unambiguous and mutually exclusive. Both apply equally well to men who are wearing or not wearing chastity devices. I would suggest that the term “male chastity” be retired. It doesn’t have a clear meaning. Instead, I suggest that we refer to the actual use of a device. For example, I may be locked in a chastity device and Mrs. Lion is practicing orgasm control with me. It’s a little more verbose, but it does correctly describe what we are doing.
I think Tom Allen’s hard work trying to develop a two-dimensional matrix supporting physically locking a penis in a chastity device on one axis and frequency of ejaculation on another, offers some insight as to the “chastity orthodoxy” of any given male. I don’t think it helps resolve any sort of thought about hardware/orgasm control spectrum definitions. Based on my own experience, a chastity device is something I like to wear. It’s completely unnecessary to support Mrs. Lion’s control of my sexuality. I’m trained to only let her bring me to orgasm and ejaculation. It’s not something I can do for myself anymore.
I know that there are men who stay locked in a chastity device full-time. Their keyholders allow them to get themselves off now and then without removing the device. It makes ejaculation a physical challenge as well as a treat.
There’s a third dimension when considering orgasm control and male chastity devices. Some keyholders use orgasm control, enforced by the chastity device as a form of discipline. Orgasms are withheld as a way of correcting behaviors. Chastity fantasies abound with this scenario. I’m not aware of any couples who practice this, but I am sure they are out there. Mrs. Lion has always kept sex separate from discipline. If I need correcting, she will spank me or impose some other non-sexual punishment. On occasions when I have been spanked, it isn’t uncommon for her to give me an orgasm as well in the same evening. The orgasm has nothing to do with my offense or punishment. It’s just a coincidence they occurred on the same night.
The reason I think we should consider disciplinary chastity (How do you like that term?) separately from orgasm denial/control.is that the chastity device becomes an instrument of disciplinary enforcement. It’s locked on as a way to assure compliance with the sentence of abstinence. This is certainly a valid application of sexual control and wearing a chastity device. I think it’s probably the rarest use of these things.
Because wearing a chastity device also implies surrendering sexual control, we often conflate the two. It’s convenient to think this way. That doesn’t mean it’s correct. We know that every wearable chastity device can be escaped. We also know that it’s possible to ejaculate without an erection and while wearing a device. At best, the device makes cheating more inconvenient. I wear a chastity device because I like feeling that my penis is under physical control. I would never attempt to escape a device. I wouldn’t try to get myself off while wearing one. I like bondage.
Mrs. Lion used my voluntary compliance with being locked into a chastity device as a training aid to teach me never to masturbate. I am well-trained and won’t jerk off. I’m not sure if I would be 100% compliant had I not been locked in a chastity device for several years. During those years, my penis was freed only under the direct supervision of Mrs. Lion. Even then, she, and only she could get me off. She has never permitted me to jerk off even under her supervision. She is my only source of sex. We aren’t practicing orgasm denial; she gives me orgasms on a regular basis. We are practicing orgasm control. I never get to have an orgasm that she doesn’t provide. All of this is completely independent of whether or not I’m locked into a chastity device.
It seems reasonable to me that we consider replacing the term “male chastity” with three, more descriptive terms. Orgasm denial and orgasm control refer to the external imposition of sexual power. Orgasm denial means that the male being denied does not get any chance to ejaculate. Orgasm control means that the male is allowed orgasms only with express permission of his partner who is exercising the control. Chastity discipline refers to the use of a chastity device to forcibly prevent ejaculation as a way of punishing an offense.
There is generally no need to refer to some sort of state defined as a male wearing a chastity device. It doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. It’s about as notable as creating a term to define whether or not I’m wearing a bowtie. The male chastity device is sexual hardware. It’s reasonable to talk about but doesn’t need a specific term to refer to a person who wears it.
I’m sure this will spur all sorts of debate. Terminology conversations always do. Isn’t it fun being a kinkster?