My story, "The Bondage Freak," appeared in the December issue of BarebackMagazine.com. This tale is actually somewhat biographical, in that I did have an experience very similar to the narrator's (cf., my post of April 6, 2008).
It is important to remember that not all people respond to bondage the same way. That said, it is probably safe to assume that the majority of people who experience it willingly find the complete surrender of control sexually exciting. Bondage really works best in a relationship of absolute trust -- and, in that sense, perhaps where cerebral Domination is to at least some extent operating (whether by deliberate design or on a more subconscious level).
The woman who asks me to bind her is doubtless aware that I do not intend to murder her; neither shall I cripple, disfigure, maim, or mutilate her, nor affix my seal upon her with a branding iron. She does not expect me to photograph her and run her pictures over the Internet. In fact, she has a very clear and precise idea of what we shall do, and has willingly assumed the sub role.
As mentioned, sometimes bondage is an end in itself, with nothing further required. And, of course, sometimes it lends itself to other forms of play. I may perhaps write more extensively about some of the more esoteric applications of bondage in future posts. Stay tuned, and Season's Greetings.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
On water-play and cerebral Domination
My short story, "Water-Play," was published in the September, 2008, issue of BarebackMagazine.com. A few friends have asked me about the connection between water-play and cerebral Domination, and I also received an e-mail from A. H. to which I should like to respond.
The protagonist in any first-person narrative is not necessarily the author. As the medium is fiction, the writer is indeed free to draw upon autobiographical resources, but he may also embellish, romanticize, and otherwise distort the tale. I hasten to append that I may be completely vanilla myself -- or I may even be a woman. Only a handful of individuals know for certain. . . .
"Water-Play" clearly does offer an example of D/s behavior, at least initially. The karate teacher binds her, plops her in the tub, and then tickles her in order to force her to befoul herself, so to that extent (including the "denial" play), he and Sue engage in D/s. What is presented, however, can in no way be confused with cerebral Domination, and it's pretty bland for conventional D/s.
Replying to A. H.: Yes, you are absolutely correct. In regular D/s, a Dom may deny the sub permission to urinate, force the sub to urinate, or urinate on the sub. This story would have presented cerebral Domination had the teacher originally wanted to engage in water-play, and had he then been able to Dom her so completely that she now wanted to do so, not to gratify him, but rather because she effectively shared the same desire. You understand completely!
The protagonist in any first-person narrative is not necessarily the author. As the medium is fiction, the writer is indeed free to draw upon autobiographical resources, but he may also embellish, romanticize, and otherwise distort the tale. I hasten to append that I may be completely vanilla myself -- or I may even be a woman. Only a handful of individuals know for certain. . . .
"Water-Play" clearly does offer an example of D/s behavior, at least initially. The karate teacher binds her, plops her in the tub, and then tickles her in order to force her to befoul herself, so to that extent (including the "denial" play), he and Sue engage in D/s. What is presented, however, can in no way be confused with cerebral Domination, and it's pretty bland for conventional D/s.
Replying to A. H.: Yes, you are absolutely correct. In regular D/s, a Dom may deny the sub permission to urinate, force the sub to urinate, or urinate on the sub. This story would have presented cerebral Domination had the teacher originally wanted to engage in water-play, and had he then been able to Dom her so completely that she now wanted to do so, not to gratify him, but rather because she effectively shared the same desire. You understand completely!
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Bondage (without "discipline")?
Somehow or other, this topic arose during a conversation recently. The question concerned the use of bondage as an end unto itself, and may have been prompted by a scene in "The Floundering Undergrad" (cf., my three-installment tale in BarebackMagazine.com, beginning October, 2007) in which the student is tied up and then tickled.
I must again remind the reader that D/s is not S/M, and that the element of illusory "control" does not provide the same sort of titillation as does the infliction of pain. That thought articulated, bondage play may arise in both D/s and S/M.
From the standpoint of "power" or "control," bondage underscores the notion of complete and total surrender. The sub is, for all intents and purposes, helpless, yet this capitulation may in fact be most exhilarating and liberating. This paradox will make no sense to those who have never experienced it, but those who have may well recognize the fact that they were actually empowered by their bondage.
I have met only a few women who were true "bondage-freaks" (or "bondage-sluts"), and distinctly recall one woman whose sexual arousal was extreme. I had already secured her legs and right arm, and easily overcame the token resistance she offered as I took her left. However, before I could tie up that last limb, her entire body began to tremble as she experienced a powerful orgasm. I suspect that it is most unusual for a woman to climax in this manner, though a fair number -- and also a high percentage of the male subs I have interviewed -- do indeed become somewhat aroused.
I should, of course, be categorically remiss if I failed to mention some of the more esoteric applications. In Japan, bondage is an art form, generally utilizing a seven-meter hemp rope in one of many intricate patterns without knots. There is also the more obscure bondage with cloth belts, called "obi-kinbaku" by some. Here, the subject is secured and, effectively, abandoned. The effects may include sexual arousal, of course, but some subjects proceed thence to experience psychological breakthroughs, and a very few experience mystical trances, "hypno-dreams," and visions.
This digression is, of course, somewhat far afield. The question was simply whether a Dom might impose bondage as an end unto itself. I believe that the evidence speaks for itself. It does not matter whether the sub has an orgasm or a mystical experience, or simply "surrenders" totally to the Dom. Regardless of the final outcome, bondage clearly establishes and delineates the two roles in question. If one party is clothed and free to do as he pleases, while the other is naked and immobile, is there really any question as to which one is the Dom and which is the sub? Moreover, cerebral Domination is by its very nature more "cerebral," and thus the Dom should be able to assert his Domination without the infliction of gratuitous pain.
As always, I shall welcome further discussion on this topic.
I must again remind the reader that D/s is not S/M, and that the element of illusory "control" does not provide the same sort of titillation as does the infliction of pain. That thought articulated, bondage play may arise in both D/s and S/M.
From the standpoint of "power" or "control," bondage underscores the notion of complete and total surrender. The sub is, for all intents and purposes, helpless, yet this capitulation may in fact be most exhilarating and liberating. This paradox will make no sense to those who have never experienced it, but those who have may well recognize the fact that they were actually empowered by their bondage.
I have met only a few women who were true "bondage-freaks" (or "bondage-sluts"), and distinctly recall one woman whose sexual arousal was extreme. I had already secured her legs and right arm, and easily overcame the token resistance she offered as I took her left. However, before I could tie up that last limb, her entire body began to tremble as she experienced a powerful orgasm. I suspect that it is most unusual for a woman to climax in this manner, though a fair number -- and also a high percentage of the male subs I have interviewed -- do indeed become somewhat aroused.
I should, of course, be categorically remiss if I failed to mention some of the more esoteric applications. In Japan, bondage is an art form, generally utilizing a seven-meter hemp rope in one of many intricate patterns without knots. There is also the more obscure bondage with cloth belts, called "obi-kinbaku" by some. Here, the subject is secured and, effectively, abandoned. The effects may include sexual arousal, of course, but some subjects proceed thence to experience psychological breakthroughs, and a very few experience mystical trances, "hypno-dreams," and visions.
This digression is, of course, somewhat far afield. The question was simply whether a Dom might impose bondage as an end unto itself. I believe that the evidence speaks for itself. It does not matter whether the sub has an orgasm or a mystical experience, or simply "surrenders" totally to the Dom. Regardless of the final outcome, bondage clearly establishes and delineates the two roles in question. If one party is clothed and free to do as he pleases, while the other is naked and immobile, is there really any question as to which one is the Dom and which is the sub? Moreover, cerebral Domination is by its very nature more "cerebral," and thus the Dom should be able to assert his Domination without the infliction of gratuitous pain.
As always, I shall welcome further discussion on this topic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)