markules Yeah, I feel like trust is perhaps the most important thing in a wearer/keyholder relationship when it comes to the wearer's acceptance. If the chastity measures are enacted without the wearer's consent, not only is that legally and morally quite questionable, it is completely understandable why the wearer would resent their device, and how insisting the device might strain the relationship. Of course that does not extend to releasing the wearer whenever they feel like it, but the chaste-keeping must happen in boundaries agreed upon before the lock gets shut, in a state where the wearer's mind is not compromised by arousal or intimidation alike. Of course incentives, both positive and negative, are allowed from the keyholder's side, but especially in the case of negative incentives ("if you refuse, X will happen"), the boundary between guidance and intimidation can be a tricky one.
Obviously a chastity relationship that was never based on real, agreed-upon consent in the first place, like in Lukas's case where the parents just decided that there would be no self-pleasure under their roof, is unlikely to result in a happy wearer. Nate got lucky that, while it started forced, it seems to have developed into an arrangement he could agree with.
As for myself, the persons I trust are all people I would rather not in my sex life, so I stay my own keyholder for now. Still, I feel like there is some sort of internal keyholder relationship because my conscious, intellectual self is trying to keep penis access away from my more primal, horny self. Not so much of an interpersonal relationship though, which skips those trust negotiations.
markules It takes a lot of time and it does nothing for me
Does it really save you time? Because from my experience, not being able to get off just makes the arousal (and its corresponding distraction) last longer.