female circumcision (for subs)

[SheDevilShay]

a similar topic currently on the board gave me the courage to finally post this here. for quite a while now i have been very interested in the subject of female circumcision, within the D/s lifestyle. it is rare, but not completely unheard of. submissives who have their clitoris altered, or perhaps removed entirely, by/for their Masters. i have read quotes from slaves who supposedly have had this done speaking of their sexual service being more "pure" since having the procedure done. how it's a completely unselfish act and frees them up to only better attend to their Master's needs. and i can very much relate to such desires, so i cannot say i would be horrified if my Master decided to do such a thing to me. actually i think it would be rather nice, no longer having those guilty feelings about being sexually aroused, no longer having to fight to push selfish thoughts of my own physical wants out of my mind.

i brought the subject up with my Master, and he was very interested in my thoughts/feelings, but says he would not such a permanent change. He even confessed that sometimes he actually enjoys me being physically aroused, so to never be able to do that again would bother him. so this slave won't be going under the knife. but have any other submissives here ever thought of this? or Dominants, have you ever considered it for your female submissives? i imagine most would find it to be a deplorable thing but are there any like myself that can see the potential beauty in it?

I understand what your saying, and it possible you could consider doing this.. it can be possibly dangerous.. there's girls whoa re circumsized in forigien counteries who die from this procedure.. it also can make any sexual stimulation extremely painful...a nd its not easily remedied if you change your mind at some point down the road, it would be like a man removing his penis...

Its doable.. but its possibly dangerous.

I thank my lucky stars that my Dom would never ask something like that of me, or consider it "for him" he'd be very upset if I took one of his toys away from him.

 

[SheDevilShay]

I just had a neat mental picture. Female dominant undergoes her own castration because she is above the weakness of sexual desire. Her energy is focused exclusively on the infliction of suffering onto her victims, no distraction by thoughts of her own physical pleasure. I see her becoming almost asexual (definitely not masculine), pure sadism. Edged.

Does that trip anyone else's mind? I think it's hawt.

Thats a very hot point... but only if thats the lifestyle you'd want to live...

I personally would not be able to be A sexual.. my sexuality and femaleness is who I am and I am glad my Dom loves me the way I am...

Though I don't care if thats someone else's choice and I applaud them for being "them".. the only thing I would hope is anything permenant done like that is well researched, looked into and is an educated decision... not a "spur of the moment frenzy" thing... its not something easily fixed.

 

[Etoile]

Did I ever post the pictures of this? I know where to find some pictures of western women who have had this done. It's actually oddly attractive, I just can't remember if I've shared the pictures.

 

[Homburg]

but what if the submissive woman you were with was totally non-orgasmic, and had no desire to be orgasmic? what if her clitoris was not a "bark button" to begin with, but just a rather useless appendage?

Earlobes are useless. Doesn't mean I want them cut off. Are you nursing, or planning to nurse? Or male? Nipples are useless. I still like them. And even if I did not like them, I would not personally want to have them cut off. I'm not into mutilation or physical modification. I would not do it for her, so I would not ask her to do it for me.

Moreover, and this is probably not going to make me friends, but I don't know that I could be with a totally non-orgasmic woman. I'm just being honest when I say that. The female orgasm is a wondrous and beautiful thing, and it is a big deal for me. If a woman I was with were non-orgasmic, sex would have a lot less appeal simply because I gain so much enjoyment from bringing my partner to orgasm.

I am one of those guys that can perform cunnilingus on my partner, and consider it a complete act with no need for reciprocation. I am satisfied by it alone at times. Even ignoring the multiple orgasms, "v" still gets far mor eorgasms from me than she gives me, and I am fine with that. I would think a totally non-orgasmic woman would be difficult for me, with my personal interests and buttons, to be excited by.

 

[alexanna]

actually, my Master is NOT the kind of Dominant who gets any special little kick out of controlling a woman's sexual pleasure. i'm not a very sexually expressive person (just my nature) and also never have been the type to orgasm more than once in a very great while. in the 4 years i've been with my Master now, i've maybe had 3 orgasms. this is not seen as a problem by either myself or my Master. when he uses me sexually, the point is for him to be pleased, to be satisfied. if in the process of him doing whatever it takes to please himself, i experience physical pleasure also, he does not have an issue with it, but that is never a goal or desire of his. what came as a surprise to me was when he told me that sometimes he actually finds pleasure in me being physically aroused by him, which is primarily why he would be opposed to a circumcision.


i'm going to look more into just how a female circumcision would effect one's physical response. i imagine lusty feelings would still be there, but nothing physically could ever match up. and likely in time that lack of stimulation could perhaps cause even the sexual feelings/emotions to fade or even die as well.


also from what i've read at least these procedures are usually done by a medical professional and not just a Dominant with a sharp blade.

OP also said in the first post "He even confessed that sometimes he actually enjoys me being physically aroused, so to never be able to do that again would bother him. "

I wonder if the OP's interest has something to do with feelings of inadequacy with having such a hard time orgasming? I'm just curious becuase I often feel very guilty in my vanilla relationship that I cannot give my husband the joy of seeing me cum and most of the time try to avoid the stress of having to try.

 

[SheDevilShay]

OP also said in the first post "He even confessed that sometimes he actually enjoys me being physically aroused, so to never be able to do that again would bother him. "

I wonder if the OP's interest has something to do with feelings of inadequacy with having such a hard time orgasming? I'm just curious becuase I often feel very guilty in my vanilla relationship that I cannot give my husband the joy of seeing me cum and most of the time try to avoid the stress of having to try.

I agree.. my guilt of not being able to cum for my Dom with out a vibrator is eating me alive so I just gave up trying and try to just "enjoy" the act and because of it, I can ejaculate and have some inside orgasms... as I learn to let go I think I will eventually be able to orgasm on the outside...

(not saying this is her issue, but that is mine)

 

[reignophelia]

OP also said in the first post "He even confessed that sometimes he actually enjoys me being physically aroused, so to never be able to do that again would bother him. "

I wonder if the OP's interest has something to do with feelings of inadequacy with having such a hard time orgasming? I'm just curious becuase I often feel very guilty in my vanilla relationship that I cannot give my husband the joy of seeing me cum and most of the time try to avoid the stress of having to try.

Not to put words in Ownedsubgals mouth, but the way I read it is that she is quite the dutiful slave. She will literally do anything her Master asks of her. She is completely devoted to serving and wants to do so to the best of her ability. She was wondering if that type of body modification would alleviate her of her sexual desires somewhat so that she may serve her Master better.
He apparently likes her just the way she is, so she said that she won't be doing it.
Most subs are masochists or have masochistic tendencies. There's a lot of guilt involved, but guilt over not being able to orgasm - In this case, I don't think that's quite it. I think many of us are severe perfectionists, and Ownedsubgal is very serious about serving to the best of her ability. It's more about being selfless, and devoting yourself to another person in completion and entirety. Not being selfless is where I think the aforementioned guilt stems from. - But like I said that's just my take on things.

I don't always agree with her practices, but I have the utmost respect for her. I'm sure she'll correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[ownedsubgal]

Did I ever post the pictures of this? I know where to find some pictures of western women who have had this done. It's actually oddly attractive, I just can't remember if I've shared the pictures.

no, not to my knowledge...and i'd LOVE to see them!! unfortunately i've only as of yet been able to find good clear pics of females who've had it done by force or cultural practice...no westerners or lifestylers. it'd be nice to admire a pic of FGC without guilt.

 

[ownedsubgal]

Moreover, and this is probably not going to make me friends, but I don't know that I could be with a totally non-orgasmic woman. I'm just being honest when I say that. The female orgasm is a wondrous and beautiful thing, and it is a big deal for me. If a woman I was with were non-orgasmic, sex would have a lot less appeal simply because I gain so much enjoyment from bringing my partner to orgasm.

I am one of those guys that can perform cunnilingus on my partner, and consider it a complete act with no need for reciprocation. I am satisfied by it alone at times. Even ignoring the multiple orgasms, "v" still gets far mor eorgasms from me than she gives me, and I am fine with that. I would think a totally non-orgasmic woman would be difficult for me, with my personal interests and buttons, to be excited by.

nothing wrong with that, everyone has preferences, needs, desires, and types of people they simply could not be with. i think recognizing that and finding someone who already has the characteristics that pushes your buttons is far healthier and more sane than attempting to force a square peg into a round hole.

 

[Homburg]

nothing wrong with that, everyone has preferences, needs, desires, and types of people they simply could not be with. i think recognizing that and finding someone who already has the characteristics that pushes your buttons is far healthier and more sane than attempting to force a square peg into a round hole.

Thank you for understanding. I don't see what is being talked about here as somehow wrong, just wrong for me. Luckily for everyone else, what is wrong for me means nothing at all for anyone that is not somehow trying to please me, eh?

 

[Etoile]

no, not to my knowledge...and i'd LOVE to see them!! unfortunately i've only as of yet been able to find good clear pics of females who've had it done by force or cultural practice...no westerners or lifestylers. it'd be nice to admire a pic of FGC without guilt.

It occurred to me that I probably shouldn't post them here since they are from a pay site. Anybody who is interested though can go to BMEzine and buy a full membership, which is what gets you the good stuff under the "extreme" category!

There are currently 140 female circumcision pictures, and trust me the girls all look quite happy about it! In most of the full-body shots you can see that they are in light bondage but that doesn't necessarily mean they were doing it for submissive reasons...I think the bondage might be necessary to keep you from involuntarily kicking whoever is slicing off your clit!

You'll also get literally thousands of penectomy and eunuch pictures, for those of you who are hoping for those. It seems to be far more popular for men to cut their cocks off!

 

[alexanna]

Not to put words in Ownedsubgals mouth, but the way I read it is that she is quite the dutiful slave. She will literally do anything her Master asks of her. She is completely devoted to serving and wants to do so to the best of her ability. She was wondering if that type of body modification would alleviate her of her sexual desires somewhat so that she may serve her Master better.
He apparently likes her just the way she is, so she said that she won't be doing it.
Most subs are masochists or have masochistic tendencies. There's a lot of guilt involved, but guilt over not being able to orgasm - In this case, I don't think that's quite it. I think many of us are severe perfectionists, and Ownedsubgal is very serious about serving to the best of her ability. It's more about being selfless, and devoting yourself to another person in completion and entirety. Not being selfless is where I think the aforementioned guilt stems from. - But like I said that's just my take on things.

I don't always agree with her practices, but I have the utmost respect for her. I'm sure she'll correct me if I'm wrong.

Is it more selfless to do this to yourself so that being selfless will be easier or to continue to strive for selflessness with the added difficulty of having to combat desire?

 

[Netzach]

Did I ever post the pictures of this? I know where to find some pictures of western women who have had this done. It's actually oddly attractive, I just can't remember if I've shared the pictures.

I agree it's kind of pretty to me too, but I like out of the norm forms. I could swear there were some preview pics of excised pussy at one point...it doesn't get me hot, and when you have the actual bloody procedural images, it's not really my thing either, but the results are interesting.

Null guys are too, for similar reasons. It doesn't get me off, but the aesthetic is pretty.

 

[dolf]

i used to fantasize about this.
i think it might have been my very first fantasy...like pre-teen.
it's not my thing but i can understand the appeal.

 

[Pure]

quint: I just had a neat mental picture. Female dominant undergoes her own castration because she is above the weakness of sexual desire. Her energy is focused exclusively on the infliction of suffering onto her victims, no distraction by thoughts of her own physical pleasure. I see her becoming almost asexual (definitely not masculine), pure sadism. Edged.

Does that trip anyone else's mind? I think it's hawt.



Netz: //Yes.

And then I think about my clit and it's suddenly so not. In the abstract love it. I want my own chastity belt to wear in scene sometimes. If parts were removable I would try it out sometimes. I think the sadism would be exquisite.//

exquisite, perhaps but a little terrifying, because so relentless. at least when a top comes, there's a break. a top who did not come, but merely wanted to hurt, debase or whatever....hmmm. what i see as hot is the asymmetry: top who's without arousal, and bottom who's subject to it. the power differential is incredible. the top, then, has only a 'clinical' or 'aesthetic' interest in bottoms arousal. possibly to use it to debilitate them.

i have seen pics on the net of neutered males, no cock, no balls, just a little pee hole remaining. you could not even get that in a woman, with circumcision. what's not mentioned is that her ovaries remain. but i've heard that removing them is bad for the health. i think i would say, from my pov, the sexless bottom would be of less interest because there are no organs to mistreat, no balls to crush, no clit to clamp. etc.

i can see, however, that 'half damage" or partial damage/removal would be fine symbol and object lesson. the male bottom sacrifices one testicle upon entering service. what would be the equivalent for a female bottom? perhaps the inner labia, but leaving the clit there for abuse, to generate submission etc. missing inner labia, however would be a symbol and reminder of status. perhaps, just suturing the labia so that the vaginal opening is closed off, except for a small hole for the menses.
(this is part of what goes on in so called 'female circumcisions' of the radical type.)

it almost goes without saying that the above are imagined in the consensual context N has described. further, a matter of choice for oneself, not just a blind desire to please or the result of the top's command that's acquiesced to. IOW, the bottom WANTS the symbol for what it makes of him or her.

 

[Etoile]

exquisite, perhaps but a little terrifying, because so relentless. at least when a top comes, there's a break. a top who did not come, but merely wanted to hurt, debase or whatever....hmmm. what i see as hot is the asymmetry: top who's without arousal, and bottom who's subject to it. the power differential is incredible. the top, then, has only a 'clinical' or 'aesthetic' interest in bottoms arousal. possibly to use it to debilitate them.

i have seen pics on the net of neutered males, no cock, no balls, just a little pee hole remaining. you could not even get that in a woman, with circumcision. what's not mentioned is that her ovaries remain. but i've heard that removing them is bad for the health. i think i would say, from my pov, the sexless bottom would be of less interest because there are no organs to mistreat, no balls to crush, no clit to clamp. etc.

i can see, however, that 'half damage" or partial damage/removal would be fine symbol and object lesson. the male bottom sacrifices one testicle upon entering service. what would be the equivalent for a female bottom? perhaps the inner labia, but leaving the clit there for abuse, to generate submission etc. missing inner labia, however would be a symbol and reminder of status. perhaps, just suturing the labia so that the vaginal opening is closed off, except for a small hole for the menses.
(this is part of what goes on in so called 'female circumcisions' of the radical type.)

it almost goes without saying that the above are imagined in the consensual context N has described. further, a matter of choice for oneself, not just a blind desire to please or the result of the top's command that's acquiesced to. IOW, the bottom WANTS the symbol for what it makes of him or her.

On the contrary, I have seen pictures of women who have had everything removed with little more than a peehole remaining. I don't think there was anything there to penetrate. It had healed beautifully - no clitoris, no hood, no inner or outer labia, just a tiny hole. It's on BMEzine if anybody is interested.

Suturing the labia is known as infibulation, and it's fucking hot. There are lots of pictures of that on BMEzine too. It provides a similar visual effect to nullification, and if you leave it there long enough you will end up with one unit. In fact, FGM is sometimes done this way; the labia are cut and then sewn together; the scar tissue from the two cuts grows together.

I think your reference to ovaries in the same sentence as "neutered male" is partially correct and partially misguided. It's true that removing the testicles is castration, and you'd have to remove the ovaries to do that to a woman. But we're not talking about castration (primarily) - we're talking about circumcision and nullification. In which case, yes, removing all the outer bits is quite sufficient for that procedure. As for removing the ovaries being bad for a woman's health - it's certainly no good for her chances of reproduction, but women undergo oophorectomies and hysterectomies all the time.

 

[Quint]

...........

 

[Netzach]

I figgered you'd get it, Pure.

Yes.

One could also look at the possibility of the Dominant eunuch. I'm drawn to people who are genderfuck or a-gendered as dominants. The idea of saying "my sex IS my whip" is really powerful.

 

[reignophelia]

Is it more selfless to do this to yourself so that being selfless will be easier or to continue to strive for selflessness with the added difficulty of having to combat desire?

LOL I don't know! This is quite the debate you have set up here.

I think it could be seen either way.

Giving up that part of yourself could really be crossing the line for some people - really pushing it. While some people would happily or gladly give it up.

Other people would have a much more difficult time dealing with the guilt of keeping it.

Some people will never have this cross their mind.

I think it ultimately depends upon the person, and what the arrangement with your PYL is.

My arrangement with my PYL will never be such that I will feel guilty for my sexuality. In fact, a lot of it is about exploring my sexuality and coming to terms with it.

Not everyone is the same though. Some people come close to worshipping their PYL, others serve more in a TiH way. BDSM is a pretty broad topic with lots of range.

I'd just say personalize it in a way that suits you.

 

[Quint]

...........

 

[Netzach]

Yes indeed. It really resonates for those of me with my young husband, for whom sex is often the end-all. What if the penis were out of the equation? I have the unpopular belief that pussy typically has the power, and it would be very...unexpected to know that wasn't the case. Big attitude adjustment.

Is that unpopular? Quelle Dommage.

Maybe that's why I play really non-sexual with girls or seriously with denial. Because I know that her pussy might check mine.

 

[Quint]

...........

 

[Pure]

note to etoile.

Et As for removing the ovaries being bad for a woman's health - it's certainly no good for her chances of reproduction, but women undergo oophorectomies and hysterectomies all the time.

you might research this, a bit, etoile, before sounding so cocksure.

you might have mentioned for instance that the 'victims' of oophorectomies (some in tandem with hysterectomies) end up on permanent hormone supplements to retard or prevent the bodily damage i spoke of. without estrogen, your bones, for instance, get weak. it's either that, or instant menopause during which a number of adverse effect occur, e.g. on bones.

so i don't think my points about unsexing were partially correct and partially misguided. the main one being that removal of all outer genitalia is quite different in effect for man vs. woman. (nullification, if you want to call it that.)

the woman would keep her ovaries, her estrogen and her testosterone; hence keep her desires and secondary sex characteristics, such as breasts; she would merely lack one standard means of expressing or relieving those desires, say, from rubbing off on her clit, but she could still have intercourse and have whatever satisfaction that brought. (this is assuming her vagina is intact and not sealed off, see ADDED)

(ADDED:the same, roughly, applies in the more unusual case you describe: if she has her vagina virtually sealed off, or even [supposing this happened in your illustration] removed, and the body completely sealed except the peehole, she still has the normal complement of hormones. further, she would have no clit to rub off, or vagina available for intercourse. her breasts, we assume would be intact and healthy.)



the man with everything outside removed, has lost his testosterone, most of it. hence his desires can be expected, usually, to wane. hence his erections diminish or disappear, and his capability of intercourse.
in short, he's more genuinely and thoroughly 'neutered' than women with standard versions of "female circumcision,' (i.e. those that fall short of closing off the vaginal introitus.)

 

[dolf]

As for removing the ovaries being bad for a woman's health - it's certainly no good for her chances of reproduction, but women undergo oophorectomies and hysterectomies all the time.

try researching that. seriously.

 

[catalina_francisco]

As for removing the ovaries being bad for a woman's health - it's certainly no good for her chances of reproduction, but women undergo oophorectomies and hysterectomies all the time.

Not this woman, even though it has been suggested by specialists. I'm afraid I prefer to put up with some discomfort, lots of pain until menopause is complete rather than possibly go through the trials of a medically induced menopause (often worse than a natural one), and the dosing of hormones to try and regulate my body to how it would have been if I hadn't undergone the knife and risking cancer as a result of the HRT treatment (and yes, it has now been proven through research that HRT not only can increase the risk of developing some cancers, but also increase the risk of heart attack and stroke in some people). I just don't like mucking with things that are meant to perform an important function. It has been trendy in the past couple of decades to opt for hysterectomies, and C sections instead of regular childbirth, often with no really solid reason.

Catalina