BeltedGirls.com

I agree. If you're giving control to each other, then you need to supply the locks to each others belts. Duplicates are all too easy to get cut.

A waist belt, for that amount of time ... she must have already spent a considerable amount of time getting used to it, because forming and getting familiar with steel-on-flesh is tiring me out something chronic!!!

Thanks for all the replies.
She says she has found a way to clean it thoroughly every day while wearing it, but came to my place today to shower with it off because she felt she needed a break from it for a few minutes.
I also got the news by e-mail that my Jail Bird is supposedly on its way. For now I am locked into a CB6000 and she is holding the keys to that at her place.
We have come to agree to an asymmetrical agreement. Though I will keep the keys to her security box, she will give the keys to mine to someone else with neither that person knowing whose the keys are and what they are for, nor me knowing who has them. But only once I am in the Jail Bird.
She did admit to me that she is worried of being tempted to cheat by leaving my home while leaving the lock unlocked or even switching locks on me, and so asked if starting next time she showers at my place, that I make it a strict point that I not give her the keys, but that I unlock her myself while she is still dressed (wearing the right clothing, she can expose the lock and not much else), that I keep the lock, and put it back on and lock it on her after her shower when she is dressed again. She also said I can switch the lock anytime I want.
I also learnt while she was showing me how to do this that an erection in a chastity cage is painful as it pulls on the scrotum. I guess fantasizing too much about sex won't be too pleasant locked up in that thing.
The main reason we agreed to the asymmetrical agreement is she said she trusts herself and me, but both only up to a point. I agreed with trusting me only to a point.
Since she might need the keys to shower, I will keep them. The Jail Bird seems easy to clean while worn, so she will pass the key to my box to someone else.

Chosen Keyholder wrote:Thanks for all the replies.
She says she has found a way to clean it thoroughly every day while wearing it, but came to my place today to shower with it off because she felt she needed a break from it for a few minutes.
I also got the news by e-mail that my Jail Bird is supposedly on its way. For now I am locked into a CB6000 and she is holding the keys to that at her place.
We have come to agree to an asymmetrical agreement. Though I will keep the keys to her security box, she will give the keys to mine to someone else with neither that person knowing whose the keys are and what they are for, nor me knowing who has them. But only once I am in the Jail Bird.
She did admit to me that she is worried of being tempted to cheat by leaving my home while leaving the lock unlocked or even switching locks on me, and so asked if starting next time she showers at my place, that I make it a strict point that I not give her the keys, but that I unlock her myself while she is still dressed (wearing the right clothing, she can expose the lock and not much else), that I keep the lock, and put it back on and lock it on her after her shower when she is dressed again. She also said I can switch the lock anytime I want.
I also learnt while she was showing me how to do this that an erection in a chastity cage is painful as it pulls on the scrotum. I guess fantasizing too much about sex won't be too pleasant locked up in that thing.
The main reason we agreed to the asymmetrical agreement is she said she trusts herself and me, but both only up to a point. I agreed with trusting me only to a point.
Since she might need the keys to shower, I will keep them. The Jail Bird seems easy to clean while worn, so she will pass the key to my box to someone else.

Seems you've a way forward. IMO you should definitely switch the lock on her belt as she says. This arrangement definitely has prospects!

Thanks Greatcornbow.

She had come back to my place to shower just this week (I like it and hate it if you know what I mean: painful erections!).
Anyway, she firmly told me that while the key to her box should always stay with me, that she has gotten used to it enough now that she knows that she can trust herself to lock herself after unlocking and give back the keys. She also said she found my unlocking her and checking afterwards to be uncomfortably arousing, so not to do it anymore. I agreed.
She also said there is no need to change the lock since she can trust herself with that.
I jokingly asked if she can trust herself enough to dispence with the belt altogether from now on.
Though she giggled at the joke, I think she meant her answer. She answered that she is not sure, and so still wants me to keep the originally agreed-on date of the first day of Spring 2016. She sees the first day of Spring to be a symbolic date of renewed life.
And she sprung something else on me. Out of the blue she gave a detailed account (it almost seemed contractual or legalistic in tone, but definitely methodical) of some rules for a relationship with her. She does not mind male friends, but is not interested in boyfriends. She also refuses to marry anyone without first knowing him as a friend for at least a year, and that she will marry no one before the first day of Spring of 2016.
She went on to say that from now on she refuses to engage in sex, kissing, passionate hugging, or easy familiarity with anyone beyond basic keyholding in my case (and apologized for asking me to check the locks the last time we had met). Then she asked if a woman sprang such rules on me, whether I could accept. A 'yes' just slipped out of my mouth seemingly unconsciously, still mesmerised by her (hyper?)methodical approach to relationship building.
Then she said, emphasizing once more that she only wants a friend and not a boyfriend, that she doesn't mind if I give her short hugs or hold her hands, even in public.
Then to my surprize we ended up speaking a lot about marriage and other subjects, yet always in the generic of her marrying someone or me marrying someone, never specifically me and her, but I couldn't help but feel she had me in mind and was just trying to create distance. She added she feels no obligation towards a man until marriage and does not expect it in return. She told me she can comfortably discuss this openly with me since now she knows there will be no rush.
We had discussed interfaith marriage and childrearing, that she could not marry a man without obtaining the explicit consent of the living biological parents on both sides regardless of the parent-child relationship out of respect for those who gave us life, that she would insist on a marriage contract requiring at least one year of legal separation without sex before permitting divorce, and that she would need to be thoroughly familiar with a man's character before she could marry him.
She asked again if I could agree to such rules from a woman and I unthinkingly said yes. Then she said in a friendly but not at all flirtatious way, almost in a matter of fact manner, 'I love you'. Not sure how to respond, I responded in kind and the conversation went on as per normal.
Sorry for my lack of experience, but is it common for a woman to be so methodical in relationship building? I was impressed.
I have never observed such a methodical approach to relationship building, not in books, not on TV, not in real life until now. If she is that medodical in relationship building, I bet she would run a tight ship as a wife and mother. Is this what is meant by Asian tiger? I have heard that Hong Kong girls often do rule the roost in a marriage. I really don't minx that, but am just mesmerized by her methodical approach
Wow. Any advice? Honestly I feel comfortable with these rules. They are even liberating. With sex, engagement, and marriage out of bounds for at least a year, I can feel comfortable being open with her without fear of losing control of the relationship. It's as if these rules ensure the rational mind stays in control over the libido. I am totally impressed.
Though all seems to be going well, I am always open to ideas and advice coming from experience.
Thanks.

Well, you've got plenty of time to meditate over the position. If you're happy not to rush sex ... then why rush the opinion!

msknight wrote:Well, you've got plenty of time to meditate over the position. If you're happy not to rush sex ... then why rush the opinion!

Thanks Ms. Knight.

You're absolutely correct. Her approach was genius. I wish I had thought of that. I would normally shy away from the difficult questions of a relationship out if a fear of losing control over it. For example, if I had a question about marriage, children, etc. I would be afraid to ask in case she interprets it that I want to marry her right away and so either scare her away or unintentionally encourage her to push marriage too fast.
By first defining the parameters of the relationship in clear terms with strict earliest-date provisions over a year into the future, suddenly we can both feel comfortable truly getting to know one another within these safe parameters.
I'm not aware that she studied psychology, but what a brilliant idea.

A bit grinding up at the lock clamp like the original lock, and you have a lock that you know for sure that she does not have a spare key.

My-Steel belt has a modified Burg Wächter model 222 C-line 15 lock
Diameter 0.11" - 3 mm
Horizontal 0.31" - 8 mm
Vertical 0.43" - 11mm

Tobbe wrote:A bit grinding up at the lock clamp like the original lock, and you have a lock that you know for sure that she does not have a spare key.

My-Steel belt has a modified Burg Wächter model 222 C-line 15 lock
Diameter 0.11" - 3 mm
Horizontal 0.31" - 8 mm
Vertical 0.43" - 11mm

I'm not sure anymore. First off, we're not married. She even made it clear that we are to be loving friends but not boyfriend/girlfriend. She has also made it clear that though she still wants to wear the belt, that she doesn't need the lock changed.
From the beginning it was clear she did not think of this as a game or a sex toy, but more like a therapeutic device to fix a problem she faced. For these reasons I do not comfortable going beyond what she has requested.

Actually it's a relationship I never thought I would find myself in: a sexless but loving Keyholder friendship. I would never have imagined finding myself in such a relationship. It's not something you see on TV every day if you know what I mean. It's definitely going to be a learning experience for me. I would have never imagined a seemingly contractual friendship.

Chosen Keyholder wrote:Thanks Greatcornbow.

She had come back to my place to shower just this week (I like it and hate it if you know what I mean: painful erections!).
Anyway, she firmly told me that while the key to her box should always stay with me, that she has gotten used to it enough now that she knows that she can trust herself to lock herself after unlocking and give back the keys. She also said she found my unlocking her and checking afterwards to be uncomfortably arousing, so not to do it anymore. I agreed.
She also said there is no need to change the lock since she can trust herself with that.
I jokingly asked if she can trust herself enough to dispence with the belt altogether from now on.
Though she giggled at the joke, I think she meant her answer. She answered that she is not sure, and so still wants me to keep the originally agreed-on date of the first day of Spring 2016. She sees the first day of Spring to be a symbolic date of renewed life.
And she sprung something else on me. Out of the blue she gave a detailed account (it almost seemed contractual or legalistic in tone, but definitely methodical) of some rules for a relationship with her. She does not mind male friends, but is not interested in boyfriends. She also refuses to marry anyone without first knowing him as a friend for at least a year, and that she will marry no one before the first day of Spring of 2016.
She went on to say that from now on she refuses to engage in sex, kissing, passionate hugging, or easy familiarity with anyone beyond basic keyholding in my case (and apologized for asking me to check the locks the last time we had met). Then she asked if a woman sprang such rules on me, whether I could accept. A 'yes' just slipped out of my mouth seemingly unconsciously, still mesmerised by her (hyper?)methodical approach to relationship building.
Then she said, emphasizing once more that she only wants a friend and not a boyfriend, that she doesn't mind if I give her short hugs or hold her hands, even in public.
Then to my surprize we ended up speaking a lot about marriage and other subjects, yet always in the generic of her marrying someone or me marrying someone, never specifically me and her, but I couldn't help but feel she had me in mind and was just trying to create distance. She added she feels no obligation towards a man until marriage and does not expect it in return. She told me she can comfortably discuss this openly with me since now she knows there will be no rush.
We had discussed interfaith marriage and childrearing, that she could not marry a man without obtaining the explicit consent of the living biological parents on both sides regardless of the parent-child relationship out of respect for those who gave us life, that she would insist on a marriage contract requiring at least one year of legal separation without sex before permitting divorce, and that she would need to be thoroughly familiar with a man's character before she could marry him.
She asked again if I could agree to such rules from a woman and I unthinkingly said yes. Then she said in a friendly but not at all flirtatious way, almost in a matter of fact manner, 'I love you'. Not sure how to respond, I responded in kind and the conversation went on as per normal.
Sorry for my lack of experience, but is it common for a woman to be so methodical in relationship building? I was impressed.
I have never observed such a methodical approach to relationship building, not in books, not on TV, not in real life until now. If she is that medodical in relationship building, I bet she would run a tight ship as a wife and mother. Is this what is meant by Asian tiger? I have heard that Hong Kong girls often do rule the roost in a marriage. I really don't minx that, but am just mesmerized by her methodical approach
Wow. Any advice? Honestly I feel comfortable with these rules. They are even liberating. With sex, engagement, and marriage out of bounds for at least a year, I can feel comfortable being open with her without fear of losing control of the relationship. It's as if these rules ensure the rational mind stays in control over the libido. I am totally impressed.
Though all seems to be going well, I am always open to ideas and advice coming from experience.
Thanks.

So far so good. But I'd still change her lock, just on principle. Then maybe put the keys to new lock in a sealed package...

The issue of changing the lock is one of trust.

She had placed trust in you, and given you responsibility over her.

This is a very, very big thing for her to do ... however ... and here is the killer ... if she is keeping spare keys somewhere ... then this makes the trust, nothing more than an illusion and could be very, very hurtful to you.

It is something which you may need to give great thought to over the short term. If she refuses, then the question is ... why?

However, you might still be happy with the arrangement, even though there is a chance that she has spare keys somewhere. But it is strange why someone would give the keys and hand over that kind of power, but object to a change of the lock to one which is really outside their control. It is a strong indicator that something is being hidden ... and not everything is, "on the level."

However, you have to come to your own decision as to whether the potential of a little dishonesty is worth it for the greater goal. Think long ... think hard... and good luck.