REDIRECTED TO MAYBEMAIMED.COM: Maybe Maimed but Never Harmed

Surfing around again tonight, I found a very interesting post by Saratoga discussing chastity versus draining ("milking") a male submissive before play time. He describes the basic thrust of the concept like this:

The point is to make his ejaculatory moment as meaningless, humbling and unremarkable as possible. Pointedly waste his seed in an unceremonious manner. Then follow it up with brisk, focused activities which sweep his consciousness away from the release of his precious male sexual fluid to the infinitely more important tasks selected by his Mistress.

An interesting thought indeed. Why would one be interested in doing this? Saratoga writes:

This assures, as the Australian Domme stated, that the male is "serving (her) from submission, not from lust." Actually, I'd suggest, from my personal experience, that the boy may still serve his Mistress "from lust," but it would be from lust for Her, not lust for his own sexual release. So, male pre-play release would assure both a more purely submissive motivation for serving his Mistress, as well as a basis for his more purely lusting for Her, not his own sexual satisfaction.

Oh, okay, I get it. Try to ensure that the actions I am taking are in fact performed out of devotion, not a desire for self-gratification. Such a thing can be debated endlessly if taken to philosophical extremes, but let's assume for the sake of self-exploration that not all actions are ultimately selfish.

I can certainly relate to this idea at times. Surely, if I am denied sexual release, won't my compliance simply be a measure of how much I want an orgasm? Sometimes, yes. Is that the point? Sometimes, yes. It's an unmeasurable thing, really, to try and determine what intentions have provided the motivation for an action of someone else's. The dominant can't ever truly know, despite how much they may suspect one thing to be the reality over another possibility. If I am really horny, I might be performing some action out of a desire to please my dominant so that she or he might grant me an orgasmic climax, but I may not. Sometimes, it's hard for me to tell the difference--and that's the real reason I see some value in this approach to starting a scene.

I think this can be an interesting tool. For example, there are certainly physiological changes that happen in one's body that are dependent on where you are in the sexual response cycle. The release of endorphins is the common example and explains why so many of us feel as though we can take more pain when we are highly aroused. Now think about what it might do to you if you were forced to take a harsh paddling or a whipping after you have had an orgasm and not allowed to enjoy an afterglow. I think it would be pretty mentally distressing...and as such could prove to be a very, very powerful tool for a dominant to be aware of.

That is to say, draining a man prior to a scene isn't necessarily a means to ensure his devotion or intention for service, but it certainly will change the way his body and mind responds to certain things. Dominance is not about devotion, it's about using the tools you have at hand to control somebody else, devotion be damned. The awareness of how a submissive reacts differently to things before or after an orgasm was granted is one of these tools. The only way to get really good at using it is to practice, practice, practice.

Just my two cents….