Under what circumstances would it be believable for noble/royal

>>51532346
Bitch, people were doing this thousands of years ago in real life, minus magic.

>>51532346
It's time to stop posting.

File: 1437890955086.jpg (39KB, 374x347px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 374x347px

>>51532346
>Under what circumstances would it be believable for noble/royal families to employ full-time beautiful prostitutes (both male and female) who are magically/alchemically made sterile, so that they can relieve the family members' sexual urges?

Are you dumb? They're called "Courtesans" or "that older, attractive maid our boy keeps catching glimpses of."

>>51532346
I don't know OP, the king he wanted it to be that way and so it happened end of story.

Do you want me to write a novel about it? Do you really get anything out of posting this? This could be a perfectly normal lore point but the fact that you made a thread about it proves that you're already thinking into it too much.

The only thing you really need to make this work is to establish that the royal palace is stupidly decadent and boom: justification, the royal family gets whatever it wants.

>>51532346
They're called Eunuchs OP, thats common in mostly oriental cultures but Im sure western cultures had their equivalents.

Read a fucking book.

>>51532346
You know the rule OP

DO YOUR BUSINESS BEFORE POSTING

>>51532658
Why would you bang a eunuch?

>>51532346
WHY THE FUCK IS THAT FOX MAKING KITTY PAWS!?! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>51532658
But the whole point of eunuchs was that they WOULDN'T fuck the royal women because they dicks don't work.

>under what circumstances

The royal family has both wealth and a sex drive. Pretty easy tbqhf

What does it matter if they're sterile? Kids are bastards anyway, do you think they're going to inherit? Are they Welsh?

>>51533179
Royal women get fucked by their husbands or have affairs BECAUSE THEY DONT HAVE RIGHTS!

That or just make up a eunuch with a working cock that serves as a sex slave, being a eunuch just means having no balls, you can have be castrated and have a penis that works.

>>51533399
You would need surgical precision to make it so erections wouldn't be hella painful.

At that point a vasectomy is so close that a eunuch is silly.

Just ain't anatomy IRL
Fantasy checks out tho.

>>51533466

Being a Ennuch doesn't make your erections painful you fucking retard

>>51533466
What you're describing is called an orchiectomy, and people who've had them can still get erections.

>>51533466
>to make it so erections wouldn't be hella painful.

Why would it be? Plenty of castrated opera singers also had lovers and a healthy sex life so I dont see why removing testicles=painful erections but please illustrate me because at this point Im curious why it would be the case.

Either way its a slave forced to fuck, who gives a shit how he feels.

>>51533607
>>51533655
>>51533677
you're right. oops
I'm confusing Eunuchs with the story of king Louis the 16th.

>>51532346

I thought (non-magical) Royal Courtesans and Mistresses existed irl, historically speaking...?

>>51532346
Concubines are a fairly common concept throughout history. A painless way to make them sterile would have avoided a few tricky situations throughout history as well.

So it basically comes down to the culture. Even in modern day England every single male royal and most of the lords have an official and open mistress. It's not a particularly polite subject but it is a thing.

>>51532410
A coutesan was a polite word for a prostitute.

>>51532658
A Eunuch had his balls removed, there are many reasons for this and sexual slavery is probably not the main one. You are thinking of a catamite.

>>51533087
Not all had their actual penis removed, and they may or may not be capable of an erection. Also, by fucking them in their ass.

>>51533179
Not always.

>>51533399
Correct.

>>51533466
.... Wut?

>>51533364

>bastards
>never inheriting

You're not too sharp on history, are you?

>>51534456
>Even in modern day England every single male royal and most of the lords have an official and open mistress
Huh. I feel like I need to look this up.

>>51534658
Yeah apparently some people thing feudal lords couldn't just do whatever they wanted. Or, you know, even merchants or any freeman really.

>>51534615
Also up, all these different words and phrases and rules for what amounts to sex slaves should tell you something. Namely your magical realm masturbation fantasy was not only unique and interesting but fairly common place.

>>51534678
Be warned, what a 63 year old man has been fucking since he was 20 is not going to be as hawt as you might imagine.

But yes, being a prince's mistress is damn near a title. I'm sure more then a few fuck every maid within arms reach and such but they all get one official under the table side bitch.

>>51532346
>Under what circumstances would it be believable for noble/royal families to employ full-time beautiful prostitutes...

If you want to fap go to /d/

>>51534658
In Wales specifically, for some fucking reason, bastards could inherit freely. Everywhere else you'd have to bully people into accepting the decision, or pay bribes, or have the bastard be better than anyone else for inheritance.

What would be the advantage of hiring a full-time prostitute instead of hiring a part-time one whenever you want to fuck?

>>51535206
Having the woman you want all the time, instead of hoping that beautiful Bess is free tonight.

>>51535206
Not riddled with STIs.

>>51534416
Harems are more common today than you'd think.

File: 100237-004-B5CB2808.jpg (116KB, 361x450px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 361x450px

>>51532346

Emperor Justinian of the Byzantine Empire married a prostitute...does that count?

>>51532346
Why does it matter?

More unblievable stuff has happened in real life, and everything has been written somewhere.

>>51533179
>female royalties having the same authority as males

Unless they are exceptionally capable individuals or are taking over a declining monarchy that's not happening (hello my fellow Britts).

>>51536188
>Harems

Not talking about concubines or footwives here anon.

File: dailydose.jpg (22KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 480x360px

>>51533094
SHUT THE FUCK UP, CISHETSHITLORD! HOW DARE YOU ASSUME WHAT ZIMZAMZUM IDENTIFIES AS?!

If xir wants to be a kawaii-neko-chan, then xur can!

>>51537394
He himself was born a peasant though, and the marriage was a scandal.

>>51534658
Almost no bastard inherited legally ever if there was a legal heir. Specially if we're going by percentages, comparing the gigantic amount of royal bastards to the minuscule and anecdotic amount of royal bastards who ruled. And in this ridiculously small group, most achieved power ilegally by force.

>>51532346
>Under what circumstances
Islam, actually.

>>51533179
Nobody is cutting the tongues off eunuchs, mind you.

It's harder to honeypot/honeydick somebody who has their own designated cumdump who travels with them at all times

>>51532346
You have it backwards. Having offspring wasn't an issue as long as you chose who lived & died... having illegitimate offspring *not* under your control was.

In the real world it was not so much rapacious sex and funny times as people forced into inhumane conditions for a select few to cement their hold on power.

Suggested reading: how the real wold Imperial Harem worked, including all the heinous shit of killing male rivals once someone took the throne or all the castrated black slaves who even had their member removed.

>>51532346 (OP)
>Under what circumstances

Islam

>>51533179
I hate to break it to you, but yes they did. Roman noblewomen actually extolled the virtues of eunuchs because since they didn't have proper orgasms they didn't have to stop unlike intact men.

>>51536188
This anon gets it. Every chad has a harem of women because women would rather crowd around the best men than give normal guys a shot until they've finished riding the cock carousel and need a beta cuck to take care of them. women age like milk, you see.

>>51532346
It's going to depend mostly on how people outside the royal family react. For example, it may seem like a neat idea to give your princess a sterile attractive man to ensure she doesn't become a slut or get pregnant, but she could also fall in love with him, and any prince looking to marry her probably wouldn't be okay with her not being a virgin or having a lover already. And just because you're the king, you can't force a foreign prince to love your princess.

Sterile women for princes would be a much separate issue, for reasons described in this thread. As long as princesses could ensure they would always have a place with their prince, it wouldn't be as much of an issue.

>>51533094

Well, foxes' paws are kinda like that too.

>>51534615
Weren't courtesan's also "learned" prostitutes. Like the type you could take to a gala or a party, and could hobnob with the nobles while the real wife was at home being useless (as was the fashion in those days)? I'm not sure where I learnt that from though, so it might entirely be wrong. I do remember reading something about something that was "kinda prostitutes, but they actually also gave financial advice etc." and 'buying an hour' with one wasn't strictly on a sexual basis.

I'm not sure anymore, I might be mis-remembering it, or at some point just found the idea of a medieval "rent a girlfriend" service being funny enough that it lodged itself in my brain.

>>51544927
Probably, Courtesans were prostitutes for high class/rich people. So most likely.

File: ffb11a723fbf14c66895458a050579f0.jpg (61KB, 476x853px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 476x853px

Does the alchemagical wankery involve the growing of animal characteristics?

>>51545872
If you had absolute dictatorial powers and wealth enough to create cat/fox/cow/whatever girls, are you telling me you wouldn't have two or three?

File: horny midgets.jpg (1MB, 9109x870px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 9109x870px

>>51546204
I'd make a whole race, or several

>>51534615
>A coutesan was a polite word for a prostitute.

Look, I know you're not familiar with the institution and profession, but there's a WORLD of a difference between a courtesan, a prostitute and a whore.

>>51542304
>The fox scoffed, and said: "The grapes are probably sour, anyway!"

>>51539622

Or the Vatican castrati.

>>51546801
Beta cuck detected

>>51532346
So it's funny I should see this bait image and actually read your post because this reminds me of a concept I drew up to become an anthology of sorts some years back.

It's a sort of extremely high class cabaret for nobles where the management pulls the top classiest prostitutes and escorts from all over town and grooms them into something far more. There is a center stage where sexually arousing performances occur, and chambered box seats with tinted windows where the patrons sit in private, in the company of one of these coutersans they can choose from a sort of menu. The furniture is only extremely bespoke, with all sorts of filigree lining tables, chairs and chaises, and velvet being used wherever possible. Men are of course in the employ as well for the female patrons (or males ones too).

The patrons themselves are the sort of upper class people, chosen very carefully based on conduct and wealth. Any dubious business happens at the club and their privilege is revoked with no possible refund. They receive these invitations only on the tightest of confidentialities, and attend these sessions with masks on at all times.

The performers there are also held to the highest of expectations, and, upon their induction, are taught language, dance, music, etiquette and arts, and are kept on a tight fitness regime. There are some "archetypes" that the courtesans get filed under, such as "Hera", or "Artemis", and several girls play the same character with some being understudies in the same way several girls play the same Disney princess at the parks.

Using this setting I was hoping to delve into themes and tropes like that one rich kid who courts the same girl until a tragedy strikes, or instances of pure drunken violence that give us men a bad name, or just playful erotic writings in general.

But yes, here is my magical realm, just for you op. I hope you jizz everywhere so mommy has to bring in the squeegee or whatever.

>>51544927
They were basically what we call an escort. An actual escort, not a college student paying her studies with sex but ashamed to call herself prostitute. So yes, basically you're right.

>>51546926
Here's your (You).

>>51546619
I know you're trying to feel good about your life choices, Cinnamon, but hygiene and clientele are the only differences worth speaking of.

And my point was a Courtesan is not some kind of sex slave.

>>51537708
>illegally by force

Yeah, you want to avoid people who have a temptation to do that. One easy way to avoid at least one group of people raising an army and deciding they are the rightful heir is to not knock up your wife's hand maidens.

>>51537484
The queen has no authority over the king and the nobles might look at her sideways if she thinks she can tell them what to do but 99% of the people in her husbands country should assume there is a silent 'or I'll have you killed' at the end of all her 'suggestions'

>>51537574
We are, actually.

>>51537708
They might not have ruled, but I'm with that anon saying that they would be a poblem. Bastards were usually more intelligent and stronger than their half-brothers, thanks to not being inbreeds.

If their parent cared enough of them to keep them around, they could be a problem.

>>51542273
Was this before or after Rome decayed into a hedonistic fuckpile in general?

>>51532363
>>51532395
Both of these.

File: 1406618409413.gif (227KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 200x200px

>>51543377
Foxes already have a much better hand gesture. They don't need shit tier cat paws.

>>51537608
FUCK YOU WHITE KNIGHT CAT KEK