<!--ADULTSONLY-->
<meta http-equiv="pics-label" content='(pics-1.1 "http://www.icra.org/ratingsv02.html" l gen true for "http://asstr.org" r (cz 1 la 1 lb 1 lc 1 na 1 nb 1 nc 1 nd 1 ne 1 nf 1 ng 1 nh 1 ni 1 oa 1 ob 1 oc 1 of 1 og 1 oh 1 va 1 vb 1 vc 1 vd 1 ve 1 vf 1 vg 1 vh 1 vi 1 vj 1 vk 1) "http://www.rsac.org/ratingsv01.html" l gen true for "http://asstr.org" r (n 4 s 4 v 4 l 4))' />
<SCRIPT LANGUAGE=JavaScript SRC=/scripts/common.js></script>
<SCRIPT LANGUAGE=JavaScript SRC=/scripts/scroller2.js></script>
<SCRIPT Language="Javascript">
<!--
runScroller();
//-->
</SCRIPT>
<pre>
  This "Images" collection is exceptionally "bloggy".  There
  are a couple "proto-images" and some of the discussions include
  some fantasy ideas.  But this one is a lot more discussion
  about BDSM than it is BDSM fantasy and fiction.  Those interested
  in discussion about BDSM may perhaps find it worthwhile, otherwise
  it'd be better to stop reading now.



My "Images" (a term I stole from Suki) are short ideas, images,
and sketches written for the amusement of and offered as tribute 
to my Liege and Lady.  They were always longer and never so well
crafted as Suki's short masterpieces, and over time, my Images
files began to include various email excerpts and other works
in progress or ideas for works and became more journal than art,
so some juxtapositions may seem odd.


Some of my Images follow.  They are generally cruel and 
nonconsensual and of interest only to sickphuxs, so please 
read no further if such doesn't appeal to you.

The Images are impurely the products of a warped imagination, and
should not be seen as a reflection of the scene, nor should they be 
imitated by anyone not interested in a protracted term as the ward 
of the state.

Steven S. Davis


---------------------------------------------

Emotional Sadism

A correspondent asked me for my thoughts on emotional sadism.
On the chance that someone might find some excerpts from
this correspondence (all words mine) useful, I'm attaching the
following:

*********


A quick partial answer is that I think the big issue with emotional
sadism is the difficulty of gauging impact, both for the top and for
the bottom, which is made especially complicated by the way the
aftereffects of emotional sadism can be so slippery.  The difficulty
of judging the impact of emotional sadism, the way responses can be
delayed, and the way 2nd day responses can be so different from first
day responses[1], all cause me to regard emotional sadism as the much 
more difficult and hazardous form.   As for the ethics of it, I don't 
find them to be any different than I do for any other extremely hazardous
play.  The main point I'd stress to anyone planning on doing emotional
sadism is that the impossibility of ever having as much information
as one would usually want is something that one must factor in.  If
we did physical sadism with as little knowledge of the impact of what
we're doing as we must tolerate when doing emotional sadism, it'd be
considered very irresponsible play.  But with emotional sadism, you
simply can't know (save perhaps when doing something very familiar
with a very familiar partner) the impacts as well as you'd like, so
if one is going to play that way one just has to accept the higher risks
that come with lesser information (which of course doesn't mean taking
no care in what one does, one still reduces risks as far as one can
and still achieve the desired results, it's just that those risks 
aren't as reducible/controllable as are those of (most) sorts of
physical sadism; a scene can go beautifully today and everyone is
very happy, and tomorrow (or worse, next week when no one is looking
for it) things can get very, very bad).  If it's hot for both partners 
and they accept those risks and the responsibilities that come with them,
and especially when it's consequences seem good for the bottom, then it's 
a quite acceptable way to play.

It's a subject which bears longer discussion (perhaps especially
on the ethical issue of doing BDSM with people whose motivations
are destructive) but that's my quick answer.


[1]  I recall a long scene in which between tortures I verbally 
     abused a woman (humiliation/degradation is not always, 
     arguably, emotional sadomasochism, though it can be sometimes; 
     I don't actually think it was, in this case, because her 
     reaction to degradation was not a painful one, however, 
     humiliation/degradation shares with emotional sadomasochism 
     the issue of "day after" responses).   I'd repeatedly vilified 
     her and repeated forcefully and frequently that she was an 
     object with no rights or dignity or choice, worthy of no respect, 
     that she existed exclusively for my pleasure and that my pleasure
     was to use her for sex and pain, that fucking and sucking and
     receiving pain was her sole reason for being and the only reason
     she was allowed to keep using oxygen, that she was just an animated
     sextoy and that what she thought or wanted was of no interest and
     how she felt only mattered when she was being fondled before being
     fucked and that she had no inherent value whatsoever, her only
     worth being her utilitarian value in the pleasure she gave from
     sex and receiving pain and fortunately for her she was very valuable
     for that so she'd be allowed to exist though as low as she was[2] 
     she had no rights at all not even the right to exist.  And she 
     quite enjoyed it all.  But the day after when the sexual pleasure
     of it all was past and she was dealing with the effect of being so
     thoroughly degraded, she didn't like it very much and needed a lot
     of reassurance and emotional support. 




   
[2]  My line about her being so low that even Robert Ballard couldn't
     find her didn't go over ;-(



*******


[regarding mind-body impacts and does what we do to one
 impact the other]

In either direction, probably so, though the impact will usually be
mostly to the body or the mind.  Obviously extreme emotional stress
can have marked physical effects (up to killing the subject) and 
physical stress can cause marked emotional/psychological impacts 
(an issue complicated by the way the post-traumatic stress disorder
is partly a physical affliction, the result of changes in brain chemistry
that result from extremely stressful events  (so if you were to 
show your submissive the car radios and garage door openers can cause
a power strip to turn on, and then show him the effects a meat grinder
has when plugged into the strip and when the power is on, then turn
the strip off and bind your boy very securely with his cock and balls
jammed into the grinder, the blades painfully pressing him, and then
walk away say "I hope for your sake no one driving buy is listening to
the wrong radio station, and that no one comes home and opens the
garage for the next hour or so", even if in fact you've fixed things
so the grinder can't come on, and even if he does trust you, if you did
a good enough job of showing him the danger and hiding the safety,
it's going to be hard for him not to be scared each time he hears
a car drive by outside, and if after a couple hours of growing discomfort
and fear you flick a button that causes a second grinder nearby to
spring to life with that sound you made certain he knew, well, even if
he doesn't have a heart attack the fear and stress might alter his brain
chemistry (or so I recall though I can't offer a citation for the element
of PTSD (and assuming that meat grinders can be used that way, I admit
to not actually knowing much about them and whether there are any you
could put a kneeling man's genitals into and leave him awaiting his 
fate)).  But while there are physical impacts from emotional play
and emotional impacts from physical play, the effects are usually 
predominantly either one or the other.


[snip]

Certainly that sort of control, and that toying with feelings
and perceptions, can be very hot.  And being under such control
and being the object of such intense efforts can also be very hot.

[snip]

Conditioning can occur without intention and in ways that are
unwelcome even when the activity is welcome.  I know a heavy
masochist who has sometimes been played with by having the
torture continue after she orgasms, which is significant because
her pain tolerance goes down markedly after orgasm.  After she
comes the pain is just pain, but it's still welcome emotionally
because she enjoys the feeling of utter helplessness she has when
she's come and he either has or doesn't want to and still the
torture goes on and she knows there's nothing she can do to stop
or even influence the torture.  But a consequence of such play
has been conditioning her against coming, because while she may
welcome it, her body doesn't and it has learned that to come means
to experience terrible undiluted pain and it wants to avoid this.
She hasn't been conditioned not to come, but it has happened that
it takes her longer to come during BDSM.  Not necessarily a bad thing,
but it was, as i understand, unintentional and undesired by the people
involved.

[regarding subs who seek destruction]


At this point I'd wonder two things.  One, does he really want this,
or is the idea of it hot because of what else it represents for him ?
Is it the idea of being destroyed, or the idea of being unable to
prevent his destruction what's hot ?  I can find the idea of being
tied down and immobile while a woman in stiletto heels rests her
heels light against my eyelids and taunts me about the ease with which
she could lower her feet and push the sharp heels through me, how it
takes more effort for her to keep the heels out of my eyes than it would
to plunge them into them, and how much she'd like to do this but not
yet, not till she's enjoyed my trembling and whimpering for a while
longer, not till the fatigue - can't I feel the trembling that's starting
in her legs - becomes more painful than my terror is pleasing.  But it's
not that I want to be blinded by high heels.  I like the idea of the
vulnerability and of the intense attention by and connection with a
women who loves my fear and helplessness that such a scene would entail.
What is it he really wants ?  Destruction, or to be known so completely
and so intimately and to feel such emotional vulnerability that he could
be destroyed in a moment by his dominant, and to be valuable and desirable
enough that she'd take the time to gain that power and revel in 
possessing it - but would not want to lose it by exercising it ?

If he wants destruction, I'd say that he's someone to avoid.  If he
craves what being vulnerable to destruction can give him, that's
another matter.  But that's very hard to know - and it's very easy to
believe what seems most sensible and most pleasing to oneself even
when that isn't or at least needn't be the truth.

[snip]

Destroying a person is a great temptation, as is having the power
to destroy a person.  And emotional destruction has the extra attraction
that you can destroy a person and then keep reveling in their destruction
(while physical destruction, however intensely hot the moment might be,
leave you with the moment past and unregainable.   I might want to 
look in a woman's eyes while I'm garroting her, loosening the cords
repeatedly while I'm doing so to bring her back several times from
the brink and then to actually do it and see the light in those eyes
go out forever.  And I might think that for someone else to want to do
that to me is very hot (though my fantasies have her saying to me, when
she has me on the brink "I so want to kill you.  It would be the greatest
moment of my life.  But afterwards you be gone and I don't want to
be in a world without you, so I won't".)  But it can't be done, the
event takes away more than it brings.  But an emotionally destroyed
person, if he isn't driven to kill himself, that leaves a wreckage
you can keep enjoying.  It's easy to understand that appeal.

I said, FWIW, that I don't think much about emotional sadism. 
That was using a fairly narrow definition.  In fact I think the
idea of bring someone to despair is very hot, as are certain sorts
of intense emotional pain (I'm not sure what else it could be
but emotional sadism to imagine, as I did in one of my Images,
having a woman tied immobile and then one by one killing her children
by very slowly draining their blood as she watched, and dripping that 
blood onto her head, her being slowly drenched in their blood while
they were blanched of it and as she listened helplessly to their
pleas for her help).  But I tend not to be as into the sadism which
aims to get inside a person and destroy her psyche or break her heart.


[regarding the self-doubts our desires can cause]

The closest answer I can give is this:

1) Thoughts and desires don't make you a bad person.  Just a person
   with evil thoughts and desires.

2) Some thoughts and desires can't be enacted without doing something
   evil, and a person who knowingly does evil is evil.

3) Some evil thoughts or desires can be enacted, or approximated, without
   doing evil, and that's OK.  If you can do something with someone in a
   way that does not leave him, on balance, less than what he was, that's
   not evil.  However cruel it might be and however horrendous it might
   seem to others or even to you, if it makes your partner more alive
   than he was without it (after, perhaps, a period of recovery), then 
   it's not evil.  And it's your partner and how he reacts that determines
   that very amorphous concept of "more alive".

   But if he's not going to be more alive afterwards, or if he doesn't
   hope and expect to be, with some reasonable basis for that hope
   and expectation, then it's not something you can ethically do.  Can
   you see a way, or can your partner convince you that he can see
   a way (applying a very high standard of proof) that what is planned
   will not leave behind person who has been, for a long term, lessened 
   or destroyed ?    When the goal is destruction, if such in fact
   be the real goal, it's hard for me to see how it can not leave a
   destroyed person behind.  But maybe there's some degree of poetry
   involved in that usage, and what the person seeks isn't destruction
   but to experience and survive an ordeal of ultimate pain, in this
   case emotional pain ?   That could be.  But you'd need to know the
   person very well and be very sure about what he seeks and what he can
   handle before you can agree to provide that ordeal.  And if what he
   seeks is destruction, and more than a few do, then I don't think you
   can go along with that without being or becoming evil.

But getting hot thinking about it doesn't make you evil.  Just kinky.

********

[Expanding on the meat grinder scene]


I suspect that the optimal variation on this scene would require

1) that he "accidentally" learn that random radio signals can
   cause this power strip to activate well before he's hooked
   up to whatever very scary device he's hooked up to*

2) that for some reason you unexpected use this power strip
   preferably at a time when he's well gagged (and of course
   securely bound)

3) that you appear to be called away or distracted (perhaps
   by a phone call) and unaware of how freaked he is


Of course, after you've let him fret for some time and possibly
after you've scared him 3/4s to death (perhaps by picking up
a remote control device that he's observed causes this power
strip to come on (how one could have arranged for him to see
this, I haven't figured out) but he doesn't think you know
this), you'd need to let him know that he'd been safe and that 
the saw couldn't have come on and you did know all about what 
he was going through.  Playing clueless can be a great way to 
make a mindfuck work, but appearing not to know what's happening 
in your scenes does not build your submissive's confidence in you.



 * Maybe after a childhood seeing people threatened by buzzsaws 
   in TV and movies (I'm not quite "Perils of Pauline" old but 
   I still remember such things popping up often on TV shows in 
   my youth (Diana Rigg threatened by one was almost as delightful
   as the one in which she was tied to a railroad track (that
   it was a miniature train made the archness of it all rather
   fun)), you decide it might be fun for him to be tied with his 
   legs apart and his scrotum resting on the blades of a circular 
   saw (perhaps for effect while you watch old "Avengers" or 
   "Man from Uncle" episodes); of course, it's just for effect
   and though you make a big show of plugging in the saw you'd
   never turn it on - but why oh why did you plug it into *that*,
   you must not know what weird things it does, and ghod, why
   did you gag him first and did you have to pack his mouth so
   well, and damn, damn, damn, why did you have to answer that
   phone, won't you look at him, can't you see he needs to get
   out of this --- oh, ghod oh ghod oh ghod not that remote,
   please not that put it down please please don't use that to
   turn on the VCR please look this way please see him please
   please  NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO..... ohhh ghod that's lucky.... but
   he's *got* to get you to let him out before some taxi comes
   by and spins this wheel... why won't you see how scared he
   is... why did you tie him so well  why oh why oh why did he
   ever go along with this idea ?
   
He'd need, of course, a lot of assurance and aftercare after
such a scene.


[regarding PTSD]

It may be the case that PTSD requires prolonged intense stress,
though I know it doesn't have to be months in combat that cause
it.  I'm not sure about this myself, but if you did plan to do
intense terror play with people it might be good to know more
about PTSD (I wonder if people who *like* terror are vulnerable
to PTSD ?).

[regarding conditioning that might occur from C&T]


It's good to be aware of such possibilities.  It doesn't seem a high
risk from this activity, though perhaps if you combined it with strict
orgasm control and only allowed him to come on days when you torture
his cock (expecting him to endure long sessions of fellatio without
coming on other days) you could get him to the point where he couldn't
have release without pain.  Shirley might be able to offer some advice 
on what to do to avoid inadvertent conditioning (BTW, were you reading 
SSB when she posted her scene report of torture by fellatio ?; pretty 
hot scene, I might have it saved someplace).


[snip]

It certainly is a hot idea to think of getting someone so he or she
can only come when you let them and/or that they have to have pain 
to have release, or can only get erect under certain conditions
(perhaps he's kept most of the time in a cock tube which punishes
erections and that's only removed (and him brought to orgasm) after
alligator clamps are put on his nipples and scrotum; that might
teach him not to get erect before alligator clamps are placed on
his nipple and scrotum (and perhaps also teach him to get erect
when they are put on him)).  It's fun to contemplate holding over
him the prospect that if you dismiss him he might never have another
orgasm, or at least that without you (if you made your voice part
of the trigger somehow) he could spend months or years regaining
normal sexual function.  Maybe a bit hazardous, though.

[regarding a sub who sought emotional destruction]


                   ....  I have to wonder about what he wanted, could
he really have meant it or understood it ?  I've never been hurt that
bad, but the deep hollow ache of much lesser losses is one it's hard
for me to imagine anyone wanting a magnified version of.  But then,
there are many physical torture that some people like and other can't 
imagine.   I'm also wondering how well this could work with the subject
expecting it and wanting it.  It's hard for betrayal to have the right
effect when betrayal is what one wants.

[snip]

That's probably it.  He's enormously underestimating the pain and
the duration of the damage - he'd very likely recover part of the way,
but he'd probably always be damaged - if you actually set out to destroy
him and succeeded (which with him knowing and seeking might be difficult).

And you're quite right to worry about the effect on you.  Could you get
to know and understand a person that well, and then not be torn up
badly by losing him ?

[regarding the temptations of such a scene]

Understandable.  How often does anyone ever get a chance to do
such a thing ?  The appeal for a sadist with NC fantasies of
a person with a terminal disease seeking to be tortured to 
death is certainly understandable, it's such a rare chance
to really indulge.  Given that once in a lifetime - once in
quite a few lifetimes actually - chance, it wouldn't be easy
to pass up if it was offered.


[regarding the appeal of destruction]

If we really think that human lives and human psyches are so very special,
how can the destroying of them not be very special ?  That's one of
the paradoxes about thanatos or the urge to destruction, that it's
based on a recognition of the value of what is to be destroyed.  Which
is something which distinguishes those with an appreciation of life
and of death from those simple and all too common brutes who just want
to smash but don't appreciate what they're smashing or the act of
destroying it.  


[regarding taunting scenes]

It's something that a lot of people, even a lot of BDSMers, would
have trouble understanding, but I'm not sure that taunting someone
till he or she cries is any inherently worse than extracting tears
in other ways.  I'd again find the key to whether it's OK or not
in what the experience does for or to the person.  I can see where
some kinds of taunting could make a person stronger, and how
taunting can be hot for the victim (I like taunting, or at least
the idea of it (never had it done to me) because it shows a focus
on me; as I said once when describing feelings of being ignored
in a relationship, I could bear being kept caged up and alone if
sometimes she'd just come taunt me about my predicament, that 
would be much better than the agony of feeling abandoned, like
she wanted me caged enough to keep me caged but didn't want me 
enough to do anything with me).  So I can see some healthy taunting
scenes.  And, of course, some unhealthy ones (as hot as I imagine
a scene to be in which a femdom taunts a femsub whose master the
femdom has enthralled and now the femsub can remain only by accepting
her greatly altered role in his life and the dominance of the femdom
over her as well, and the femdom is relentless in taunting the
femsub about how she couldn't hold her man, she just wasn't good
enough, and isn't it clear why, what is she good for after all save
for a little trifling play from time to time (well, it didn't sound
really hot there, but I can see it being very hot), I can't imagine
how that could fail to harm the femsub).


[regarding aftercare]

Aftercare can be very important for the top's well-being (both
aftercare of the sub for the dom to show that the sub is OK and
is pleased with the dom**, and aftercare of the sub by the dom 
to give the dom a chance to express zir other aspects (and remind
zirself that zie's not cruel and vicious, zie just likes to do
some cruel and vicious things with people who enjoy that).  And 
for some subs it's the real point of the scene ;-&gt;

 ** - An idea which some Domly Doms, especially Domly Doms who 
      never actually dominated, might find horrifying, but people 
      who do this sort of stuff to people they care about can
      badly need that reassurance, and sometimes the *only* thing 
      which can justify some highly sadistic play is the reaction
      of the bottom.  When one is dealing in extreme sadism, the
      sort of stuff well beyond normal human interactions, then 
      the fact of prior consent, while important, is not enough to
      make what was done OK.  This is a case where often only the
      ends can justify the means - and where if when we're done
      the submissive isn't happy and healthy, we did evil, no matter
      how careful our actions and no matter how complete and informed
      was the prior consent.  Consent is essential and required but
      it isn't always enough, which is why when we don't think that
      the actions are going to produce a bottom who is happy and healthy
      (or at least one who is happier and healthier than he or she would
      be without the activity) we do have an ethical requirement to say 
      "no" even if the bottom strongly wants it.  Partly because of an 
      obligation to protect the bottom, but even more so because of an 
      obligation to protect ourselves.  The consequences, emotional and
      psychological and emotional, of having done evil - even if all we 
      did was legal and in accordance with accepted scene protocols and 
      we would never face either legal or social censure - are too
      serious to be treated lightly.


--------------------------------------------------------

"Quasi-cuckold fantasies"


Doing some pondering on my favorite subject, my kink (it was
interesting reading a comment that one turnoff in malesubs is when
they only talk about their kink and don't ask about the domme's;
were I to ever answer a personal I suppose that I should keep
that in mind (though I already knew that men talking about themselves
too much is a turn-off to a lot of women), especially since as
I thought about it I realized I just about never ask anyone else
about their kinks, partly because of my own self-absorption
(I just *know* there's a joke to be made somewhere about male
self-absorption and sexual-denial, but I can't seem to find it),
partly because people I discuss kink with generally seem to
discuss what they want to discuss without me doing much prompting,
partly because it seems somehow a bit rude/pushy to me to ask
(my ever petulant advocate for submales (hmmm, "the petulant pet" ?;
needs work) is presently singing his favorite song "You Just Can't Win"
(of course not; subs are not supposed to win ;-&gt; ) about the unfairness
of it all: it's rude and pushy to ask, it's obnoxiously selfish to
talk about oneself, it's a sign of either inadequate self-awareness
or of too much silly porn if one doesn't talk about oneself; I know.
of course, that's it's about reasonableness and balance, but the
petulant advocate for submales aspect of myself is, like most advocates,
not very interested in being reasonable).


Anyway.....


I got to wondering whether the ease with which I embraced, in fantasy
at least (never having a chance to try it in RL), the quasi-cuckold
fantasy (quasi because it's not a cuckold fantasy if the woman is fucking
her husband instead of me) is because of an oddity in the way I imagine
my dominants.  As much as the key to my fantasy is her excitement
at the prospect (or the fact) of her doing something to me that she likes
and I don't (both because I want her to enjoy, and because I need her
to want me (but being selfish, mostly the latter)), for some reason, and
I'm not sure why (perhaps I *have* read too much porn and so have a hard 
time imagining a domme deviating from the "Rules for Domme Interactions 
with Submales"), I always imagine that my domme wants to conceal from
me the extent to which she values me and enjoys what she does with me
- even though if she knows me at all she knows that's so central to
what I need that if she did actually conceal it from me I'd probably
dump her (telling myself some tale about how if she doesn't enjoy
playing with me, well, it's my duty as a sub not to let her waste her 
time on me when she could be doing something she enjoys, when the truth
was, of course, that I need her to want me and if she doesn't show me
this then I won't be getting what I need and will go elsewhere).
In fantasy I can deal with her staying cool and composed when in my
view because I can see how desperately excited she is when she's not 
within my view, but of course in RL I won't see her hugging my handcuffs
when we're apart or squeezing the ropes she uses on me between her legs
or getting on the phone and so giddily telling her best friend how
she's got me tied up in her playroom.


But what I could see, in a quasi-cuckold scene, is the way she'd attack
her husband after a period of coolly torturing me (her husband would
also be able to see this, which has always been something that 
worried/bothered me about such scenes in RL (though it occurs to me
that if *he* had a sort of cuckold fantasy of his own, a quasi-cuckold
scene in which his wife would torture me for a while and then come
to him with a degree of passion she didn't usually have, that might
work out (as it might with a man who was pleased with anything that
pleased his wife, or one who didn't care what it was that got her
turned on, as long as he was getting great sex from it (none of those
situations seems very plausible to me, though, so my worry would
still be, if she's getting so hot from playing with me before fucking
him, what's that going to do to him, and what will that do to them,
and (because I am, ultimately, an immensely selfish fellow and
everything always comes down to me in the end) what that will mean
for me)).   So while I never started having quasi-cuckold fantasies
until I was in discussions with a femsadist whose most vanilla
husband didn't mind her playing with me (since it meant someone else
getting tied and tortured besides him), he didn't want us having sex,
so the scenarios my mind started crafting were of her torturing me
till she was unbearably horny then going to him.  What I hadn't
realized till now is that one of the things these scenarios did
was getting her showing the uncontrolled passion that my "femdoms
don't do that" idea wouldn't allow; since the man getting attacked
by a woman out of her mind wasn't her sub, that didn't violate
the rule  (still need to work on why that presumption existed;
possibly because I have some problems accepting such feelings
directed at me (simultaneous with craving them) so my fantasy
partners, naturally, don't do that, and my RL dom, in those scenes
that we did do, didn't do it (which was quite fine, I mention it
only to indicate that there was never a "reality blowing away
false assumptions" event in my experience); anyway that's a
subject for more pondering another time).

---

Vaguely related to the above is this recent "proto-Image":


Not enough time or focus for a real image, so I'll just share
another idea for an image.


Another of the strangest of fantasies, fantasizing about what
I'd never see, my domme obsessing about me when she's alone
(with her always being - or at least starting out being -
very cool and composed and in control when we're together
(and she's in domme mode; she doesn't need to always be
"CCC" with me, of course, but when she's letting herself
not be so, she's also not focused on me, which is of course
fine but means the only times that she let's herself display
obsession with me is when I'm not there).  Perhaps some
of my sadism does slip out in these fantasies, since generally
domme torture is unacceptable, but a hot and frantic domme
rolling around in bed hot and horny as hell but unable to
to get any meaningful relief and cursing her state and me
for not being there and vowing that I'll pay for what I've
done to her by giving her this need and ache, well, perhaps
that is just a bit sadistic of me.

Of course, I loathe TDY (business travel), but maybe if it
was going to get my Lady in this state, that would be a redeeming
feature of it ;-&gt;

Anyway, the image is of a woman laying in her bed, swallowed
up in a much too large for her man's shirt, fondling her
toys and especially the leather cuffs and collars and harnesses
she keeps her boy in, holding and smelling them and hugging
them to her, taking bundles of rope and holding them tight
and saying how tightly she's going to bind her wandering boy when
she gets him back in her clutches, she's going to tie him down
so he can't move at all (well, maybe one part will be able to;
ah, well, maybe two) and she's going to keep him there and not 
let him go anyplace till she's had her fill of him and that could
take a long, long time.  Putting the bundle of ropes between her 
legs and squeezing it hard, rubbing it against her wet panties
(that she's wearing so the rough rope doesn't rub her badly,
as she thinks that when she gets him she's going to tie this
scratchy rope around his bare skin and show him no mercy, she's
going to rub it over his cock and balls and tie them tight with
it and rig him up so she can pull a rope across a underside 
of the head of his cock and then pull the rope slowly across
him as he's amazed by how much rope is coming out from under 
her bed as as this seemingly endless cord is pulled across his
cockhead and drives him insane; the only other things she has
one, his shirt, and those high heels he likes so much (much
as it embarrasses him to react so much to a pair of shoes,
and she doesn't mind playing with either his reaction or
his embarrassment, and so the shoes she once just tolerated
she's grown to love wearing) are to remind her of him) ... 
ah, rubbing the bundle of rope against her wet panties and 
squeezing her legs together hard and rocking with that bundle
between her legs, flushed and hot and moaning and whimpering,
needing him so much, missing him so much, and both hating and
loving the feeling which she can't stand and doesn't want to
end (so reaching for any mechanical toys doesn't even occur
to her, and any insertion toys she fondles she does thinking
of using them on him), squeezing her legs tights and shifting
them back and forth a little as she hugs and sniffs and
kisses the bundle of leathers she uses on him, loving their 
smell and his and she dreams of what she'll do to him and
wonders whether when she wraps this rope around his head and 
in his mouth again and again, coil after coil filling him and
encircling him, if he'll catch the smell and taste of her on t
he rope - and as she wonders, she slips off her panties and
presses the rope hard against her pussy and squeezes and grinds
on it.

---
Addendum

It might perhaps be that I need to clarify something.  I have for some
time pondered why I so often fantasize about thinks I don't like.
That's not "protesting too much" ;-&gt;, I really don't like them.
I have no desire to be bound or hurt or terrorized.  So why the 
fantasies ?

For awhile I thought that I was fantasizing what I would do if I 
were the femdom.  But they change depending upon who I'm talking to.
OK, now I got it, I'm a good sub who wants his dom to get what she 
enjoys.

I'd like to believe that.  But it's not true.  Or at least it's not
the important truth.  It's true that I want here to get what she wants,
even and sometimes especially when I don't like it.  And not because
being a sadist myself I understand sadist pleasures and want here to 
have them (that was the next theory).  No, it's because (according
to the current theory)  I'm an attention slut who craves being the
focus of attention and desire from sadistic women.  Of sadistic
women because (I think):

1) my affection and admiration for women has always been strongly
correlated with sadistic impulses towards them, so it's hard for me to
really feel valued if someone doesn't want to hurt me

2) because while I crave attention, I also reject it; it's weak and
unmanly to want it, it's an ignoble desire, and it's thoroughly
poor submission according to my own ideals of what a submissive should
be (which once upon a time I actually thought I was)

So the only way that the attention and desire is made OK is when
I don't have a choice about it and she's doing to me what she wants 
and not what I want, and/or when it's in the nature of aftercare
when I have good objective reasons for needing and accepting the
attention (hey, I don't want it, but since she just beat the shit
out of me, it's required, and besides, having hurt me she now needs
a chance to be nice and to show both me and herself that she actually
is a good person; I mean, I wouldn't be accepting it, but I have to 
do it for her benefit, don't you see ?).


Yes, I know.  I am *soooo* full of shit.  It took me awhile to
figure out how full of shit I was.  But that's where my digging into
my kink (the submissive side of it, anyway) has led me.  I'm an attention
slut who hates being an attention slut and seeking it through bottoming
to femdoms who are sadists is a way of getting attention and desire in 
a way that I can accept it from them and feel OK about myself.


Which makes it rather weird that I so often fantasize about cool, composed
femdoms who won't ever let me know how much they crave me, even though
their craving is the whole reason for my submitting.  I'm still
working on that part.  I think what you said about power may be on
point here: I want her to want to have power over me, because she *does*
need me so much, she needs to control me, and the behavior of concealing
her desire and her need is a behavior that I'd expect from someone
trying to exert power over me and control me. 


But the twist in this is that if I fail to perceive need and desire,
I won't be getting what I need and of course, being a selfish do-me sub
not the noble selfless "what pleases my dom" person I used to think
I was (what pleases her is important - because it cause her to want me
if she's pleased by me, then I'd eventually leave.  So I end up with 
scenes like one in which she chained me to the wall outside her office
(home office) while she gets some work done, but she's constantly finding
some excuse to step out of her office for this or that, something that 
gives her an excuse to pass me and to idly kick me in passing.  *not*
because I want to be kicked (I don't), but because I want her to be
unable to resist the desire to kick me.

Though not being a masochist, how long I could actually handle those
kicks, I don't know.  Probably not long.  Awkward being an attention
slut who wants attention through sadism, but simultaneously being a
pain wimp.


Regarding a correspondent's comment about not letting her
slaves know how much she wants them because it would be
a transfer of power to them:

That may be that answer to why I imagine cool behavior from
my dominant.  It may be that my expectation is if she needs 
me as I want her to need me, she will want to control me, 
and if she wants to control me she'll conceal her need for 
me, making the concealment of her need confirmation 
of it - but only if she doesn't conceal it too well.

Like I said, this is a really twisted kink (hmmm, interesting
combination of words; if you twist a kink would it straighten ?;
this is getting all too confusing ;-&gt; ).


--------------------------------------
Burning the subbie (couch)

Sent in private email in response to a public article

 From sd Mon Aug 11 20:42:27 2003
 Subject: Re: This isn't personal... so why name a person?
 To: moonlight  (StormWolf)
 Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:42:27 -0400 (EDT)
 Cc: madylarian

&gt; On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 17:18:42 -0400, mady &lt;madylarian&gt;
&gt; wrote:

&gt; &gt;Terse words????  Oh dear, the shame, the (non-con)humiliation!  *delicately
&gt; &gt;waving my pink fan then swooning on the subbie couch*
&gt; 
&gt; EEEK!
&gt; 
&gt; BURN IT!!!
&gt; 
&gt; moonlight - damn thing's BACK again....

Hmmmm....

{view mady on the couch}

{Begin revelry}


Perhaps the problem has been that there hasn't been
a proper sacrifice made when the couch was burned before ?

Given the importance of this task, I'm sure mady will
be willing to make a contribution to the effort.

And if when she wakes up from her swoon she finds her hands
tied and herself gagged, well, that will just make it easier
for her to do this.  She might resist a little as we finish
stripping her before getting some long Nylon rolls to wrap
her in from ankles to neck and around her head, before 
we tie her ankles and knees and tie her wrists to her legs
and ropes around her torso (given that she'll be sitting
on the touch, it will be nicer if her hands are in front 
of her, the better to enjoy their desperate twisting).

What would make this especially nice would be a steel
seat for mady to be chained into, but such might be
hard to find on short notice, and failing that simply
chaining her to the couch will suffice.  Past efforts
to burn it should have given use some experience with
the burn pattern, and we can then put accelerant on
the couch as needed to move the fire as we prefer.
My recommendation would be to coat the edges so the 
flame rushes around it and edges the couch in flames
before it more slower burns toward the middle where
mady is.  I'd personally recommend a long slow fuse 
spiraling around the couch that we can light and have 
it slowly circle towards it (and her) until it touches 
the edge right on the accelerant and quickly encircles 
the couch.  A couple hours between the lighting of the 
fuse and the fuse lighting the couch would give time
for interest to build (not least, of course, mady's 
interest).  Of course, given that amount of time,
we'd have to be sure she was expertly tied, as she'd
be trying rather strongly to get free even before the
couch lit up, and her by that time exhausted efforts
would receive a boost when she felt the heat surrounding
her.  The metal seat, if one could be found or fabricated,
would protect her from the touch of the flames even as
the couch was engulfed in them, but not from the heat
of the flames (students of burning executions may recall
that it's an easier death when the subject burns than
when the subject is surrounded by flame and dies from
the heat; friends of the condemned would even, I've read,
try to push the burning bundles against their friend
to hasten zir demise).  The heat would be of especial
interest in this case, as mady would be nude under the
nylon sheathing all but her hands, feet, and face (so
the contortions of each could be viewed), and nylon melts
at high temperatures, making this especially agonizing
for her.

But if no metal seat is available, perhaps chaining
mady into a wicker chair and placing that on the couch
would have some aesthetic pleasure.

Such a sweet sacrifice in the destruction of the couch
would surely help it stay gone this time.

And if it didn't, well, most unfortunate, but still
an exceedingly beautiful event.


{end revelry}

{sigh}


Well, surely there *must* be something that can be
done about that couch.  What that might be, well,
I couldn't say.


----------------------------------------
"Cocksucker"


A quick image and accompanying thought.


The man sits on the stool, his hands tied behind him,
his ankles crossed and bound below the stool, his toes
touching the ground only because the stool is so low;
were it a couple inches higher, the fact there's a hole 
in the seat of the stool and his bound balls hang through
that hole, pulled by the cord from his ankles to his balls.
He's blindfolded and wearing a headset to cut off his perception
of outside sounds.  His only awareness of when someone is
near him is when a hand touches his chin and he opens his mouth
to accept a cock and suck on it, his visitor tapping his head
to indicate whether he should suck faster (his orders being to
start each one very slowly; his orders also deny him the right
to refuse under any circumstances, though he hopes that his
mistress or whoever is watching him (if anyone still is) will
prevent unprotected cocks from being inserted, and through the
hours of the party none such have been, he cannot refuse one
if it were to be pressed into his mouth).

Shortly before the blindfold and head harness had been put on him,
he saw along side him a couple other devices, a rubber vagina
and a rubber woman's head, being set up alongside him.  The
message, that he was a toy for servicing cocks, had been quite
clear to him, and apparently to everyone else, since he'd received
no contact at all all night save the prescribed touches to his chin
and head and the cocks in his mouth, not one other stroke or
touch or pinch or caress; how many hours this had been and how many
hours it would continue he couldn't tell, all he knew is that it 
wouldn't be his choice and even if he were allowed to speak, which
his Lady had made very clear he *must* not do, not under any 
circumstances and were able to say how desperately he wanted this
to stop, it wouldn't matter, since whether he liked or hated this
mattered not at all, all that mattered is that his Lady enjoyed
him being used this way.


Quick thought:  it matters a great deal whether this is being
done to let him know that this is all he's good for, in his lady's
eyes, or if he knows that using him this way is a sort of
conspicuous consumption, his Lady showing off her wealth by using
something as valuable as him alongside such tawdry toys and as 
a higher-class version of such a toy.  To that end, it matters 
whether the sound in his ears is white noise, or a looping file 
of her praise, or the sound of person after person saying again 
and again "cocksucker".


-------------
Some ponderings on ponderings


From a private email response to a public newsgroup article

 From sd Fri Aug 15 16:50:41 2003
 Subject: Re: Assertive and Strong Doms and Subs
 To: 
 Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 16:50:41 -0400 (EDT)

A very good article, with one paragraph that sort of 
leaped out at me.


&gt; Not that there's anything wrong with that sort of punishment play if
&gt; it's a wholly conscious choice, along the lines of, "It just makes my
&gt; socks roll up and down when you tell me I am naughty and punish me!" 
&gt; When it's a cowardly substitute for having the intestinal fortitude to
&gt; own up to one's needs and desires, that's uncool.  Neurotic.  And not
&gt; "sane", a la SSC.


  [FWIW, uncool, definitely, neurotic, probably; not sane, probably
   not.  It's either unaware or dishonest and either of those seem
   to me good reasons for not doing BDSM with someone, but I think
   insane is a bit of an overstatement, since being sane requires
   neither honesty nor a high degree of self-awareness, and any 
   strategy followed which does in fact lead to a person getting 
   what he or she actually does want and need is a sign of sanity, 
   not insanity.  But with that quibble....]


Why it leaped out at me is really not something you need to have
inflicted upon you, but I'll do it anyway.  It's a conclusion 
I've found myself coming to recently after a lot of analysis of
my bottoming kink (my reason for being a sadist never needed
analyzing; causing fear and pain simply feels really good).

excerpting from something I'd written recently:

----

It might perhaps be that I need to clarify something.  I have for some
time pondered why I so often fantasize about things I don't like.
That's not "protesting too much" ;-&gt;, I really don't like them.
I have no desire to be bound or hurt or terrorized.  So why the 
fantasies ?

For awhile I thought that I was fantasizing what I would do if I 
were the femdom.  But they change depending upon who I'm talking to.
OK, now I got it, I'm a good sub who wants his dom to get what she 
enjoys.

I'd like to believe that.  But it's not true.  Or at least it's not
the important truth.  It's true that I want her to get what she wants,
even and sometimes especially when I don't like it.  And not because
being a sadist myself I understand sadist pleasures and want her to 
have them (that was the next theory).  No, it's because (according
to the current theory)  I'm an attention slut who craves being the
focus of attention and desire from sadistic women.  Of sadistic
women because (I think):

1) my affection and admiration for women has always been strongly
correlated with sadistic impulses towards them, so it's hard for me
to really feel valued if someone doesn't want to hurt me

2) because while I crave attention, I also reject it; it's weak and
unmanly to want it, it's an ignoble desire, and it's thoroughly
poor submission according to my own ideals of what a submissive should
be (which once upon a time I actually thought I was)

So the only way that the attention and desire is made OK is when
I don't have a choice about it and she's doing to me what she wants 
and not what I want, and/or when it's in the nature of aftercare
when I have good objective reasons for needing and accepting the
attention (hey, I don't want it, but since she just beat the shit
out of me, it's required, and besides, having hurt me she now needs
a chance to be nice and to show both me and herself that she actually
is a good person; I mean, I wouldn't be accepting it, but I have to 
do it for her benefit, don't you see ?).


Yes, I know.  I am *soooo* full of shit.  It took me awhile to
figure out how full of shit I was.  But that's where my digging into
my kink (the submissive side of it, anyway) has led me.  I'm an attention
slut who hates being an attention slut and seeking it through bottoming
to femdoms who are sadists is a way of getting attention and desire in 
a way that I can accept it from them and feel OK about myself.

------------------

Which the more I think about it is actually rather pathetic.
Definitely uncool, probably neurotic, certainly either insufficiently
self-aware or dishonest, and more than adequate reason for someone
to decide not to do any such thing with me, which makes it unethical
to seek to have someone do it.

  [ Wouldn't say it's insane, though ;-&gt; ]

Not that I've been bottoming for some time, nor very actively pursuing
someone to whom to bottom.  Sort of interesting that now that (I think)
I know why bottoming appeals to me, to do it seems (for me, with my
motivations) rather low and sleazy.  Curious little note on the issue
of personal analysis of one's kink: sometimes knowing why you want 
something can make it something that you can't do (or at least now
know that you shouldn't).

-------------
A highly confused proto-Image

Haven't been able to do much in the way of focused/coherent
fantasy of late, whatever I come of with I end up wondering
about too many things to be able to make it into a story or Image.
For example some thoughts about a possible scene in which
a domme either kept kicking her kowtowing (I *think* that's
"on his knees with his head very low if not actually touching
the ground with his forehead, but I'm not 100%; in any event,
that's how I'm using it) boy as she circled him putting a foot
by his face from time to time for him to kiss or not, with no
agreement that she'll stop kicking when he falls to kiss it
but in fact she will take that to mean he's had enough and
maybe kick him two or three more times so he doesn't feel 
like he stopped the scene) which went to where he had to
kiss her foot or she would stop; as I was seeing it, it'd
be much more of a trial for him knowing that however much
he wanted it to stop he had to force himself to kiss her
foot each time or she'd stop having her fun with him and 
he'd be responsible for that and he didn't want that and
so he'd keep kissing her foot up until the time the agony
just become beyond bearing and he couldn't will himself
to kiss her foot again, knowing that another sharp kick
from those beautiful shoes he was getting to really hate
would follow if he did, and even with her toe under his
chinning raising up his face while she cooed at him and
asked if he didn't want to kiss her foot anymore and did
he really mean for her to stop having so much fun with him
and he hated to say either thing to her and to tell her
both of them by the same (in)action was unthinkable 
but the ache in so many places (since she'd been careful
to spread the kicks around) was such that he couldn't bear
the thought of even one more kick and unable to make his
lips touch her foot again or answer her questions as they
won't from cooing cloyingly at him to sharp and demanding
and he just burst into tears.... but that got all tangled
up in thoughts about how it seemed like he had too much 
control and how it seemed like he was exchanging kicks 
for kisses; now, in fantasy I can know that she knows
that neither of these were true, and in reality I can hope
she'd know him well enough to know what he was feeling
and that neither of those was true...which lead me to
thinking that, in real life I'd be desperately hoping
that long before that she'd be sufficiently impressed
with my suffering to decide to stop without getting my
"safeword" and it's very likely that if she didn't,
if she let it go on until I broke down in tears, while
I'd be very disappointed in myself, I'd also be disappointed
in her and (while I might not show it or admit it even to
myself) I'd be very angry with her.... which of course is
one of those infamous "expecting the dominant to have
telepathy" situations and it's quite unfair of me to be
holding it against her for continuing something which
I could have stopped at any time and was in fact expressly
allowing to continue and that's very terrible of me ....
but then, she knows me, she knows I don't want to stop her,
I don't want to safeword, I don't even want to have a safeword
(in the "coded command" sense of one) and she should know that
there'd be a danger I'd let myself be hurt before I'd be willing
to use a safeword (I'd probably hold off if I wasn't sure I was
injured and by the time one is sure, well, then one's been 
injured for awhile and is probably now badly injured) which is
all very bad submission because I sub shouldn't let his dominant
expose herself to such an unhappy situation, he owes it to her
to stop her before she feels bad about hurting him (and is probably
angry at him - whether she'd admit it, even to herself - because
he didn't stop her.... but if she knows me, and she shouldn't be
doing something like this if she doesn't know me well enough, then
she should know that I can't be trusted to stop and she has to be
watching for when she should stop.... but she can only tell, maybe,
about real injury - and only maybe; besides not having telepathy
she also doesn't have X-ray vision - she can't know when it just
hurts too much to bear or when it hurts so much that though I can
bear it it will hurt me that she made me bear that much....


Well, anyway, as you can see, just too much to process (yet, anyway)
into an Image.

---------------
Sharing a flirt with a bookloving spanko

So I've never threatened to torture you with books, how odd.
Cane your ass and let some welts rise then take a big heavy
book (an obsolete commercial book; I used to have an out of date
list of cars that would serve the purpose) and pound on your
hot sore ass, or hang nets from nipple clamps and put paperbacks
in the nets as weights until the clamps pull off ?  How very rude
of me.

Perhaps aside from perhaps using them as threats, those nets full
of harlequin romances attached to really cruel clamps would not be
useful.  That which would cause you to leave is obviously of no
value, since keeping you is the goal.  Ideally by having your
fear perfectly balancing your need and paralyzing you so you can
neither flee nor advance but can only stand there quivering as
I approach and circle you appraisingly and admiringly with you able
to do nothing but whimper when I put the collar and chain on you
that you know takes away all your options, and now no matter what
you might decide to do, you can't escape.

Once you're kneeling on the bed, the thick wide collar padlocked
around your throat and chained to the rail at the foot of the bed
and giving you no place to run to, those two netting bags of books
hanging from cruel clamps which are attached to rubber thongs
(so you can see how deeply the clamps bite into the rubber, and
how much the weight of the book stretches it, and be even more
terrified at the prospect of those things being used on your breasts)
would mainly serve to motivate you when you don't want to hold
your face on the pillow and your ass in the air as I work through
a variety of implements for beating your ass ever more painfully.

"What, dear, you don't want to put your ass up for more spanking ?  
Well, as you would have it, my dear, so shall it be, we'll let your 
aching ass recover for awhile while I use the weights on your nipples... 
oh, is your ass feeling better now ?  How nice.  I'll see what I can 
do about that...."

