Why I think erotic submission works

Our brains reward us for
leading and following,
for dominating and
submitting

Over on reddit, somebody asked about the underlying psychology of erotic submission. This is my answer:

Though I'm sure our personal stories are what lead us to D&S, I strongly suspect that the satisfaction from either role comes from a combination of evolutionary psychology plus the odd way the brain works.

The evolutionary psychology part is a simple.

We're wired to feel good about being in charge - being alpha. However, not everybody can be in charge at any given moment, so we're also wired to feel comfortable not being in charge.

In other words our brains reward us for leading and following, for dominating and submitting.

(If you prefer, perhaps this is socially learned behavior; things go well when we lead or when we follow, but not when we compete pointlessly.)

no matter how much you wrap up 
your D&S in communication, consent, 
safe words, scripts even, a primal 
part of your brain registers it as real

The brain itself is odd.

For a start, parts of it are stupid and can't tell the difference between the thing and the thing that looks like the thing.

So no matter how much you wrap up your D&S in communication, consent, safe words, scripts even, a primal part of your brain registers it as real -- hence triggering the evolutionary psychology working.

Then there's this thing where a lot of our emotions run in parallel.

Our brain chemistry makes it possible to like things we don't want, want things we don't like, get a buzz out of things that scare or hurt us. This is especially true if the sensible part of our brain is assured that we are really physically safe.

 ...much of the joy of submission
comes from ambivalence.

If that sounds complicated or implausible, consider all the other weird things humans do: bungee jump, extreme sports, horror films, roller coaster rides...

You can't meaningfully untangle all this or reduce it to a single factor because much of the joy of submission comes ftom ambivalence.

So in short:

Our psychology may lead us to submission. However what makes us stick is that it feels good on a primal level and at the same time provides the same kind of safe thrills as a roller coaster ride. The ambivalence is the buzz. Don't over think.

---

Don't just have deep thoughts about Femdom ! Use my manuals to walk the Femdom path! There's one for him, and one for her. 

New product description for Roman Dominatrix

I'm just about to update the Amazon product description of my How to be a Roman Dominatrix self-help guide.

Some readers seem to be expecting a very different kind of book, perhaps the Mistress Lorelei's Mistress Manual,  which as I recall - it's been a while - uses the male partner's fantasies as a starting place and relgates benefits to the dominatrix as a byproduct. It's a good book, and by giving a woman permission - since she's doing it to please her man - has a good chance of giving her the space to explore her own feelings.
Roman Dominatrix just does something different - it starts off with the idea that owning a slave can be fun in vanilla ways and assumes that the sub gets his kicks as a byproduct.

Other books I haven't read are more embedded in the BDSM Scene. That's not a bad thing. A sense of belonging to a wider culture can - again - grant permission. However, some women just aren't interested... aren't natural joiners. They only want to know "What's in it for me?" That's who my book is for.

I've tried to update the product description to reflect this more clearly. Hopefully this will help me avoid any oddly angry reviews. What do you guys think?

Ancient Roman ladies enjoyed having male slaves, and - yes - they did put them to erotic use. Why does modern bedroom Femdom have to be so much effort? What’s in it for you?

Written from experience by an otherwise normal (!) submissive male, this book is for women who are sexually adventurous but have neither the time nor inclination to embrace BDSM culture just in order to satisfy their partner’s fantasies.

It WON’T teach you to be a “good” dominatrix, nor guide you through clubs and munches, nor drill you in bondage, topping or protocols, nor help you negotiate scripted scenes, nor expect you to manipulate your man, nor urge you into a Female Led Relationship.

It WILL use techniques drawn from modern psychology to help you build a strictly part-time Roman version of your relationship… and to make that mistress-slave relationship feel 100% real.

You need never feel silly or awkward or at a loss. You’ll always know what to do because you’ll be following your natural inclinations, albeit unrestrained by consequences or reciprocity.

Relax and be… self-indulgent, introvert, extrovert, mean, affectionate, playful, practical, flirtatious, sensual, clinical…  There’s a good chance that, as a byproduct, enough of his fantasies will be satisfied to make it worth his while.

You get to be yourself. He gets to be your slave. You get to have a hot secret couple adventure. Everybody gets to be happy.

But why are you reading this description? Take a look inside the book and make up your own mind!

Conservatives can teach us a secret about Femdom!

In the UK we have lots of queens but also an actual Queen - old lady, wears a crown on occassions, odd taste in dresses.

Silly...

And that's the thing, take away the deference, the "OMG it's Her Majesty" and you're left with something pretty silly - the Empress has no clothes on!" (Ewww!)

Less silly?

For example, (left) here's a top-flight lawyer receiving his knighthood. A moment of great solemnity and a life achievement but...

Most social institutions are potentially silly

The ultimate recognition for a hard-working lawyer who presumably earned every single ounce of his achievement is to kneel down before  an elderly woman who - though charming and hard working - is a monarch via random inheritance? What she gives him is a title that qualifies him to clatter around the medieval countryside rescuing damsels?

Isn't that a little bit silly?

The same goes for all the objects of relationships that underpin traditional society.

You can choose to see: a President as just a politician with an interesting record; a flag as just a scrap of cloth; a teacher as just a science graduate who couldn't get a research post; a priest as somebody with a friend you can't see; a boss as just somebody who holds the purse strings; a (traditional) husband as just the partner with the penis who leaves the house to work, rather than stays home and works equally hard....

Looked at from the wrong angle, it's all silly.

The right angle

Oops

One morning in AD1789, the French commoners woke up and - as one - exclaimed, "Zis monarchy she is merde!"

Monarchy stopped being real and we ended up with the Great Terror - not ultimately a happy thing. (Happier examples include the collapse of East Germany, and of the toxic regime in the Philippines.)

This is what conservatives of all flavours fear. They know that the entire social and political structure can potentially be laughed out of existence if enough people insist on looking at it from the wrong angle. Hence the loud "defence" of the head of state, the Flag, deference and protocol in all walks of life, and of the institution of marriage itself.

So, rightly or wrongly, conservatives are always rushing to defend this institution or that.

A Femdom blog is not the place to discus their choice of what to defend, and to defend rather than to adapt. However, they are absolutely correct in the way they choose to defend their preferred institutions; by insisting we only address them from the right angle; which is the one in which you treat the underlying relationship as real.

Treating relationships as real makes them real

Humans only think we are fully self-aware and consciously in control.

The sad truth is that situation and context mostly determine our behaviour. There are plenty of experiments to back this up, most notoriously the Stanford Prison experiment: pretend jailers and pretend prisoners quickly began to act their roles, and - however tongue in cheek or ironic their initial behaviour - ultimately believe in them.

Treating relationships as real makes them real.

The the real world, people - abused spouses, bullied workers, alienated teenagers - stay in bad situations they could just walk away from; the relationships have become more real than the practical means of escape!

This loss of perspective can be also happy thing.  In what Stephen Pinker calls the Civilising Process, the state, social pressure and choices made by potential mates forces the cowboys to become gentlemen, and then they start believing in it. I think the same goes for many very happy marriages.

So, the evidence is that most relationships gain strength from the outside to the inside.

Call it pragmatic or cynical, but conservatives have long known this, hence their love of deference, formality and protocol... sounds a bit BDSM, doesn't it?

Conservatives teach us to treat the Femdom relationship as real

In a  wonderful recent blog entry, Robert Anthony wrote:

The weird thing is, it seems totally normal now... which is how it should be I guess. Although I am somewhat surprised that we've never looked back, never had a break from it, never had second thoughts - either of us.....[my edit]  I no longer crave denial. Oh I still want Mistress R to control my orgasms and I still want her to tease and deny me for however long pleases her, but I no longer 'crave' denial, because denial is my everyday reality.

We've had a  similar experience:

Loss of perspective...

I want to tell her I love her. Tell her how much I desire her. Instead, I can only rub, pummel, and thumb her naked flesh until she's limp and relaxed. I know what's going to happen and I segue from frustration, through irritation, to a kind of erotic horror; I know we have a relationship beyond this slavery, but I can't reach out and touch it. I'm powerless to do anything other than massage her until...She announces that she's ready to sleep and does just that.

So, no, I'm not going to argue that conservatives are all perverts, or that any flavour of conservatism is inherently inspired by the Marquis de Sade. That's not the point!

The point is that our Femdom relationships are as inherently fragile, as potentially silly as any of the institutions beloved by our conservative friends. No slave contract is legally enforceable anywhere you would want to live. No punishment is really inescapable. No discomfort is truly forced.

And yet, our Femdom relationships - be they 24/7 or part-time, or some nuance in between - can easily become real to us. We can - gloriously - lose perspective.

However, this loss of perspective only happens if we take a leaf out of the conservative playbook and unremittingly treat the power relationsip as real.

Don't step outside the Femdom

He dropped her best coffee mug!

We submissives need to never step outside the Femdom. If we question an order or express pain or discomfort, if possible we must do it as a slave ("[this] will result in [that], mistress."). Mostly we shouldn't question an order, nor do anything to elicit a dommish response. Mostly we should accept the rough with the smooth, the boredom with the ecstasy, the frustration with the fear. Safewords, yes we need them, but only as a last resort.

Dominants also need - or I would humbly advise them - to never step outside the Femdom, not for practicalities, not for safety, not even for irritation. If the slave does something annoying the slave gets punished; don't flip into your vanilla role to yell at your husband or partner. If the slave is suffering but the husband seems to be enjoying himself, ignore it. If the slave is really suffering and you feel sorry for your boyfriend, shrug it off. You can cuddle him later.

Anything that looks beyond the power relationship to the consensual one wrapped around it risks committing the worst sin of all...

Why "not treating it as real" is the worst Femdom sin

Really, beyond safety, sanity and consent, "not treating it as real" is the worst Femdom sin because as soon as you go "You know what, I/you don't have to do this!" then the lights go up and neither of you look very dignified. One or other of you may look just plain silly.

The dominatrix is caught being evil, which can be very uncomfortable if she is ostensibly vanilla. She may also feel a fool for playing such a childish game of tying up and make believe, and suddenly embarrassed by her sticky-crotched husband cringing at her feet.

"...suddenly embarrassed by her sticky-crotched
husband cringing at her feet."

The sudden splashdown to reality is just as bad for the submissive. It's the nightmare of being found out made real, coupled with the embarrassment at his partner's embarrassment, and a fear that the Femdom will go away.

And if it does keep happening, then the Femdom will probably go away. That glorious loss of perspective? You can only achieve it if the vanilla relationship isn't lurking at the boudoir window.

She needs to know her orders will always be obeyed, otherwise she will start second guessing your wants, and you'll start editing your reactions to prevent this from happening. Soon you'll both be on edge, irritated and going through the motions. It won't be real anymore. It'll probably just be embarrassing.

So, like the conservatives do for relationships they care about, we must treat our Femdom  as 100% real.

For how to make this work in practise, see my Femdom self-help guides for couples where the female partner is mostly vanilla....

Is erotic submission a gift?

Margo Adler, ethusiastic kinkster, says in her blog:

...sadomasochism is embarassing enough without adding an additional layer of cheese and canned corn over it.  Jesus Christ. Are we going to a Renaissance Faire next?  I don't know about you, but I am absolutely terrified that a filmmaker out there is planning to make a Trekkies-style documentary about us.  When that happens--and it will--we will never, ever live it down.  

Who is giving who the gift?

She's talking about subs who loudly tout their submission as a "gift".

I tend to agree.

In Femdom, the only gifts that count are the ones that aren't your (the sub's!) idea.

Suppose your dominatrix wants more than you would normally give for fun: she wants more service, or more suffering, or more of both. If it's her idea, and you give it because you want to please her, then that is a gift. However, it's the kind of gift you can't offer up front, especially to strangers. (Perhaps it's also the kind of gift you shouldn't give. Would it not be better for the rest of the relationship to ask for a trade?)

There is one other kind of genuine gift you can give a dominatrix. If you truly serve - e.g. polishing the boots, not licking them - then you are making a gift of yourself as a slave. However, in return she gives you the precious gift of experiencing being a slave.  This is the kind of gift that cancels itself out in the giving! 

So, either you can't offer it up front, or else your gift is really one side of an exchange of gifts. In either case, it's not really something you should rush to mention, let alone get any kind of advantage from. To do so reeks of emotional blackmail, of trying to be special like the Mary Sue of a million episodes of one-handed slash fiction, or grasping at a figleaf of dignity, when shedding dignity is the whole point.

Most of all, it's making a fuss! If you have followed this blog or read any of my Femdom how-to guides for semi-vanilla couples, you'll know I'm big on Not Making a Fuss Over Your kink: stick to specifics, don't unburden or expect to draw your partner into fantasy land.

The problem with Vanilla Subs

A dominant mate of mine was told by his vanilla ex - "Thank god I don't have to do any of that nasty stuff again."

Privately, he reckoned this was rubbish. “Orgasms don’t lie,” he said.

As a sub myself, I think it’s more complicated.

Even though it’s consensual, D&S simulates evil and feels real to the primitive parts of the brain. (Yes, I know there’s also fluffy stuff in there about trust and intimacy.)

This simulated evil is at least half the fun. However, it creates problems with vanilla people who haven’t had the years to work it through.

Bad for a vanilla dom to whom it simply *feels* morally wrong. Worse for the vanilla sub.

The vanilla sub experiences the simulated evil direct and unmediated… the violation of will and body, the humbling and humiliation, the forced intimacy…

…and they get off on it.

This is a supremely dark place to be and one that challenges a person’s very identity, especially if they’ve had to fight for self determination in this big mean world of ours.

I think the best approach is to be very careful how you “frame” the D/S part of your relationship.

Are you all D/S is darkly romantic, authentic, significant?

Perhaps it would be better to cushion your sub by treating it as just a bit of fun: no big thing, just make believe or an erotic sport. Joke that you do most of the actual work and she gets most of the orgasms.

Most of all, in the immediate aftermath of your sessions, get back to normal as quick as possible!

Two kinds of Femdom submission...

A friend's recent post got me thinking about the two modes of Femdom submission.

Submission is like love... probably is a kind of love, so it has two modes:

Submission the process

Submission the Process

This is the place for a lot of traditional  "scenes" and certain kinds of "play" as limits stretch and the tested sub goes deeper into their submission. It's also about those moments of passion when you fall at her feet and... well... submit.

But, just like love, it can't be like this all the time...

Submission the state

Submission the State

Imagine the toyboy of a Roman domina; he doesn't have time for expressions of undying submission, nor is his owner likely to go in for theatrical tests of his submission, because his submission is a simple fact.

A real - historical - slave lived in a state of submission. In Femdom, that  kind of state is the logical result of the process of submission.

This is the Femdom equivalent of comfortable but deep romantic love. Lovers share space and time, and enjoy eachother's company. An erotic slave serves and his mistress enjoys his service. If his devotion interests her, then there's ritual as well; he worships and she enjoys being worshiped. However, none of this is dramatic.

Getting it right

Humans just don't do boundless passion on demand! And, if the process of submission is powerful enough, then it can only lead to the state, for a while at least.

In a long term relationship Femdom is probably no different from any other kind of sex. Realistically, vanilla couples have loving sex as standard, with passionate lovemaking as the occasional peak experience. In the same way, Femdom couples can realistically expect submission-the-state as routine, with wild BDSM Femdom for matinee performances.

Moreover, some couples can't really achieve submission-the-process. Perhaps she's too self-conscious, or not forceful enough to dominate him. Perhaps he's so deeply submissive, there battle's over before it begins. In this case, submission-the-state is the only kind that's available.

The good news is, both kinds of submission are deep, real, valid. I suspect it's best to revel in what you have at any one time, rather than to try to force things.

For help in building any kind of Femdom relationship with your vanilla partner, try my book!

Relationship Modes

These hardwired human relationship models that researchers have identified? I'm going to rechristen them so they make more sense within an actual relationship:

• LOVE MODE (was COMMUNAL SHARING): Share and share alike without keeping tally. Think a couple sharing a meal they cooked together. Any trading has to be like for like, with near simultaneous benefit. 
• AUTHORITY MODE (was AUTHORITY RANKING): One person in charge, the other does as they're told. Think "eat your greens, child!".
• FRIENDSHIP MODE (was EQUALITY MATCHING): Rough turn and turn about. Think, two friends taking it in turns to pick up the tab for coffee.
• CALCULATION MODE(was MARKET PRICING/RATIONAL LEGAL): Carefully calculated interactions. Think, you buy a meal in a cafe.

These all have their place in a day-to-day vanilla relationship.

Take chores.

Generally, we share the chores without thinking about it (Love Mode). Sometimes one of us is the expert and takes control, e.g. interior decorating (Authority Mode). At times, we explicitly trade chores, perhaps I do the kitchen and she does the living room (Friendship Mode). Only when things go wrong do we end up in Calculation Mode - "Hey - I spent two $%!***! hours in the kitchen while you gave the living room surfaces a quick wipe then retreated to the bath!"

Some things, like sex and intimacy, are supposed to belong only in one mode. Applying the wrong mode breaks a taboo. This partly explains why some couples have such a hard time getting Femdom off the ground.

The most important thing you need to know when trying to get your vanilla wife or girlfriend to dominate you

Or, why some men can  trade housework for Femdom, but you probably can't...

Some women want to win the "Battle
of the Sexes", but probably not your wife
or girlfriend (sorry)

I've been reading this book called "Better Angels" by Steven Pinker. It's all about the "civilising process", how humans have moved from being violent and slave owning to being liberal hippies, or something like that.

Obviously, I've been reading it because I'm always looking for ways to rewind the civilising process on a local basis, thus creating a violence-prone pocket of (female) slave owners :)

I got to page 626 and thwack! - there it was. Fiske's Relational Models.

No, no, please don't go to sleep. Give this  a moment. It really is valuable. I promise I'll try to boil it down to something more digestible, but not any time soon.

It turns out that humans in general are near-as-damn-it hard-wired to pigeon-hole relationships into just 4 models:

COMMUNAL SHARING: Share and share alike without keeping tally. Think a couple sharing a meal.
AUTHORITY RANKING: One person in charge, the other does as they're told. Think "eat your greens, child!".
EQUALITY MATCHING: Rough turn and turn about. Think, two friends taking it in turns to pick up the tab for coffee.
MARKET PRICING/RATIONAL LEGAL: Carefully calculated interactions. Think, you buy a meal in a cafe.

These models - his word, but think "modes" if you want - determine correct behaviour in any interaction:

You have to use the right model for the interaction. Using the wrong one gets you into trouble and moreover feels Just Plain Wrong.

For example, you don't offer to pay friends for the dinner party, order your friend to eat his greens, or compliment the restaurant staff on the fine meal and say they must come round to your apartment some time.

Some things are sacred.Offering cash for a dinner party invite is a faux pas. Offering cash for a night with your host's wife puts you beyond the pale.


(Sorry, all a bit dry. Go look at Femdom and flapper images for a moment, then come back... Better? Good.)


So how does Fiske's Relational Model Apply to Femdom?

So, you want your vanilla partner to dominate you.

First problem, even talking about your sexual relationshop violates the Communal Sharing model by trying to apply Market Pricing/Rational Legal. Whoops!

Oh, sure, we're all supposed to talk about our relationships, but that's because of decades of self help books and pop psychology reframing it as an act of love within the Communal Sharing model; Let's have better and more mutual sex, let's be more intimate, more sharing. As soon as you stray from the vanilla, you're straying from that prepared ground and a feeling of wrongness may pervade the conversation.

Next problem, you're trying  to shift things from Communal Sharing to Authority Ranking, which is usually a no-no.

Finally, it might seem all very rational to point out the practical benefits - "If I'm your slave, then I'll clean the apartment lots". However, that means you're trying to persuade your wife or girlfriend to use something sacred - sex, intimacy, emotion - in order to buy something practical, or offering something practical in return for something intimate... either way you're applying Market Pricing/Rational Legal to something sacred within Communal Sharing. Major no no.

Instead of Femdom, substitute "blow job" and you'll see what I mean: "Hey, honey, if you blow me more often and I'll spring clean the house and do the lawn."

Yes, I know. Slavery is something you want to do for her, and a BJ is the other way around. But both are acts of intimacy. Sorry.

Hang on, you said some men can trade housework for Femdom...

Some women, deep down, see relationships as adversarial, or at least an ongoing negotiation. It's the last throws of the Battle of the Sexes. They probably already use sex or its withholding to get what they want in the relationship. Come home from work with a bonus, and there's a bonus in the bedroom for you. Neglect that roof repair, and her headache lasts months.

That kind of relationship belongs in Equality Matching.

Not my cup of tea, but there's nothing wrong with that - it's how couples have operated since the Dawn of Time.

For all their apparent cynicism, Equality Matching relationships do have lots of advantages.

First, she has permission to be sexual - she may be quite conservative and need an excuse to let go.

Second, it makes (semi) explicit the things that happen anyway. If the roof repair is your responsibility, and you neglect it, well that's kind of selfish and hurtful. The sex is likely to dry up anyway.

So if he says, "Use sex to control me, it'll be fun", then she may gleefully seize on the advantage in the Battle of the Sexes, and have a choice to enjoy the game without having to admit that's what she's doing.

Women from a similar cultural or emotional background may also think, deep down, that the proper model for a relationship is Authority Ranking, with them in charge. If that's their underlying assumption, then there's at least a chance that they will want to be in control, for an evening or for much longer.

Unfortunately - or fortunately - the rest of us, especially the younger generations, don't think this way. We're obsessed with keeping our relationships within Communal Sharing and only have permission to go Market Pricing/Rational Legal in order to stay there.

So, what about the rest of us?

Most modern, educated Western women have a strong sense that their relationship should sit squarely within the Communal Sharing model. You can't tempt them out with supposed benefits because they like mutuality, and because it would Feel Wrong -  like offering a haddock a banana.

So, how the heck do you even approach the subject?

Well, as described in my Femdom how-to book, actually. (This new information only makes me more confident of what I've already suggested.)

The rules of the Communal Sharing model seem to be pretty much:

• Trade like for like
• Aim for near simultaneous benefits

Anything else feels... disingenuous and calculating, so reeks of the Market Pricing/Rational Legal model.

Go back to blow jobs as a reality check In the midst of sweaty sex, "Blow me and I'll lick you off," is not an out of place proposition, nor is the 69 position.

So, since Femdom is pretty obviously an erotic thing, start in the bedroom (and possibly expect to stay there). For each possible aspect of the shared experience, find matching benefits.

• Trade erotic for erotic - It will be erotic for you, and erotic for her. Don't suggest that Femdom will make you more loving, that's Erotic for Intimacy.
• Trade intimacy for intimacy -  Sharing a fantasy experience makes you mutually vulnerable and hence intimate. Don't suggest that she can use her power on you to force you to be intimate, that's Market Pricing/Rational Legal talk!
• Trade emotion for emotion - You will enjoy affectionately pampering her as much as she enjoys being affectionately pampered. Yes, giving her a 1 hour massage will probably turn you on unbearably, but you don't need to dwell on that.

For Service beyond the bedroom, you can still trade emotion for emotion. However, once she's comfortable with Femdom, you have the possibility of moving the interaction into Equality Matching:

• Trade practical things for practical things: For example, being a slave is mentally relaxing, so why doesn't she relax and let you serve her? Again, this will often or mostly be erotic for you, but there's no need to dwell on this.

I'm not saying lie, or manipulate. I'm just saying be appropriate. 

You wouldn't say, "Let's watch a chick flick with a bottle of wine so we can get in the mood for dirty sex later," so why approach Femdom any differently?

(For advice consistent with all this, take a look at my book, "The Vanilla Dominatrix or Getting Your Wife or Girlfriend to Sexually Dominate You".)

"How to be a vanilla dominatrix" - How to be bad (T&D)

Here's an excerpt from my work in progress, "How to be a vanilla dominatrix." This is all about how to enjoy being a vanilla dominatrix. Let me know what you think...

HOW TO BE BAD

In an ideal - male fantasy - world, your partner could hand you a whip, put you in charge. Your dark side would take over and you'd instantly become a terrifying yet sensual dominatrix.

This isn't of course very common. If you're reading this book, you're probably not one of those vanishingly rare natural dominatrices. This is probably a good thing, since it's you your partner loves, not some latex fantasy.

However - again - since you're reading this book, you're obviously open to experimenting with Femdom in ways that are mutually satisfying.

That means you have the problem of how to be bad.

There are two approaches to this.

You could treat the fantasies as a menu. You can look over the menu - his or your fantasies, or ideas from erotica or fetish forums - and pick the onces you fancy. It's certainly worth a try. Unfortunately, it's not always clear why you would enjoy a particular activity, and the activities themselves don't always hang together naturally.

More natural, though requiring a little more thought, is to build fantasies from who you already are. That's what this chapter is about.

Your vanilla sexuality is a fantastic foundation for authentic but deeply kinky Femdom. This shouldn't be too much of a surprise because most male submissive fantasies are just an exaggeration of what women already do.

Don't believe me?

Take an example. A popular (but not universal) male kink is for "teasing and denial"

In Teasing and Denial (T&D) she leads him on, then denies him orgasm.

Only a minority of - usually young - women do this deliberately. In the UK we call them "prick teases", though "ruthless flirt" would be a fairer term. Sometimes they get an erotic buzz from this, other times it's the attention or pampering they enjoy. (There's nothing inherently wrong with this sort of behaviour. If the men stick around, it's because they're enjoying it.)

However, a majority of women have done this truly without intending to, or even being aware of it. You may be on a date enjoying kissing or petting, he thinks this is the lead up to sex. You may be the grateful beneficiary of practical help, he thinks he's seducing you. Or perhaps you enjoy an active social life with friends of both sexes, but occasionally have to distance yourself when a male friend becomes frisky.

Deliberate or accidental, it doesn't matter. Men, young men especially, live in a crazy sexualised world. The male (entirely subjective) experience of courting is to be continually led on and repulsed, teased and denied. We don't mind really, because it's so very exciting... and because some of us get a secret satisfaction from submitting to it.

That heady mix of excitement and submission, and the association with youth and attractive females, easily produce a fantasy where the teasing and denial go further. For instance, she enjoys her sexual penetration but makes him withdraw before he can come, or she toys with his penis until he's ready to ejaculate, then stops...

It's not a kink that females easily empathise with. Fortunately, like your Ancient Roman incarnation, you don't have to. All that matters is that you enjoy your side of the kink.

If you always found flirting fun, and if you've missed it since settling down, then perhaps teasing and denial is actually worth experimenting with. Not only do you get to flirt with your partner, you also get to have your cake and eat it; you get to flirt and have an orgasm while doing it.

That kind of activity is what I call a game. It's like the "sex games" you get in vanilla manuals - the classic Joy of Sex calls it "slow masturbation" - and like the "scenes" you encounter in BDSM culture. You are deliberately setting out to tease and deny him (at least for a little while). You're calling the shots, and he's quite possibly tied up. You tease and he pleads.

The problem with games is that they require time, energy, self confidence, and some skill. If your first response isn't "That sounds fun," then it's probably a blend of "How the heck to I make that work?" and "It sounds like a lot of trouble".

That's fine. If you still like the idea of the kink, you can get enjoy it in other less demanding ways.

The easiest is to introduce a rule: He doesn't get to come unless you say so or perhaps doesn't get to come at all, and no pleading (unless you like the idea). You can even enforce this with a prop; there are plenty of reasonably cheap male chastity devices on the market at the moment (see later). Now, if you like, you can make love "business as usual", totally mutual and spontaneous, except that for that rule.

So, you're making love with a man who isn't allowed to come... Or better yet is in a chastity device. Might you be tempted to tease him a little bit? A caress here, a taunt there? "Is that nice? What a shame you can't put your cock there..." Because you're both doing something else, in this case making love, you have the space to also enjoy dipping into the game.

Another approach to teasing and denial is through service.

Service means him actually performing tasks you'd want him to do anyway. Licking your boots doesn't count as a service, licking between them does, as does cleaning the room and doing the household chores. The thing about service is that your slave can only do as he's told; he needs a positive instruction in order to come. Denial is the default.

So, if your slave performs an erotic service with little hope of an orgasm, then that's still teasing and denial. You can get your back rubbed, enjoy oral sex... whatever, all with his frustration to add spice.

Just as with a rule, service can also give you the space to actively play a T&D game. The service doesn't even need to be erotic! If you enjoyed the long drawn out game of real life flirting, then you can do the same with your slave. Set him a mundane chore, and flirt outrageously and physically while enjoying the sense of security that comes from complete control.

Now, what if you're not interested - excited - by teasing or denying your slave? It's still possible that you might enjoy not being responsible for his orgasm.

For example, there may be times of the month when you enjoy erotic play, but not penetration, or find regular sex a bit too messy. A rule will help here. It's also possible that you enjoy a back rub with a "happy ending", and once you're sleepy and sated you lose interest in sex: that would be service.

Finally, what if teasing and denial doesn't excite you, and you are always happy for him to have an orgasm, but it's still a major fantasy for him?

If you feel like it, you can still use rules, games and service but, as a perk for him, deliver a dose of teasing and denial.

By perk, I mean something that's extra, that's for your partner's benefit, even if it makes your slave more miserable. It could be something as simple as you wearing stockings, or as complex as a drawn out ritual or game.

Teasing and denial is one of those perks that need not require much effort on your part. For example, you can proceed as normal, but with the rule that he's not allowed to orgasm or plead. If he's in a chastity device, it need not even interfere with normal sex - just make him use a "strap-on" dildo. This has the added benefit that you get to pick the shape and size, and he "lasts" as long as you want him to, and no longer. It's also the ultimate in safe sex... The same goes for service.

Of course, if pleading his part of his fantasy, you have the option to just tell him "tough luck". Or, perhaps you enjoy punishing him for pleading.

So, teasing and denial is like a lot of Femdom. It starts with something quite normal, vanilla flirting or occasional female indifference to male sexual needs, and uses rules, games and services to ramp it up into something wild and kinky.

Vintage picture captures the Vanilla Dominatrix dynamic

This picture from 1897 perfectly captures the Vanilla Dominatrix dynamic.

Of course it's supposed to be a satire, or a dire warning; the couple have exchanged traditional roles.

However, it's easy to imagine that he's her slave, perhaps with a chastity belt under his trousers. Right now he's doing the chores and she's interrupting him to get her shoe polished.

After that, she'll haul down her britches and demand oral sex. He'll meekly obey. Then she'll go off to enjoy her bicycle ride, and he'll get back to work, frustrated and turned on.

From her point of view, everything is comfortable and satisfying in a vanilla way - who doesn't like the housework done and an orgasm on demand?

From his point of view... :)

The dirty secret of D/S: It's not all about sex!

(Triggered by an interesting discussion over at Tamara's blog.)

Being a submissive is pretty embarrassing.

If you don't believe me, imagine explaining it to a square friend; "Well, Bill, I like to get off by rubbing against my girlfriend's feet, then I lick the cum from between her toes."

If it would be embarrassing to explain to people in the outside world, since that's our reference point, on some level we're still a little embarrassed by our submissive urges.

We respond by putting a spin on it; "I'm this wild eroticist! I plumb the depths of human sexuality in order to reach new peaks of ecstasy."

Well, maybe.

That doesn't explain why those of us who enjoy giving Service - me included - are happy to spend long periods in role, just doing chores. I don't mean doing chores while  being stalked by a whip-happy mistress, I mean just doing chores, as in getting on and washing and cleaning while she relaxes, with only the distant prospect of punishment.

Yes, I know some subs talk about dripping precum while doing the ironing. However, most of us can't stay physically aroused for hours at a time, and many of us are happy to continue serving after we've had an orgasm.

Of course, thinking about slavery is a turn on. 

Imagine spending a week in a lonely cottage as her chaste slave, doing all the work, pampering her, while she relaxes. If you fail to meet the mark, she gives you a perfunctory whipping - no ritual, no dressing up, just, Kneel! (WHACK!). Every couple of evenings, she enjoys a massage and oral sex. Most of the time, she just turns in after her shower, leaving you to picture her wet naked flesh while you try to sleep on your camp bed in the kitchen, tormented by the throb in your chastity belt. Too bad - you've signed up to be a real slave.

Well, that turns me on at any rate. What would it actually be like?

Sometimes, you'd be  aware of what was happening to you, of your hopeless situation, and your chastity belt would tighten like a vise. Some of the time you'd be bored, but that would remind you of your slavery and you'd get turned on. Most of the time, though, you'd be lost in the routine of quiet service.

Yes,whenever it comes into focus, the fact of our slavery turn us on unbearably. This should be no surprise. But what about the rest of the time? When we're not hard inside our chastity belts?

There has to be something else going on. Two things, I think:.

First, letting go and giving quiet attention to the tasks in hand is profoundly relaxing. Shorn of the whips and chains, it looks suspiciously like a spiritual practice. Apart from the object of our devotion, are we much different from the monks of old?

Second, and more importantly, slavery makes us safe from the dangers of life. We can feel 100% secure because we're told exactly what to do, and the consequences of failure, though painful, are always temporary. A slave never gets rejected or fired, only whipped or chained.

During in the glorious week of slavery that we imagined, you're safe from modern adult life - there's no need to think about career or mortgage, or education loans, or home improvements. You're also safe from the dangers of your relationship - she tells you what she wants and you don't have to guess or second guess, or be empathic; her expecations are limited and explicit.  And, being a slave keeps you safe in the most dangerous place of all - the bedroom...

...and that's why slavery is erotic; slavery keeps us safe from all our fears and anxieties over sex.

However, that "enslaved freedom" applies across the board--which is maybe a bit embarrasing. :)