Hanging Cherry

Normally I don’t post anything that looks at all snuffy. When nooses enter the picture, it stops looking like good clean dirty fun to me, and more like the documentary about that bad man from the internet your momma warned you about, the one with the trash bags and the duct tape.

But sometimes, the picture is just too damned pretty to ignore, like this shot from Hard Tied of Cherry Torn with her neck in a noose:

Cherry Torn with her lovely neck in a noose

And how can I resist when Cherry calls herself “willing art” and posts pictures from the shoot with the noose on her blog, saying:

My new room will have a noose like this, maybe even another one over the bed. There’s just something about a constant, dangling reminder of filthy sex. I love that you can practically feel the veins pulsing in my neck and forehead.

Answer: I can’t.

Elsewhere on Bondage Blog:

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
  • post on your Tumblr blog

8 comments on “Hanging Cherry”:

Pat Powers commented on January 18th, 2012 at 1:28 pm:

Even voluntarily, necks are very vulnerable areas to be playing with. Very easy to injure.

les commented on January 18th, 2012 at 1:43 pm:

And, thank goodness, that’s not a noose.

Once a noose is put under tension, it snugs up and almost becomes a 1 way knot. Play around with one some time. Nooses REALLY don’t want to let go.

I don’t like the neck thing to begin with, but that would take it way too far. After all, a suffocating submissive likely won’t be able to safeword. That trembling and kicking WON’T be an orgasm.

Rope Guy commented on January 18th, 2012 at 4:54 pm:

Pat, duh?

Les, you’re wrong. A noose can be simply “a loop in the end of a rope or cord” — look it up.

It would be correct to say this is not a hangman’s noose — which has the characteristic you describe. But, of course, nobody said different.

John commented on January 18th, 2012 at 7:00 pm:

Cherry Torn is amazing…though she looked better with the pink hair.

Rope Guy commented on January 18th, 2012 at 10:29 pm:

I kind of liked her as a brunette, but you know, different strokes and all that. ;-)

Rope Guy commented on January 19th, 2012 at 3:44 pm:

As explained in the link I provided to Pat, risk assessment is individual and personal. If you’re attempting to comment on Bondage Blog to argue that a given activity is “too risky” or “not too risky” for people other than yourself, you’re probably discovering the joy that is blog comment moderation right about now.

Pat Powers commented on January 20th, 2012 at 1:27 pm:

I’m not arguing she has no right to do noose play if she wants to, but I think it’s well to warn that the problem is not just ashphyxiation, but neck injury as well. Cherry wants to do noose play, it’s her call. But I remember when I used to hang at the forums at Kristine Imboch’s Bondage University, we’d occasionally have to caution newbies about noose play and also some of them would ask questions like, “Where can I get some chloroform so I can knock out my cutie/be knocked out by my dom?” and we’d all be going, “Chloroform bad! Kidneys go boom!” Or something to that effect. You never know who’s reading your blog, or how much they know or don’t know.

Rope Guy commented on January 20th, 2012 at 5:45 pm:

Yes, Pat, but how many times does that warning have to appear? Ultimately it’s an editorial balance. That information has appeared on this blog before, but I don’t believe it’s my editorial obligation to plaster safety information on every post that features potentially dangerous play (essentially, all of them). What’s more, I think it’s rightfully my editorial decision to make, and I get just a little prickly when commenters come along and say (or strongly imply) that they disagree with my editorial decisions, and then try to provide the safety warnings that I chose (for whatever reasons) not to provide or repeat in connection with a given post.

The line I tend to draw is that I allow, but do not particularly appreciate, the provision of safety information in comments, if the info strikes me as accurate and non-judgmental. Under this standard, Pat, your first comment was fine. Les crossed the line by providing wrong info in a way that struck me as both judgmental and condescending. A couple of subsequent commenters (both first-timers) didn’t make the cut, with explicitly judgmental comments asserting that this sort of play was too dangerous for anybody — essentially, attempting to impose their safety opinions on the rest of us.

Make a comment: