I think part of cum denial, done right, is an appreciation of orgasms that you do, finally, get allowed to have. It is also a level of self control and discipline - you are taking away the sub's right to touch themselves and therefore give themselves an orgasm. This places the ability to grant an orgasm solely in the hands of the Dom.

Not convinced that for women it is now 'normal' to force an orgasm rather than deny it. That speaks of a Victorian concept of 'lying back and thinking of England' and implies that women do not want sex and therefore have to be forced. Modern women (like women all through history regardless of historical myths) have strong sexual needs. However, even if you prescribe to this view, it must be considered that cum denial actually builds desire.

I agree that long term denial is a bad thing. It is a little unimaginative and can get routine as a result. Also, certainly for men, there is a level of risk of damage (albeit very small) if there is denial with teasing and no outlet (denial without teasing is ok as it does not build up prostate secretions).

I have only been on denial for short periods and that was only after I partook of a particular operation popular among young Jewish gentlemen (for medical reasons, not religious reasons ).

I think denial long term needs to be made 'interesting' for a woman. It needs to build desire and encourage sexuality. I am currently experimenting with a method of CR where someone is given a month of CR but split into periods that increase with each step. So, step one is one day CR followed by a day of break then 2 days CR followed by one day break then 3 days and so on. This is accompanied by daily clitoral stimulation. Still in the middle of this...

It is not for everyone, I agree, but it is also not necessarily unimaginative if applied right.