Chastity, forced male chastity, and Eroticism.

[sexy_louise]

Thank you! From what I understand, there are no images of male chastity devices prior to 1999, so yes, it is a new theme for everyone.

Weren't such devices popular even in ancient times by any chance?

I wonder if for some among the caged men, this is a kind of time machine, making him relive the same frustrations, the same insatiable desire, that he had when he was a virgin of 18 yo or 22 (or 26, or 40!), with unsullied girlfriends who teased him but would not allow him to... just fuck.

I suppose it could be a reason, sometimes kinks are a way to redefine unpleasant events and relive them in a safe space.

Perhaps we try to avoid that particular sadness, choosing instead that particular prolonged arousal?

Nothing feels better than that first orgasm after an hour of edging, when I'm alone I try to hold it off as long as I can, so it's very likely another reason people want to try a chastity cage.

 

[Norway_1705]

Weren't such devices popular even in ancient times by any chance?

Not in ancient Greco-Roman art. I have seen that in India (and not elsewhere) there is theoretically the concept of piercing two piercings to force the penis into a "shrimp" position by joining the skin of the foreskin to the skin of the perineum with a very short chain, but I don't know at all if it works in the case of an erection. I don't know anything about it but it seems very painful by pulling the skin and nerves: whereas the cage, after all, is just a shell.
Speaking of Shells, athletes in "contrast" sports often wear shells with brasserie jocks to avoid grabs at the family jewels: for example, in Judo and Football. Perhaps some husbands have worn a sports shell to show devotion to their wives? I don't think so.

The strange thing I've been noticing for a while now is that there are not even "drawings" of penises locked inside a cage, before 1999. As if no one, not even a creative artist in a situation of pure imagination, could imagine something like that.
Before 1999, you can only find many drawings and photographs of men handcuffed to two columns or a St. Andrew's Cross, gagged and blindfolded, but with their dicks erect. Even in the vintage-style "femdom" categories, spanked or whipped men have their dicks tied with a bow or rope, but it is not a cage.
If anyone can suggest older images I would be delighted.

Beyond figurative arts, I don't recall any literary "stories" with a caged penis before 1999. Emasculated and castrated men (eunuchs) have always existed but it is the opposite of this fetishism: the joy, for man and woman, consists precisely in the frustration of a denied but potentially cumming man
The only effective "penis constriction" before 1999 were "granny girdles" (like Bridget Jones) or full-body latex suits. But in both cases, not enough capture was achieved to prevent erection. Let's say that if the submissive's intent was to "get his cock out of sight," perhaps to look more feminine or to show that he was renouncing masculinity, a little bit worked

 

[Astrotrain]

Weren't there victorian devices to prevent teenage masturbation?

 

[Norway_1705]

Let's face it, the world is pretty phallocentric

Yes, and the pornographic industry was perhaps even more phallocentric than the real world.
In hundreds of porn films, the climax and grand finale is the cumshot, often filmed with the thighs wide open and out of the vagina in favor of the camera (whereas in real life, the thighs clench tight and the ejaculation lands inside).
Entire generations of porn directors, scriptwriters, lighting and cinematographers have built their entire careers on shots of the perfect cumshot. And Actors, of course.
The cage appears counterintuitive. Then a great many tapes (and narratives) try to bring the situation back to normal: either they frame another man's cumshot (a gay man taunting the submissive caged, or a straight Bull fucking the cuckold's hotwife while he watches them hopelessly) ... or, after much talk about the prolonged stay of the penis in the cage, the tape ends with a cumshot and the story ends with a description of a cumshot.
While perhaps it would be more ... I can't find the word ... more revolutionary? More "groundbreaking", that is, to write that the wife, satisfied with her orgasm, rolls over and falls asleep, while the husband, still horny as hell, is left with frustrated arousal. The wife no longer has any duty to reciprocate, nor to clean up, nor to cuddle him because he gave an "outstanding performance" (business as usual in pornography).
She can "choose" whether to cuddle with him according only to her mood, regardless of the "urgent needs" of his cock. And he may discover, or rediscover, that as in his twenties, even forty years later there may be something else besides vaginal penetration.
Separate discussion: to differentiate between husband and wife who "play" with the cage as if it were a temporary sex toy, and husband and wife who "share" key and cage as lifestyle 24/7/365.

 

[Norway_1705]

Weren't there victorian devices to prevent teenage masturbation?

I am afraid they were prototypes without practical applications. I do not recall reading about them in either Lawrence Stone's books or novels.
I have never delved into them but they seem to me (so, epidermically) to be typical abstractions of a physician/moralist who would like to patent muzzles for dragoons and saddles for wyverns.
For women, too, we have "blueprints" and "Prototypes" of rusted scrap metal to be locked with heavy-duty padlocks, but no evidence that they were ever used in earnest. This sounds like a medical/moralist fantasy.
Besides, but in the 19th century, who cared about the masturbation of young people? At that time no one cared about the young, who could have died of pestilence within a week! Or from famine, or from a war!
Only a few moralists who claimed to teach morals (using... a cage instead of morality!).
Young people in the 1800s fell into two categories: either they were poor (and then no one cared if they impregnated drunken girls in pubs) or they were rich (and then they were allowed everything, as Samuel Johnson testified).

 

[Kumquatqueen]

The strange thing I've been noticing for a while now is that there are not even "drawings" of penises locked inside a cage, before 1999. As if no one, not even a creative artist in a situation of pure imagination, could imagine something like that.
Before 1999, you can only find many drawings and photographs of men handcuffed to two columns or a St. Andrew's Cross, gagged and blindfolded, but with their dicks erect. Even in the vintage-style "femdom" categories, spanked or whipped men have their dicks tied with a bow or rope, but it is not a cage.
If anyone can suggest older images I would be delighted.

Beyond figurative arts, I don't recall any literary "stories" with a caged penis before 1999. Emasculated and castrated men (eunuchs) have always existed but it is the opposite of this fetishism: the joy, for man and woman, consists precisely in the frustration of a denied but potentially cumming man
The only effective "penis constriction" before 1999 were "granny girdles" (like Bridget Jones) or full-body latex suits.

I'm pretty sure I knew guys in the late 90s who wore cock cages, but it was a very niche interest, the sort of fetish served only by a couple shops on Old Compton St in Soho and some even more niche photocopied fanzines. One did post stories here but isn't responding to messages.

The men in the Spanner case (R.v Brown 1987) engaged in urethral sounding and cock piercing, among other things, and IIRC there were restraint devices mentioned in some of the legal proceedings.

Given the existence of Prince Albert piercings and their use to encourage penises to stay in place in tight trousers, I'd be surprised if no-one had tried chaining one to a guiche or just adding a non-expanding ring. Cock rings must date back years, surely?

 

[TarnishedPenny]

Weren't there victorian devices to prevent teenage masturbation?

There were indeed, and the Victorians took masturbation very seriously. It was claimed that it brought insanity, feeblemindedness and destroyed lives. Until not all that long ago, many dictionaries defined it as ‘self-abuse’.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

A good article on how ‘self-pollution’ was viewed: https://bust.com/the-solitary-vice-victorian-views-on-masturbation/

 

[bodyshavedsmooth]

a caged pic

https://www.***********/scl/fi/ri5v...0205.JPG?rlkey=q1k4m8nlhlyk242fuf19pz1ra&dl=0

 

[Norway_1705]

Victorians took

"Victorians", is the word.
Penny you know I respect your insightful wisdom. but as a historiographer I have to ask myself: do the treatise writers of that era, do they constitute a representative sample of "what goes on in the daily lives of ordinary people," or are they an anthology of abstractions and generic advice about "what we would like decent people (Bourgeoisie) to believe and say, regardless of whether they actually do as a beahaviour or not?"
I mean, no serious treatiseist has ever recommended in a printed book that Naples be included in the Grand Tour (or maybe just to see the volcano Vesuvius and the ruins of Pompeii) , yet all the wealthy gays of the 19th century passed through Naples confessing in secret epistolary letters to close friends that it was a paradise for homosexuals.
Until the 1980s no Baedecker would write in black and white "Mykonos in Greece is the island with the most gays in the world" even though gays knew about it by word of mouth.

 

[Norway_1705]

guys in the late 90s who wore cock cages, but it was a very niche interest,

Thank You Kumquatqueen as always a mine of informations.
As with all inventions, we must assume there has been a phase of custom prototypes and who knows, even injuries and infections caused by unproven materials.
And that the pioneers, like early aviators or early deep-sea divers, risked a lot of injury and also acted out of a certain amount of extreme exhibitionism (correct me if I'm wrong),
I believe there is a huge difference between piercings and cage.
Piercing is an assault against your own flesh. Okay, earlobes can take it just fine, but that's the penis, dammit! There's only one, and what about the "rest" period for healing?
The cage is ultimately just a very, very tight panty (of a very strong "material": as a judoka shell. Everyone has seen kids punching and kicking their friends' family jewels while playing wrestling in the meadows: a shell repairs from that.
The lock with the key introduces a "character" that acts with a will of its own.
And: The piercing always stays there.
While the padlock, by implication, invokes its own key. The "keyhole" implies that there is a key (somewhere, near or too far from reach).
If the key is far away, e.g., at an online dominatrix ... if the key is in the hand of a gay man ... if the key is around your wife's neck sleeping next to you (horny and caged) ... each of these situations triggers consequences. Whereas the presence of piercings does not involve another character: a man has a piercing, period.
And, sticking to your words, I think the niche of men with penis piercings is distinctly smaller than the niche of men who would be willing to wear the cage to take a fifteen-minute or one-hour test. Because a piercing is forever (at least on an ideal level), a cage can also be just a sex toy for a quick fun session.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

Thank You Kumquatqueen as always a mine of informations.
As with all inventions, we must assume there has been a phase of custom prototypes and who knows, even injuries and infections caused by unproven materials.
...
And, sticking to your words, I think the niche of men with penis piercings is distinctly smaller than the niche of men who would be willing to wear the cage to take a fifteen-minute or one-hour test. Because a piercing is forever (at least on an ideal level), a cage can also be just a sex toy for a quick fun session.

I have to admit I'm a bit too squeamish to research much further, but I would be incredibly surprised if some sort of leather cock restraints, likely with buckles, didn't exist at least by the Stewart period, in the more risqué molly houses and such. Even before that, if you had a piece of stiff canvas, rolled it round, and tied it tightly with cords, you might achieve a similar effect of restraint and deterrence. For a 'quick fun session', as you suggest.

Then seal it with a wax seal, just like a letter?

Basically applying my knowledge of history of materials and household items, to the puzzle!

Small padlocks didn't exist until the early 20th century, needing industrialisation, though hefty ones date back to the Romans.

Given that dildos have existed since antiquity, with little recognised documentation until recently, I would lay money there's some Greek vases or poetry or 17-century diaries which allude to various forms of cock restraint, even if it was physically possible to remove the available materials. (just like bolt cutters exist now, I suppose).

 

[Norway_1705]

Given that dildos have existed since antiquity, with little recognised documentation

Given that dildos have existed since antiquity, with little recognised documentation,
I refer you to the opinion of a teacher of mine, she said that scholars never gave a damn about women's sexuality. Women could mastubate, kiss, sleep together naked, and nobody gave a shit. Dildos were of no interest.
But precisely, if there had been penis cages at that time, some genius author would have written it, Lewis Carroll, Swift, Oscar Wilde... no?
Instead, so many chains, so many shackles, so many portraits in churches "St. Sebastian tied to the pillar and speared by long dripping darts while he has ecstasy in his eyes," but never a drawing of caged penises, not even in Wonderland.
And everywhere, hogtied and gagged prisoners.... you find that everywhere. But never something as simple as what you describe, and that couldn't be locked with a brass padlock, at the risk of the key rusting and never opening again. The family jewels...

 

[Norway_1705]

I have always admired a Japanese illustrator, KAMI TORA. We often see Femdom situations, spanking and humiliation in his drawings. Well, it may be a coincidence, but no illustration before 2000-2005 contains hints of a male chastity cage. Starting from 2005-2007 (depending on the sources) chastity cages increase all the time.
Another similar case visible in the evolution of illustrator MARE's drawings.
And don't forget RODZO: Rodzo's Facesitting are so poetic, with a man handcuffed and kneeling under one of two female profiles... and yet, he wear only very tight sea speedos. I imagine that if a man were forced to wear three or four speedos on top of each other, like the layers of an onion, erection would be made difficult. But the appearance would be--just funny, while the cage (with bars, like Tweety and Sylvester's cage) conveys a message of incarceration at the behest of "someone important," and deprivation of freedom.

Today, those looking for drawings of male chastity cage can find thousands of images. And also many photographs and films played by pro actors or amateur couples. But until 1999-or nothing, or almost nothing.

P. S. I am trying to fill this gap by "inventing" an imaginary presence of magical cages closed or opened by magical mechanisms: either in the "Hercules Caged" series or in the "Caged Beauty and the Beast" series. I am sorry that I am such a bad writer, that I do not come across as convincing, and i alway bore anyone with my nonsensical ramblings. Hopefully someone will write better stories in this vein!

 

[TheRedChamber]

@Norway_1705

I will sponsor you to go on Mastermind with a specialist subject of 'Male Chastity Cages'. Lets make this happen.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

Norway, thanks for that. Forgive me, but not having done much research on gay references in tour books, I simply cannot comment on your examples. I will certainly agree that there is a great deal more done than openly acknowledged.

Yet, as someone modestly fond of history myself, I think one can find ample evidence of masturbation being widely viewed as dangerous, immoral and harmful.

One simple example. Not sure if the joke has the same history in Scandinavia as in N. America, but virtually everybody here will understand the line, “Well, can I do it until I need glasses?” Virtually a meme in itself, its near-universal recognition stems from generations of mothers seriously warning their children that masturbation would cause blindness. Such a widespread understanding of the joke would hardly be possible had not generations of children not heard the warning.

Consider that, as late as the Clinton administration, the Surgeon-General was fired for having spoken in favour of masturbation. How much deep-seated concern over a fairly trivial thing must there have been for a senior administrator to have been let go?

The Boy Scout Handbook for most of the 1900s enjoined against it. It was a best-seller for generations. And, again, for a mid-20th century dictionary to define masturbation only as ‘self-abuse’ or ‘self-pollution’ speaks volumes.

I would again refer you to my earlier post with a link to an article on how society and the medical profession viewed it.

All that, of course, means little in terms of what actually was going on. I strongly suspect that all the anti-masturbation diatribes did was to make people feel guilty.

 

[desecration]

I have to ask myself: do the treatise writers of that era, do they constitute a representative sample of "what goes on in the daily lives of ordinary people," or are they an anthology of abstractions and generic advice about "what we would like decent people (Bourgeoisie) to believe and say, regardless of whether they actually do as a beahaviour or not?"

Seems to be a problem, including what we know of homosexuality, infidelity, and ritual sex from ancient times. No one writes about the mundane, so we get a distorted view of the past.

 

[yowser]

I think it in order to review two important studies on this topic, lest we be uninformed.

Onanism : Onanism Amongst Men ; Its Causes, Its Methods, Its Disorders ; Masturbation Amongst Women ; Its Causes ; Different Ways of Maturbating, Signs, Consequences (1900?)- Dr. Alibert

and

Onanism, or, A Treatise Upon the Disorders Produced by Masturbation, Or, the Dangerous Effects of Secret and Excessive Venery (1839)- S. A. D. Tissot

In the preface (the whole text is available via Project Gutenberg) we note:

To those who would complain of the publication of a work upon the delicate subject to which the following pages refer, we would remark, that the evil here depicted, is one of great magnitude. This cause of disease is often entirely overlooked even by medical men, either from false notions of delicacy, or because their attention has not been drawn by fearful experience to cases which are ascribable merely to onanism. The patient is unconscious of his danger, and perseveres in his vicious habit—the physician treats him symptomatically,and death soon closes the scene.“Many a young man,” remarked a physician,who had seen much of disease from this cause,“many a one has come to me, totally unconscious that his criminal act was sapping to the very foundation his health and strength.”

 

[TarnishedPenny]

Poor Onan. What a sad way to be remembered. That he’d already driven the lady in question crazy with his tongue is never mentioned.

 

[Norway_1705]

mothers seriously warning their children that masturbation would cause blindness.

THANK YOU! Mothers, who prevent, male children, from ejaculating!
So what are all these Keyholders (for love or money) in the stories, if not new mother figures, preventing male sons from ejaculating (both jerking off or, heavens forbid, with a vaginal penetration with some girl)?
Or is it the other way around: the biological mother admonished her son (ineffectively, but triggering much guilt) instead the Queen Keyholder in the stories concretely succeeds in imposing chastity on him, wow!
Or is it still different: the Keyholder at the end (after an hour, after a weekend) in the last lines of the story allows him to cum, unlike mom, who would never have wanted to accept it (!) ?

I mean, only on a literary level, not in real life.
Yet if these "warnings" have been so widespread, as you write ... then perhaps they are part of the collective imagination of whole nations, or who knows, perhaps the whole world even outside of Westerners.

 

[Astrotrain]

Poor Onan. What a sad way to be remembered. That he’d already driven the lady in question crazy with his tongue is never mentioned.

Onan didn't even jack off. God killed him because he refused to impregnate his brothers widow, withdrawing before ejaculation and spilling his seed on the ground.

 

[Norway_1705]

Onanism, or, A Treatise

​

Yes, there are numerous treatises written by physicians and moralists and even moralists with medical degrees. They are almost all from the "industrial" period, say post-1776, for a very simple reason: before that time, aristocrats were allowed everything (screwing maids, impregnating peasant girls, paying whores in brothels ... and even masturbating, as did all the sailors of the world and all the soldiers of the world for millions of years).

And the commoners didn't care about anyone--they could get drunk in pubs every weekend, vomit drunk, impregnate some Bridget Jones drunk, or masturbate. The Poor Don't Matters...recruiters would enlist the most addicted in the army or Navy.

Then, between 1776 and 1968, we begin to see a middle bourgeoisie, trying to be more refined and more snobbish than the working poor.

These bourgeois are not as privileged as the aristocrats, and they risk being misjudged by public opinion, or condemned in a court of law (whereas no one could judge or condemn an weird Duke or a perverse Marquis).

Correct me if I am wrong. The craze to ban masturbation is a characteristic of this specific historical period (with the spread of the Press) and of a peculiar socio-economic group, namely, The Bourgeois. No one cares about the poor sowers or the poor fishermen, yet no one can judge a Duke, however, everyone asks many questions about the behavior of the Pickwick Club or the biography of some Thomas Hardy’s character.

 

[Norway_1705]

subject

@ RedChamber.

Oh, I am just a poor idiot exploring a perversion and wondering if mainstream pornography already exhausts all the potential of the cage, or if sufficiently intrigued writers could develop other literature in other directions.

Like all fetishes, this one inspires "horror and revulsion" in all those who (Vanilla) would like to write simple stories with simple vaginal penetrations and simple ejaculations. Isn't this what has always happened in the last ten million years? Aren't we all convinced that "boys only desire one thing, and it's disgusting," right?

 

[nice90sguy]

I can see the appeal of forced chastity, in fact I investigated chastity cages a while back, and was thinking to get one. But after reading how damn painful and potentially dick-damaging they can be, not to mention unhygenic, I got over the idea.

I can't see why any women would find male chastity cages appealing -- it's a guy thing, and having a penis is an essential prerequisite of having your penis in a cage.

For me, first and foremost, it's because I'm such a wanker, and a cock cage would stop me being such a wanker.

Also, there's the pleasure of denying yourself something, and then eventually allowing it. Food tastes better when you're hungry, but sometimes, well, you just wish there was a lock on the fridge door...

A cock cage where the key is owned by another person brings the power-dynamic element into it. That's not an exclusively male thing, to get turned on by having your freedom curtailed: Women have fantasies like that too, all the time.

Lastly, and again part of a power game, is being forced to please a woman without using your dick. I know there'll be lots of women who claim to be dick-crazy, but I think men need to fuck more than women do. Pussy-licking is a real service (even if the licker is getting off on it), so wearing a cock cage is like being put into a role of servant.

 

[Norway_1705]

being put into the role of servant.

Thank you. As a writer, I believe that many men are happy to bring the woman they love to orgasm. And as a reader, I have read many accounts of women left halfway through by men who cum too fast, then rolled over to sleep while the wife had to clean the mess and then masturbate in silence, listening to him snore like a steam train.
So perhaps momentarily excluding PIV vaginal penetration can free the wife from the anxiety that he will finish too soon, and also that he will leave a disgusting mess that she, still horny and frustrated, will have to clean up
Perhaps a plot for a story can be about a husband who wants to orally "serve" his wife. Did you know that a large percentage of husbands in the U.S. never give head down there? Blame it on Batman, they say. For me it's heaven, but I'm not here to talk about my biography.
Often (in the stories) the caged husband is ordered to perform "sexual services" or domestic chores. But that is perhaps what any man in northern Europe normally does. I do not believe that ironing, cooking, and cleaning are " feminine tasks." On the contrary, I believe that in every Army and every Navy, there was a male tailor, a cook, a butler -- like the fictitious-not-so-fictitious character of Charles Carson in "Downton Abbey" ironing in the series and the movie.
Or perhaps, every male son helps his mom in the kitchen, washing carrots, and peeling apples, to keep his mom happy... he same mom who tells him not to touch his willy, who tells him not to peek while his mom changes clothes to shower...the same mom who somehow (peremptory or gentle) warned him not to masturbate.
Perhaps some caged husband somehow seeks, in the Keyholder figure, a woman who is authoritative but sweet like a mom?
These are all insights to be developed.
P.S. Buying a chastity cage is very cheap, and easily falls within the expenses justified as "study material" for a writer. Just saying.