Slaves' Right to 22

If you read our last post,  you saw a reference to a fancy Harvard touted study that purports to show that if a male in his middle years has at least 22 orgasms / month he has 2/3 the chance to contract prostrate cancer than his less sexually active counterparts.

In the absence of any scientific data to the contrary, I am going to assume that such a prescription for good healthy maintenance of those precious guy parts is based on good science and worth heeding.

Of course, just like those who deny the theory of evolution, think dinosaurs walked the earth 2000 years ago, or don't believe in "climate change", there are some of you out there who no doubt will insist that infrequent orgasms are the best way to maintain a male slave in good working order.

Nor would I argue  that the occasional sentence of abstinence (say one week every few months) for bad behavior - or just for the fun of it - is likely to materially raise one's health risks.

But that said, I am urging all of our readers - whether male slaves or submissives or female dommes - to sign onto a new addition to the Male Slaves' Bill of Rights: the right to 22!

Of course, Diane and Terri,  I suppose that doesn't mean that one's 22 monthly orgasms can't be administered while the cage is on and the hitachi is engaged.

Though I still can't figure out how that works!

Fortunately for this pampered house slave, Mistress is very indulgent. I have been on a 22 + / month diet for at least the last 22 years, even following the "no touch rule".

When I asked her if she was interested in following the advice of that crazy video posted here earlier in the week and limiting my cums to no more than once every 14 days, she scoffed.

"What would the point of that be, slave?"

Particularly with her side-dishes on hiatus due to scheduling issues these last few weeks, I think she would miss a good daily fucking, even if it comes from her same old, same old work-a-day cock.

Lucky slave!

In Defense of Pampering Your House Slave

On Wednesday I reported on that guy who believes that "happiness" is enhanced by denying males sexual release, based on a formula that would limit old guys like me to a cum frequency of no more than 1 every 14 days.  You younger guys can do it a little more frequently, no doubt because he's younger!  The formula of (age-7)/4 was offered up without much explanation.

I can tell you that Mistress, when exposed to this argument scoffed.  I think she likes to spoil her slave, or at least has come to believe that I behave better when encouraged to "release" all those sexual fluids on a regular basis.

But at the back of my mind was my recollection of studies that said men have a better chance of avoiding prostrate cancer.  Of course my own thoughts on who does or does not get prostrate cancer is purely anecdotal. I am at an age when I've known several guys who dealt with this disease, including my own father, then in his mid-70's.  The other, younger guys I know all fall into a certain category: nice guys who didn't seem likely to be getting much "action" at home, and unlikely to look for it elsewhere. (Of course, I could be completely wrong about that, I'm just making a probably unfair judgment about them based on their personalities and who their spouses).

Fortunately, one of our commenters did the research for me and came up with an article  with the name Harvard attached to it.  From there I found another article with the name Johns Hopkins attached to it.  The gist of both is that initially folks hypothesized that more frequent sex might actually encourage prostrate cancer by exposing a guy to STDs and inflammation.  But then someone actually did a study of sexually active guys in middle age and this is the summary:

Previous studies have been inconclusive, notes Platz, but "taken together, they hint that men who have more sex, or who have had a sexually transmitted disease, are more likely to have prostate cancer."

Platz and her colleagues at Harvard and the National Cancer Institute were unconvinced. As part of a massive study, led by epidemiologist Michael Leitzmann at Harvard, they recently studied nearly 30,000 men participating in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study. Most of these men were white and middle-aged, and very few had ever had a sexually transmitted disease. "In 1992, we asked the men who did not have prostate cancer to report their typical number of ejaculations per month in their twenties, forties, and during the past year," says Platz.

Could a man's sexual activity have any repercussions-one way or the other-on his risk of getting prostate cancer?

Over the next eight years, nearly 1,500 of these men went on to develop prostate cancer.

The scientists found that men who reported more ejaculations-more than 21 a month, on average across their adult life-had two-thirds the lifetime risk of prostate cancer of men who reported fewer (4 to 7) ejaculations a month. Notes Platz: "Compared with men reporting fewer ejaculations per month at all ages, men who reported 21 or ejaculations per month had one-fourth the risk of prostate cancer."

Certain important features of this study make these observations more credible, she adds. One is the sheer number of men involved; another is "the fact that the men reported their ejaculation frequency well before they were diagnosed with prostate cancer." Also, the scientists were able to rule out such factors as a man's history of sexually transmitted diseases, which could have clouded the results.

Another recent study of many men, with and without prostate cancer, has produced similar findings, says Platz. "Based on these two large, well-conducted studies, men should not be worried that frequent ejaculation will cause prostate cancer." The next step, she adds, is to figure out why frequent ejaculation seems to have this protective effect, and the role inflammation plays here.

I am one of those fortunate guys who has averaged more than 22 orgasms per month for the last 23 years or so.  I would bet I am at about 30  / month over those years, with the occasional two-a-day canceling out the rare abstinence day. 

So it seems that according to this study, Mistress's approach to her slave's orgasm management - whether intended or not - may assure that my chances of getting prostrate cancer are one third less than those of you who have less than 21 cums per month. 

Of course, one can still draw the bad card and lose out, despite all that good behavior. We all know folks who have had heart attacks who eat well and exercise regularly.  Sometimes your number is up despite the "odds".  

But in terms of my own "happiness", and while toying with tease and denial every now and then can have  a certain appeal, I am glad Mistress has elected to "stay the course" and continue pampering her house slave. 

14 Days of Denial? Really?

Mistress and slave are in their final hours at our sublime SW sanctuary.  We head to the airport after some brisk wake-up sex in a little while.  Yesterday we took a break from skiing (well the lifts were closed as is typical on a Monday this early in the season), and headed into town for some Christmas shopping. It was a restful final day, that included our morning sexual adventures as well as a late afternoon bike-ride.

And while we did not engage in a two-a-day as we had earlier in the week, our morning sex was particularly energetic, with lots of cock riding after slave deployed Mistress's power tool for an exuberant "starter cum".

But what if slave's sexual activities were one sided, like our blogger friend Terri over at "A Married Sissy", who seems to spend weeks at  a time on lock down while Diane enjoys both his oral attentions and the benefits of her lover Paul's cock.

According to this video seminar I stumbled upon (Sexual Denial Makes You Happier), men who have their sexual climaxes rationed are actually happier!  Of course, it's not clear what the scientific basis for this guy's "formula" is, but let me explain.

He claims that the  pace of sexual release to assures a male's optimal happiness is determined by the following formula: (Age - 7) / 4.  That is take your age, subtract 7 and divide the result by 4.  For me that comes out to a cum every 14 days and 4 hours.

Huh?

Of course, this guy is substantially younger than me - maybe 40?  So he's worked out a formula that would allow him to cum once every 8 days or so.  Ageist Bastard!

If you check out the video you will see that his formula for computing his "happiness" is very subjective. I would love to see this theory tested for replication and reliability in an independent laboratory, as any sound scientific theory should.

Interestingly, he is NOT saying a male like me attempting to optimize happiness should not engage in sex for 14 days.  Just not sex taken to orgasm.  So presumably I could deploy my humble work-a-day cock for Mistress's riding pleasures on a regular basis, but just retreat into frustration once she had her fill.

Nor does he mention the need for a cock cage, though I must say I would be tempted to "risk unhappiness" if not secured away during the moments when Mistress was not requiring her cock's services.

Finally, I have operated on the theory that there are health benefits to frequent sexual release?  Aren't their studies that regular usage of all those organs down there helps keep prostrate cancer at bay?  Or have I been making that up?  Doesn't all that release of sexual juices make me a more docile and complaint slave, anxious to please Mistress? Or a t least cook her a nice dinner?

So what do our readers think? Is there any scientific validity to this theory?  Would pacing my sexual releases to once every 14 days make me happier, as well as a more devoted and loving slave?  Or would it turn me all cranky and discontented?

Day in the Sun, Night On the Town

Mistress and slave are winding down their pre-Christmas getaway. On Sunday we packed lots of action into our day: robust wake-up sex with the rising sun shining over the mountains into our bedroom window; lots of skiing on slopes that have more than the typical share of snow this early in the season; then back to our little hideaway where Mistress enjoyed some blazing afternoon sun.

Don't you like the tights she wore under her ski pants?  I know her slave did!

After a nap to rally our strength - with a little worship thrown in - Mistress and slave headed out for a night on the town.

At a "silent auction" for two local charities, we sipped wine and mixed with some of the locals, particularly a recently married f/f couple who seemed taken by Mistress and a little disappointed when they discovered that the balding guy standing next to her at the bar was actually with her. Nevertheless they provided lots of entertainment.  They described themselves as denizens of these parts as well as LA and Denver, who appear on a TV show which is a sort of "Shark Tank" for the burgeoning cannabis industry prompted by the legalization movement in CO, CA and WA.  The two were probably in their early 50's, leaned to the femme side of the spectrum, and were charming in a brash Hollywood sort of way.

Somehow the conversation turned to how welcoming the local community, which might otherwise seem rather traditional,  has been  to lesbian ladies and gay marriage. The blonde of the couple speculated to me that it may be that the western culture was well tuned to strong, independent female "pioneer" types, who could raise a barn, rope a steer, or put a man in his place, if need be.  I happily agreed.

"And that's exactly how Molly and I are", using my best deferential tone.

"So she wears the pants in the family", the blonde said, nodding toward Mistress, with a raised eyebrow. Her eyes seemed  focused with more than a little interest on the fit and sensuous body filling the short skirt and black tights that Mistress was wearing for this "fancy" holiday event.

"You could certainly say that.... absolutely.  I try to be of service to her in whatever way I can....cooking, whatever...."

I'm not sure she got the point about my role here in the UCTMW household, but she and her spouse seemed very interested in getting back in touch with Mistress in the weeks to come.