UllrsIshtar
Posts: 3693
Joined: 7/28/2012 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LadyPact If a chastity device was the same thing, there wouldn't be any worry about the s having a key because he's already wants to obey and the potential for *needing* a key for the sake of an emergency wouldn't be an issue. I disagree, in nuance, with that. I do agree with you that, if the only way you can extract obedience is by physical force, or restraints, there isn't that much submission to speak off, and it makes the whole D/s relationship kind of moot. However, for me personally at least, locks are an integral part of restraints that cannot be skipped on. Because without the lock, the mindset itself that the restraint is supposed to bring doesn't happen. I don't do collars without a lock, because collars without a lock don't create the same "mood" for me as collars with clasps do. (Hell for permanent wear collars I don't even like steel eternity collars, which can be opened with an allen wrench, because they don't feel "locked" enough to me. Nor do I like leather collars with a keyed lock, because leather can be cut easily. It needs to be steel with a keyed lock to create the right "mood".) So I also don't prefer cuffs, or gags, or chastity devices, or cages without locks. To me, the lock in and of itself is an integral part of the "mood" of an item that enhances my experience. And part of that "mood" is that the spare key, that the s-type holds, needs to be behind some sort of barrier where it cannot be accessed without the D-types knowledge, like the envelop I mentioned. It's got nothing to do with obedience -at least not for me- and I could be as obedient about not opening a lock with or without the key physically in my hand... but my headspace in both cases would be totally different. You lock a collar around my neck and hand me the key, and you may as well have used velcro, because at that point, the lock doesn't add value anymore. Another illustration to maybe make that difference clearer: I wear a white gold wedding ring my husband got me for our first anniversary. The first year of my marriage I wore a fake cubic zirconia ring. Did I feel less married the first year? Nope, not at all. Do I need a gold wedding ring as an affirmation of my commitment to him? Nope, but I sure do love wearing it. Do I feel the same about wearing both pieces? No, not at all. I didn't feel any less committed, or married, or in love, or appreciative of him when I was wearing a fake ring than now that I'm wearing an actual gold ring... but at the same time, the "mood" of both rings isn't the same to me either. When I use locks, either as a top or as a bottom, the "mood" is all that's important to me. My entire motivation for putting a collar, or a chastity device on somebody would be to create a certain headspace/mood in that person. Therefore, my choice between velcro, claps, or locks and between leather, plastic, cloth or steel would all be based on what the goal "mood" was. I've "tied" people up with sewing yarn, ordering them not to break the fragile strings, because of the way I felt at the time, and the headspace I wanted them to be in. However, when I select a lock for use having the key "easily" (without the enforcement that it will be know if it was used) accessible to the s-type ruins the "mood" that a lock brings for me. And therefore make the difference between using a lock and no lock non-existent, which defeats the purpose of selecting a lock to begin with. It's about creating the fantasy of the lock... not about the actual physical restraint.
< Message edited by UllrsIshtar -- 3/22/2013 3:41:07 PM >
_____________________________
I can be your whore I am the dirt you created I am your sinner And your whore But let me tell you something baby You love me for everything you hate me for
|