 |  |  |  |  |
We lost something when politicians stopped taking public transit. Caption here says “At Bristol station, on Saturday, a frantic suffragette attacked Winston Churchill with a dog whip.”
See Also:
Riley from AAA Spanking is getting double punishment in this screenshot. She’s getting her hands spanked with a heavy leather strap while she’s holding a sudsy bar of soap in her mouth:
Presumably she gets a lot more with the leather if she drops the soap.
See Also:
The legendary fetish queen Bettie Page just won this catfight, and now she’s rubbing in her victory with a solid hand spanking:
See Also:
The Giamonster captioned this video “POV: u can’t sit right cuz your boyfriend taught u a lesson.”
Looks like it will have been a memorable one!
See Also:
For as long as we’ve had photographic BDSM porn, we’ve had fake cane welts and whip marks. Once I even found a photo of the fake marks being applied to a model’s bottom.
My editorial policy on marks is somewhat multiply-lobed. To protect gentler sensibilities, I try never to show real/actual open cuts or blood (though I did once show a bloody paddle of cruelly-innovative design.) I don’t worry much about severe or colorful welts. I don’t worry at all about whether a given set of marks is real or fake, because art is art, and good forgeries offer the same pleasures as the real thing when it comes to visual media. (More discerning readers sometimes remonstrate with me about this.) However, at the risk of contradicting myself, if marks are too obviously faked, I’ll avoid and not share those images, for the same reason that nobody likes to watch an obviously-faked orgasm. And, finally, I generally avoid faked “bloody” marks, which I find far more distasteful than any honest dents and dings that may result from heavy or enthusiastic BDSM play.
Some of you may never have seen what I’m talking about. We don’t often see fake blood in porn these days, because the credit card companies prohibit it. But for a brief time in the anything-goes cash-paying 1970s, when all the rules were changing, it wasn’t uncommon. Artsy film makers were making outrageously bloody exploitation and horror films, while pornographers were experimenting with cheap special effects and wondering what would sell in the under-the-counter magazine space. And so it wasn’t at all uncommon to see cheap attempts at making BDSM porn — usually by vanilla pornographers who didn’t understand kink and missed or misunderstood all the important fetish signifiers — that included super-fake bloody whip marks. Because of my interest in vintage porn, I come across it surprisingly often.
Despite my usual practices, I’m publishing these two images from the 1970 Dutch porn magazine Kwak #5. I suppose I want to preserve and transmit the memory of just how cheesy and terrible porn could be, half a century ago. These whip marks are extensive, but appear to have been painted on with runny catsup or perhaps cheap theatrical blood. In truth I’m far more interested in the faux-medieval costuming, which sadly isn’t shown very well. But since many of you may not expect to see fake blood here at Spanking Blog, the painted-on whipping marks are obscured. Click the image to see them in all their dubious glory.
See Also:
There’s been a lot of attention recently to a ten-second clip of right-wing demagogue Tucker Carlson saying “when Dad gets home, you know that he says? You’ve been a bad girl! You’ve been a bad little girl, and you’re getting a vigorous spanking” in a speech at Turning Point USA:
I used the word “creepy” in the post title for a reason; I acknowledge that it’s subjective as hell. But we all recognize the intensifiers in that sentence as sexualized. If Tucker were talking about an actual Dad, spanking an actual girl-child, rather than an erotic power exchange impact-play session between roleplaying adults, the repeated “bad girl” and the adjectives “little” and “vigorous” would be out of place. We all understand: that’s porn talk, kinky talk, like we celebrate here at Spanking Blog all the time. It’s not something we’d feel comfortable hearing an actual dad say to his actual teen girl children.
But Tucker? He’s making an extended metaphor, between what he considers an intolerable cultural and political situation (beyond the scope of this blog and this blog post) and an imaginary domestic discipline scenario that we are to understand as metaphorically equivalent to what will happen when his preferred candidate wins. In the 11-second clip above, he’s speaking the words of “Dad” to a pair of rebellious teens, described in the extended clip below as a “your 14 year old [who] light[s] a joint at the breakfast table” and a “your hormone-addled 15 year old [who] slam[s] the door of her bedroom and give[s] you the finger”. Watch the full minute and a half, and it becomes clear: he’s describing this domestic punishment scenario with a lurid and pornified enthusiasm.
Whatever we may think of family corporal punishment for actual teens (never a topic for this blog), describing it in the sexualized words of adult-spanking roleplay porn is, yes, creepy.
See Also:
