Thursday, May 26, 2011

My Service Oriented Submission Revealed

In this series of posts I will explain the reasons for some of my views that one could call, among other things, jaundiced. I prefer to call it experienced. I have experienced good things. I have had expectations come to fruition, and then subsequent frustrations. I have experienced the irony of many submissive man’s dreams: chastity and denial. I will now put this into the context of my reality. The subjects I will present are
  • Formalized Service Oriented Relationship
  • My Case of Service Oriented Submission
  • The events Leading up to This Scenario
  • What Is Left?

 Formalized Service Oriented Relationship

Looking over my earlier postings there is evidence of evolution of my views. I may be contradicting my earlier pontifications, but I have to say some things. I don’t know whether I am experiencing an early onset of senility or a late acquisition of wisdom that seems to have afflicted me. Nevertheless, my thinking is evolving.
The moment I returned to Rika’s book pecipitated this revelation. When I first read this book I was enamored by her views, her applied methods, and what she was trying to teach to would-be-dominant females who may not have had any interest in domination other than from time to time in the bedroom. A few years downstream, as I mentioned in my previous post after re-reading of her book “Uniquely Rika” I became disenchanted with her approach to handling her submissive men. Her method is unworkable in general. Her main theme, service oriented submission is being discussed in blogs lately. In most cases it is with the naïve view that I presented in my early posts. 
One of these blogs is different. I was trying to catch up with the postings of one of my blogosphere friends, Scott, who appears wanting to work with his wife Em to turn his voluntary servitude into more service oriented submission. See I always Want More written by Em. If the direct link does not work, try to navigate back to the March 20, 2011 post. Their situation, however, is much different from what Rika advocates. For one thing, Scott and Em are real in a real life D/S marriage. Em seems to like mental torture by cuckolding, mild humiliation, and promises of physical punishment. The promised punishment may be for real or perceived misdeeds of Scott, or simply because she needs to unwind after a stressful week by whipping, binding, caging, and doing other delectable treats with Scott the lucky target. Given all that, the only resemblance to Rika’s method is the name: service oriented submission. She actually wants Scott to get off on serving her regardless of what she does to or for him in return. There is no problem, however. Scott is perfectly willing to hone his skill at gracious service to his loving wife, for he knows that she needs it, and she never neglects him. In their relationship her motivation is self-satisfaction just like Rika’s. The difference is that she actually enjoys treating Scott. Unlike in Rika’s relationship, these are not “rare” or “occasional” gifts unrelated to Scott’s behavior. There is love and satisfaction for both parties.
The unique case of Rika's requires two people of specific nature. One, selfish and uninvolved, devoid of love or attachment to a submissive. Her only investment is the time she had put into training him. The other requirement is a man who remains satisfied to serve her in all respects for an occasional crumb tossed his way that he can lick off the floor. He needs no recognition, no reciprocation of feelings, no safety, no escalation of pleasure, no evolution of the situation, no chance to state his needs. You can see how difficult it would be for two people to find each other and, especially, to stay together to fulfill these requirements. What she has is a man with no soul. What remains of his character is like the product of breaking a wild horse: he serves well and willingly, but his spirit is gone. Regardless of how good a boot-licker he is, at some point she would become bored with him. What happens then? Does she begin to pay attention to him and challenge him in ways other than adding more mind-numbing drudgery to his daily routine? That is unlikely, for that would be changing her basic premise of the service oriented submission that requires total servitude in exchange for absolutely no reward or recognition. The alternative is to get rid of this slave and find another.
She mentions communication, but then reverts to communicating her way: She tells, he listens. That is not communication. That is stating a request by one party with no recourse by the other. While Rika still had her blog up I once asked her a question. “I sometimes have problems that need to be discussed with my wife. If we follow your rules, I may never be able to voice them. How do I let her know?” She answered, “You don’t. That would be topping from the bottom.” I took her answer as trivial, and never asked another question from her.
Next installment: “My Case of Service Oriented Submission”


Friday, May 6, 2011

Tongue In Cheek

I am a sucker for women of well-endowed features. They tend to abound at WalMart. Before you laugh your ass off, I want to state that this is not the only reason for my visiting this icon of American genius in retail marketing. I go there to buy lawn chairs, kitty litter, and an occasional box of ammunition for my various guns after I had used them for legal purposes. I know this is weird, but from time to time, I can find attractive females even at WalMart. I consider it slumming. This is no reference to the employees, but to the shoppers, of whom I am one.

Between getting my thrills with visits to see the WalMart fauna, I bring up websites occasionally to get some ammunition of a different type to replenish my supply. These sites present females of slightly higher presumed quality, for most of them appear washed, albeit, heavily made-up. I know, appearances can be deceiving. However, when my expectations are mostly limited to looks, pictures are, as we often say, perfect. Unless the soles of her feet show that she had been frequenting the WalMart parking lot barefooted, lack of cleanliness is not clearly discernible, so I can assume pristine qualities for the moment. With my hormones raising hell from below, I can be excused of going with those first looks: they are delicious. They are the caliber of female that I imagine would feel good under my fingers and tongue. But that is just a mental hobby without any possibility of physical fulfillment. I spend no effort or tangible resources to pursue it further than looking on my wide-screen monitor. I imagine. I wish. And then I go on to more justifiable pursuits, such as reading world news, and making indignant comments at the reported and recorded stupidity of our elected representatives at the federal, state, and local level. After a while I return to the women of large caliber for rest and relaxation, which brings up the subject of this post: my tongue between some cheeks.

In support of my part-time hobby I want to leave you with something pleasant. She is not exactly WalMart material. Given the context, heavy makeup is not an issue. Not being clean is defined only by the quality of the river water in which she has obviously dipped as evidenced by her damp hair and the sun reflecting off her wet skin. She has a natural beauty without artificial means, background, lights, or paraphernalia. Sure, being young helps, but I suspect that her beauty transcends her weight and her age. She would attract a regular human male plus or minus many pounds of weight and years. The second picture is even more earthy. You can see the hot sand clinging to her perspiring body. A dip in the surf with her would be lovely.


Sunday, May 1, 2011

Chastity Without Being Asked

There is a lot of material on the blogs about chastity primarily on the man’s part so to speak. On the woman’s part, well, the other side is advocated: chaste men, promiscuous women. Why is that? Is it a form of reparation for past injustices in which the men were usually the ones to stray from marital vows? Is it just another form of submissive self-abuse by men? Is it another form of dominance by the feminist movement? Is this good or evil? Will this right wrongs? Will this make both sexes happy?

I admit that I am fascinated by the trend, if it is a trend. At the least, I am intrigued by the details that men and women involved in this subject add to the discussion. It is fun to see newcomers asking for help, even adding naïve, but to them, authoritative views as they see it. It is somewhat sad to see experienced but on the way to disillusion views of some who have done it and found it less than a lifetime commitment. Between the two there is a lot to be appreciated, to be amused by, and even to learn from.

I cannot really add to the primary reason for male chastity. All has been said, even invented. There are those who want to stop excessive masturbation, those who just get off on this very specific form of bondage and discipline. Then there is the fantasy partner who forces the men into chastity through physical force, blackmail, avarice, or just plain sexual traps. Regardless of the source of the sexual style, the details are endless, female dominant, and cater to men’s need for attention. Sure, we are, or can be aloof, show no emotion, and go through the dangerous avenues of life with stoic manliness. However, when it comes to an understanding female, we drop all that and salivate at her pheromones. They have us by our ovoidal testosterone containers and we love it.

What we love even more is a physical containment in addition to the mental and primal. Primal is the willingness to follow her female scent against all odds. Mental is the fixation on her only even in the absence of any tangible reminder of the warmth, charm, goodness, pain, suffering of which she is capable to induce on us. The physical containment is an added spicy enticement to remember her, and only her, as long as she has the key and at the same time provides constant or frequent reminders of our dependence on her. Sure, we could smash the damned cage and whack off any time. But few of us would dare, for that would jeopardize a deep relationship, which we somehow nurtured even unknowingly: remaining loyal to her in spite of our nature, against all temptation, against our better judgment, against our physical needs.

Here I am, for the moment, without a chastity device installed by her or by her order. I could do self-gratification any time. Yet I choose to abstain with the hope that she will need me soon and I want to be ready and able for her. I could have release, and be ready for her in no time. But there is guilt in doing so. She has not asked me or told me to be chaste to that extent. Am I being foolish? Am I wasting my pleasure? Am I wasting my time?