[MrVanilla]

I’m confused...

My LW says that she really enjoys being ‘tied up’ and she defines this specifically as using some sort of soft restraint that would be attached to the bedposts and then to her wrists. She also admits that there were only two people in her past that she ever trusted enough to do this.

Okay, I get that part.

The part I don’t get: is the fuzzy handcuffs? She has/had two pair. One was a real set of handcuffs outfitted with padded velvet slip on covers, and the other set were more like a pair of sports wristbands with a short chain.

It’s been brought to my attention that she used the ‘cuffs’ with way more than just ‘only two people’ in her past.

I was upset when I first understood this, and felt as if she’d lied to me - but I’m doing my best to give her every benefit of doubt. So, is it possible? - that she is making a very real and clear ‘mental distinction’ between wrists being bound behind her back in cuffs, and wrists being bound by neckties to the bed?

Is this a reasonable distinction for a woman to make when it comes to "being bound"?

(and if it is?: why is it so?)
.

 

[Jane_Doe]

If she is able to easily slip out of the handcuffs, then she may not be defining it as a real 'restraint' - and sports wristband type things seem like they wouldn't offer much restraint at all. I can't say about the real handcuffs. But being bound with wrists behind your back means you could still effectively 'move around' by yourself.

Tied to the bedpost, however, that'd definitely inhibit all movement. You're totally stuck there at the mercy of your captor.

So I can see a difference, but I'd still ask for an explanation from her, to make it crystal clear (when it comes to tying someone up, you don't want any grey areas if you can help it).

 

[TheMonogamista]

My LW says that she really enjoys being ‘tied up’ and she defines this specifically as using some sort of soft restraint that would be attached to the bedposts and then to her wrists. She also admits that there were only two people in her past that she ever trusted enough to do this.
.

Wow, so is she saying here that she wants to try this with you (or just that to do that would require a lot of trust)? If she is saying she wants to try it with you...how fun! And it shows the trust she has in you. Congratulations! Some couples never get there.
I've dabbled in binding and restraints, and YES!, the more restraint and the more my movement is inhibited, the more trust I must have in my husband. Or else I just can't go there. When I am completely restrained, say tied to the bedposts so that I can't get out of the bind without my husband's help, all of my vulnerabilities are exposed; and I can't turn a way, push a hand away, curl in to feel safer. I'm just there, at his mercy. Which is thrilling.
If your wife is willing to do this with you, what a tremendous gift she is giving to you. Best of luck!

 

[wiigirl]

I agree with Jane, I think it has do with how with how much she can/cant move in each setting. Each one probably requires a different level of trust for her

I get the impression of something like this myself:

Amazon.com: Best Bed Restraint Kit"--#1 Top Seller for Underbed: Health & Personal Care

 

[40isthenew20]

It sounds like a fun type of thing to do but my rod would go down if my wife told me how she did this with other guys. There's no need to throw that in your face.

 

[Omgitsjoe]

Mr V ...

I think you're putting too much thought in this and why not just appreciate the fact that your wife is willing to just have plain vanilla sex in the bedroom ?? If she had experienced this in her past ..... that's her past and why not enjoy this with her ??

I'm sure there are a lot of husbands here on TAM who wouldnt mind experimenting this way with their wives and here you have yours and feel it's an issue ?? Enjooooooy and good luck !

 

[MrVanilla]

...but I'd still ask for an explanation from her, to make it crystal clear (when it comes to tying someone up, you don't want any grey areas if you can help it).

Thank you for the quick response this morning. It gave me time to phrase the question correctly and to ask her to clarify things. Since I have zero experience in this area, I pretty much thought that bound was bound, was bound. She, however, had a hierarchy that I was not aware of, and once she explained things, it became far more clear.

It's a little like learning a foreign language. She'll use a word that I'm completely unfamiliar with and think that I understand what she's saying - when I don't have a clue!

Wow, so is she saying here that she wants to try this with you (or just that to do that would require a lot of trust)? If she is saying she wants to try it with you...how fun! And it shows the trust she has in you. Congratulations! Some couples never get there.

Yes. I am saying that my LW is hoping that I can find a way to try this with her. Whether or not 'we get there' is yet to be determined. =) That's why I'm asking, I would rather not get it wrong!

...the more restraint and the more my movement is inhibited, the more trust I must have in my husband. Or else I just can't go there.

So, if I read this right, you are also are agreeing with the other ladies that there are 'varied degrees' of being 'bound' and that the bedpost is a higher level of trust than bound wrists with free movement?

If your wife is willing to do this with you, what a tremendous gift she is giving to you. Best of luck!

If she could just 'gift me' the desire that one must need to do this... we'd be in much better shape!

There's no need to throw that in your face.

:scratchhead:

I'm sure there are a lot of husbands here on TAM...

:scratchhead:

Thanks Ladies!

 

[Interlocutor]

It figures....... Of all the people to be given this "gift" it is MrVanilla, who'll be complaining shortly how much it goes against his beliefs, is gross, and why can't she just want 5 minutes of missionary.......

See MrVanilla's profile to understand what I am saying.....

Like x 100

About time someone mentions that...

 

[justbidingtime]

I am more and more convinced MrVanilla is a troll..... He has a wife talking openly to him sexually after 10 years of ABSOLUTELY NO PHYSICAL CONTACT, and she has pushed, pushed and pushed the envelope with him and is consistently turned down and he comes here to be reassured that he perfectly within his right to say no to what have been very frankly "vanilla" requests, which 98% of people on here would jump at.....

So far he has said no to oral, light spanking, handcuffs just as a start. He hasn't answered any questions on orgasms and pleasing his wife.

Most importantly he hasn't addressed how they could go 10 years with NO SEX OR INTIMACY of any kind.

Remember too that this is the second marriage for both.

If he is not a troll I am convinced that his wife had an affair that is now over and she is trying to introduce what she had with her AP as there is no explanation at all for this behaviour.

Yes I admit along with Trying2fgureitout, they are the two most interesting posters on TAM......

 

[juicecondensation]

I am more and more convinced MrVanilla is a troll..... He has a wife talking openly to him sexually after 10 years of ABSOLUTELY NO PHYSICAL CONTACT, and she has pushed, pushed and pushed the envelope with him and is consistently turned down and he comes here to be reassured that he perfectly within his right to say no to what have been very frankly "vanilla" requests, which 98% of people on here would jump at.....

So far he has said no to oral, light spanking, handcuffs just as a start. He hasn't answered any questions on orgasms and pleasing his wife.

Most importantly he hasn't addressed how they could go 10 years with NO SEX OR INTIMACY of any kind.

Remember too that this is the second marriage for both.

If he is not a troll I am convinced that his wife had an affair that is now over and she is trying to introduce what she had with her AP as there is no explanation at all for this behaviour.

Yes I admit along with Trying2fgureitout, they are the two most interesting posters on TAM......

Yep, I think so to.