More Cage Time At Work?

Mistress is on the next leg of her long African journey. Now she's headed to Madagascar. Hopefully her internet connections will be better there. We've been unable to speak for about 5 days now. Which may be a record for us.  Although we've been able to communicate one or two times per day via text. And she's gotten the snap chats I have sent her documenting  my compliance with her "rules".

She also mentioned she's been texting with JJ too.

slave: "What's he been saying?"

Mistress: "Oh you know 'are you ready to be fucked? '  stuff like that.

slave: "I think he misses you, Mistress.

Mistress: "I think he does".

But in the absence of any real action to discuss here (other than self abuse), let's consider the implications of an article that appeared in the Times over the weekend: "It's Not Just Mike Pence. Americans are Wary of Being Alone With the Opposite Sex". Recall that recent article, in which the new VP stated that he will not dine alone with a female staff member? There was a lot of tut tutting over the implicit discrimination in such a policy. Some suggested that it was an anachronistic quirk of some former radio talk show host who calls his wife "mother".  But it turns out it is an attitude more widely shared than one might expect.

As the article reports, a recent poll shows that Americans have doubts about interactions between a married person and a member of the opposite sex, whether or not at work.  And the surprise is that women are more more suspect of such interactions as men.

When it comes to having a drink with a member of the opposite sex not your spouse, 60% of the ladies think it's inappropriate. 48% of men think it's inappropriate.

What about lunch with someone not your spouse, including a work colleague? 44% of women say "no". And 36% of men take the Mike Pence position of never dining alone with a member of the opposite sex.

(If they asked the question, "Is it appropriate to provide oral sexual pleasure to your female boss", they did not report the results).

Some argue that this disinclination to socialize with work colleagues is necessary to avoid false allegations of sexual harassment. The article quotes men who fear even meeting with a female colleague privately unless in a glass walled conference room, or with the door open. (A rule that Roger Ailes clearly did not follow!)  On the other hand, working women can fairly argue that such policies inherently discriminate against them, by eliminating opportunities for the types of interactions with their bosses that men in the workplace enjoy.

But there's a solution!

If more men  wore cock cages to work, then the risk that an innocent business lunch, dinner, or one-on-one conference would deteriorate into a sexual interaction on would be eliminated!

And being able to demonstrate that you were caged at work would automatically become an "affirmative defense" for a boss falsely accused of sexual harassment. Example: If  Bill O'Reilly had documentary evidence that he always left the house in a cock cage, no one would believe the stories about him inviting blonde female correspondents to his hotel room. He'd probably still be bloviating nightly on Fox News. What a loss!

There would not be a cloud hanging over Justice Clarence Thomas if he had been able to demonstrate that he was caged when he described that pubic hair on the coke can to Anita Hill in his office at the EEOC.

And if "mother" snapped a photo of Mike Pence in his cage every morning before he leaves for his office in the West Wing, he'd feel more comfortable lunching privately with his female staffers (if he has any). Or even Kelly Ann Conway!

As the policy of men wearing cages to work gains more popularity, it would encourage entrepreneurs to design and manufacture new and improved cock cage designs. Comfort would likely improve for folks like Terri and me. And prices would go down!  It's the American way!

Of course, it would't be fair to limit this remedy to inherent sexual discrimination in the workplace to male supervisors, would it?  Should lady bosses be required to wear a shield that would prevent them from demanding sexual favors from their male subordinates?

Let's not get carried away.

Biding Our Time

This sharing of the nest thing is getting a little old.

We've got two daughters at home with too much time on their hands. The projects and jobs that the cute Co-Ed started the summer with are spent and she does not go back for another two weeks.

The one who came back from Europe did not make plans herself, apparently on the theory that it was only a month before she left herself for College.

So here they are: loitering at the UCTMW World HQ, generating laundry and dirty dishes, and cramping their parents more exotic sexual stylings.

I'm sure it makes for a rather tedious "sex blog". Could UCTMW survive as a negligent parenting blog, or via low brow political commentary and movie critiques?

Moroni Forbid? (oops. see, now I'm lowering myself to Mormon jokes.)

Rest assured, Slave is still making sure I worship Mistress at the end of our work day. And there has been daily wake up sex here in the executive suite. But we haven't had a decent orgy, or a sleepover by Mistress's lover in weeks now.

She is going to drop by his house on Saturday morning.

"I figure a bike ride followed by sex Slave.... then home by around 2? Will that work for you?"

"No problem, Mistress."

She deserves a little "vacation" from her work and mommy roles, don't you think?

Speaking of work, Slave has handled some strange sex harassment cases over the years in my work role. Some have been very conventional: the dentist who can't take no for an answer from his hygenist. Others more exotic: the gay guy who's convinced that folks are discriminating against him, but then ends up with porn on his office computer.

But this week there was one I heard about that is sex blogable: the guy who gets fired for soliciting a co-worker to have sex with him AND his wife.  The husband and wife worked together. And there was a collection of other "young things" (female variety) around the office. Sounds as if the wife would let the husband know which of the young things she would find appealing, then it was his job to see if there was any interest in a threesome.

Apparently some women who received the query were offended and reported the solicitation. So the husband was fired, but the wife kept her job.

Now that's what I would call "taking it for the team."

But it also turns out that other women in the office were offended because HE NEVER INVITED THEM TO PLAY.

What, are we chopped liver?

You just can't win.



The lesson here is that when you are looking for a third or fourth, don't do it at the office.

Now that I'm thinking about it, maybe my office needs to watch out.

Yesterday as I wandered through the lobby, where a big screen TV mounted on the wall is usually turned to CNN, there were images of women in bikinis frolicking in some sand, swatting a ball back and forth, and frequently embracing one another. As the Mayor of London described the scene, they were like "glistening seals", but with nice curves and tans.

Presumably one of our female employees could accuse us of creating a hostile work environment with these images of cavorting semi-naked women on full display in the work place.

Drat. It was just the endless Olympics. 

Why don't table tennis players wear bikinis?