Future Male Chastity Technology
How sextech might shape the future of male chastity devices
The future is chaste!
Well, no it’s probably not.
Not all men are kinky. Not all kinky men are submissive. Not all malesubs are into chastity.
However, it’s certainly chaste for a significant minority of men. We know this partly because maybe 2.5% of men own a chastity cage, and because of the way male chastity seems to not be a conventional fetish, but rather supernormal stimulation. There’s also a delicious synergy waiting to happen when the 20% or so straight women who dislike penetration discover there are men who are overjoyed to wear cock cages in bed.
Since there’s a growing and competitive market for male chastity devices, we can expect new vanilla technology to be repurposed as (anti)sextech. This has already started, for example with 3D printed devices, some custom, and remote locking.
And that’s what this series — inspired by M Christian’s article on the future of Furries — is about.
Male Chastity Device Features
If we’re going to talk about the future of the male chastity device, then we need to define its features. I see these as “Convenience” and “Security”, each with its own aspects:
Convenience
The more convenient a device, the more wearable long term, and the more acceptable to partners, especially vanilla ones.
Practicality: How practical is the device to wear indefinitely? 0% would be a cheap metal full belt from a medieval “replica” shop. 100% would be… well imagine a SciFi hardcup full of nanotech like in my Chastity Planet setting that just sits there with no issues. I’d say my surgical nylon device comes in at about 90%, which is the current cultural upper limit — I have to be careful about swimwear and urinals, and couldn’t wear it into nude spaces.
Reversibility: To what extent does the device leave the wearer unmodified? 0% would be some appalling body modification. 100% would be a normal ball gripper cage that leaves no trace. A PA piercing rates as 50%.
Security
Security is, of course, a turn on. However, it also reduces reliance on trust.
Neutering: To what extent does this prevent sexual function? 0% is naked. 100% would be only achievable with the kind of futuristic device that features in my CARGO stories. Modern chastity devices normally rate 30% — since you can pull out the back. Add a piercing, and you still only get to 50%, because you can get off with a vibrator or anally.
Muzzling: How hard is it to remove the device in a normal bedroom in the moment? How finger-proof is it? 0% would be one of those Oxballs silicone things. 100% would be the titanium device with PA hook that Mina’s Bitch built. My current device is a 50% — I could probably break it off if I really wanted to.
Sealing: How hard is it to remove and replace the device, without getting caught? 0% would — again — be an Oxballs device. 30% would be something with a cheap lock you could pick. My current device is 100% sealed — I can’t remove it without breaking it or destroying one of a known number of seals.
Chastity Users
You might expect that the ideal device would have 100% Convenience and 100% Security. However, in reality, I think there are four archetypal users of male chastity devices, and each has different requirements and priorities.
Locked Subjects
Unsurprisingly, the two biggest drivers of male chastity are men with chastity fetishes.
Locked Bois: Gay men who present as locked for sex and treat the chastity cage as a body modification. The gay community seems cheerfully blaze about kink, so though there are toppy men who particularly like Locked Bois, Locked Bois aren’t really catering to a specific market. The typical Locked Boi is not greatly bothered by Reversibility, but Neutering needs to leave him enough function to get off anally.
Chastecels: Men who enjoy locking up but are otherwise celibate, with the possible involvement of a remote keyholder. Other fetishes may be involved, e.g. Sissy. He has the Locked Boi’s attitude to Reversibility and Neutering, but also often enjoys a lower Practicality score, especially if it buys better Security — the fuss and bother is a feature.
There are also two kinds of men who aspire to a particular sort of partner, but it’s better considering the partner directly: Locked and Chastes.
Partners
Where the chastity is in the context of a relationship, then the partner — or the idea of the partner — is the true user, even if the chastity was the subject’s idea! If the relationship is “born vanilla” — typical of F/m dynamics — then the partner may have qualms about anything less than 100% Reversibility. Generally, the more secure the device, the easier it is to get an interested but vanilla partner to take it seriously.
Keyholders: Men and women who enjoy controlling a “Locked” man’s genitals. The typical Keyholder requires 90% Reversibility because sex is still a possibility. They probably enjoy the imperfect Neutering because there’s fun to be had in making the subject orgasm without unlocking him.
Virgos: Specifically women who prefer “Chaste” men, meaning without functioning penises, and maybe get an additional sadistic kick out of this. The typical Virgo is enthusiastic about Security in general, and Muzzling in particular — she’s very keen on not encountering an erect penis. She’s also keen on Practicality, because the fuss around an impractical device centres the penis. Permanent chastity is her ideal. Were she single and chaste dating was a thing, she would have no qualms about a man who came pre-installed with a 0% Reversibility device, as long as it wasn’t squicky.
Future Chastity
I’m going to look at plausible future social and technological developments and how they might feed into each other. I’m also going to look at what might be technically possible, but unlikely and why that is. Expect some excursions into the underlying science and physiology when they become relevant.
Like all future histories, this is going to be a speculative one!
Check out one possible future of chastity…
Interesting that there's next to nothing on the rise of chastity on the Future of Sex website.