The Future of Chastity - Real Talk...

You know you can edit posts, right?

Yes, this is an internet forum for a specific kink. Welcome.

 

yeah here you go again, being all stressy and triggered, and I can’t figure why. This was a relatively whimsical thread about “the future of chastity” and you jumped in, shouting about how you don’t care about the future of chastity.

 

Quite aware, and apparently you think I should. Perhaps I should have consulted you to determine what words I would chose to speak, but alas, I didn't. I spoke for myself, correctly so.

No, it's not. It's a forum for chastity. To YOU that's a "kink," something that attends your sexual drive. Again, if it doesn't fit your world, it must be wrong, then? Too bad.

A thread about "the future of chastity." God forbid a future in which people are locked up for any reason other than sexual frustration or gratification.

I'm neither stressed, nor triggered. Clearly you are, though.

There's no shouting here. You've lied. Why?

 

For the sake of argument, let's imagine a person using a chastity device for purely religious or spiritual reasons. If we then imagine an average person who has learned about this behavior, does it seem untoward that they'd consider the practice, in a word, kinky? Would it seem outlandish for them to ask, "If this isn't sexual for you, why use a cage at all? Couldn't the same goal be achieved with willpower?"

Additionally, now that we're talking about traditional religious practices we're no longer talking about the future (unless you're predicting a rise in traditional religious practices and I'm misunderstanding your intent). I think it's also important to note that your two examples are not explicitly sexual practices such as locking a physical device onto one's genitals.

 

Nah, that was for Muppet. sorry

 

Does a sharp line need to be drawn between "kink" and "spirituality?"

The tree that falls in the forest, unheard, has still fallen, all philosophical apologies to the contrary, aside.

If one engages in chastity for "spiritual" reasons and someone else calls it a "kink," does it change the reason that someone has engaged in chastity? If an object is red and someone calls it blue, does it change the redness?

More apropo, if you practice chastity and someone doesn't do the same, will you stop? If you practice chastity and someone doesn't like it, will you alter your practice? If you change your practices, or start or stop, will the world be altered in the slightest way?

Others might love or hate your behavior, but that does not change anything, unless you choose.

If you choose to lock yourself, it doesn't matter if someone takes the key, unless it matters to you.

Locking a device on one's genitals isn't an explicitly sexual practice, unless you choose it to be, any more than not engaging in sex without the device, is explicitly sexual. In fact, not engaging in sex may be entirely non-sexual. It is only explicitly sexual if you choose to make it so, but that is your choice and does not change the rational of anyone else, unless they choose.

 

No I’m not stressed at all, I’m just enjoying this thread! When I said “shouting”, I meant it metaphorically cos you can’t really shout in writing.

 

So essentially we agree.

 

Generally speaking, posting in all capital letters is considered "shouting."

There's no need.

Another thread here asks about the popularity of chastity: I submit that it's more widely practiced than may encompassed by demographics. In other words, there may be far more who engage in chastity in one form or another, than can be measured by surveys, or gauged by sales of chastity cages on amazon, etc. In fact, by the latter metric alone, the result is not knowable as one cannot assume that Amazon is the only source of cages, or that it's a representative sample of purchases or use...and one shouldn't assume that only those wearing a device, are chaste.

What of a catholic priest who takes a vow of chastity? Setting aside that person's potential failure to abide the vow, if the priest is true to his word, is he more true if he wears a device? Less true? Would anyone know?

I'm wearing a device now. This one replaces one I left in a shower in Singapore, a few days ago. I purchased the same one because it was comfortable, light, and worked for me. I think I got this one on ebay. it wasn't expensive. The lock and key, I believe are Chinese. The cage is 3D printed, I believe, and may have been made in China or maybe in the US. I'm sure my purchase won't appear in any sales statistics of cages, but ebay is full of choices, and given the frequent updates and the sheer number of models, one might reasonably opine that they wouldn't be selling them, if they didn't sell. I suspect, without any particular evidence, that a lot of people are buying them. They're inexpensive, discreet, easily had.

Why would someone wear them? Could it be that the reasons are as varied as the number that purchase them? What if a priest buys one for his own purpose, has no "keyholder," and tells no one? Can he be part of the "future?" Is his wearing as legitimate as the "kinkster?"

 

Sorry, but this reads like an argument made in bad faith.

Anything involving the genitals is sexual by definition, as genitalia are defined as sex organs.

Furthermore, if an object is red and someone calls it blue, of course that doesn't make it so. But simply claiming an object is red does not make it so either. We determine an object's "real" color based on what the majority sees, which is why I referenced an "average" person in my previous comment.

Not sure why this needs to be an epistemological debate unless the future of chastity is arguing about the common definition of already defined words.

 

An objects color is subjective to the eyes which view the object; color is a function of reflected wavelength, and not all see or perceive the same thing. Regardless of perception of the viewer, the intrinsic nature of the object is unchanged. You can call a dog a cat, but it doesn't stop being a dog.

The reason that a discussion about the definition bears relevance is that simply because you define something your way, doesn't make it the only way. If one places his penis in a vagina and engages in sexual intercourse, the act and function of the body parts are sexual. If one stands facing a urinal and empties one's bladder, the act is not sexual, unless one has a particular "kink" that involves urinating in a urinal. It's a non-sexual act.

When I had a kidney stent, it was inserted through my penis; the event was absolutely non-sexual, and was performed by a man and a woman. It doesn't get much more intimate than someone reaching inside you through your penis. It wasn't sexual when the surgeon ripped it out through my penis either, while I was very aware, and very awake. My penis serves far more purposes in my life than sex; by and large the percentage of time it is used for, or involved in sex, would be a very small percentage. Some cannot imagine being focused on anything but that small percentage. That is not true for everyone.

If you are obsessed with your penis as a sexual object, that is your choice. It doesn't change the way I use, view, or treat mine. It can be a sexual object, but doesn't need to be; likewise, the placing of an object over a penis doesn't necessarily make it sexual. I'm wearing such a device at the moment. It does not make me feel aroused, nor turned on, nor "kinky." If your wearing a device makes you feel those things, more power to you. That's your path. Not everyone is on the same path.

 

If a priest is wearing a cage I'm going to have questions to start with. They don't exactly have the best pr to start with. Being chaste for any reason besides kink ends when you put a cage on your junk. As for the future I don't really care. Ill do me regardless

 

I'll concede the point regarding genitalia and medical necessity as that's a worthy caveat. But again, this reads like a bad faith argument to me; surely you can agree that medical necessity is the exception to the rule here. If not, this will probably be my last reply.

To your point on color: color is indeed a function of reflected wavelength, but what we call a given color (e.g. "red" or "blue") is based on the average qualia produced by that wavelength. In the same way, what we call "kink" is based on the average definition of "normal sexual behavior", or more precisely, that which falls outside of "normal sexual behavior". The use of a chastity cage clearly falls under this definition.

If you want to make the claim that the use of a chastity cage is non-sexual, by all means. But from my perspective, and, I think, the perspective of the average person, what you are saying is akin to the colorblind person claiming an objectively red object is actually blue because of their own subjective reality.

 

Much as I hate to agree with MrX, who has me on ignore...

I too do not think a chastity device is inherently kinky.

 

99% of us asked for this. For me it was about stopping porn addiction and that has made me for less kinky if anything, though my interest in kink brought me to chastity. Go figure!?

 

One obvious reason why you "might" "possibly" want to do that is that in your experience chastity often turns out to be, in general, good for relationships. Worked for me, for example, and because it did I am interested in promoting chastity. It's about the same as being interested in promoting health or any other form of well-being.

 

Why would I want to edit a post?

 

Did I make a typo?

 

I would say though, that if you asked the majority of people who know little of the practice of chastity, then they would say it is very kinky. So by majority rules, then "Yes" a chastity cage is kinky as fuck.

However, little do they know that for a lot of middle-aged men it can be a way of reducing the kink in their lives, and make sex less penisentric and more about a connection of minds. Which is why I don't think it necessarily is, or doesn't come from that kinky place in my mind.

Her cropping my ass once in a while, I think that's definately kinky... And I love it!

 

So you can have all of your responses in a single post instead of four posts in a row. Just basic online etiquette. lol

 

Keyholders and MC has certainly come up on my TikTok, I don't have an account so can't like or favorite any clips. My feed is mostly construction related as that's my job but young women talking about keyholding have cropped up and then the algorithm sends more my way if i watch them .

 

oh I quite like the brief episodic style.

so you mean that doing this (reopening and adding to the earlier one line post) is somehow stylistically preferable to you than a series of discrete messages?

I suppose that never occurred to me. Why do you prefer it?

 

Ah now I just tried to add more and it wouldn’t let me so presumably there’s some sort of limited window of opportunity for so doing…?
Now I think about it for the first time, I suppose the reason I shy away from long form single posts is cos I’m hopeful of real time exchange so I don’t want to be gabbing on without gaps. Then if no one replies I send another brief ejaculation into the void, and so on.

 

15 minutes I think

 

Well we live and learn!
Another reason for doing umpteen short posts instead of a few longer one is I’m rarely giving my whole attention to this, I’ll be cooking a stew and watching a film and texting a friend and scrolling thru online news and so on.