Erotic fiction inspired by Mary Lin in “The Appointment 2”
Re: Casefile 1507
Given the fevered interest in potential ethical violations by the university’s sexual research team, I wanted to brief you on the initial findings of my investigation. While rumors have swirled about various sexual deviancies going on within the research department, I am singularly focused on charges by a whistleblower—not one of the sexologists—that a head researcher took advantage of a female patient, whom I call Patient M.
The complaint alleges that Dr. E abused her authority. The instruments of said complaint were a “sharpened No. 2 pencil” that she used aggressively to prompt the undressing of Patient M, and an electrical device through which she “shocked the patient for her own personal enjoyment.”
There is a fair amount we can glean from the video evidence about Patient M’s state of mind when these allegations occurred. However, to provide additional context I would first like to examine the potential motives of Dr. E and give you a proper understanding of how shock treatment can be used in some circles to improve sexual outcomes.
It’s clear to me from Dr. E’s own personal writings that she is deeply infatuated with Patient M. She secretly calls her “Patient Bunny” and writes about her unlike any other patient. At times, she sounds more like an aspiring writer of pulp erotica than a follower of the Hippocratic oath. This is from an entry the day the alleged incident took place:
Bunny wore her sexy librarian glasses today. It was hard to keep my hand from shaking as I pointed my pencil at her top button and down her lab shirt, motioning her to undress. I could see in her eyes that the little temptress knew how much I loved it. She went painstakingly slowly, making me sweat it out before showing me her luscious breasts. She has the hips of a pin-up model. I waited as long as I could—I am an eager beaver—to instruct her to take her panties off. You can tell Bunny loves her body by the impeccable way she grooms herself. Her wispy blonde hair is always perfect without looking fussed over and she hasn’t a trace of pubic hair covering her gloriously naked love parts.
Perhaps most damning of all is Dr. E’s confession that after completing the session she had “soaked through my thick underwear” and needed to find a quiet room to “unload” and “get my mind right.”
Despite these revelations, I would point out that Dr. E volunteered her personal journal, which we didn’t know existed. More importantly, the video shows no evidence of mistreatment, or even differing treatment, of Patient M versus the others. Her lack of tenderness in her initial inspection of Patient M, wearing rubber gloves, is consistent with other patient interactions. Dr. E always has a pencil in hand to jot down observations on her clipboard. For all her patients, she also uses that pencil to direct them to take off their clothes—she is a conductor, after all.
Despite Patient M’s significant jolting during therapy, the frequency of the electrical impulses Dr. E administered was comparable with other patients. In my inspection of more than 50 different videos, I wasn’t able to find one instance in which it seemed that Dr. E’s motives went beyond helping a patient achieve an orgasm.
Patient M knew full well what she was there to do. She agreed to surprisingly straightforward language in the memorandum of understanding. She was submitting to the “experimental use of shock therapy to reclaim my ability to orgasm.” She accepted that the “experiments were to be conducted fully in the nude, at times with obtrusive objects in my vagina or connected to my body.” She waved her right to sue for any damages resulting from “exposure to electrical shocks that could prove harmful to my health.”
It would be easy to discount shock therapy as some misguided relic of science, akin to using leeches to let blood. While maybe not a common treatment within our commonwealth, the transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) device used in the test is FDA approved—you can buy similar devices over the counter. The research team has made a convincing case in respected journals that this therapy is simply an amplification of the same electrical impulses our body uses to tell the nerve endings in the brain that we are taking a hug or giving a kiss. Essentially, the electrical impulses reduce the body’s ability to process the sensation of pain, meaning the body can process pleasure quicker and with greater intensity.
I am convinced that the treatments enabled Patient M to have an orgasm. While this ventures beyond my area of expertise, there was clearly a difference in Patient M’s arousal before and after her treatment. After the treatment, her pussy was visibly wet, even on a grainy video, and her labia puffed out of her body. She looked invigorated in a way that belied the disappointment in her face when she masturbated before the treatment and felt nothing.
Dr. E’s conclusions in her journal are much more scientific:
Post-treatment, I performed non-invasive thermographic analysis when she first started to masturbate, just before her orgasm, during her orgasm, and following her orgasm. The pictorial found a warming of the labia during the plateau phase and a warming of the clit during orgasm. This confirms what we found using the photometer last session, which detected a gradual build-up of blood in the vaginal walls over the four stages of Bunny’s sexual response.
If I may say so, if there was any subjugation that occurred in this session, it was the way Patient M surrendered to the overwhelming waves of pleasure after vigorous masturbation. If there was any harassment, it was the way that Patient M—unprompted—climbed onto the chair on her knees and turned away from Dr. E, “propping up a near perfect ass, but for a bunny tail, into the air”—her words, not mine—as she “slid her fingers through her charged pussy.” It would only be a slight exaggeration to say all of this was unfolding at the tip of Dr. E’s tongue.
Within the sciences, there is a longstanding belief that what is observed is often changed as a result of that observation. But can’t we allow for some change to occur—some inner movement—in the observer as well? It wasn’t so easy for Dr. E:
I bounced my legs in rhythm with the circular motion of her fingers over her squishy pussy, doing whatever I could to satisfy the needs of my burning clit without touching myself. I didn’t know how much longer I could last. She was in such a state of vulnerability—her head back and eyes untethered with her lips pinched under her teeth—that I imagined the many things I could do that she would not resist. She spoke in a siren’s tongue, calling me to rip down my shirt and have her suckle my tits until she came. If her spasms from the orgasm—seemingly stronger than her reaction to the electric shocks—had come any later than they did I might have lost my certification.
I commend Dr. E for maintaining her professionalism in the face of such beautiful temptation. Even a dispassionate scientist—or a lawyer—could be forgiven for seeking to address the needs of a patient searching desperately for pleasure.
I confronted Patient M about these charges on the way to her most recent session. I could see the pain form immediately in her eyes. “Don’t you dare,” she said, and then ran off.
I would gladly continue this investigation. However, the overwhelming body of evidence tells me this would be an indulgent waste of our time. I recommend we shut it down before we bring the university further embarrassment.
About the author: The Junkman is a contributing writer for the MetArt Network, blending his twin passions for erotic storytelling and high-class porn. He shares a range of musings at JunkPixels.com
If you enjoy erotic fiction and would like to contribute some of your own, you can email it to firstname.lastname@example.org. We don't promise to post it in full, but we will pick out the juiciest bits to share! To see more stories and true confessions, check out our free fiction site, MyErotica.com