The life of the mind is sexy, even if it’s inadvertent

So, I was scrolling through some pictures and couldn’t help from pausing over this one:

A nice girl, with a lovely bottom. Just another photo, right?

What got my juices flowing is the depth of communication created by the poster in the background. The poster itself can be seen in more detail here, but briefly it is the famous 1911 US socialist “Pyramid of Capitalist System,” showing how capitalism “really works”. (Whatever your politics, its incontrovertible that a handful benefit wildly while most grind through life worrying about their mortgage and health care, and maybe that’s not the best way to organise the world?)

Anyway, the point is the poster in the background changes everything in the foreground. Suddenly it is no longer just another girl showing her bum, but a really quite complex musing on exploitation and choice. Because of course, nudity is political. Who keeps their clothes on, who takes them off, who is the viewer and who the viewed, is all about power.

Women’s organisations have, with mixed success, drawn parallels between exploitation of workers and of women — mixed because, submission and proto-exploitation is a very common erotic choice. Desire is mostly politically incorrect and all that. Also (let’s avoid naivete) the undressed women is not powerless. She has quite significant control over the owner of testosterone and can shape him to her will.

With all that in mind, suddenly there is a lot going on in this picture for me. A statement on many levels. And as one who finds thinking women sexy, I find myself fantasizing what else this woman has to say? Yes, I drool over her cheeks, but an interesting head makes them twice as nice.

It’s likely this is all my construction — the poster probably just what was there in the background when some leering photographer snapped pictures of just another model. But, there is the worker’s cap to make the link, so maybe I’m right…?

The apparel oft proclaims the man …

Following a now-quite old post here on why spank pay sites give me cause for pause, someone popped up in the comments box to helpfully point me to Spanking Tube. Thanks. Of course I already know about it. Yes, there are some real couples posting their own clips. But it is mostly a forum for the pay sites to show their trailers and the whole thing is set up by ‘Real Spankings’.

Anyway, not to say that the pay sites don’t do some good work (and I happily pay to see a movie or buy a CD in the vanilla world). It’s just not clear to me what the levels of real exploitation are, that’s all, and as much as I can find ‘play’ or chosen exploitation sexy, real exploitation is a huge turnoff. The thin, um, red line is crossed. And in pay-spank sites (as in all pornography) I often can’t tell whether it’s been crossed or not.

spanking-1

Cargo shorts? Dude, like, c'mon

Anyway, thus cycling back to Spanking Tube after a few months and seeing what’s out there currently, I was given to the following thought. It’s clear that one can’t in the spanking world generally say “what is good for the goose is good for the gander.” The whole field has an awkward double standard: If she’s been bad she get’s spanked; if he’s been bad, well, what happens? And I’m not saying switching is the answer. It’s just a pickle.

But there is one area where I feel certain goose gander eqivalency can and should apply — or at least, speaking for myself, I like to apply it — and this is in dress. I feel if she’s well turned out, in a nice skirt, with elegant heels and so on, I should be more-or-less in the male equivalent: proper trousers, formal shoes, collar shirt. If she’s  in an evening dress, with perhaps …mmm… stockings and suspenders (US translation: garter belt), I should be in a dinner jacket or equivalent.

The blog commenters are going to kill me, I know. (Just kidding, I love it!) I’m not saying one needs to dress formally to spank or be spanked, just that it’s meaningful if the couple dress more-or-less equivalently.

I feel it does two things. First it shows respect. We all want respect, dominants, submissives alike. It just takes different forms. A submissive doesn’t want respect in the sense of simple reciprocity (you spank me I spank you back) but she does surely want it in the sense of having her submission honoured, that is, honouring what she is giving, which is a lot. We dress up for client meetings or job interviews and so on to show respect. Taking the time and care to dress equivalently to her level of dress shows respect in that same way.

A bonus applies too: Dress helps put us both, dom and sub, into the frame of mind. That’s what the heels and stocking are all about. For my part,  I know I feel different in formal dress, real trousers, a suit, or even a tux. I feel more “executive”, a little more styalised in my masculinity, and I intuit that this plays a not inconsequential role in switching on feminine submissive fantasies.

Mesmerised by Red Charls

I was introduced to a site called Red Charls “site amateur, gratuit” by a correspondent who popped up in my email inbox with the most enticing review, waxing lyrical and far too deliciously not to quote a bit – see below.

I see spanking and DD as essentially theatre of the mind, and I’m generally more pleased by a good story than a picture. But these photos are really something. On the downside, Charls’ spanking section is merely one tranche on a site that does rope and candlewax and other (to me) mere clutter. And it’s very “Euro-noir” in overal ambiance. Yawn. But there is real art here.

ss-rc-203

ss-rc-45a

First, the photographer, whoever he or she is, is a genius. The pictures are not just pleasingly polished, clear, well composed, beautifully lit, colour-balanced and so on, but they also breathtakingly feel the ‘motion’ of spanking. The swing, the strike, the squirm, it’s all humanity-in-motion and it’s all captured. The pictures also seek out other things that are hard to express: firmness of purpose, gentleness of intent, totality of submission, and so on. It’s a pure an evocation of masculinity / femininity, utterly different in aspect, dress and role, colliding with a desire that leaps off the page. To me it is just smokin’.

Another perspective – what my correspondent (who’s name I’ll withhold, but who identifies herself as a straight female from New England) had to say:

ss-rc-gg1 “Her hair is gorgeous and I like that it’s left flowing behind her. I like the simplicity of the bindings- just what appears to be soft green rope. Her positioning is again, simple, but perfect- leaning forward throughout, with her back arched and bottom pushed back pleasingly (photo 11 is stunning in this regard). She’s in simple heels, nothing too showy. There are about 33 photos in this series featuring this same girl/same scene, and the beauty of that is you can really see her going through it all, from panties on, then being pulled down slightly, and her bottom being completely white, to them finally settling where they are in these photos- acting as a bit of a binding in themselves – preventing her from opening her legs wider, all the way to her bottom being rendered bright red…

“I like the implement too, which is simple as can be, the man’s arm which is shown to be veiny and muscular, and the strength that that implies. But I have to say the thing that captivates me the most is the markings. #13 in particular, is the one I find myself staring at. The markings are so obviously real, and freshly received, all the way from that beautiful curve of her lower back- how you can see the imprint of the stitching in the leather and that it’s higher up on the right since he’s on her left & is using his right hand, the redness across her cheeks, which in this photo is in the midst of being walloped in double whammy fashion, down to her upper things- particularly her upper inner thighs, and then, of course, those panties again, just below it all. Am I crazy for finding this breathtakingly hot?”

Spanking marks and the workings of identification

spanking-caning So I was setting up a few links to blogs and sites I find compatible (please link!) and I came across an interesting short post “Marks” by Cyndi at Her Secret Corner.

Cyndi says: “I don’t know why it is, but I’m turned on by marks. An overall red bottom is good, but discernible marks are where it’s really at for me. Of course, I’m only into dd scenarios, so I think it has something to do with the idea of power and control.”

I have to confess too that I find marks very attractive – good marks, like in this picture. Not brutal marks. (The boss must never loose control.)

So what’s going on? Let’s first say that marks mean a certain level of spanking impact, and with a stiff implement – cane, crop, brush, etc. So marks mean he has, literally, “made an impact” and that impact will be lasting. Let’s say he crops her and leaves good, warm marks, red and raised, and then takes her out to dinner. He knows and she knows, and he knows she knows, that she has those marks under her skirt. It lenthens the spanking’s impact, allowing it to linger. Mmmm. Who could wait to get home?

Also, with marks on her bottom, she inevitably carries the spanking – the alignment with her authority figure – into the everyday. Next day, let say she goes off to work, or to a party. She secretly carries her consciousness of his power everywhere she goes. That’s attractive.

Also, marks are strong “markers” (literally) of identification in every society. In traditional societies people paint their faces, pierce their skin, and so on, to show affiliation with the group. In modern societies people identify themselves with sporting teams by painting team colours on their faces and bodies at matches. Some tatoos are strong markers of couple or group identification.

In this same way, her marks are proof of identification with him, his authority and discipline, and the spanking process. They should fade soon of course (play safe!) all the better to be renewed frequently and vigorously.

The visual and the tactile in the spanking position

spanking-ready

For fear of falling into a terrible cliché, I do think there is much in the old truism that male erotics is visual. We respond to pictures. Not all pictures, for sure (what’s the merit in the gynaecological, I ask myself?) But the image is a big part of the erotic. For women, apparently – and I’m very happy to hear thoughts on this – the touch, the tactile is the bigger part.

I think this plays out hugely in spanking. There is a huge payload in seeing the submissive in submissive position. Can be various positions, to taste, but we know what we’re talking about. See picture alongside (I think it was a Girls Boarding School pic, but I don’t exactly remember. I’m not a member. Not a member of any pay site, but that’s for another post).

Point is there is much attraction in seeing the submissive in position. What is it saying? Could it be: “I am here, lifting my bottom to you. It’s yours to take, to spank, as you see fit.”

Now, she may actually thinking “where did I put my cell phone?” but the point is the picture, the visual field, is erotic. If you spank the bottom and she remains in position, all the better. But there’s little tactile attraction other than a heated-up hand, and none at all if one uses an implement.

Thinking what it must be like from the other side, there’s no visual field for this woman. All she sees is the bed’s headboard. If OTK, all she would see is the floor. The erotic must be in the revealing, in the making self available. And then of course in the touch, which will come, which may be a pat or some very telling swats, as he chooses.