Become Her Slave!

My once-vanilla wife now loves keeping me as her chaste slave. Learn how to get some Femdom in your life too!

Friday, 20 January 2017

Are BDSM fantasies good when you do them for real? Would I do the things in my books?

My erotica takes me to darkly kinky places.
(Click here to download this book.)
My erotica takes me to darkly kinky places.

I'd like to claim that they are all escapist BDSM fantasies, not manifestos.

However, I didn't honestly expect to enjoy any of the intense kinky things that are now part of my life.

Back when I was young, I liked getting tied up and edged. There was a clear sensual benefit - long plateau phase followed by powerful orgasm. The other stuff I filed under "fantasy".

I mean, who would really want to be whipped hard? (Me, actually.) Or to spend hours kneeling being ignored? Or chained up in a cell? Or slaving away at domestic service? Or to spend weeks or months locked in chastity?

So I worked on ways to simulate these experiences, either nerfing them - soft whips, just a 30 mins chained or in chastity -- or roleplaying that they were true - "Hah! Slave! I condemn you to eternal chastity! Bwahahaha!"

Neither approaches felt particularly satisfying. Nor did either work well with partners.

Most people aren't talented actors or good at improvised role playing. Moreover, all that simulating required my partners to drop into the role of facilitator, certainly hard work, but also not really compatible with the dominant personalities of the women I tended to date (and have now married).

So gradually, partly by accident, I started experiencing my fantasies for real.
I started experiencing my
fantasies for real.
(Find out how!)

I am now routinely whipped hard enough to make me squeal, long enough for me to want it to stop, and though "enjoyment" isn't the right word, I'm certainly happy that it's part of my life. The effect is exactly what I imagined: thrilling fear, deep submission, intense sensations, loss of self....

I've knelt for hours at a time, and spent entire evenings chained in a makeshift cell. Again, it had the effect I imagined: I was deliciously frustrated, wonderfully relaxed, scarily powerless, deeply surrendered.

Then there's extended chastity... it seems odd, but it's an awesome experience I could not however undergo without being forced to. My sensuality is expanded, my plateau phase extended, my submission deeper and more acknowledged, my power exchange relationship more ever-present.

Finally, our Female Led Relationship, which a few years ago I would have dismissed as a foolish fantasy, but which now makes us both so happy.

And here I am, churning out books about men who are permanently enslaved and condemned to permanent chastity with permanent orgasm denial. Whose wives or girlfriends cuckold them with other women. Who descend into total power exchange.

Who would really want to be
whipped hard? (Me, actually.)
It really feels like a slippery slope!

So, how do you tell what BDSM fantasies would work out for real, not just in your head when you masturbate?

I think it's down to realism and consequences.

Realism is the gatekeeper. If your fantasy is not realistic, then it's not going to work out in practice.

Some fantasies are clearly not realistic. People into being eaten in the non-cunnilingus sense, are usually aware that the sensations they imagine are not the ones they would experience. Less reflective men who hack off their own man parts for erotic reasons are often surprised to find it hurts.

Some fantasies are also unrealistic if you research them. For example, long periods tightly bound are impractical because of cramp (and thrombosis!) and because of the need to pee. There are similar problems with stress positions or being human furniture. Days of intense 24/7 Femdom would also be too physically draining for most participants.

Realism is the gatekeeper. 
Most detailed just-so fantasies are hard to replicate in practice. Real people aren't telepathic so can't guarantee on getting inside your head to play you like a musical instrument, or do things with the right intensity at just the right moment.

And of course, some kinky behaviour doesn't produce the desired response in other people. Public sissy-style cross-dressing may trigger polite indifference, rather than humiliation, or perhaps a thorough beating from homophobic thugs. Putting on a chastity device isn't guaranteed to turn your conventional middle aged wife into a nymphomaniac cougar.

So if your fantasy isn't close to the reality, you are unlikely to get the experience you were looking for. At best you'll be disappointed and perhaps cause irritation to your partner. At worst, you'll get hurt emotionally or physically... which leads us to consequences.

Fear of consequences can spoil kinky experiences, no matter how realistic our expectations are.

So, to take an extreme example, somebody who gets off on the fear of a castration, would genuinely be afraid when faced by the real thing - the fantasy is realistic as far as it goes - but would probably not enjoy themselves because the consequences - not having a willy, extreme pain, violation of self... - would loom too large.

Similarly, even if our exhibitionist does get just the reaction he expected, his pleasure may be spoiled by fear of legal, social, moral and professional consequences.

However, I think it's fear of more personal consequences that keeps people from exploring kink: the consequences for their sense of self and their relationship.

Who I am at work is different from who
I am when I lick my own semen from my
wife's feet
Scarily - and here's the slippery slope - it turns out that most of these consequences are damp squibs.

Unless we have unresolved traumas, our sense of self is far more robust than we might expect.

We can do the wildest, most humiliating, things and still be the same person after.

This is partly because self is context dependent: who I am at work is different from who I am when I lick my own semen from my wife's feet.

However, it's also because if we want to do kink then we are already kinky. If anything, carrying around a secret kink is a burden. It actually turns out to be quite validating to just do it.

Kink can have consequences for relationships, but often they are either ones we secretly want - like our Female Led Relationship - or else don't actually manifest.

A broadminded partner can do dirty things with you in bed, and still respect you in the morning. Properly handled to insulate from practical consequences, couples can survive all sorts of shenanigans, from extreme power exchange through to the whole cuckold, hot wife and bull thing - not my cup of tea unless the bull was a lesbian...

Which leads me to: Would I want to be in my own Femdom fiction? I'll get to that in another blog entry.


Learn how to how to walk the same Femdom path with your partner! 

CLICK HERE to download my Femdom Erotica (all written while chaste!)
(For ebook format, 
Lulu or iTunes.)

Sunday, 15 January 2017

Monday, 9 January 2017

What do crap male subs do wrong? #4 Fantasy Blinkers, #5 Stealth Mode. Any more?

I've been trying to nail down crap male sub behaviours (rather than the underlying motivations behind them). I've now got a name for my 4th category:

  • Fantasy Blinkers: Wrong-headed behaviour in which the sub is overly certain "this is how Femdom works". It covers everything from inappropriate use of protocol, e.g. addressing a new acquaintance as Goddess, through to sending unsolicited dick pics. The behaviour usually conveys a sense of a knowing wink and self-entitlement: I know the Secret Femdominate Handshake.

However I now have a 5th category suggested by what Marcia B calls Desire Smuggling: essentially all the dishonesty, duplicity, disingenuousness, self-victimisation and hidden agenda-ism displayed by subs who can't or won't ask for what they want.

I'm going to use my own term, associated with an existing strategy known as "stealth submission":

  • Stealth Mode:  Getting submissive kicks through deception while failing to own one's own sexuality. (Of this, more later.)

So, so far we have:

  1. Flip-Flopping
  2. Self-Negging
  3. Do-Me-ing
  4. Fantasy Blinkers
  5. Stealth Mode

Have I missed anything?


Learn how to how to walk the same Femdom path with your partner! 

CLICK HERE to download my Femdom Erotica (all written while chaste!)
(For ebook format, 
Lulu or iTunes.)

Friday, 16 December 2016

Help me Kinky Internet! What do crap male subs do wrong?

Probably a bit of Do-Me going on here.
Yes, I've given in. I'm working on a new book provisionally titled, "How to be a male sub without being a loser or an ass." The first step is to nail down the main categories of male sub behaviour that are both self defeating and annoying.

Note, I'm looking at behaviours here, things subs do (or don't do!). What's behind them is mostly either heresies (wrong ideas about BDSM, women or humans in general), or issues (low self-esteem, muddled fantasy life etc). I'll get to these later  - though please do help by sharing your insights in the comments...

Three obvious crap male sub behaviours - please tell me what you think

This sub has over-committed
and is likely to Flip-Flop
So far, I think three general terms capture most male sub crapness:

  • Flip-Flopping, the pattern of enthusiastic commitment that turns out to be over-commitment. This covers everything from "submissive until orgasm" through on/off relationships, to abortive internet courtships.
  • Self-Negging, meaning activities in which subs put themselves down or take a position of generic rather than fetishised inferiority.  Classic examples include approaches along the lines of "I'm an overweight small-penised slob who needs a Goddess to sort me out" through to just feeling like a loser because of your kink.
  • Do-Me-ing, which describes a general focus on what the sub wants, rather than on the dynamic or reciprocity. Making first contact with a list of very specific "needs" falls under this, as does going into a scene or session with overly restrictive limits, or using a safeword as a skip track button, all with the intent of channelling the domme through particular activities. Do-Me can be innocent due to simply not thinking, but can also segue into duplicitous scheming, e.g. deliberately planning to end a session once you've had your kicks and before you reciprocate.

Help me name the fourth category! 

The Magical Secret World of Femdom....
I'm missing one category - a catchall for wrong-headed behaviour in which the sub is overly certain this is how mutually satisfactory Femdom works.

This covers everything from sending unsolicited dick pics and worse, through presuming a dynamic out of the box (e.g. using protocol terms with a new acquaintance in inappropriate circumstances), to weird expectations of a domme (e.g. that she telepathically divine your needs, or automatically regards pegging you as you serving her). 

I am pretty certain it really is a family of behaviour because a sub who, say, sends unsolicited dick pics is quite likely to call a dominant woman "mistress" on first meeting her, and offer to serve her by sniffing her panties or licking her boots.

The behaviour is different from Do-Me-ing because, though the sub may come across as creepy or presumptuous, he's really an innocent abroad - a comedy tourist, somewhere between Twoflower and Borat, or Inspector Clouseau undercover. 

The sub is so very certain he's mastered the phrase book and knows the secret handshake. All he has to do is send you a picture of himself in panties and you will induct him into the Magical Secret World of Femdom....

What should I call this? Or does the behaviour really fit into the other three categories? (Or is it really two categories?)


Learn how to how to walk the same Femdom path with your partner! 

CLICK HERE to download my Femdom Erotica (all written while chaste!)
(For ebook format, 
Lulu or iTunes.)

Thursday, 1 December 2016

Characteristics of a Submissive Thrall

Thralls want to serve, 
as in really serve
(If you've just tuned in, then "thrall" is my term for a submissive who submits for real. You are still a "real" sub or a dom if you don't thrall. I just think it's time we identified this flavor and gave it a signal boost.)

Things like this article from my friend Ava Ex Machina got me thinking:
So oral worship huh? That’s your primary thing?” he asks.
“One of many things. Even vanilla women tend to like oral sex.”
“I don’t, at least not giving anyway. I don’t eat pussy. I’m old enough now that I know I just don’t like it, never have. Don’t do it.”
“I understand if that’s not your thing, but it’s a deal-breaker for me. I’m not really into play that’s only about pleasuring the submissive.” (He had just finished telling me in extensive paragraphs all about his desire to be pegged.)
“A deal breaker? That’s fucking ridiculous.”
And then the... gentleman outed and harassed her by proxy at work. And she reflects:
...entitlement to my body, my sexuality, my space still exists, a function of how men see women: consumables, objects available for their sexual consumption.

We are defined by our submission,
not your dominance
Ugh. 

Submissive Thralls wouldn't do this! It's not that we are good people or think we are the "nice ones" -- #notallmalesubs -- it's just that we wouldn't want to. 

When we submit, we want to actually submit. Yes we have our hard limits, but they are of the "Danger Will Robinson" type, not "Me no like can we skip to my blowjob" kind.

So much for what we're not. Here's some of what I think we are.

1. We are defined by our submission, not your dominance. Yes, you may or may not "dominate" us or have a "dominant personality". 

Regardless, we want to submit to your authority as if it were Ancient Rome and you owned us. When you say come here, we come here. Our limits serve as safety barriers, not guide-ways.

2.  We like doing things we don't enjoy. Partly this is masochism. Mostly, it's proof of our subordination. That means that if we don't enjoy giving head, we'll still gain some satisfaction from doing it. Moreover, if we're doing it because you just want an orgasm that way, then we really don't want you to second-guess our experience. The same goes for leaving us kneeling in the corner, or having us spring clean an entire apartment. Or whatever.

We're more interested in your wishes than our fantasies
3. We want to serve, as in really serve. I don't mean serve by licking boots or wearing panties or weathering a beating. I mean serve as in doing things that would make sense to a vanilla observer. 

Yes of course you can play with us if you want, but we also want you to have us give you a foot rub, cook you dinner, clean up, not because it's a fetish but because we are your submissive.

4. We're more interested in your wishes than our fantasies. This is partly participant voyeurism. The pleasures you seek when you have "permission" to be selfish are far more intriguing than anything we might imagine. However, it's primarily about experiencing actual submission rather than fantasies resonating with submission.

5. We like it when you don't focus on us. You can if you want -- if you enjoy torturing and teasing and BDSM for effect. However, you don't have to. You can, in fact, just kick back and enjoy being in charge. What's in it for us? Again, submission and voyeurism.

6. We still want to submit after we've come. If we get to come, we still feel submissive after ward. We'll bring you a nightcap, tuck you up in bed, and -- if that's what you want -- crawl off to our cell, and do all this long after the afterglow has faded. In the morning, we'll bring you breakfast in bed, even though we're too groggy to feel horny, and it's a work day anyway.

In short, when we're your thrall, we're as low maintenance and consistently obedient as if you owned us.

Learn how to how to walk the same Femdom path with your partner! 

CLICK HERE to download my Femdom Erotica (all written while chaste!)
(For ebook format, 
Lulu or iTunes.)

Tuesday, 29 November 2016

Paradox of Domination and Submission Resolved: Power Exchange and Spheres

The dom may also
sadistically "mistreat"
the sub. And yet
the masochistic sub
consents and "likes" it.
Our kink is riddled with paradoxes!

Doms aren't evil. Subs aren't losers. And yet out erotic focus is on the experience of victimising and victimisation, exploiting and exploitation.

Doms often want to make their subs happy (e.g. because relationship). Subs stick around because they are happy. And yet the tone of our kink is often coercive and extends into the callous.

Doms aren't all powerful. Subs have rights and stand up for them. And yet the dynamics we crave  revolve around an empowered dom and a disempowered sub.

The dom may also sadistically "mistreat" the sub. And yet the masochistic sub consents and "likes" it.

We're left with the conundrum:

How can any of this be real? 
And if it is real, how can it be OK?

This is so confusing to the tidy mind that it generates trite non-useful statements like "the sub has all the power" and simulationist approaches that blunt the underlying dark urges.

The confusion around motivations dissolves when we consider that there's no authentic "I".
people on a roller-coaster scream
in genuine fear... then buy
another ticket.

Rather - as modern science tells us - we are a mess of subsystems working in parallel. That's why people on a roller-coaster scream in genuine fear... then buy another ticket.

The confusion around ethics and authenticity similarly dissolves when we compare our activities to sporting ones. For example, two boxers consent to be in the ring, are governed by rules, and yet authentically fight.

These apparent paradoxes are actually built by comparing things from different spheres!

Fearing and enjoying can coexist as brain chemicals without contradiction. Rules constrain freedom of action but do not prevent it.

Thus, as soon as you are strict about what applies to which sphere - my catchall for headspace, framework, and system - BDSM relationships start making sense.

The outer framework spheres are what give people permission to indulge in D/s:

  • Consent Sphere: Both parties consent to a scope, otherwise the relationship would not be possible.
  • Moral Sphere: BDSM is OK because (if!) both parties consent within sensible limits. The dom is therefore not evil. Nor is the sub a victim.
  • Relationship Sphere: The dom understands that the sub craves BDSM and is therefore making them happy on some existential level. The sub wants to be there, despite the considerable bravery sometimes required, and is therefore not an exploited loser.
The inner experience spheres are what satisfy our orientation and they are dark places.
  • Physical Sphere: The physical activities and sensations are real. Therefore any sadism, victimisation, and exploitation is experienced as physically real, as is any coercion.
  • Power Sphere: The dom commands and the sub obeys (within the scope covered by the consent). It follows that the power exchange is at least as real and authentic as the action in a boxing match.

D/s couples actually experiencing D/s
quickly forget that it's not real. 
Just as boxers lose track of the framework beyond the ring and forget that it's "just a game", D/s couples actually experiencing D/s quickly forget that it's not real.

We become accustomed to the power dynamic to the extent that disobedience starts to become unthinkable, even though the dynamic only exists because of the consensual, moral and relationship framework.

This is no different from the way that people in conventional marriages forget that they don't have to be faithful or work together.

Therefore D/s relationships are at least as functionally real as traditional marriages.

Conversely, I think people in a room considering BDSM shy from the darkness and treat the framework as an end in itself, rather than as a means to support the experience of domination and submission.

Perhaps this explains both "do me" subs who spend more time on the internet than on their knees, and also what I think of as "consent and aftercare fetishists" who seem to take two important concepts too far and put them in centre stage.

Learn how to how to walk the same Femdom path with your partner! 

CLICK HERE to download my Femdom Erotica (all written while chaste!)
(For ebook format, 
Lulu or iTunes.)

Monday, 28 November 2016

Towards a Submissive Thrall Manifesto

The action will be for the
dominant's benefit.
My name is Giles English and I'm a "submissive thrall".

OK. I made up that last term... or almost. Merriam Webster defines a thrall as:

1
a : a servant slave : bondman; also : serfb : a person in moral or mental servitude
2
a : a state of servitude or submission <in thrall to his emotions>b : a state of complete absorption <mountains could hold me in thrall with a subtle attraction of their own — Elyne Mitchell>
So, essentially thrall is another - more poetic - word for "slave" but with romantic overtones - e.g. "I am enthralled by my mistress" - and no specific BDSM expectations.

I propose...
a submissive thrall 
is a sexual submissive who, 
when they (consensually) submit, 
actually submits to their 
dominant for real.

A thrall, when submitting, can be anything from an affectionate subordinate lover through to a mute protocol-bound slave. The scope of a thrall's submission can range from occasional bedroom only, all the way to 24/7/365.

None of that matters.

What defines a thrall is that, when we submit, the power exchange is effectively real within permissive limits. Specifically:
  • A thrall's hard limits (a) are permissive enough to grant satisfactory freedom of action to the dominant, and (b) identify only those lines which would be dangerous to cross.
  • A thrall offers their kinks and fantasies to the dominant as optional tools to be exploited for the dominant's pleasure by way of reward and incentive. (Or as an a la carte menu for inexperienced dominants.)
  • A thrall's safeword is for mental and physical safety, only. There will be no attempt to direct the action.
It follows that a thrall accepts:
  • They may sometimes be bored, frustrated or uncomfortable.
  • The action will be primarily for the dominant's benefit, even when they give pleasure.
  • Any issues will be handled within the context of the power exchange.
  • Punishment will be real punishment.
  • Nobody will step out of role, because nobody is in role.
Nobody will step out of role,
because nobody is in role.
We need a specific term for this because "submissive" is now used very loosely to cover anybody who submits erotically in anyway to anybody doing anything.

Somebody who submits within a very tight scope - highly scripted scenes or ones with lots of affirmative consent - can identify as a submissive, as can somebody who hires pro-dominants in order to  explore their fantasies.

All these people are "real" submissives. (And their dominants are "real" dominants.)

However, this means we don't have a word for a submissive who craves a D/s relationship in which the power exchange feels real, even if it is limited in scope and time. ("Slave" won't do because it can mean a specific level of lifestyle submission and/or particular protocol and has some unfortunate associations for some cultures.)

All this makes it hard for "thralls" to identify themselves to themselves and to potential partners, and doubly hard for dominants to make clear what they are looking for.

Hence my term, submissive thrall.

And no, I have no idea what the dominant counterpart would be called.

Learn how to how to walk the same Femdom path with your partner! 

CLICK HERE to download my Femdom Erotica (all written while chaste!)
(For ebook format, 
Lulu or iTunes.)