HollyBlue -> RE: Punishment: What to punish for and how brutal? (9/27/2007 12:26:09 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: amelliagrace Valyraen would never mind fuck me like that for punishment. Which is good because that sort of punishment would probably destroy a great deal of the trust I have in him. But it works for you and that is what counts. quote:
The same here. It would destroy it quickly, and just about completely. -grace I agree with these two, but no, Estring, ass play is definitely not off the table. The reason that punishment would destroy trust is that I must be able to trust my Master's word. If he says he's going to do a thing, and doesn't do it, then I never know what to think about what he says. So, OP, I think "implied threat" is definitely not a good idea. In addition, make consequences, not threats, and if the sub does the behaviour you have previously defined as having specific consequences, then FFS carry out the punishment you defined, to the letter! I have an entry in my blog on corporal punishment that may be of some interest: http://hollybluesflightofideas.blogspot.com/2007/09/on-corporal-punishment.html Also, my Master and I have since developed a punishment protocol that goes as follows: 1) Master: Holly, [insert infraction here i.e. 'you are tardy.'] I am going to punish you, with [insert consequence here, e.e. 'two hard smacks to each ass cheek.'] Do you have anything to say? (This "Do you have anything to say" question is one of the main reason our punishment protocol exists. It stops a punishment from being carried out if the infraction was due to a misunderstanding. So, in the above example, if I was tardy due to circumstances beyond my control, I can explain the circumstances to Master. Or, if I'm about to be punished for being "mouthy," it gives me an opportunity to explain if I was indeed not being disrespectful, but Master misunderstood me. I do not abuse the privilege of this communication cross-check before punishment occurs; it's just a failsafe. Master knows I'm not the kind of person who would use it to wheedle out of a punishment I deserved.) 2) Holly answers. In this example, let's say she was tardy because she was messing around on the internet. That is not a good excuse. So, her answer would be "No, sir." 3) Master: "Why are you being punished, Holly?" 4) Holly: States reason, in this case she would say, "Because I was tardy, sir." 5) Master: Specifies desired slave position (Holly assumes any one of 10 positions immediately on command), or simply has Holly take down her pants without assuming a special position. 6) Holly assumes position and/or disrobes as necessary. 7) Master administers punishment. Holly is expected to understand that it will hurt...it is not for her pleasure. She is also expected to take it quietly and gracefully, remaining in position. 8) After being punished, Holly thanks Master for punishing her. Sounds complicated, but in reality, it only takes a couple of minutes, and insures that there has been clear communication as to why the punishment is occurring and whether the punishable transaction did, in fact, occur. P.S. Oh, and about the ass play thing...um, I too would be extremely turned on by the OP's described activity (if he carried through on his promise and inserted the thing fully), therefore it would not be an appropriate punishment for me. [;)]
|
|
|
|