Things going wrong with chastity, awkward situations and "fails"
Damien could you elaborate on the difficulty?
Well, lying in bed, it's quiet, there's nothing to occupy your mind, you're naked (at least I am), you think of some individual or situation that turns you on, you're horny to begin with from lack of release ... that's probably more than enough for this forum.
Sasha Still a pretty good friend now it’s a running joke between us
i had a similar situation with my best friend, she once saw a part of the belt and since then she knows all about it. but she is also the only friend who knows about it and it is good to have someone to talk to about it. 
other than that, i can't say that things have really failed, as an involuntary wearer, i've always taken great care not to have any avoidable emergencies. the silicone on the waistband was changed once. otherwise I can think of another unpleasant experience with the thighbands, but that doesn't fit the thread here
- Edited
Here's another fail, a keyholder fail. And I was the keyholder.
Another Australian girl, one I met online when she was looking for orientation in a crisis with her bf. The two had gotten her a my-steel months before, and the first stories I received were indicating that her bf was a little careless with her keyholding. I asked about her own motivation in this chastity quest, and she deflected the question, asserting she's just passively enduring things and her bf is the one in control.
After a while I had understood that the two were both technically virgins, and her plan was to use the belt to make sure the relationship remained sexually limited, at least for a while. His keyholding role was thus only accepted half way and grudgingly, and he more and more refused to care for comfort, hygiene breaks, security, her emotions and his friendship with her. They broke up over an alleged "affair" (she kissed a girl friend at a party) and, after making a fuss out of his key possession, he gave her back her keys two days after it was over.
So two weeks later, she mused that it's a waste and a shame, that expensive my-steel belt just lying around, and I became her (very) remote keyholder - hey, it's not like I didn't ask her to offer the keys to her girl "affair", but she was too shy to come out to a local friend.
Being keyholder to a girl who discussed her belt cheating efforts with you in great detail only weeks before is additionally entertaining, and as she's a funny, spontaneous and outgoing person we enjoyed a few months of her chastity quest together - she was kind of determined to remain chaste, even tried to superglue her lock once, and at another time asked me to throw away her code - but of course had her moments where she wanted out, and quite often got I wooed, bribed, shouted at, seduced and baby-dog-eyed. But in all those months, she never used her safe word, and the only real problem was to remotely keep her disciplined through her hygiene breaks.
This February, contact broke for three days, and I was worried. Even more so, when I got a "everything's fine but I need the code by tonight 11pm", and when I asked for the reason, I only got a repeat "no problem at all" and her safeword.
So with doubts and awkard feel, I texted her back the code to her mechanical wall safe with both her keys in it.
She's pregnant now. She had unprotected sex with a fellow student she had never mentioned before on the night I gave her the keys back. She described the sex to me in detail, and that she had dreamt about being pregnant for months, and how it had become her most important goal in life. She has the full support of her parents, and she says maybe the guy will stay with her, but that would be not too important. She says she's happy. I was flabbergasted. Can you fail harder as a keyholder?
Damien I mean, on the one hand you let her do the one thing a chastity belt is supposed to prevent, and it is fair to see that as a keyholding failure. Safeword use should immediately be followed up with a conversation about boundaries and why the safeword was used, and you did not have that.
On the other hand, you probably did not have an unlock procedure in place, and in that case it was the right call to end the no-longer-consensual arrangement as quickly as possible. Give her access to the key first, talk later - the safeword means she no longer consents. The fact that she decided to violate her chastity before talking to you is on her. Being her strength against safeword misuse only becomes your responsibility if you have (consensually) defined a safeword procedure that does not start with an immediate unlock.
- Edited
youdontknowme you probably did not have an unlock procedure in place
Consensual unlock procedure, that's an intriguing idea. I'd be curious what the wearers (well the ones who have a say about it, I'll never get used to the concept of involuntary wearers) here think about it.
On the other hand, this Australian girl never had her own emergency key, so I found (and still find) it adequate that she could safeword out immediately any time, with the questions discussed only after the safe has opened. It was just - surprising!
I think as you.
Damien Consensual unlock procedure, that's an intriguing idea. I'd be curious what the wearers (well the ones who have a say about it, I'll never get used to the concept of involuntary wearers) here think about it.
In the context of BDSM play, it would probably considered a form of CNC. Best not proposed by the keyholder unless they are very close to the wearer. In the context of "serious" belt use, it could be argued that it is a valid measure to combat self-destructive impulsive behavior, but still, such arrangements push the boundaries of FRIES consent.
Damien Consensual unlock procedure, that's an intriguing idea. I'd be curious what the wearers (well the ones who have a say about it, I'll never get used to the concept of involuntary wearers) here think about it.
I think this is the only adult way to do this, otherwise you are someone else's prisoner, at least as far as wearing chastity gear is concerned. I could understand someone surrendering control over their body in some way as part of a game, e.g. some sort of BDSM-like scene, if they get off on that. But trusting someone else enough to give them irrevocable control, even for a period of time, no.
Damien But the safeword made this whole conversation mute.
It left you speechless? lol
- Edited
MissBlossom moot. I meant moot, not mute! It's been a while since I learnt English in school
Damien
Oh, you didn't mean "moo"?
Damien surprised how much resistance the cables put up against my side cutters
That is because the thin looking cables apparently really are some kind of stainless steel, cutting the same thickness of zinc-plated PVC-coated steel cable is significantly easier. But even then, for the diameter (which looks to be about 4mm) that is used by FS or for rear cables used by other manufacturers the correct tool are bolt cutters and if that is not available it makes more sense to either file or saw through it (which as you are cutting individual wires and in the process fraying the cable is surprisingly easy. But note that the same effect introduces another, and somewhat unpredictable, injury hazard into the process of cutting something off from someone).