Is tease and denial the right message to be giving out?

i don't think you're a "fraudster". Just full of shit.

Well I did. Now I understand more clearly. You do all that you do for free and for the benefit of mankind. I had a hard time believing that before. Now I see clearly. The Amazon Wish Lists are there for men NOT to buy you things in exchange for the service you're NOT providing them.

I. Love. Big. Brother.

 

That is so English and made me guffaw. Which is English for laugh out loud in a self deprecating way.

Thank you, @SubVerity I really needed that. It's the sort of telling off that is a simple Tsk Tsk that means so much more than the rant that I was reduced to.

 

It happens with each new generation of members who seem to find it hard to imagine any reality other than their own and so jump to conclusions.


If anyone is interested in contacting @Administrator or any of the mod team with screenshots demonstrating wrongdoing, or findom, then they are welcome and encouraged to do so. If you do not then you also do not have the right to cast aspersions and make allegations.

Interestingly, we've had not one report or PM containing any substance to the allegations contained within this thread.
Not one.

 

okay...

whew this thread has a tone no person seeking information should ever run into. hiding under a supremacist ideal that a person and i remind you a fellow HUMAN is utilizing a tool different than you is wrong all while stating that there under a banner that there is multiple ways to utilize that tool is just sad. The threads on Chastity and enforced Chastity are diluted and clouded the view point on what Chastity really is. I never realised before how grotesque people are with such a tool. Which it really is a tool in power exchange. People have this notion that there is no need for trust or even if the chaste is harmed it doesn't matter and never stop to consider the importance of consent. I went a long while in Chastity to prove I wasn't joking about wanting to submit. Well as my time ended I knew I would never look back; would never regret my time I spent giving a sacrifice. Read a majority of these post and see that it is nothing more than a perverse fan fiction for lonely boys to wank to. My view on Chastity is it is equivalent to a pen or a hammer, it is a mere tool for a greater discipline or great work it is formative to reinforce the idea of the greater power exchange at hand and not something to get hot and heavy over. If you believe Chastity is solely about being told to ejaculate on command or turned into a female then you are sadly mistaken on the use of this tool. You are more than likely selfish and pretending to be submissive to get your rocks off and are the type of person that messages a dominant telling them they can use a strap on they can humiliate you. You have no investment in the trust, communication, or strong bond you could form and have for a lifetime. Serve a purpose and not your own libido or self interest.

this tool called chastity has built a staple of trust it has formed a dialogue between you and your "wife" and that works for you. another thing here that hasn't been addressed is that Lucy's gain is not that of physical submission but subtle mental domination. That what is derived is a longing to please and not anything sexual. Lucy is proud of the true servants, subs, and slaves she molds and she takes more from them being loyal, faithful, and devoted then them wearing a silly lock and cage. that after a while the cage is no longer needed but often kept to show just how devoted they are. there is an idea promoted by these sites that chastity is only productive with tease and denial this is a product of a fetish people have developed.

i was locked by Goddess Lucy and it is the ultimate sacrifice to show devotion, and trust that i was willing to anything to show devotion. From the begining she told me it was not sexual, through this year it has remained the same and guess what i am still there every day to talk and discuss with her things inside and outside the fetish community and far outside the scope of what the fetish distortion has placed on chastity. it is a different aspect than what you have come accustomed to this does not deem it wrong or out of place. you have attacked over gifts, purchasing of a lock, or asking to donate to a legitimate charity. you have a gaggle with pitchforks claiming she should look else where because she doesn't fit what this site stands for. where is your sense of community or understanding that tools such as chastity serves more than 1 purpose. claims about her photos being a tease? well you look through the lense of someone searching out the erotic and not seeing the time, effort and, artistry she places into each outfit and photo. i have written about her photos before:

Goddess will have Her faithful ones know that the end-goal of this devotion and indeed of all devotions smartly submitted to Her, is that of true love and worship of Princess Lucy, their One True Pure Goddess. To enable servants, who are feeble, to come to Goddess more easily, Goddess gives them ‘reminders’, images of Herself, in one form or another. The image of Herself as she is, Goddess of All Nations, is a gift of Love from Her Heart to Her servants, intended to put before their minds the remembrance of Her and therefore help them to hold The One True Pure Goddess close in their hearts and remember they kneel and live solely to provide happiness and purpose to Goddesses world.

I serve in many ways, but to say that because they are all non-sexual is wrong is closed minded and i remind you that just as the tool of chastity may be used different. The gift and definition of submission is always different as well. no one is wrong for practicing these things differently, but often many are misinformed and lead to believe that there is a standard to how these objects are used. it is on us all to realise that you must research all avenues to understand what you can provide and if it will return with the expectation you so hoped for.

 

This thread is a God damn gory horror show. People seeing what they want to.
Please let it die.

 

I think we all provide a service to each other. If I smile at someone in the street because they made me happy, then we do each other a service.

Service is similar to exchange, but without any sense of expected reimbursement. Yes, it's possible to perform a service in exchange for recompense,
but it's perfectly possible to be able to perform a service for the pure pleasure of serving.

 

@SubVerity

I see you've substantially 'edited' and (thankfully) diluted Jasmic68's earlier vitriolic and deeply offensive tirade against one of the members here.

I seem to recall that when Amanda Snake did this, as a moderator here, she was instantly pilloried and vilified. Has the Mod's operating agenda been radically updated, or is this (as it currently appears) simply some kind of complicit favouritism extended to a specific member?

 

Did you actually see the post where I apologised and asked a mod to edit my earlier vitriolic and intentionally offensive tirade? No? Oh, it wasn't long after. @SubVerity thankfully answered my request.

Did you see what my vitriolic and intentionally offensive tirade was in response to? No? It was the intentionally antagonistic response from the 'one of the members here.' you fail to call by name. Throughout the thread I have tried to back that person up by answering her original question with a measured and opposing view without putting her under an argumentative and aggressive microscope.

Believe what you want about my motives, I honestly don't care.

 

Well that's dandy then, isn't it.

I didn't think it was necessary to call Lucy by name as she has been fairly well involved in the thread...

 

Ok - third and (promised!) last try! This time without humour!

This is getting disgusting! (and I not only have absolutely no idea what "FU" might abbreviate, I won't look it up as well!).
But I'd love to recommend things like: look up the meaning of "discussion"!

As I'm no native speaker (thinking about it: I AM a native speaker, but not sure about all of you understanding german! ) I would like to recommend the Oxford Dictionary: Discussion - "The action or process of talking about something in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas"!!! (they did a good job I'd say!)
What's happening in here is a babble about all and nothing, an educational offer for the assumed intellectually challenged, an inconvenient mixture of attacking and defending, of findom and finders, - and it really makes me feel probably "FU"!
Is this really the last problem that has to be solved by mankind? Aren't there any serious issues?
Be glad that I'm no moderator in here, as I own some very pointed heels, and sometimes I feel like everyone on this planet needs a good kick up the "FU"!

 

I think we need @sylvana chastity in the mod-team pronto. I'll have a word with Jens.

 

*LOL* did I mention my pointed boots?

 

@sylvanachastity

Hi there,

Yes, I agree it's all some kind of hideous 'babble' as you put it, and of course you can always 'Ignore' or simply look away.

But to some extent it's also about the right of a woman to have a particular 'take' on a certain kind of sexual activity without having to conform to a prescribed version of that proclivity. Further, that she has the right to run her own 'verified' and sanctioned outlet for that activity, among consenting adults, without being attacked and forced to justify herself for it.

 

@kevinp What are you waffling about? Normally when one of my posts is quoted I can tell what the person quoting it is referring to in my writing, but with this post I have absolutely no idea.

Anyway, my post you first quoted was made after your wonderful princess asked me would I be still interested in chastity if tease and denial was removed. I answered her in the positive, giving a few examples of the sorts of things I would miss. In the second quote you correctly identify the reason I would still be interested.

"wife"? What are you implying?

If you go back through my posts, not the general thread, you will find that I repeatedly said that our ways of doing chastity were different and neither were wrong. Other people might have said your princess was doing it wrong, I didn't. She inferred but was very clever not to directly say that the way my "wife" is doing it, in a loving and caring relationship, with the use of tease and denial was wrong. Apparently we are all giving out the wrong message.

You are very good at telling me what I am doing, when it wasn't me that made any reference to those images that she has posted. But, hey, if that is what you want, then you have come to the right place. Have you heard about semiotics? It is the study of the use of symbols and symbology, as a form of language. It looks at how the image including the still photograph and the moving image of film is used to say much more than it would otherwise through the use of culture, society, history, joint understanding through membership of subcultures and so on. It is part of the degree that I studied and I apply it in my day to day life and career. And the word you were looking for is lens.

When an image is taken that uses the tropes of sexualisation through outfit, position, lighting, isolation, situation and content then that image is sexual in nature and if it is seen by someone who has seen any sort of similar image in the past. A sexual image is taken to titillate, to tease, to excite.Would you have the same reaction to the image if it was taken in a messy room, poorly lit, taken with a low quality camera, with a less attractive subject?

Separate from that is the fact that when an artist releases a work the meaning of that work no longer belongs to them but becomes the property of the consumer. An author cannot tell someone who has read their book that they have got the point all wrong. The same is true of a visual artist or a musician.

So because some people are one handed typists mean we all are? We cannot control all of the people who visit this forum. Some of them pop in, make a few comments and then leave again when the chastity reality doesn't match their fantasy. Do you think I would stick around and make a few thousand posts if I was making all of this up? Read through my posts and find just one example of where I say I am doing it right and you are doing it wrong.

Now you are just rambling. What the heck has this got to do with anything?

As far as I can tell reading your thoughts (and I admit I might be wrong, but then your thoughts and ideas are a bit difficult to follow) you are as guilty of telling those of us, the mad mob with pitchforks I am apparently at the head of, the grotesque and selfish who use tease and denial that we are wrong in our use or understanding of chastity as you have been told that you or the princess is wrong with her use.

 

sigh how easy it is to sexual something because of the clothes they wear.

This is not the case unfortunately the media belongs to the photography unless it was a paid service then the model. in Lucy's case: she is both.

Since you don't get it let me break my post down for you.

real simple this time.

chastity is a tool.

How you use a multipurpose tool is up to the person using it.

It is about affording every person on here an opportunity to express there use of chastity.

it's about allowing questions to be asked, opinions to be stated and all learn a little something.

going to quick?

You are leading a which hunt, and honestly i hope you enjoy the attention.

Just because she feels chastity is a different outlet than you do doesn't mean she is wrong or you are wrong.

This thread is absurd. for all involved name calling, false accusations, and false facts are just childish.

ALL IF YOU ENJOY HOW YOU USE CHASTITY. Then excellent don't change anything. if you feel culture has brought out people that solely believe tease and denial is the purpose of chastity and you are looking for something different then discuss. if you are indifferent then move on or see what others are saying. We yes WE have a small community and what each person brings is vastly different than the next. embrace that and understand that opinions are going to differ but if you are going to lead on yelling about how one is wrong and you are right then you need to open up your mind and accept that each person is looking and enjoys different aspects around a silly object.

 

You misunderstand me and this is my fault as I have used language commonly understood by those in the communication industry. The belonging I refer to is the ownership of the consumer and it refers to the understanding of intent, not the literal copyright.

Again I repeat something you seem to be struggling to understand. I am not leading anything, least of all a witch hunt. Anyone else who posts in this thread is doing so completely independently from me. Throughout the thread I consistently tried to remain on topic. Not once have I said anything about findom, and neither did I mention the images in reference to them being used as a method of tease and denial. Not once did I say her version of chastity was wrong, I was careful to point out that her form of chastity was just different.

I am going to say the next statement in bold capitals to signify I am raising my voice, not in anger, but to make it absolutely clear I am being heard.

I DO NOT IN ANY WAY THINK THAT THE WAY SHE IS DOING CHASTITY IS WRONG. I THINK IT IS DIFFERENT. THE ORIGINAL QUESTION WAS WORDED IN A WAY THAT SUGGESTED THOSE WHO USE TEASE AND DENIAL ARE SPREADING THE WRONG MESSAGE ABOUT WHAT CHASTITY IS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT, AND THEY ARE THEREFORE THE ONES 'DOING THIS WRONG'. ALL I HAVE DONE IS TRY TO DEFEND THE RIGHT OF PEOPLE IN A RELATIONSHIP TO NOT BE BLAMED IF FANTASISTS GET THE WRONG IDEA AND THEN BLAME SOMEONE IF THEY WONT MEET THEIR FANTASY REQUIREMENTS.


I again invite you to go through all of my previous posts, not just the ones in this thread, my entire Chastity Mansion involvement, and find one single example of me saying that anyone is doing anything wrong.

 

Oooookay. This has been an interesting thread to slog through. I have a lot of thoughts about what's been going on here, and I'll tackle them as cleanly and clearly as I can.

1. Lucy's original point: is this site sending "the wrong message," i.e. that T&D is all there is to chastity?

In my opinion, no. This site is a public forum. Users are encouraged to discuss their experiences with chastity here, and I think it only fair to expect that a variety of perspectives will be discussed. Content is completely user-generated. There is no such thing as a "wrong message" when the message this site "sends," whatever that means, is completely user-derived. We make the message. The onus is on casual readers to realize that the content of this forum reflects a variety of opinions and lifestyles, not on the users to limit what they say. If some selfish guys are reading this site and coming to the conclusion that "all" chastity play or "normal" chastity play involves T&D and thus they're entitled T&D as soon as they ask to be locked up, that's not this site's fault. It's their fault for being entitled little dinguses. Or for not looking for other sites.

I am, admittedly, a bit puzzled by Lucy's most recent statement above. She claims not to be saying that anything is wrong, while simultaneously asking whether something is "given too much importance." Maybe I'm missing something here, but those two seem virtually synonymous to me. In this context, the use of "too much" implies wrongness. If we are "sending the wrong message" (that T&D comes with the territory), that implies that the content we add to this site is wrong, which implies that at least one facet of our personal chastity/FLR lifestyles is somehow wrong. Obviously, this last statement is not true.

Perhaps Lucy meant something more like this: a simple acknowledgement that the overall vibe of the site promotes T&D, without actually blaming the users for that or asking them to change their ways. Feels like kind of an odd use of the phrase "the wrong message" to me, but hey.

2. Is Lucy running a business or a service?

I'm actually not going to touch this one. Lucy clearly enjoys what she does, and that's cool. Whether it's a business, a service, or neither is more an issue of semantics than anything, and I really don't think all the ad hominem attacks I've seen so far are helping anything. Move along.

3. Are most males who seek an FLR or other chastity arrangement "selfish"? Where do we draw the line between sexual and non-sexual worship?

It's no secret that some guys are selfish. Lucy has shared with us that she regrettably encounters many of these, and this forum itself sees some short-lived accounts that guys use to dig around and then give up when they don't find what they were looking for.

But here's where things get messy, and a bit philosophical. Where do we get our motivation to be submissive? What makes a sub selfish or selfless? Some would argue that it is the difference between sexual interest versus non-sexual interest, the difference between tickling one's fancy versus truly submitting to a woman for its own sake.

Yet I propose this question: are those truly separate things? What is a sub's motivation to serve a woman, if not because he feels good from doing it? You could say he's doing it "for her" rather than for himself, but what compels him to do it for her? Because he feels better for it, I would assume. He feels like a better person for serving her, and thus, at least a part of him derives enjoyment from service. Whether that enjoyment is sexual or not is, in my opinion, irrelevant.

The great Kant once posited that selfless acts done by people who truly enjoy doing good were, in fact, not as morally valuable as selfless acts done by people who begrudgingly do them out of nothing more than a sense of pure moral obligation. Why? Because the people who enjoy doing good are getting something out of it, so they're actually still being selfish on some level. If we were to apply this logic to male submission, the most selfless submissive male in the world would be one who utterly dislikes his position as the sub of the relationship but forces himself to go with it anyway because he feels like he's supposed to. Now, maybe that's technically true. But I dunno about you, but that just doesn't sound fun to me at all. And that's with me speaking as a dominant female!

Maybe we shouldn't argue about the worth of "selfish" and "selfless" subs in terms of who's sexually motivated and who isn't. Maybe we should recognize the problem for what it is: subs who are rude and act entitled to anything without prior communication.

4. Is there a superior way to engage in a female-dominated lifestyle?

No, despite what some people here might try to say to the contrary. Is it morally inferior for some guys to prefer short lockups and pat each other on the back for them? Maybe, but so what? Is it a waste of the "tool" of chastity not to expect pure, long-term, non-sexual reverence? Maybe, but so what? Is it strange for a woman to enjoy holding many keys while giving little to nothing in return? Maybe, but so flipping what? Different things work for different people.

This is a place to discuss and embrace chastity in all its forms. Let's be grateful for that.

 

well if it wern for the Admin man who buy this place from a Lady then it wudnt have been here. so i'm glad he did do it and its still here.

 

Okay, so similar to what other people have said, outside of actions that are clearly immoral there is no real right or wrong way to do something. And I have to say that's the same with this site being run by males. It isn't necessarily the "crazy" way to do it, just different than what others may prefer.