Multiple Simultaneous Sadists
» S&M Fantasies
(This was written over a month ago while contemplating nonmonogamy.)
Some guys have fantasies of gangs, legions, socities of women dominating them as a group. That is yet another species of kink that didn’t occur to me until I read about it. Even then it was a long time before I entertained such a fantasy. And only rarely.
Why? Another baffler. A reflection of my bias to privacy? My dislike of groups? Absorption in the personality of the one controlling me? Lack of imagination?
Ideas once encountered tend to make their way onto the inner DVD player. Not all. Stories where consensual enslavement is legal leave me unmoved.
My imaginary scenes with multiple tops creep me out. I’ll admit something akin to shame. What better purpose for a blog about sexuality than confession the thoughts that make you blush?
The Couple
The most pedestrian is serving a couple. In response to an old personal - vanilla and gay - a man offered me the privilege of fellating him. Even without the latter, his claim of heterosexuality repulsed me. But pleasing a couple means all the enjoyable bits of human anatomy are available.
That never worked for me really. If only because my hypothetical hetero couples were just too damned normal. Perhaps influenced by what I saw in ads seeking such.
Even in vanilla life I’ve turned down the few offers of threesomes that have come my way. I should’ve been open trying the experience. Many of my friends did it.
The Cruel Girl
In high school one of the most beautiful girls in school tried to humiliate me. Among two thousand students I was the supreme outsider, the weirdo everybody knew. Happily for the sake of nerdy boys everywhere her attempt failed.
It was Alexandra who pointed out to me the cruel schoolgirl as icon. Being enslaved by a pretty but shallow young thing was so hot I felt sort of ashamed for having never thought of it.
So this smug young beauty - now likely a bored housewife with ungrateful children and a SUV - finally had her way with me. Mockingly bending my horny young self to her will she extracted my consent to do anything she demands. Out popped two of the jocks she hung out with and ahem
There’s an ethical dilemma: the boys are straight. My feelings about gay men who lust for heterosexual males because of their heterosexuality are complicated. As a young homo I was torn between pity and disgust.
The Wealthy Woman
This one must have been beamed into my brain from the planet Mars. I pictured myself on the floor of a limousine licking a woman’s shoes. She wore a discreet black cap and a veil: high couture widow’s wear circa the 1940s. While kind of nice it corresponded to nothing I could think of. Maybe a brain cell mutated.
She announced that I would be turned over to women who would train me to serve her. The latter derive I suspect from female bodyguards in some forgotten spy or adventure movie.
The trainers were specialized. One subjected me to physical violence. Another psychological torment: conditioning me to protocol and ritual. The last was a nurse specializing in cbt. (She came from a photograph of a cruel looking redhead whose appearance made me swoon. Otherwise I have no medical fantasies.)
The Centerfolds
I’ve bought three issues of Playboy. For interviews with David Bowie, Jimmy Carter and Fidel Castro. Some years back I wound up with stacks of the magazine at home. They were for my store but we were afraid to sell them because we were near a public school (Eventually we sold them to another shop.)
Those magazines helped me learn that having a woman control and hurt me was exciting. One particular centerfold made me realize that my masochism wasn’t restricted to my own sex. Like many of my psychosexual revelations this left me feeling very boneheaded: why didn’t I already know that?
Of course it was a bit of a surprise to find that I liked Playboy pictorials. I tended to think of the magazine as very anti-female. And the airbrushed women a bit - I’m not sure - wrong somehow. My shift probably stemmed from being on the rebound from the breakup with the woman I’d lived with for five years. (I was never able to look at any of the similar magazines. Playboy’s exploitation seemed good-natured. The others seemed creepy.
I’ve put aside worries about sexual objectification. And even though I haven’t bought one since the Castro interview I can think of the photographs as enjoyable. And have a fondness for some of them. At least up to recent times. (Though the women made of silicone have a masochistic appeal. The inflated lips and too symmetrical faces seem inhuman.)
But on to the fantasy. It makes me feel so shamefully ordinary.
It is impossible to imagine the average playmate as dominant. But given enough issues to leaf through I found several with the right posture and look. Which one to dream of? So hard to choose. How about a house filled with them? That worked.
The entertainment was in having so many different personalities. Though I could only imagine being with them serially. Too cumbersome a fantasy to sustain.
None of these evolved into regular fantasies.
Even when looking at drawings featuring multiple tops I focus on one woman and one guy. Any others I pretend aren’t there. More often I’m just turned off.


Comments
Interesting. My fantasies of being topped/enslaved nearly always occur in a Roissy-like situation where there is a whole house of us (men and women) and I’m abused/used/enslaved by a group of men, all of whom are essentially anonymous. (I never even picture faces or bodies for them. Often even in the fantasy I can’t/don’t see them. I’m blindfolded or facing away.)
Recently I have fantasized a couple of times about having more than one slave in bed with me, which is of course a whole different issue.
Posted by: Devastating | October 10, 2007 4:03 PM
Roissy like almost everything in The Story of O was pretty foreign to me.
I think this inhibition is just a sign of my asocial nature, inability to respond to many people at one time. While it might seem like that would make multiple partner scenes hot it just flips my off switch.
Posted by: Richard | October 10, 2007 4:09 PM
I found The Story of O amongst my mother’s books as a teenager and found it fairly compelling, but not initially erotic. It grew on me over time. I think it is part of what wired my brain this way.
Posted by: Devastating | October 10, 2007 4:13 PM
Wow, my mother never read anything but the trashy bestsellers of her day.
Posted by: Richard | October 10, 2007 4:20 PM
I just wrote about this today briefly on my blog. When it comes to straight sex, the idea of multiple partners is very hot. When it comes to BDSM, there’s such an increased level of trust necessary for me that I can’t imagine subbing to more than one domme. Also, I don’t know how I’d focus on more than one subject of my slavish attention.
But I’m new at this. Maybe it’s something that comes with experience.
Posted by: Under the Boot | October 10, 2007 8:21 PM
With the phone gig, there are very few scenarios fluster me. I can even do a “multiple female dominating the wimpy sub” scene and have a lot of fun with it. I prefer no more than two other girls, but can handle it if the caller desires more.
But…I detest “vanilla” multiple scenes, what I guess you would call “group sex.” I just don’t get it.
I’ve never desired multiple partners at the same time. I like the intimacy between two people. In fact, I would go so far to say that additional people actually dilute the experience. The broth just gets to thin.
Posted by: Angela St. Lawrence | October 12, 2007 1:15 PM
The idea of focusing on two or more people leaves me feeling confused. I can’t help but think / feel in terms of focusing on one person.
Posted by: Richard | October 15, 2007 9:10 AM
I agree about focusing on one person; that’s one reason I don’t go for threesomes. I’d much rather focus all my attention and effort on one woman.
But playing is a different story than sex in this regard, at least for me. I’ve been topped by two women at once on a few different occasions. Verrrrry hot. The feeling of being “teamed up” on is beautiful.
Posted by: roo-roo | October 15, 2007 9:46 AM
I think the whole point of multiples is not serving or focusing on one person, but of being overwhelmed and overstimulated.
This is why I like threesomes.
I will be tag teaming my pet this weekend. The other lady gets someone to pay proper attention to her shoes (her husband figures a pair of boots is a pair of boots). The boy gets some attentions I don’t normally provide.
And we have the opportunity to confuse the poor thing until he doesn’t know whether he’s coming or going, with him outnumbered by two female creatures with twice his stamina due merely to our number.
Posted by: R | October 23, 2007 12:53 AM
It is probably something I could enjoy with the right people even though it has no appeal for me in the abstract.
Posted by: Richard | October 23, 2007 11:29 AM