I do not regard the William Jones male device as entirely satisfactory. From the descriptions, it would seem that the end of the penis can be touched and stimulated without much difficulty. Although the penis cannot reach the erect condition, my experience suggests that it would not be long before the wearer could achieve orgasm. The 'La Ceinture' and 'Tollyboy' appliances both have this fault.
The Kastley device does not suffer this fault, but the protrusion of the penis sheath, both forwards and downwards, does seem to be a serious inconvenience, both in terms of visibility and of comfort. The devices used for masturbation prevention in the 1800's and early this century used much shorter penis sheaths, some pointing straight down, others with a lesser forward projection.
Another feature of these belts which bothers me is the straight waist-band. Any device designed for long-term wear must be comfortable in use, and not chafe anywhere. I feel that any properly fitting device should have a band which follows the contours of the hips, and not just a straight waist-band.
The 'Belgian' device seems to be about the most satisfactory male appliance on your pages, with one slight draw-back, that the base of penis, below the scrotum, could be pressed and manipulated, and this might lead to unauthorised orgasms.
There does not seem to be a wholly satisfactory female masturbation preventer on the market. Although many would adequately prevent the finger touching the clitoris, all would allow something to be inserted, (perhaps a piece of string threaded through from one side to the other, or a feather, perhaps), to provide stimulation. Many seem also to allow access to the edge of the vulva area which could also provide sufficient stimulation for orgasm to occur. I would be interested to hear from a real-life user of such a device as to how long it took for her to find a way of outwitting it.
The female devices used in the period 1870 through until about 1930 required complex and accurate fitting in the vulva area, but were much more effective in design. They even deterred unauthorised orgasms through the vulva-squeezing technique. I would be interested to know of any manufacturer today who produces a really effective female device that combines comfort and complete masturbation-prevention.
It seems to me that the manufacturers are missing an opportunity, here. There are, in effect, only two types of device on the market: one is the toy type suitable for only a few hour's wear maximum; the other is constructed like a bank safe, resistant even to determined attempts to penetrate it.
Any responsible master will surely give his slave a key in a sealed envelope for emergencies. Woe betide him if the envelope has been opened without a good reason! Why, then, does the belt have to be so strong? It seems to me that there is a place for a light-weight device, perhaps made of plastics, which would mean that any unauthorised attempt to touch or stimulate the parts would damage the device or its fastening and reveal the attempt to the master. The device needs to be robust enough for the day-to day knocks and shocks of life, but no more than that.
I imagine one made of perspex or other transparent plastic so that the parts can be seen and inspected, but are untouchable. The lock could be the sort of plastic security tag used in shops: use once and cut off; the master keeps a supply of spares. This would cause much less inconvenience and time-wasting in airport and other security systems. It would be far less obtrusive under clothing, and there would be less risk of skin, hygiene and corrosion problems with a plastic device than with metal.
Please keep my identity confidential.
Page last updated 97-Mar-10 by: Altairboy@aol.com