£4.99 Sunday delivery! Hurry ends in ...
  1. My first experience of male chastity (CB-3000)

    1227118866
    Gyrator53 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 865
    • Joined: 27 Sep 2007

    chastity is too much of a tease i really dont think i would cope id probably end up exploding xx

    Yes, I reckon about 48 hours would be about my limit. Luckily neither of us is taking this very seriously.

    This thread is absolutely fascinating. Keep us updated, folks! It's so, so interesting.

    Well, the 45mm ring has turned up and I'm flight testing it as I write. So far it seems both secure and comfortable.

    1227394107
    timetraveler [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Lieutenant
    • Posts: 9
    • Joined: 12 Oct 2008

    Ok, I know that consensual male chastity is highly paradoxical - and that is how I like it. But surely there are degrees of paradoxicality...

    I have every respect for Lubyanka's intelligence, which is why I can't take her twin statements: "chastity play as solo masturbation (which is fine in my opinion)" (her italics, not mine) and "I think that masturbation is great (and I do think it's great)" (ibid.) completely seriously.

    Surely the whole point of male chastity, and particularly that variety that involves wearing a physical device, is to prevent masturbation? Or at least to drastically reduce its frequency.

    My thesis would seem to be strengthened by the "5 months" claim (which is becoming nearly as notorious as Tony Blair's 45 minute claim...) in that, for masturbation to mean anything, we really have to assume that it means masturbation to orgasm.

    The idealisation of male chastity, which I am happy to admit I still buy into, consists in its denial of the male orgasm ad infinitum, and its gradual replacement by more sensuous pleasures - and by the female orgasm, that most sensuous of pleasures...

    I am astonished to find that I really don't miss (solo) masturbation at all. I do often get the urge but I simply choose not to satisfy it. Sometimes I even catch myself wondering whether I will, just for old times' sake... but soon abandon the idea.

    On the other hand, when I am with my partner, I am so priapic, it is no wonder she resorts to the CB-3000 just to calm me down. The other day, I was standing at the kitchen sink doing the dishes when she came up behind me, put her hands in my pants and deliberately, methodically brought me to orgasm in a matter of minutes! I felt quite cheated as I stood there with spunk dripping from my shirt, but then I thought well, of course, it's her cock... she can do what she likes with it!

    I hope I'm not coming over (pun not intended) all one true way-ish here. There must be almost as many philosphies of chastity as there are practitioners - the more paradoxical the better. But I do have to draw the line (pun most certainly not intended) at the idea that solo chastity could ever be an aid to masturbation. I mean, what are you going to do, deny yourself an orgasm so that the eventual one your autonomous "keyholder" allows you will be the most spectacular you have ever experienced? Absolutely absurd...

    So, what exactly did you mean, Lady Lubyanka? Is it just your own masturbation that you think is "fine...great'? Or do you encourage your "kvetch" to masturbate frequently, just not to orgasm? Is your 5 month claim all it is cracked up to be? Has this thread become so paradoxical, it's impossible for it to take itself seriously?

    Answers on a postcard please to... timetraveler

    1227407465
    Lubyanka [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 879
    • Joined: 9 Jan 2007

    I'm sorry I wasn't clear timetraveler, I see that you may have misunderstood my use of the term "masturbation".

    When I mentioned use of a chastity device for masturbation, what I meant was, a person without a partner, who locks themselves up for their own benefit or enjoyment. In other words, solo play, even if they are restricting their own play, if you see what I mean?

    I call that "masturbation", even though it isn't a person stimulating their own penis to orgasm, because the chastity play is done solo.

    I apologise for the confusion, I understand perfectly why you weren't clear, that was my fault.

    1227408389
    Lubyanka [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 879
    • Joined: 9 Jan 2007

    Oh, I forgot to say, I do allow kvetch to masturbate once a week for an hour, but not to orgasm. I mean, I've never had any issue with him masturbating, he was the one who felt it was kind of taking over more time than he would have liked.

    Also, my chastity play with kvetch is all about orgasm control, not orgasm denial. The way we play with chastity is not about preventing kvetch from masturbating, it is about my ownership of his pleasure. I do think masturbation is great, no matter who is indulging. In my and kvetch's case, I just want to be the one to say when and whether. :)

    Does that make sense to you?

    I wasn't really able to make sense of all of the queries in your entire post, so if you included any queries I didn't address, then would you please rephrase? I did my best with the ones I was able to work out. :)

    1227435936
    timetraveler [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Lieutenant
    • Posts: 9
    • Joined: 12 Oct 2008

    Yes, orgasm control not orgasm denial. That does seem to be the essence of it. Although I think that the one-true-wayers practically come into their chastity devices at the word "denial", whereas "control" doesn't sound quite so hot. Paradoxically...

    Also, using the word masturbation to connote solo sex play rather than manual bringing to orgasm kind of makes sense. When we say "what a wanker", we mean someone who is afraid to communicate properly, who is unhealthily focused on his own desires - but we wouldn't use the term to refer to how many orgasms somebody has (or doesn't have).

    As an ex-wanker myself, I think it has to do with how much time one wastes but it also seems to have to do with how to access one's own willpower. Procrastination is the thief of time; masturbation sells it below value on the black market.

    I think you got the gist of everything I was trying to say. Mainly I was enjoying writing about this subject for its own sake, there is something about the delightful paradoxicality it entails that seems to encourage expression, n'est-ce pas?

    One thing I was wondering: do you think that chastity play necessarily leads into "harder" S&M practices like whipping? I must say that this issue is starting to come up for us recently though we haven't (yet) indulged...

    1227443877
    Gyrator53 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 865
    • Joined: 27 Sep 2007

    I have some health concerns about the more extreme – long-term orgasm denial – aspects of this at least for those in their 20s and especially for those who may still wish to have children. There are studies that suggest that there are positive health effects to men who have frequent orgasms in their 20 and 30s with avoidance of prostate cancer being among the considerations. There are also suggestions that extended orgasm denial may give rise to atrophy of the musculature associated with the orgasm. In other words it could affect the ability of the man to project his semen fully. This is a significant concern for conception as sperm act collaboratively in the fertilisation process and this gives rise to a non-linear relationship between number of sperm and probability of conception. Halving the number of sperm more than halves the probability of conception. For someone who is for other reasons only marginally fertile it could certainly be the last straw.

    1227446222
    Lubyanka [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 879
    • Joined: 9 Jan 2007

    I investigated the health implications of restricted orgasms as thoroughly as I was able prior to embarking on any chastity play. A urologist answered some of my questions here:

    http://en.allexperts.com/q/Urology-Male-issues-989/2008/6/Chastity-restricted-orgasms-prostate-1.htm

    timetraveler, you wrote:

    "for masturbation to mean anything, we really have to assume that it means masturbation to orgasm."

    I've written before in this thread about the way that restricting orgasms has led to increased awareness and enjoyment of other parts of the body, and a more sensual experience overall. So I disagree that "masturbation" is only meaningful if it includes an orgasm.

    As for whether I think that chastity play necessarily leads to what you call "harder SM practices"? I think not. If people want to, then they will. If they don't, then they won't. I don't know why chastity play would necessarily lead to the use of any force in play.

    1227451022
    Gyrator53 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 865
    • Joined: 27 Sep 2007

    Yes, I saw that page in my investigations. You said in your question there that :-

    “he also has customarily enjoyed arousal and ejaculation which both of us feel is within the usual range of normal”

    which is in my view very wise.

    My concerns are specifically for people going beyond what you practice and have regimes where the frequency of ejaculation is well below anything that could be considered normal. The problem here is that they are operating so far from the norms that the medical profession is most unlikely to conduct any studies that would provide and data on the risks they may be running.

    1227459310
    Gyrator53 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 865
    • Joined: 27 Sep 2007

    Perhaps I should say here that in this regard the substitution of milking for orgasm does not seem to resolve the issue of the possible atrophy of the muscles. I can not find any indication as to what extent any such atrophy would be reversable.

    1227468786
    Lubyanka [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 879
    • Joined: 9 Jan 2007

    Gyrator53, which muscles are you concerned about atrophying?

    1227522869
    Gyrator53 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 865
    • Joined: 27 Sep 2007

    Well, the ejaculatory process seems to involve a whole series of muscles. The muscles of the prostate propel the prostatic fluid into the urethra and muscles of the vas deferens and seminal vesicles propel semen into the urethra in advance of the orgasm. Then muscles of the pelvis and in the penis rhythmically contract to propel the semen along the urethra and out of the penis. There is also a vital role for the muscles at the neck of the bladder that must contract in advance of ejaculation to prevent retrograde ejaculation where some of the semen is drive into the bladder.

    My concern is that some of these muscle groups only get any exercise in a full, explosive ejaculation and that they may weaken if this does not occur reasonably frequently. One only needs to look at the rate of muscle mass loss in hospitalised patents to see that this loss can be a fairly rapid process when muscles are not used. I'm also concerned that the correct sequence of muscle contractions is vital for successful ejaculation – something that could perhaps be disrupted by long-term training against ejaculation. I'm sure I'm not the only man who, while trying to hold off ejaculation got the timing all screwed up and ended up with a bladder full of sperm (as atested by very milky pee) and a puzzled looking wife! I think it's important that anyone indulging in long-term orgasm denial and who may subsequently wish to father children at least has an occasional full ejaculation to make sure the equipment is not running into trouble.

    1227529690
    Lubyanka [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 879
    • Joined: 9 Jan 2007

    Whilst skeletal (also known as voluntary) muscle does respond to being exercised and atrophies from lack of use, the muscle tissue of the prostate and seminal vessicles is smooth (also known as involuntary) muscle. The differences between these two types of muscle tissue are significant. As far as I know, smooth muscle is considerably less subject to atrophy than skeletal muscle.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_atrophy

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle#Atrophy

    As you've said, retrograde ejaculation is when ejaculate is redirected into the bladder instead of out through the urethra. As far as I know, this phenomenon is unrelated to muscle atrophy of the ejaculatory muscles in general, and is primarily due to a specific dysfunction of the smooth muscle sphincter which holds the bladder closed. As far as I know, this dysfunction is unrelated to exercise or other use or disuse.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrograde_ejaculation

    If you recall that pulsing sensation you've had at times when you were trying to prolong your sexual activities without ejaculating, you'll know that it's perfectly possible to make regular use of this group of smooth muscles without ejaculating.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orgasm#Multiple_orgasms

    If you maintain your chastity without a chastity device, then there is nothing preventing your usual erections and other responses of arousal, including muscular responses.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulbospongiosus_muscle

    You can also exercise your perineal muscles through defecation, wearing a butt plug, and other pelvic floor activities. There is very little information in the medical literature describing any detrimental effects of too-infrequent ejaculation.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ejaculation#Health_issues

    Admittedly, I am not a medical professional, so please don't rely on anything I say. Having said that, I have never come across any mention of smooth muscle atrophy in all of the research I have done on male reproductive function. If you're concerned, then by all means, ensure that you have an arrangement with your wife where you are allowed to orgasm at whatever frequency you both agree is healthful.

    Phew, I hope that works for you, Gyrator53. :)

    1227538837
    Gyrator53 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 865
    • Joined: 27 Sep 2007

    There is very little information in the medical literature describing any detrimental effects of too-infrequent ejaculation.

    I think that is the crux of the matter and comes back to what I said earlier about the lack of medical research in this area. Given that the number of people involved is small the only useful information you are likely to get is, at best, tangentially related to the situation. There probably never will be any surveys that directly investigate this question. So, for example, the information on autoimmune problems that might occur due to sperm re-absorption in this case is the result of information that came to light in studies into the failure of vasectomy reversals.

    I should point out that I am not concerned for myself - I am well beyond fathering more children – I have done quite enough of that! However, I think it is worth being cautious when indulging in marginal activities as the full answers are not likely to be at hand.

    1227541878
    Lubyanka [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 879
    • Joined: 9 Jan 2007

    I think that the number of people involved in this is much, much larger than you might think. There are many businesses which survive on making these devices, after all. So really, it's my opinion that this topic has been criminally disregarded by the medical community, most likely simply because it's a sexuality topic which has a stigma.

    I think there probably are some surveys somewhere, but they may not have been meticulously conducted. Perhaps you can convince your wife to initiate some movement in this area by her colleagues.

    Since you're not concerned for yourself, I find myself wondering what your concerns represent?

    1227551495
    Gyrator53 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 865
    • Joined: 27 Sep 2007

    My impression is that there is currently one major manufacturer, Millers, and a modest number of small – almost one-man bands – that come (if the word is permitted in this context) and go from the market. Millers output is, I understand, about 500k units/year so there are a significant number of users. However, it is not at all clear how many such users take that usage to the point where the frequency of full orgasms is outside the normal range. As you have already observed there are clearly a lot of fantasy players on the web.

    I'm not sure that it is the responsibility of the medical profession to instigate an appropriate investigation. It is extremely difficult to gain research funding in medical science unless there is a possible angle for one of the major drugs companies. I don't see that being so in this case. If there are large number of serious players that take orgasm denial to extremes perhaps they could club together and fund a study that would answer the specific question of any possible health implications from their activity. Perhaps Millers, as the major manufacturer, could be persuaded of its value to them.

    I don't understand why you find it strange I should have concerns for the well-being of others. It is, after all, the basis of all charity. In turn, however, I find your position on this topic strange. You did specify in your question to the urologist that your partner did receive orgasms at a frequency in the normal range so I assumed you subscribed to the notion that this was a healthy precaution. Are you, in fact, in favour of taking denial beyond that level?

    1227556150
    Lubyanka [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 879
    • Joined: 9 Jan 2007

    Ok, I'll start again...

    Gyrator53 wrote:

    I don't understand why you find it strange I should have concerns for the well-being of others.

    Actually, I never found, nor said that your concerns were strange. What I said (and meant) was,

    Lubyanka wrote:

    Since you're not concerned for yourself, I find myself wondering what your concerns represent?

    To put it another way, I'm wondering how your concerns for others might relate to any other concerns you might have regarding your own chastity play. That was all.

    Gyrator53 wrote:

    In turn, however, I find your position on this topic strange. You did specify in your question to the urologist that your partner did receive orgasms at a frequency in the normal range so I assumed you subscribed to the notion that this was a healthy precaution. Are you, in fact, in favour of taking denial beyond that level?

    If you find my position on my personal chastity explorations strange, then so be it. It works for me and my partner, which is all that matters to me.

    I didn't say anything to the urologist about frequency of orgasms. What I said, which you quoted, was

    Lubyanka wrote:

    “he also has customarily enjoyed arousal and ejaculation which both of us feel is within the usual range of normal”

    What I meant by that was that our experience of kvetch's arousal and ejaculation was that he became aroused and ejaculated normally, without any dysfunction. I neither said nor intended anything about any specific quantity of ejaculations which kvetch experienced within a given time frame.

    I did wonder what you'd meant when you said you thought that was very wise. I have no idea what you mean by "taking denial beyond that level".

    If it isn't the medical profession's responsibility to investigate and meticulously research health issues which affect large numbers of people, I don't know whose it is.

    I hope that cleared up your queries?

    1227608593
    Gyrator53 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 865
    • Joined: 27 Sep 2007

    If it isn't the medical profession's responsibility to investigate and meticulously research health issues which affect large numbers of people, I don't know whose it is.

    I would dispute your assertion that this affects large numbers of people. Lets consider a quick Fermi estimate on this:-

    Millers output ~ 500k units/year over 10 years so perhaps 5 million units total. Other manufacturers must be insignificant in comparison. Assume 50% of these are still serviceable and in use (almost certainly an over-estimate given reported breakages, second purchases by the same individual, etc). Let us also assume that 10% of those users use them for long-term orgasm denial (also likely to be a significant over-estimate given the fidelity assurance and anti-masturbation uses these products can be used for). This suggests that there might perhaps be 250,000 people world-wide practising long-term denial. Given that we have 6 billion people on the planet this does not constitute a significant number especially as any medical problems associated with this are the consequence of a lifestyle choice by the participants. The idea that precious medical research resources should be used to investigate this is absurd given the large number of disorders that afflict vastly more people and that are not the consequence of a lifestyle choice by them.

    If you are happy with your choice that is fine. However my choice is to flag up to others contemplating this that the medical hazards of this have not been specifically investigated and so all that can be done is to estimate the dangers from extrapolation of information from other medical studies etc. Extrapolation in any science, and especially in medical science is prone to error so I feel it's important someone makes it clear that the medical dangers of this lifestyle are, and are likely to remain unquantified.

    1227616931
    Lubyanka [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 879
    • Joined: 9 Jan 2007

    I don't know if you're aware that no device is necessary to practice long term orgasm restrictions? Or if you're aware that there are other people who practice orgasm control outside of erotic power exchange? Any person who practices celibacy shares the same risks. Quite a few communities around the world have celibate members, and this has been going on for centuries (if not millennia). These people are not included in the sales figures for chastity devices.

    I don't feel comfortable with the idea that one person's health concern is considered to be less or more important than another's. I don't think it is appropriate to assess medical need based on any medical professional's personal judgments on an individual or their life.

    If you don't feel comfortable practicing orgasm control with your medically qualified wife, then by all means, I hope you feel free to desist from that practice. If you wished to flag up specific medical dangers and hazards to others, I think others might find it helpful if you named them. I know I certainly would.

    I'm getting the feeling that there's something else you were trying to get at. I have been making some efforts to address your queries, yet you seem to focus on very small portions of my messages whilst disregarding the rest. As this topic seems to be drifting away from the original thread, perhaps you'd like to start a new topic to address your concerns?

    1227625542
    timetraveler [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Lieutenant
    • Posts: 9
    • Joined: 12 Oct 2008

    Heh heh, its funny how emotional truths tend to get buried beneath heaps of scientific or quasi-scientific information. I guess if people are emotionally attached to regular orgasms - at will - they won't take kindly to practices that deprive them of that. Then again, I believe my experiences testify that it is easy enough to exchange that emotional attachment for a different kind of emotional attachment. But you probably have got to really want to first.

    Lubyanka, you make a very good point about communities with celibate members. Though you don't specifically mention this, it is the case that in general these are religious communities for whom celibacy (chastity) is thought to be a way to get closer to God.

    For me, too, though I am not a practicing member of any religion, chastity is a spiritually-related activity. For me sexuality and spirituality are intimately linked. Cock-driven sexual behaviour, where the activity is focused on the perceived need for the man to get his rocks off, is almost entirely bereft of any spiritual content. I find chastity play to be fun and sexy but it is also a way to elevate the bedroom to a place of worship. It is almost irrelevant that the object of worship in this case is my good loving partner (though I wouldn't say that to HER heh heh); the point is to make sex more fulfilling than the perfunctory act of self-gratification - a deluxe wank, if you like - that it can tend to be.

    It may be that this thread has run its course; if so, thanks to everyone who has taken the time to join in the discussion and good luck with whatever direction it may have taken you in.

    1227635015
    Gyrator53 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 865
    • Joined: 27 Sep 2007

    Having said all that, if you know differently, I'd love to hear about it, seriously. I'm not a medical professional, so I would gratefully welcome any corrections or additions to the information I have.

    Well, as you can see from the above quote you asked me so I asked my wife and during the subsequent discussion she raised subsequent fertility as an area for some doubt (after all, the fertility of those who practice abstinence for religious reasons is not generally tested). I'm sorry if you don't like the answer she gave. If you don't like the idea that one doctor thinks there may be some health implications to what you are doing then please feel entirely free to ignore it. Perhaps you should take the question up with your own GP who is, of course, in a position to assess and monitor the health of your partner.

    Post a reply to this thread

    Please sign in to post messages to the forum.