Before running a few very small surveys on my @theCagedLion account on Twitter, I made assumptions about what our readers would like to see over the years. I don’t want to offend people who read our posts or follow me on Twitter. When we started this blog almost nine years ago, I assumed that pictures of a soft penis (usually mine), either bare or in a chastity device was what readers would like to see. I believed that showing erections might offend some of our female readers.
I maintained a loose standard of limiting penis pictures to the flaccid. If my surveys are accurate, our female readers prefer hard penises. They also don’t mind seeing balls. How about that? The guys like to see caged cocks. I assume erections are viewed as neutral images. Everyone is OK with my bare bottom, spanked or unspanked. That doesn’t mean any particular reader gets off on my aroused cock. I would be very surprised if anyone got turned on by it. I’m average at best. Like my friend Julie at strictjuliespanks.blogspot.com, we find it a turn-on to show you our naughty bits.
There’s a feeling of vulnerability created by publishing such intimate images. Julie has it better than me. It isn’t obvious whether or not she is aroused when she shows her pussy to us. My penis, on the other hand, very obviously communicates its sexual interest. I can’t pretend to understand what specific reactions these images of me inspire in our female readers. I hope they are arousing. I assume male readers react neutrally.
When we publish CBT images, I am hard in almost all of them. I don’t know how our female readers react to them. I feel another survey coming on. I hope they are educational at the least and arousing at best. I imagine that some male readers will find them exciting since they can imagine themselves in the same predicament.
We also considered avoiding images entirely. A lot of bloggers post pure text. They don’t get involved with pictures. Some bloggers post highly sexual photos of their activities. Male bloggers seemed more inclined to do this than females. Many female sex bloggers post “art” shots of their bare bodies. They often publish close-ups that are skin but not readily identifiable as to exactly what skin is being shown. I think the female body is much more photogenic than the male. That may be my bias as a heterosexual male.
I admit that I like naked images. Cock shots don’t offend me. Few interest me. Spanked bottoms are interesting. I like seeing how others end up after a spanking. Bloggers rarely post videos. They are much more difficult to produce. Also, the ones that manage to get into blogs are generally poorly lit and not very revealing. A stationary camera/phone on a tripod won’t yield a particularly fun spanking or sex video. A camera operator and some help with lighting are needed to produce a worthwhile recording.
Even still images are often poor quality. Phones and point-and-shoot digital cameras have come a long way over the years. It’s rare to see out-of-focus pictures. Unfortunately, it is equally rare to see well-framed shots. Most of our photographs are taken with a Canon point-and-shoot camera. It does a good job (we always use the flash!). I always improve the image in Photoshop. This is a valuable tool to use. Adobe offers a “Photographer” subscription for about $10 a month. It’s worth the money. Learning to use it isn’t that difficult.
In my opinion, blogs are almost always improved if images are added. The images need to be of good quality and identifiable. Blurry “art” shots annoy me. Naked bodies of both sexes are worthwhile in my book. Clear illustrations of sex play, like CBT, are always appreciated.
Our current position on what we publish in The Journal is that we will show erections and, when available, sexual activities and play. Do you have an opinion about our use of images? Please comment!