27 Apr 2016

The Ideal Society - Part One

"The Ideal Society" is a two-part piece of text I wrote originally around 2010 on Facebook, purely for my own enjoyment. I lost access to my account some time afterwards, and with it everything I had written there. Fortunately I had earlier version of this text saved, so I was able to reconstruct it, even with with illustrations, after a considerable amount of time and effort in 2011. To avoid that happening again I am now posting both parts here.


Recently a female Facebook friend of mine made status update about men’s penis size. One might call her a size queen, or least someone who takes great pleasure in letting her poorly endowed admirers what she thinks of them. In her status update she stated that women should be warned about small dicked losers.

One of the comments raised a question what sort of warning system should be in place. A sign? Some sort of stamp on the back of the hand or forehead? Or maybe a siren?

That got me thinking. What she said is very true. Looking at a woman one can see her, well, assets fairly quickly. With men it’s much trickier and harder to tell.

Basically it should be required by law for every male to reveal that information to government officials as he turns 18, maybe even younger, as a condition for getting a citizenship. That is size flaccid and size hard, if it gets hard at all. A bit like the social security number, it would be included in your drivers’ licence and passport.

Naturally that information would be filled in all official forms, including the ones used when applying a job. That way the lady on the other side of the desk would know if there’s a small dicked wimp applying, since the lack of manhood often correlates with your other abilities as well.

Including it in your drivers licence would be very handy, because you’d have to show it when you go to a night club, for example. That way it could be ensured that only real men get in and small dicked wankers don’t. All women would also have the right to see your drivers licence, which would prevent the ladies wasting their time.

The rights you are entitled in the society could be set by your dick size as well. The real men would get the best jobs for example, the lowest class naturally consisting of those limp dicks who don’t get their small peckers hard at all.

And when one comes to think of it, there should be annual chek-ups as well. After all, man’s physique changer over time. Measurements and statistics taken at 18 aren’t valid 20 years later. This way the first measurements could be recorded when a male hits puberty. If he passes the masculinity limit, he would get his citizenship.

After that the procudere would be repeated annually, and each time the statistics would be updated to official databases, as well as to his drivers’ licence. Each time his manhood would determine whether he’s still man enough to keep his citizenship, as well as determine his citizenship class and social status.

This would naturally led into interesting and awkward situations within age groups. Males develop physically at different rate. When a boy gets his manhood before the kids of his age, he would get all the benefits of a citizenship long before them, maybe even before kids years older than him. And naturally the last loser wimp of the class to do so would be the laughing stock of all his classmates. Naturally that would be the case even when a small dicked loser does get his citizenship, but his vitals turn out to be less than adequate.

Naturally this will happen vice versa when a man starts to lose his manhood. When man starts to close forty and the annual check-up reveals the cold truth, he will be forced to face the consequences, pay reduction and lower social status, as younger and more virile studs pass him at workplace.

If his vitals turn out to be low enough, the employer isn’t required to keep him and he will be most likely laid off. This way the aged men who are still able to perform sexually, that is, the real men, can enjoy benefits that come with a high social status.

This kind of system also ensures there’s enough cheap labour for the most menial tasks in the society. That is to say, work force that consists of aged men and limp dicked young sissies. The existence of the latter would naturally be the result of a screening system that prevents them getting to right schools in the first place.

This part of the male population, the ones with no citizenship, or with a very low genital status would also work as maids in the rich households, led by their Mistresses. The male maids’ rights would be limited and in many cases they would be little more than prisoners. In fact many of them would be legally property, a fate usual for those who fail to get a citizenship.

Naturally the Mistresses would have the right to rent their sissies out. After all, the sissies must do something to earn their upkeep. The jobs they do can be anything, from light household chores to actual, but menial jobs, performing sexual services to the Mistresses or even lent out to male whorehouses. This all would be only logical and fair. After all, what could be a more suited job for a limp dicked sissy, than to clean up public toilets, or work as sissy household maids? 

While the household sissies run chores outside the house they will wear something that symbolizes their position, most likely only a collar naming their owner and a tiny pouch made of pink leather outside their genitals.

If we accept the existence of male slavery, then we must also accept the fact that this will be a female led society. This, of course, is nothing new. The male sub fantasies are full of similar descriptions, societies where female domination is the norm, men are slaves are at least lower in the social hierarchy than women, in all areas of life.

Recently there was a post in a Facebook group devoted to that idea, more accurately three questions: Should disrespecting a woman be a crime? And if so, what sort of disrespect could be considered a crime? And thirdly, what should the penalty be? I answered, for the questions raised the small sub inside me.

Disrespecting a woman should most definitely be a crime. Disrespect can take many forms, not complying to women's orders or wishes immediately, talking back or disagreeing with a woman, thinking impure thoughts of a woman or suggesting something on those lines to her, talking behind woman's back and chauvinistic behavious in general.

Naturally there would be different penalties for different crimes. Fines at least for minor crimes, life of imprisonment for ANY kind of violence towards any woman, with no chance to parole.

There was even a follow up question. What if a man disagrees with an orders of say a 12 year old girl? In my opinion age should make no difference whatsoever. Any man should obey any female, even if it were a 5-year old girl. This should be taught to boys as soon as they're able to walk. All females are above men in the hierarchy and it is the job of their mothers to ensure their daughters don't misuse their power over men.

That is to say, if they don’t want that to happen. Many times it can be very efficient way of teaching husband and sons their place, letting their underage daughter or sister to humiliate them.

This leads us to very quickly to semi incestuous fantasies, also a common theme in male sub fiction. That is to say, stories describing female led families, where the women of the house make the rules and it is the duty of males to obey. Wives humimiliate use, abuse and humiliate their husbands, mothers their sons, daughters their fathers and brothers.

The men of the household have no rights or privacy, their needs come after the womens and they are to obey every command given by the females. They have no right to wear clothes inside the house if the women so wish, maybe not even outside while doing yard work. At least not male clothes, that is. Boys and men can wank, but only by permission of the women and usually under observation, at least not behind a closed door.

This all sounds very cruel, but we must remember that these kind of fantasies are usually written by males themselves, that is to say, those who find the idea of being stripped all rights, exciting and erotic. If we think of our ideal society, it is very obvious it too must follow similar rules when it comes to family life.

So, if we observe our ideal society, first we have the women. Then we have the real men, who despite their freedom are second class citizens. Then we have the varying classes of sissies defined by their genital sizes. And finally we have the lowest class, those males who are too small or otherwise inadequate to be called a man, without citizenship at all.

Naturally all political leaders in this world would be women, as well as heads of ministries and corporations. Men could work in politics, but only as assistants and secretaries. Naturally their female employers would have many uses for males working under them. In fact it would be most likely impossible for men to run into office at all, and the higher positions in the society would be reserved to women by the law. Naturally men wouldn’t have the right to vote either.

Also the education would support the same ideology. The girls would come first in everything and the teachers, all women of course, naturally would favour them over boys. The schools’ primary function would be teach boys their place in the society ruled by women, and to girls their rightful place ruling it and men.

Boys would be divided into groups at a very early age, to those who have enough brains to have an actual career, and those who don’t. The latter would be taught only the most basic skills. The history would be told from the women’s point of view, underlining especially the fact how much worse things were when it was led by men.

Wouldn’t that be the ideal society?


A second part can be found here.

No comments:

Post a Comment