The video from I Know Ayrel was posted twice, in slightly different versions, so Iā€™m going to assume it was scripted content.

Maybe someone can free the video. I'm not on Facebook, and web search doesn't show anything like that.

  • Joh likes this.

I am also not on Facebook, but I think I found the 2nd video you mentioned:
https://youtu.be/aGg3oT5x8Tg?si=AccatUEYST-SSM9a
If that is it, it has been posted here before and the general consensus is that the mom is just joking with the interviewer, though looking at some of the other things on that channel, I would not be surprised if @Marder is right and the whole show is scripted.

    pestulens I would not be surprised if @Marder is right and the whole show is scripted.

    Wasn't me saying that, but @audioguy58 himself - but I would agree. The whole channel looks like content generated as clickbait.

        Angelina I could see the video itself being genuine, but I think the mention of a belt was a joke.

            Finally, I have something meaningful to contribute. In that longer video, the daughter talks about practicing soaking. This is a supposedly-not-sex technique that wouldn't work while wearing a real chastity belt. Therefore, the chastity belt the mother talks about is probably more a symbol for her expectations.

            pestulens

            yes, i think so too. i also think there would be heavy reactions if a video with such content were true šŸ˜‚

              • Owl

                • Post #15
                • Edited

                Thanks for the recent updates.

                The facebook video I've yet to see (no facebook account ...); but I've seen the iKnowAyrel video. (Actually spent too much time with it.)

                For reference: The full video (Episode length 37:35 minutes, though it contains multiple stories, not just the "Castitity Belt"-one) can be found at Youtube (as of 2025-02-01): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEDpahvde1c

                CAUTION: Especially if you have sensory processing issues, ONLY watch if you have masochistic tendencies. I can't say how much I abhor the neverending, added "(B)Uh" cries, pseudo-giggles, electronic iron hinges, fake heartbeats, ... and drum sounds!

                That being said, into details:
                In short, I see very little evidence that daughter wears a belt, besides the mother's comment. (Let's assume for a moment, that the portrayed relationships are actually legit.)

                At most, I could rather hallucinate than truly visually identify vague "might-be-veiled-shadows" / suspicious creases or traces of a solid belt (??) in some frames of the video.

                For anyone on the way into the rabbit hole:
                The Timecodes (based on a saved version of the video, AV1 video codec in webm container, UHD res) that could be most interesting to attempt to "discern" anything:

                • 04:42.908 to 04:43.009 (camera on her crotch (clothed! šŸ˜† ), as the tries to hide her phone)
                • 04:45.796 to 04:45.997 (dito, while she must reveal the phone)
                • 11:10.668 to 11:11:131 (as she bends towards the car and her skirt might reveal faint traces of a solid crotch band)
                • 11:36.741 to 11:37.488 (dito. Only if you believe. The skirt is also too thick to allow accurate assessment.)
                • (Maybe) 13:13:341 to 13:13.546 (as daughter talks to mother in front of car. But more color banding than belt shapes.)

                For now, I'd say: Sketchy at best. Maybe, someone with video image manipulation skills, contrast enhancement can extract more from the video. I've had enough and my fair share of staring at crotch and butt-frames.

                Then there is intrepidspiff's valid interjection ( https://unwedchastity.org/d/1148-two-items-from-facebook/13 ) that the daughter describes "Soaking". (I'd like to add, she even describes that a third person had supported by "Jump Humping", see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soaking_(sexual_practice)#Related_practices ).

                Firstly: Thanks intrepidspiff for enriching my knowledge. I had no idea that these practices existed as a known phenomenon and even had names.

                Secondly: I thought about the belt prohibiting these activities that as well. You are right, in case of a (properly tight) cable- or chains-rear. However, in case of a solid rear with (relatively large) anal hole plus a guy with relatively low girth penis ... it could physically work. (At least I remember having seen anal penetration through solid belt rear at some porn site.) Though it surely didn't look comfortable to me.

                At last: If mother and daugher actually made rules that forbade "no sex before marriage" (or maybe "not fucking") but actually allowed soaking as a loophole, besides 1 year of hiding a boyfriend, those rules were what I call a trainwreck. (Quote: "our little way of getting around my mom's rules", video at 09:00 to 09:33). A deterrent example how not to design chastity rules.

                Again, if you consider the whole story authentic at all.

                I've to admit I find the situations and interactions between characters in that story so erratic at times, that I like to pledge for "authentic". Anyway, it'd make a really surprisingly odd while also unconventional script. Maybe, that made me waste part of my life. šŸ¤¦ )

                TL;DR Owl tries to grasp why he wasted parts of his life with the iKnowAyrel videos to see hallucinations of a belt, listen to horrible sound effects, and describes how you can dive deeper into the rabbit hole as well. Better not.

                  Owl I thought about the belt prohibiting these activities that as well. You are right, in case of a (properly tight) cable- or chains-rear. However, in case of a solid rear with (relatively large) anal hole plus a guy with relatively low girth penis ... it could physically work.

                  No, you don't soak in the butt. The only reason that soaking supposedly is not sex, is because they are not actively moving.

                  • Owl replied to this.

                      • Owl

                        • Post #17
                        • Edited

                        intrepidspiff

                        Though transferring the concept to anal penetration - even though "soaking" probably wouldn't be the exact term any more (and they had to provide for lube ofc)) - seemed fine to me. If you stay in their "technically not f*cking" logic.

                        For the records: Whether his penis enters her kitty or rear opening was enough to call it sex for me. I consider the whole idea that any such practices wouldn't be counted as sex just because there was no active movement (well beside initial penetration šŸ¤¦ ) to be completely absurd. But to each there own.

                          • Owl

                            • Post #18
                            • Edited

                            intrepidspiff

                            I forgot to mention: The mother allegedly even gets to see the pictures from her daughter's "loophole" activities. Quote "lana backwards" -- for me that's indeed the video's silent, shining star ;-).

                            (Hence, I wanna adjust my judgment. That term (+ the soaking finding) gave my wasted lifetime back their meaning. I'm saved.)