| Subject: Re: Restraints |
Author:
steve
| [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 15:29:53 12/31/16 Sat
In reply to:
Stan
's message, "Restraints" on 10:15:14 04/02/16 Sat
>RESTRAINED VERSUS RESTRAINT-LESS PUNISHMENT
>as a confirmed spankee who is punished both while being restrained and unrestrained i must say the bondage horse sounds interesting for my more severe hidings
>Although there are countless ways of categorizing
>punishment scenes, one way that seems very significant
>to me is whether or not the "bottom" is restrained
>during the punishment. I think this is more than a
>trivial observation as it affects the relationship
>between the bottom and the top, and the bottom's idea
>of the purpose of punishment.
>
>The most common real-life situation (now a thing of
>the past) I associate with "restraint-less" punishment
>is the high school Phys. Ed. paddle spankings where
>the unfortunate student is ordered to bend over, hands
>on knees, and take one or more swats with a wooden
>paddle administered by his gym teacher. What forces
>the student to take that punishment? There are several
>possibilities: (1) Perhaps, it's fear of even worse
>punishment if he fails to obey the teacher's orders or
>(2) maybe it's fear of being branded a "coward" by
>his fellow students. If the latter is the case, this
>restraint-less punishment might be looked on as a test
>of one's manhood. Although perhaps not thought of as
>punishment, per se, rites of passage, such as Army or
>Marine basic training, could fit into that category
>also. And perhaps even "fight clubs" too. Although the
>bottom voluntarily submits to the punishment, he sees
>his ability to "take" that punishment as a way of
>proving his manhood.
>
>The most common real-life situation (also now a thing
>of the past, at least in the USA) I associate with
>"restrained" punishment is "judicial corporal
>punishment". Since the whole purpose here is to
>inflict unbearable pain on the prisoner, it is
>necessary to put him in restraints so he cannot escape
>from that punishment. In this type of scene, the
>prisoner is physically forced to submit to the
>punishment, and it is hoped, perhaps, that the
>prisoner will then psychologically submit to the
>authority administering the punishment. So, in this
>type of scene, the goal is one of submission to
>authority, not the egotistical test of one's manhood.
>
>My own personal preference (as a bottom or a top) is
>for "restrained" punishment. And this leads to the
>second part of this post regarding types of restraints.
>
>
>TYPES OF RESTRAINTS
>
>Perhaps, the one type of restraint that most people
>are familiar with is handcuffs. It's the one type of
>bondage you can actually observe on the TV news as
>well as on TV crime dramas. In spite of their
>undeniable association with "submission to authority",
>I don't generally recommend the use of handcuffs in a
>"recreational" punishment scene for several reasons:
>(1) The risk of injury to the bottom's wrists from the
>use of inflexible steel, (2) The risk of injury to the
>bottom's shoulders caused by the awkward position
>cuffs place the bottom in, (3) The bottom might try to
>lower his hands to shield his ass from the punishment
>instrument and end up injuring his hands instead, and
>(4) Cuffs can malfunction which can result in an
>embarrassing situation (especially for the top).
>
>Probably, the most convenient, efficient, and
>economical method of restraint are leather wrist and
>ankle restraints, which are perfect for tying the
>bottom down spread-eagled on a bed. The restraints
>usually have metal rings so you can easily attach the
>restraints to the legs of the bed. I've found
>relatively thick clothesline cord ideal for that
>purpose. At one time, I had used 4 equal lengths of
>metal chains, easily obtainable at a hardware store
>(assuming they don't become curious what you plan to
>do with them), along with double-clasped metal key
>holders, to attach the restraints to the bed legs.
>Although chains provide a unique (and appropriate)
>atmosphere, they do have their disadvantages: (1) They
>can be noisy (a consideration if you live in an
>apartment or condo, (2) Chains can damage a quality
>wooden bed, and (3) they can damage a hardwood floor.
>Anyway, wrist and ankle restraints allow convenient
>access to all parts of the bottom's body, especially
>the all-important ass. These restraints also allow the
>top to use the more convenient downward motion when
>applying a belt, a razor strap, or a much larger
>prison strap. Another advantage of these restraints
>is that they can be conveniently stored out-of-sight
>when you have house guests who "would just not
>understand".
>
>"Bondage furniture" comes in many different forms and
>can significantly heighten the impact of a scene. If
>you do a "Google Image" with the search words
>"spanking bench", you'll find an interesting variety
>of bondage furniture. Unfortunately, bondage furniture
>tends to be expensive and is most likely to be found
>only in the homes of the most dedicated punishment
>advocates or in the facilities of a spanking-related
>organization.
>
>I have only had 2 experiences with bondage furniture.
>One was at the facility of a spanking organization,
>and it's described in my post titled "The Most Painful
>Whipping I Ever Experienced". The other was in a
>private home. The homeowner had a huge St. Andrew's
>(X-shaped) cross in his living room, made with wooden
>beams about 4" thick, extending from the floor to the
>ceiling and bolted to both. (Perhaps, such an addition
>to one's living room could be explained away to the
>more gullible as the latest technology in earthquake
>protection!) There were metal rings above my head and
>at the base to which were attached leather wrist and
>ankle restraints. When I was tied to the cross, my
>body was restrained with my arms spread wide apart
>over my head and my feet were spread apart at the
>base, basically in the same position if I had been
>tied to a whipping post. However, the owner had one
>additional restraint to keep my body from flailing
>around unceremoniously during the whipping. He placed
>a weight-lifting belt around my lower back and wrapped
>the loose ends around the narrow middle part of the
>cross (where the beams cross each other) and buckled
>it tightly on the other side.
>
>Most spanking benches seem to have the bottom's body
>in some variation of "being on all fours". The most
>significant difference between a spanking bench and
>being tied down spread-eagled on a bed, is that, with
>the bench, the bottom's ass is prominently raised and
>is in a vertical position (facing backward), whereas,
>with the bed, his ass is in a horizontal position
>facing upward. The spanking bench seems ideal for the
>use of a wooden paddle or maybe a razor strap, but it
>would seem less ideal when using a belt or a large
>prison strap as it requires an awkward sideways
>swinging motion which means the top is fighting
>against gravity.
>
>In my post titled "The Most Painful Whipping I Ever
>Received", there was one thing that bugged me about
>the bondage device I was placed in and that was that
>my hands and arms were free. I would have much
>preferred the feeling of "security" one gets from
>being in wrist restraints, even though the wooden
>stocks that held my ankles and the 3 wide leather
>straps that stretched across the top of my body were
>more than adequate to prevent me from escaping from
>the painful whipping I was subjected to.
>
>What looks to me like an ideal piece of bondage
>furniture, I've only viewed on the website
>fetishfurniture dot org, where it is referred to as a
>"bondage horse". Unfortunately, their photos only show
>the device by itself without any person "attached" to
>it. So you need to use a little imagination to figure
>out how it operates. Overall, it is basically shaped
>like an elongated sawhorse, except that the 2 long
>sides are mostly solid wood, only cut away a few
>inches off the floor into separate legs. The top of
>the device is flat and padded and is about 7" wide,
>and the prisoner's chest and stomach rest on that top.
>Below the top, on each side of the front end, are
>attached 2 padded arm rests for the prisoner's
>forearms. Restraints at the front end of the arm rests
>keep the prisoner's wrists attached to those arm
>rests. Above the back portion of the arm rests are
>belt-like restraints in vertical slots. These
>restraints wrap around the prisoner's upper arms,
>keeping them firmly attached to the sides of the
>horse. At the back end of the bondage horse are padded
>leg rests for that portion of the prisoner's legs
>below (and including) his knees. At the back end of
>these leg rests are restraints to keep the prisoner's
>ankles attached to those leg rests. And belt-like
>restraints in vertical slots over the front portion of
>the leg rests insure that the upper half of the
>prisoner's legs are firmly attached to the sides of
>the horse. The designers of this bondage horse seem to
>have thought of everything. Since prisoners' arms and
>legs come in varying lengths, there are additional
>holes in the sides of the device so that the arm and
>leg rests can be raised or lowered to accommodate
>different body sizes. Near the middle of each side is
>a wide horizontal slot just below the top. I am
>guessing that one or two restraining straps can be
>threaded through these 2 slots and then buckled over
>the top of the prisoner's body in order to restrain
>the only portion of the prisoner's body not yet
>restrained. I feel certain that any prisoner attached
>to this device will not have to worry about
>accidentally falling off of this horse. I would dearly
>love to try out this bondage horse, even at the
>substantial risk that its owner would want to get a
>return on his investment (taken out on my hide) and
>would feel justified in subjecting my ass to an
>intensity of pain it has never experienced before.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] |
|
Feedback: 