Getting spanked is erotic? Duh, you knew that. You’re here, aintcha? And it’s right in the blog subtitle.
But over the years, there’s been a ton of BDSM porn that treats spanking as a thing done unto others, for the sole pleasure of the sadist doing the spanking. That makes the frankness of this book cover something of a treat:
Update: This scan has been all over the place lately, but I think Zille may have been the one who actually put it on the internetz.
Usenet ain’t what it used to be these days (damn these kids with their tubes and tumblrs and torrents and newfangled ways of hiding porn from their tech-challenged elders!) but sometimes I can still find gems like this little vintage caning and whipping photo sequence:
Erectus says this is a scene from the 1968 movie The Headmistress. If I am reading IMDB right, this is probably the actress Julia Blackburn getting whipped:
I’m torn about this post because sometime in the last couple of years, about half of my favorite sex blogs tore themselves apart doing boring old sex toy post after boring old sex toy post. So, I try to keep the toy posts and links to a minimum, even though they do help pay the server bills. And since I just made a toy post last week, I wasn’t planning to do so again right away.
But then my favorite sex toy store rolled out another one of their big sales, in celebration of San Francisco’s 2010 Folsom Street Fair. And in these recessionary times, who can afford not to at least check out a sale, to see if there are discounts on toys you’ve been lusting after?
Three heavily discounted items in particular caught my eye; two old Spanking Blog favorites and one item that looks like it ought to be, though I’ve never actually had my hands on it.
This was the first cane Bethie and I ever played with, so as you can imagine, we still recommend it fairly highly. If you get the small one, it’s quite mild by cane standards, also.
Next, another old friend: a comfy black spandex hood for girls (and boys if you play that way) who insist on peeking when they shouldn’t.
I recommended them here before (during a different sale) and wrote:
They just slip on like a ski mask, no messing with buckles and straps and no worries about collar tightness at the neck, and you can breath through them just fine, so no worries there; plus they come off instantly if the hoodee panics when you aren’t wanting that. They look nifty, especially if your girl has been trying to control you with pouting and remonstrative looks. But, best of all from my spanker perspective, they are utterly effective as blindfolds, with no peeking possible. No more will she get away with cheating at your game of “guess the instrument”! I love these things, end of story.
Last, the item that I haven’t actually seen or handled, but which looks like it would become a swift favorite: the Daddy’s Belt slapper toy.
The description reads:
A clever twist on the classic punishment belt, this slapper has a traditional belt buckle and loop, and 14 steel rivets holding a looped strap together as a handle. The strap makes a fear-inducing snap, when grabbed at both ends and quickly straightened. The strap is 1½” wide, and 17″ long in a loop.
On pages 245-246 of his famous Index Librorum Prohibitorum, the bibliographer of erotica Henry Ashbee (writing as Pisanus Fraxi) reproduced substantial chunks of a letter omitted from the more common edition of a work called Part The Second Of The Exhibition of Female Flagellants. The “curious and facetious letter” contained advice to the editor respecting illustrations for the book.
I can only say that for material first written prior to 1885, this is awfully familiar stuff, instantly recognizable to anybody who has run a spanking blog and fielded comments from some of the more fanatical fetishists out there. Apparently for as long as there have been fetishes, there have been people who want to make sure that their fetish material is uncontaminated by anything that doesn’t match the fantasy playing in their minds’ eyes.
Goes the letter:
“I hope (a hope the title seems to encourage me in,) [the book] will consist of a display of Female Backsides, for though I think a Ladies Bum uncovered an agreeable and diverting object, I would not give a farthing to see a man’s Arse. This I believe is only agreeable to persons of a certain description, too bad to be countenanced.
But to see the representation of an agreeable young Lady having her petticoats pulled up, and her pretty pouting Backside laid bare, and seeming to feel the tingling stripes of a rod, is amusing enough: such is that excellent print of yours, the Countess Du Barre’s Whim, which is nearly perfect in its kind. I would therefore, have your book contain such subjects and such descriptions.
Now a word or two to the engraver. Let him pourtray the Lady’s Backside, which no doubt will be the principal figure in the piece, round, plump, and large; rather over than under the size, which the usual proportion of painters and statuaries would allow; let him in general present it full and completely bared to the eye; though in some plates for variety, he may give it us sideling, or a little bit of the Ladies under-petticoat or shift, shading some part of it, and, let it be remembered, that if he has that complete knowledge of his subject I imagine he has, and is a man of genius, a large field is open before him to display it in. He may show us several different sorts of Backsides, all of them natural, and proper ; all of them elegant and handsome (for there is almost as much difference in tails as in heads) but not all alike; he certainly will not give the little round firm backside of fifteen to five and thirty, nor the full mellow bum of the middle aged Lady, to the boarding school Miss.”
