behavior correction

Gallery

Behavior correction case file #413: Katrin. Subject is a part-time lifeguard during summers between college terms and has been repeatedly caught by pool owner engaging in surreptitious masturbation, high-risk sexual activity and other inappropriate behavior on the grounds. Rather than risk a mark on her employment record and possible misdemeanor charges, subject agreed to behavioral therapy at the Institute.

Katrin is a less complicated case than subject #328 and will likely respond to straightforward aversion therapy. She is required to wear a swimsuit similar to her lifeguard uniform at all times, though this one is fitted with microscopic body monitors and electrical stim units to aid in analysis and reinforce direction of guidance.

As per standard Institute policy, subject will be shackled to bed when not in treatment and woken each morning by an orderly who will provide manual stimulus until her monitors indicate sufficient arousal. She will then be taken to our own swimming pool and, while in an environment similar to the one that has caused her such problems, be treated with Hitachi therapy as per standard orgasm control/induction regimen B. (You know how this goes–make her beg to come then make her beg to stop–pretty straightforward. DT) The obvious potential for breathplay and cold-water shock should be explored as well.

A week of such treatment should be more than sufficient to reform the subject. However, subject has already agreed to spend two months at the Institute voluntarily. Division D has expressed interest in continuing treatment and observing subject’s behavior on a daily basis. What are her reactions to an extended forced pleasure regimen? Will temporary aversion become a more permanent fetish related to the environment, clothing, or bondage in use, and will this fetish affect normal sexual function? Will the subject bond with a single handler or grow accustomed to rotation through a group of staff? The Institute stands to learn a great deal from this case.

Gallery

Behavior correction case file #328: Maura. Subject masturbates compulsively, to the point of interference with social life and career, seclusion, and possibly self-harm. Subject known to spend multiple hours per day on Tumblr.

Maura has already undergone one round of treatment for her disorder at a similar facility, but the results of attempts at aversion therapy were impermanent, and she was referred to the Institute as a special case. The course of treatment proposed relies on overcompulsion instead.

Subject will be fitted with a small pacemaker-like contact implant at the base of the spine, supplying a regular electrical stimulus to the nerve but interfering with normal signals from the pelvis. Past experiments indicate that this will both keep the subject physically aroused–almost unbearably so–and inorgasmic. No amount of pleasure, physical or otherwise, will allow her to climax.

Subject will stay in an apartment on the Institute grounds similar to her own home, permitted toys but not clothing, and will have pornography from her own browser history selected and played on screens in each room. She will be monitored in this environment until she reaches a point of desperation considered dangerous for her own safety (estimated time: 36 hours).

She will then be informed that, if she chooses, she may enter an adjacent closet-sized chamber, crouch, lock her hands and ankles into a stockade, and present her orifices for use. Doing so will deactivate the implant. Subject will then be available for use by any staff member, visiting colleague, or other patients with grounds privileges. The rate of such engagement will obviously be variable and random. After sufficient begging, polite thanks to her partners, and 10-12 orgasms, the stockade will unlock and the implant will reactivate. The chamber will not reopen until subject once again reaches a level of extreme desperation.

NOTE: it is possible this course of therapy will require several months to take effect. All staff in Division E are encouraged to make use of the subject during her availability periods and discuss her progress at weekly check-in.

Gallery

Behavior control case file #312: Vanessa. Subject generally willful, insistent that she can achieve orgasm only during solo masturbation, and lacking in libido. Surveillance of such habits, however, indicates a distinct preference for masochism, female submission, and predicament bondage. Note: subject referred to the Institute by partner under misleading pretenses and will likely be uncooperative.

Vanessa will be kept in some form of restraint at all times and displayed for observation by visiting colleagues for at least an hour a day. She will be mechanically stimulated upon waking each morning and will have two orderlies assigned to maintain her state of arousal until curfew. In between, she will undergo a series of therapeutic sessions designed to retrain her orgasmic response and obstinacy.

Pictured above is one such session. After being harness-bound and edged, Vanessa is submerged and must lift her hips above water to request being lifted out of the tub. Clitoral/vaginal stimulus will commence for fifteen to thirty seconds before she is lifted by her harness, hair, or nipples out of the water and allowed to breathe. As she shows signs of approaching climax, stimulus will be removed and subject will be dropped back in.

If desperation and self-degradation seem sufficient, subject will be permitted orgasm just as she is once more denied breath. Current recommendation is no more than twelve such permissions per day.

Hypothesis is that within the first week of such therapy, Vanessa will have a baseline elevated arousal level and willingness to submit, as well as quite literally associating breathing with pleasure and need. Follow up with forced orgasm regimen (type H or J), then fucktoy rotation on level 6.

–

(This series is inspired by a number of things, but most obviously by pleasuretorture’s experiments.)

Gallery

Behavior correction case file #253: Chrissy. Subject is a “screamer,” unable to control the volume or pitch of her voice during sexual activity. While vocal enthusiasm is a highly prized trait here at the Institute, it comes second to self-control when so ordered.

Chrissy will first be conditioned to associate being gagged with arousal and a need for stimulation–a common course of reeducation for new subjects. Once complete, we will begin building the idea that the gag is her own responsibility, and must remain in her mouth in order to reach orgasm. Opening her mouth to scream (or biting the gag too hard) will result in a series of bouncing, weighted tugs on her nipples, and cessation of clitoral stim.

After the first failure, she will also receive a series of punishments of ascending intensity to her vulva, and will be required to beg–in a whisper–for the gag to be replaced between her teeth.

Subject is not a quick learner. Reassess case progress at two weeks or two successful orgasms, whichever comes last.

(Tip of the hat to Z.)