Do clothes imprison the girl?

[Frédérique]

“I believe petticoat discipline to be effective, fun, and helpful to society and family. Restraining or scolding is of course necessary; but the lesson I want to teach is how wonderful the nurturing, loving, sensitivity of femininity is! I would rather have my man, boy, or rowdy girl melt into the joys of silks and lace - even if beginning with some force is called for. I surely do not want to teach the ridiculous contradiction that femininity is to be respected so you must be feminine because it is demeaning! Is there really a problem with the "student" learning to love the subject - unless the teacher is afraid to lose her own corrupt, macho, power that is actually the weakness of insecure masculinity?” (from a petticoat discipline website)

Clothes “make” the man, but do they imprison the girl? :thinking:

Years ago, when I first got access to the Internet, I quite naturally looked for any information about crossdressing, whatever it may be. Sometime during this exploration I bumped into the idea of “petticoat” punishment, whereby mischievous boys (and men) are forcibly made to wear girl’s clothes and the clothes subsequently modify their behavior. I find the concept of punishment via crossdressing to be abhorrent, but I frequent a site or two dedicated to this twisted practice, if only to read a positive story amongst the thinly-veiled tales of domination...

Just the other night I visited a site that trots out a new image of alleged petticoat discipline each month, usually a painting from a time when boys actually did dress like girls, or a photo of an adult woman with a “boy” or two wearing dresses – the latter are actually girls with very short hair, so you need to use your imagination. Looking at the latest depiction of emasculation via crossdressing, I began to wonder about how female clothes actively imprison an otherwise free spirit. Imprison may be a strong word, so one can safely substitute “confine,” which means to restrict, to keep within bounds, or to keep in a limited place or area. Other than the vintage photo I saw (of two “boys” in green smocked dresses flanking their mother/dominatrix), I was further inspired by Julianna Louis’s “Turning boys into girls” thread. Something odd is going on here...

Female clothes have magical powers, both positive and negative, depending on how you look at it, or what side of the “fence” you’re on. To me, wearing female clothing is exhilarating and liberating, even though I am using unmistakable confinement to affect this liberation. Since male clothes are essentially shapeless, colorless and indelicate, wearing something form-fitting, colorful and very delicate can be revelatory if not transcendental. Unlike male clothes, female clothes are somewhat impractical, and I think they are designed to be that way – girls/women/females are meant to be confined (or imprisoned) by their clothing, and they are isolated, kept apart, or their gender roles defined, by the clothes they are supposed to wear...

I know that all females do not “get into” this idea of confinement, if they recognize it, which may explain the more practical male-inspired female garments women wear that some feel are a blatant form of unintentional crossdressing. Imagine going from wearing shorts and a t-shirt to wearing a dress – a highly impractical dress, no less, designed to draw attention to oneself, for reasons of attraction. I see it as a kind of containment vessel, albeit a beautiful, unforced, yet unwanted confinement. The entire female figure is declared and accentuated, including the waist, the shoulders, the bust, the arms and the legs in a highly impractical manner, but what a display! The whole effect is “Here I AM, a woman!” She can do this, in fact she’s expected to embrace this gender-specific imprisonment, but how does SHE feel about it? Her form-fitting garments hug her all over, but are these welcome feelings?

I pay close attention to the relationship females have with their clothing – well, I would, because I’m a MtF crossdresser. I detect sadness here and there, the girl and/or woman being somewhat uncomfortable with her unique possibilities. I recently saw a photo by David Hamilton of a young girl (his specialty), wearing a very pretty white dress with puffy sleeves. This seemed rather discordant amongst his trademark images of soft-focus girls in various stages of undress, but I was attracted to it. Well, it was something I would like to wear! The girl in the photo was rather demure, passive, and self-contained, perhaps self-conscious of her femininity and... dare I say...expectations. Maybe she couldn’t wait to get OUT of her dress, and have some fun! Does she feel uncomfortably confined by the clothes she is expected to wear? I would answer “yes,” in fact clothes of this nature do affect change by their inherent impracticality – you can’t really do anything when you wear them, except maybe dance, float about, or simply look pretty. Oh, to be in this state, but that opinion comes from a distinctly male viewpoint...

With all this in mind, putting girl’s clothes on a boy completely changes the playing field, along with the mindset, especially if behavior is a problem. One moment he blends in with his comrades or playmates, doing as he pleases, and the next minute he is a world apart, hurtled at light speed to a place where nothing FEELS the same - all this because he’s now wearing a dress, something extremely un-masculine and sissified. The waist is up HERE, not down there, his inner thighs are now in contact with each other, his little sleeves are downright effeminate, and the diaphanous fabric of his chemise moves with the slightest breeze. His girly shoes are cute but ridiculous (to him), and he is most likely wearing unfamiliar undergarments that are creating further unknown pressures and/or pleasures. An unruly boy is efficiently emasculated by clothing, and he now knows how the other half feels...

I’ve read many stories whereby the boy is forcibly brought under control by his “petticoat” punishment, a brief imprisonment in clothes he is not supposed to enjoy. I’ve also read a story where a boy undergoes his transformation into a girl, enjoys it, and it becomes a lifelong obsession with an attendant need for domination. My favorite tale involves a boy who is “tamed” by his babysitter via dressing-up, but this is for fun and not used as punishment. However, the boy (now an adult) relates how his overall behavior changed, almost overnight, simply because he was wearing the “wrong” clothes. The boy, or the male, is suppressed (or confined) by wearing female clothing, which leads me to believe that girl’s clothes have this power designed into them, either intentionally or unintentionally. It’s just another wrapper, I suppose, but there’s no doubt in my mind that girl’s clothes have magical attributes – I have felt the difference...

Rather than humiliate or embarrass, girl’s clothing actively suppresses everything I dislike about being male – in effect I’m using confinement as a tool, imprisoning my male self by way of the clothes I like to wear. Call it confinery, a state of mental self-punishment, whereby I become more demure and placid simply by making a few gender-unspecific choices. I’m sure this willingness to submit would make no sense to females, but they may understand the concept of unwanted imprisonment I am referring to – you can see it two ways, if you’re open-minded. When you’ve been on one “side” for so long, you yearn to be on the other side, and tuck your “self” away for reasons that are extremely hard to explain to anyone, including yourself. How can a change of clothing be so amazingly transformative, or how can one person’s imprisonment be another person’s longed-for liberation? The mind boggles, as well it should...

When I was a boy, I was never “punished,” or otherwise imprisoned, by being forced to wear girl’s clothes, which is a pity, I suppose. I mean, I could’ve started crossdressing sooner! I’m sure that if anyone detected the obvious pleasure I derive from dressing as a girl, the REAL punishment would’ve begun!

Don’t you feel sorry for girls (or women) now and then, my fellow MtF’ers?

PS – Referring back to the (psychopathic) quoted text: being feminine is “demeaning?” I don’t think so... :hmph:

[Stephenie S]

No, silly. Not at all. I'M a woman and MY clothes don't confine me. Not a bit. And my clothes aren't that "delicate" either. My clothes have to be comfortable because I live in them. As a crossdresser, you have the luxury of wearing any clothes you want, 'cause after it all you get to take them off. As a working woman, I don't have that luxury. I can't take 'em off till I get home.

These "forced feminization" stories are popular because being "forced" to CD takes all the guilt away.

"I had no choice. She MADE me do it". (ie, no guilt.)

In reality, "forcing" someone to dress (or whatever) is hard work. That's why there are commercial "Doms". SOs rarely have the time or the energy to go through this. But the literature is full of these stories, and that's the easiest way to enjoy these thoughts. In literature.

Stephie

[Cynthia Anne]

I found this to be interesting and perhaps the clothes do imprision the girl! I will add that if I'm going to be imprisioned then bring it on! A beautiful way to be locked up! Hugs!

[Karren H]

My corset feels like it does at times. Especially when the laces get knotted.

[Sophiewouldbenice]

Nice article, probably your are right about the confinement of clothes for woman but actually even jeans are confining, even for guys - i.e. most disable you to get your knees up your waist ;) - suits for example are worse to me, they restrict my arm movement and unwanted shoulder pads move strangly upward, also such suits hand on my sites and make me bigger. So, well not as bad as corsetts and some ball gowns, but anyway ;)

And I must really say many skirts are much more comfy than jeans, well not those which restrict your movement and of course you have to be aware of a glances, when you are sitting incorrectly.

[Kaz]

Great article as always Freddie!

Men's clothing has confined men for a long time now... and these days far more so than women's.

[Foxglove]

Thanks for a great article, Freddie. I think the main question is one that women need to answer. How do they feel about their clothing? I've often noted, though, that if women's clothing is confining, they do quite often willingly confine themselves. When they want a night out on the town, they do themselves up, because they look great, and they want the guys to see them. Maybe they also feel great. They'll have to speak for themselves.

As for me, I've often found male clothing confining. I used to be dragged to church regularly as a kid, and always in a suit and tie, which I always hated. I still do. I haven't worn a suit in I don't know how many years, and I'd be surprised if I've worn a tie more than 6 times in the last twenty years or so. When I was a kid, I always hated getting a new pair of those heavy duty jeans we wore back then. You had to break them in quite a bit before you could run or do anything else comfortably in them.

It's one reason (though not the only one, of course) that I like dresses. I've never been into short dresses and heels. I like loose, flowing skirts of a reasonable length, with comfortable shoes. I feel less confined that way than in a lot of male clothing I've worn. Obviously I wouldn't dress like that to paint the house, but for the most part, the dresses I've had were more comfortable than my male attire.

[Stephenie S]

Oh for goodness sake.

What a pile! What century are you guys in?

Confining? Restrictive? Excuse me? Maybe 50 years ago. When I was in high school you HAD to wear a garter belt, panty girdle, or an all-in-one. There was no pantyhose. And we had to wear a dress or a skirt and hose. But that was YEARS ago. There's a panty girdle in my drawer, but it hasn't seen the light of day in years. There isn't a single article of clothing in my closet that is in any way "confining" or restrictive.

This fantasy belongs in the Fictionmania department.

And you find male clothing restrictive too? I suppose we could all run naked through the woods, but this time of year that would be a bit chilly. And my neighbors might complain.

I dress just like all the other women I know, both at work and at home. And believe me, uncomfortable restrictive clothing has no place in my wardrobe.

Sorry, women just don't put up with this kinda crap now a days.

Auntie Stephenie

[TGMarla]

In old China, before the "modern" age came along, families used to bound their girls' feet in a most horrible and cruel way. The end result was an awful stunting of the growth of the feet, which in effect, left them hobbled as adults. This was seen as very feminine and attractive to the adult males of that world. This also had the added benefit that women with bound feet were unable to run away, should they for some reason become unhappy with their lot in life. Women with unbound feet in those days would be akin to a woman with hairy legs and a beard ....and maybe with leg irons.....in our world.

The "petticoat punishment" you refer to is more of an humiliation tool. It's punishment by emasculation. Ha ha, look at you, you're a girl! As if that was a bad thing. To "normal" boys, being made to dress as a girl would be most unpleasant. And whether or not one actually likes wearing things like that, doing so in front of one's peers would be most unpleasant. This touches upon the social stigma that applies to us as crossdressers even today. The difference is that we actually like it - the dressing, not the humiliation.

For me, when I dress, I also find it very liberating, at least spiritually. And like most of us, I find the actual wearing of the clothing quite fun. In fact, it's such a blast, that some of us every once in a while will post a lament that women don't know how good they have it, and that they're all so lucky to be able to wear such things to work, and that they don't understand why women don't wear dresses anymore, and that they complain about how high heels make their feet hurt, and on and on. But high heels can and do make one's feet hurt. And the clothing can be a bit of an imprisonment. When I'm all dressed up, I get little more done than some very aggressive sitting around and looking pretty. Every once in a while I might clean house a little. But for the most part, I get nothing done. I'm simply not dressed for it. When I'm wearing my pretty clothes, I don't usually even eat. I don't want to get them dirty or damage them in any way. I don't want to run my hosiery, either. I'm not about to go mow the lawn, weed the yard, change my oil, vacuum the porch, or pick up the dog poop. In essence, I get almost nothing done while dressed, so it becomes in all practical terms, completely wasted time. So in that sense, the clothes are an imprisonment. While wearing them, I'm trapped in a world where I can sit, play on the computer, prance around the house in my high heels, or look in the mirror and primp. My options for any real work are somewhat limited.

And I look forward to it almost every time!

[Chari]

This post takes me back to when I was four, when my mother "petticoated" me, first in a frilly smock, then each time she thought I was bad, adding another girl item for me to wear. She demanded I become her "little sissy maid" - that is what she called me until my late teens, and learn how to do ALL the household chores - from washing dishes, laundry, ironing, scrubbing floors, to setting the table and cooking supper- usually chores girls did at that time. Every chore had to be done to her white glove inspection standards while I was in girl attire with only her and I in the house. I was "never to tell anyone" or be punished harshly. My life was all very humiliating, degrading, and confusing. Many years of therapy was required before I finally could accept both sides of me. Now I always dress to be comfortable and confident in what ever I choose to wear!

[Susan_Xdress]

I am with Stephenie and Marla.

What you are speaking of is,

1. Of another century, and highly fictionalized.
2. Pure fantasy time to explain dressing. "Oh, horrors, I have been 'forced' to do it'.

Contrary to everything you said, My female clothes are the total antithesis of confinement. My dresses and skirts are totally liberating, my absolute mental and physical freedom from the drabs.

[Nikki A.]

It's a matter of semantics and situation. "If" its done as a punishment then being dressed is a confinement and more so in that it is made to be a humiliation.
However for most of us it is a liberation in that we choose to wear what we want and how we look. Sure some items may be uncomfortable and confining, but we wear them because it helps us feel good about how we want to look.

[Julia_in_Pa]

From someone who isn't a cross dresser I have a question;

Isn't the very essence of cross dressing the clothing that you wear?

Without the clothing "imprisoning" you wouldn't that be like someone obsessed with fashion not being a fashion victim?

Clothing defines a cross dresser not a cross dresser defining clothes.

Example; A heroin addict shaping the drug not the drug shaping the heroin addict.

I say imprison yourselves because we need those dressed like it's the queen's coronation at the local mall.


Julia

[Stephanie47]

When I was a kid we had a baseball team-not organized- but just guys who played other guys. Kind of block and against another block. Our center fielder was 'Charlie" AKA: Linda. She loved playing baseball and she was a good player. She wore jeans tee shirt and sneakers. All the other girls in the neighborhood wore dresses and played hop scotch, etc. Dresses were confining in the sense, girls attire and the roles of the day were confining. Now I see youth girl's teams for all sports. Women of all ages have the ability to dress as the situation requires- everything from the youthful having fun look to the serious women looking to attract a male with her feminine mannerisms.

A cross dresser just has to adopt a mode of dress that fits the occasion. I'm dressed today as if I were June Cleaver of the 1960's- doing the laundry, baking and wrapping Christmas presents. I'm sure a youthful cross dresser is doing the same in jeans and tee shirt.

A boy or man 'forced' to wear feminine clothing as a form of punishment is really not a cross dresser. Is a man wearing a collar and crawling on all fours and barking a dog?

[Momarie]

Perhaps your porn petticoat discipline websites would appreciate your long winded, fluffy forced feminine fantasies.

[Veronica27]

Crossdressing and bondage are closely related topics. I am not referring here to domination, S&M or to physically being tied up. Nor am I referring to the form fitting and binding nature of many female garments. Both CDing and bondage involve risk, and danger as well as a sense of adventure and excitement. However there is also a commonality to the emotional and psychological principles at work. The word "confine" is an excellent one to describe this. When a boy, or man, begins his initial forays into crossdressing, he usually does this under the utmost secrecy. He is in a sense, imprisoning (confining) himself within the resulting feelings of guilt and shame that he feels. The fact that he feels compelled to return and do it again represents the key being turned in the lock. He cannot escape. If the crossdressing begins by force, such as in the many stories we read of mothers, aunts, petticoat punishment etc., then substitute humiliation for the guilt and shame. The closet becomes the physical prison for our confinement, and for many this continues throughout their lives. Just as the "victim" experiences his unique form of pleasure from bondage, so to does the crossdresser experience his own unique pleasures from crossdressing.

We all seek to understand and to accept this part of our being, but even total acceptance does not necessarily release us from our confinement. In a sense it can often expand the confinement, if we begin to use our newfound acceptance to move out of the proverbial closet. The prison just becomes larger, as we feel the pressures of safety, passablility, and most of all our own vulnerability taking hold. Where can we be seen? Who can see us? Shame and humiliation are still only a word or even a look away, having been temporarily swept under our rug of acceptance. The risks and dangers may be even greater than in our closet.

But it is not only our greatly expanded closet than confines us. Like the bondagee, who wants it taken to greater and greater heights to satisfy his desires, our pleasure becomes exhileration when we leave our closets and we become even further confined by the need for this enhanced form of excitement and thrill.

Do we ever truly get released from our confinement? Do we really want to? We can argue convincingly that the benefits far outweigh the disadvantages of confinement. In fact as I pointed out some of the benefits are derived directly from the confinement.

These are all just some crazy thoughts and theories that have buzzed around in my mind ever since I began to accept myself, and took a few steps out of my own closet to a few CD events in recent years. I am now confined by unrequited desires much greater than those that limited me prior to stepping out.

Veronica

[Kathy Smith]

And you find male clothing restrictive too? I suppose we could all run naked through the woods, but this time of year that would be a bit chilly.

Don't knock it until you've tried it, Stephanie! I've done just that, run through the woods (at a naturist club) at about 4 or 5 Centegrade. Cold. It was great! Heavy rain is fun too, but mainly in summer when you can dry off without much risk of hypothermia. :-)

[pattyv]

Marla- your remark "completely wasted time" got my attention. Did you know that the time we enjoy wasting is not "time wasted". So when you sit, play on your computer, prance around the house in your high heels, or look in the mirror and primp- then this is the time you enjoy wasting which is not time wasted. LOL

Merry Christmas.

Patty.

[PetiteTonya]

In my opinion, tis not clothes that imprison a person, tis the MIND.

Best wishes

[Lynn Marie]

What a facinating post Frederique. To me the confinement is one of the most attractive parts of crossdressing. I love the tight skirts, form fitting tops, very snug underthings, support stockings, and heels that fit just right. I simply love the restrictions of being dressed. It's pretty close to being restrained in bondage which is another one of my great pleasures. Being dressed and bound is heavenly. I get this thread in a big way. Thank you.

[Joanna Maguire]

I love being kept in bondage. But even when I wear tight corsets etc I do not find constricting Just feminine. High heels and tight skirts etc. Make me walk more like a real woman Its feels so wonderful even now atfer ove 50 years as a CD.

[suit]

The "petticoat punishment" you refer to is more of an humiliation tool. It's punishment by emasculation. Ha ha, look at you, you're a girl! As if that was a bad thing. To "normal" boys, being made to dress as a girl would be most unpleasant. And whether or not one actually likes wearing things like that, doing so in front of one's peers would be most unpleasant. This touches upon the social stigma that applies to us as crossdressers even today. The difference is that we actually like it - the dressing, not the humiliation.

I think the part of being"forced" dressed as a girl, it was never in anyones mind possibleble to do it and make it work /to pass. it was to make a flag this ,effectually said," this does not work", this is a fail, you have just been judged and sentenced to being outcast, apariah . and children know they would die if cast out of the family,or fear they would.
the image in a childs eye of worth and why , big boys dont cry , the grass is alwasy greener . and the girls get fussed over with there clothes . the women get acolades about there looks .where is the added value ?, in a boys eyes ? its the clothes ! and their safer to explore than to get slaped for curiosity .

[Frédérique]

Yes, I’m actually going to reply to a few responses in my own thread! :clap:


As for me, I've often found male clothing confining.

I was thinking today that wearing a tuxedo is very gender-confining. Since women wear them on occasion, I’m guessing THEY enjoy the difference…


Oh for goodness sake. I suppose we could all run naked through the woods…

Oh, for goodness sake – lighten up, willya? :doh:

I (like Kathy Smith) enjoy running naked through the woods! All clothes constrain to a certain degree, or shoehorn the person into their assigned gender role (or roles). Crossdressing upsets this predetermined exercise, but I feel that female clothes are designed and promoted to confine the female – please don’t confuse physical confinement with mental confinement, OK?


The "petticoat punishment" you refer to is more of a humiliation tool. It's punishment by emasculation. Ha ha, look at you, you're a girl! As if that was a bad thing. To "normal" boys, being made to dress as a girl would be most unpleasant. And whether or not one actually likes wearing things like that, doing so in front of one's peers would be most unpleasant. This touches upon the social stigma that applies to us as crossdressers even today. The difference is that we actually like it - the dressing, not the humiliation.

I’d like to say that petticoat punishment (along with the idea of femininity being "demeaning") is an antiquated idea or method for controlling males, but the fact that this “niche” form of crossdressing continues to flourish contradicts that statement. You’re correct in saying that it’s all about peer pressure, itself a representation of social expectations and accepted mores. If the “punishment” was done in private, one-on-one, the boy may get to enjoy his crossdressed appearance. In that instance, the emasculation is local, but the presence of others (male or female) makes the demeaning exercise quite painful, depending on how far apart your inherent selves may be…

Luckily, we are not “normal,” so crossdressing cannot, will not, and shall not be seen as a form of self-humiliation. I think this comes under the heading of being comfortable with one ”self,” and not afraid to experiment with largely taboo concepts. Indeed, humiliation never crosses my mind when I dress, nor do I feel I’m injuring or negating the male in some fictitious way. If you have an insight into the mysteries of gender, even if it’s a toe-hold, these ideas of emasculation seem to evaporate, along with those social stigmas that come along for the ride. It takes courage to do something that most people think is humiliating, and MtF crossdressing is a courageous act…


Crossdressing and bondage are closely related topics.

It seems so, but I’m referring more to psychological confinement, and how female clothing reinforces that state. I KNOW that wearing women’s clothing is liberating and NOT confining in a literal sense, but in the OP I am addressing the “apartness” that female clothing creates. Just like boys are not expected to wear pretty things (especially at this point in time), some girls balk at the notion of having to “be feminine” and dress according to predetermined expectations. From a CD standpoint, it opens the door for us to experiment, change humiliation into exhilaration, and re-dress the balance (pun intended)…
:battingeyelashes:

[Gillian Gigs]

This is one CD'er that got their start by being dressed in panties and girls clothes as a punishment. I still remember the humilation and taunting I recieved from my sisters. Both of my parents were aware of their taunting. Lets separate reality from fantasy folks, there is a vast difference. It has taken me until the last couple of years to finally come to terms with the punishment that I suffered at the hands of my parents. Why would some one who was punished and humilated this way become a CD'er? I do not know why, but I did. I accept myself now and finally enjoy the part of me that was driving me for so long. There may be a BDSM side to dressing, all I know is that I love tight and restricting clothing. The joy in wearing pantyhose has more to do with tight fabric against the skin more than anything else. A bra that is tight feels great, it does not matter if there are forms or not. I could go to body shapers and corsets, but I think that you get the picture. If you want to play slap and tickle, the imagine being forced that is fine with you and your partner, but don't get this mixed up with the real thing. Shame and humilation are powerful tools and I would not wish these weapons being used on anyone other than a willing participant. And I do mean willing participant!

[BillieJoEllen]

Like Gillian, I too was punished one time from an aunt of mine. I had fallen into some mud by my uncle's lake and gotten my boy clothes dirty. My aunt could of easily had me wear a boy cousin's clothes but no- she made me wear the clothes of a girl cousin. I had everything on. It was horrible and I panicked when I was marched out of the house to go play with other cousins. I was mortified and grossly embarrassed to say the least. Needless to say the teasing and taunting started right away. I wanted to die. I was left in those clothes for about 8 or 9 hours. Shes the same aunt that beat me silly with a rubber hose. Today she would have gone to jail for that beating but back then all I got from my parents was "you probably had it coming". After the dressing incident I knew why all my girl cousins wanted to get out of their pretty dresses and into pants when we were at various family functions. Its because they were embarrassed and humiliated like I was when I had to wear girl's clothes. At least thats what I thought at the time.

[ArleneRaquel]

Yes corsets, bras and other female undergarments can imprison the the body, but if that's prison sentence me to a life term. Tonya is right it's the mind that imprisons.

[Lorna]

What a fascinating topic, Frédérique. It raises so many issues and questions. Having grown up in the 1950s and 60s, I have witnessed the change from a female dress code that, as some contributors have pointed out, could be quite physically imprisoning to today's casual and made-for-comfort styles. I enjoy sampling all the periods and styles from that span of time and enjoy both the restriction of some forms of dress and the freedom and ease of others. I have no difficulty in understanding the relief women felt when stockings, suspenders and girdles were replaced by tights and tee shirts yet I also enjoy experiencing something of what women have experienced in all those different forms of dress.

Imprisonment is, perhaps, too strong a term. Nevertheless, it implies loss of freedom or liberty and that was certainly a factor of the typical woman's dress when I began taking an interest in it in the 1950s. I didn't have any sisters but I had female cousins and neighbours and was intrigued by the small but significant loss of freedom they experienced and accepted as the norm of the day when they began to grow up and started dressing as young adults. Wearing stockings was an important milestone for young teen girls and I remember several instances of such girls learning that they now had to be careful how they sat and moved because they must avoid showing stocking tops. One girl was told she could not play with me and another friend in our garden because she might ladder her nylons - nylons she only wore as Sunday best and of which she was very proud....but they restricted her freedom to run around and enjoy herself.

A little later I had a girlfriend whose younger sister had just started wearing stockings and when she came home into my girlfriend's house the first thing she did was to go upstairs and take off her nylons so that she could relax in the garden in the sun without having to worry about laddering her stockings and could lift the hem of her dress just a few inches above her knees to let the sun get to her legs. I asked my girlfriend why she didn't do likewise and the reason she gave was that we would be going out again after lunch and if she took her stockings off she would have to get out of her girdle as well and it wasn't worth bothering to do all that only to have to put it all on again afterwards. Going bare-legged was not, for that 17-year-old girl, an option on a Sunday afternoon! She wasn't imprisoned, but there was some restriction imposed by her everyday clothes.

Now consider the young woman who likes to show off a good figure by wearing a tight skirt. She'll also put on some heels. That combination - freely chosen - will slow down her walking, prevent her from running, make climbing stairs more difficult and require extra care when sitting. Back in the 1960s and still today, women do exactly that. If they needed help with their figure, back then it was a firm girdle and a good, possibly long-line bra and today it's an underwired push-up bra and a tight Spanx-type shaper. None of those clothes promote freedom.

On the other hand, modern women enjoy the option of minimal clothing - in warm weather just a bra (optional), dress or skirt and top or jeans or shorts, panties and flat, comfortable shoes - no hosiery. Pretty well total freedom.

Those of us who are not women but enjoy the sensations of wearing feminine clothing have the luxury of choosing freedom or restriction, just as real women do. The world of petticoat punishment and forced feminisation is a world away from that but it represents another, perhaps more extreme, facet of the crossdressing genre. I dooon't indulge or have any experience of it but I will confess to sometimes enjoying making myself wear the more restrictive items (firm girdle, long bra, stockings and suspenders, tight knee-length skirt and heels and then try to go about my day's business around the house (not, sadly, furher afield) just to sense what many women would once have felt as they tried to manage despite the limitations imposed by their clothes. Every move and action then needs more consideration and I find myself thinking how much easier it would be to bend down without the tight girdle, to sit comfortably on the sofa without suspenders digging into my legs or to climb on to a chair to reach a high shelf without the skirt trying to stop me..... Then, another day, in a light bra, sheer tights, comfortable shoes and a loose dress I can do the same things so comfortably and easily....and still enjoy every moment.

Its the freedom to choose that is so compelling - and that includes the freedom to choose restriction.

[Veronica27]

It seems so, but I’m referring more to psychological confinement, and how female clothing reinforces that state. I KNOW that wearing women’s clothing is liberating and NOT confining in a literal sense, but in the OP I am addressing the “apartness” that female clothing creates. Just like boys are not expected to wear pretty things (especially at this point in time), some girls balk at the notion of having to “be feminine” and dress according to predetermined expectations. From a CD standpoint, it opens the door for us to experiment, change humiliation into exhilaration, and re-dress the balance (pun intended)…
:battingeyelashes:

I think we are saying something very similar, but are simply approaching it metaphorically from two different directions. I was discussing the psychological impact of being confined by our compulsion and or need to crossdress, and the resulting association of that confinement to feelings of exhileration. I used the comparison to bondage as the actual physical confinement of bondage is more apparent, but the psychological impact and result are the same. Rather than discussing the physical confinement of the clothing of CDing, or the ropes of bondage, I was looking more at the risks involved, the need for secrecy, the reaching for higher plateaus etc. of each activity as being sources of confinement, leading to the resulting psychological impact of exhileration. From your initial post, I gathered that you were thinking more in terms of the dissociative nature of wearing the "wrong" clothing, and the psychological impact of placing the same restrictiveness upon ourselves that society imposes upon women. Many of the other replies, tended to look more at the nature of female clothing, and dealt with restriction in a pure physical sense. This aspect is of course, true, and leads to a lot of the confusion by others, especially spouses, as to why we would subject ourselves to such discomfort unnecessarily. You have to go beyond the physical limitations in order to gain any understanding of this.

Veronica

[Blodwen]

You bring your own associations to objects. Having worked with teenagers I know that they think wearing Ray Barnes glasses makes you a hipster, I imagine the same applied to petticoat punishment. Because the mother said "This is your punishment..." then the boy would think so and associate it with weakness but this also ties in with the heavily gendered playground culture. If the boy admired women and was told "this is your reward for doing well" then the boy would have a positive association with the clothing.

I think any item of clothing can be seen as restrictive really, I don't like wearing comfortable trousers sometimes because I associate them with work. The clothing back then was restrictive for any gender, the collars on men shirts could kill them not to mention the tight fitting clothing men used to wear back then too.

[PetiteTonya]

Perhaps your porn petticoat discipline websites would appreciate your long winded, fluffy forced feminine fantasies.


...Not the least bit helpful. Rather mean spirited in fact I think.

[kimdl93]

I guess there are some pretty cruel people out there. Deliberately demeaning a child by any means is just evil. I can't imagine my parents ever attempting to punish me in such a fashion, thank goodness.

But to answer the question from my perspective, men's clothing, perhaps, does indeed feel a bit confining.

[Foxglove]

Perhaps your porn petticoat discipline websites would appreciate your long winded, fluffy forced feminine fantasies.

I'd initially ignored this post, but since Tonya picked up on it, I thought I would, too. From what I've seen of petticoat discipline, it seems to me it's as much a woman's fantasy as a guy's. It appears there are certain girls and guys who groove on this sort of thing--the dom/sub culture.

What I get from it is that there are women who enjoy demeaning a guy in this way, just as there are guys who enjoy being demeaned in this way. But why is it demeaning to a guy to be dressed as a woman unless we regard women as inferior? And why would a woman want to convey the message that she's demeaning you by making you like her?

I used to do some work around a primary school, and one day I overheard three girls taunting a boy, saying, "So-and-so sulks like a girl! So-and-so sulks like a girl!" I thought that was odd. The girls were insulting him by comparing him to themselves. What really did they think about themselves?

If we're talking about petticoat discipline, it raises as many questions in my mind about the female mentality as the male mentality.



I think any item of clothing can be seen as restrictive really, I don't like wearing comfortable trousers sometimes because I associate them with work. The clothing back then was restrictive for any gender, the collars on men shirts could kill them not to mention the tight fitting clothing men used to wear back then too.

What were those things called that well-to-do men used to wear? Dickeys? Those fake, plastic shirt fronts that fastened in the back with straps. Must have been bloody uncomfortable. Why didn't they just wear shirts? An insane item to wear.

[LilSissyStevie]

Petticoat Punishment stories have always been my favorite kind of TG fiction. My favorite books are the series Miss High Heels, Miss Buckles, Miss Sissy. There's less sex, BTW, in all these books put together than in one chapter of a typical romance novel. It's obvious that most of the critics in this thread are unfamiliar with the genre. Of course, ignorance never stopped anyone from having strong opinions about something. First, petticoat punishment stories are not about women. They are about effeminate young men that are trying to assert their male privilege and masculinity but get put in their place instead. It is true that women are stereotyped in PP fiction. They are stereotypically powerful, independent, disciplined, smart, cunning, dominant, stern and a bit cruel. These women, rather than submit to the brat, gain control and progressively feminize him, against his furious resistance, until he realizes, accepts and submits to his true feminine nature. Then everyone lives happily ever after. These stories are not about forcing a masculine male to be feminine, they are about forcing away the masculine facade to reveal the feminine core. The ultra feminine clothing serve as powerful symbols (fetishes, if you will) that do not confine the 'girl' but envelope and release her.

Whenever I see people try to explain Forced Feminization stories as some kind of mental trick to assuage guilt or shame, I think of all the times I use to fantasize about tossing my first wife into a wood chipper. I knew it was wrong to think about doing that to the mother of my children and I felt guilt and shame about it, too. But I never fantasized that someone was forcing me to throw her in so I wouldn't have to feel bad about it. I'm probably just not clever enough to trick myself into believing that, by fantasizing that someone is forcing me to crossdress, I'm not really fantasizing about crossdressing or that it somehow preserves my masculine dignity if I fantasize about a woman forcing me to wear a petticoat but not if I just put the petticoat on of my own volition. The guilt theory is absurd. My own speculation about FF fantasies is that they are about the need to be desired as feminine beings. We want our partner to desire our femininity enough to force (help) us throw off the masculine veneer so we can surrender to the inner feminine essence. Sure, in most cases it ain't never gonna happen but, hey, that's why it's called fantasy!

[Veronica27]

Whenever I see people try to explain Forced Feminization stories as some kind of mental trick to assuage guilt or shame, I think of all the times I use to fantasize about tossing my first wife into a wood chipper. I knew it was wrong to think about doing that to the mother of my children and I felt guilt and shame about it, too. But I never fantasized that someone was forcing me to throw her in so I wouldn't have to feel bad about it. I'm probably just not clever enough to trick myself into believing that, by fantasizing that someone is forcing me to crossdress, I'm not really fantasizing about crossdressing or that it somehow preserves my masculine dignity if I fantasize about a woman forcing me to wear a petticoat but not if I just put the petticoat on of my own volition. The guilt theory is absurd. My own speculation about FF fantasies is that they are about the need to be desired as feminine beings. We want our partner to desire our femininity enough to force (help) us throw off the masculine veneer so we can surrender to the inner feminine essence. Sure, in most cases it ain't never gonna happen but, hey, that's why it's called fantasy!

I disagree with your conclusion that the guilt theory is absurd. A fantasy about forced crossdressing is still a fantasy about crossdressing. Many men have difficulty overcoming the feelings of shame and guilt associated with what many in society regard as a taboo activity. Fantasizing that it is out of your control for whatever reason, enables the mind to get beyond the shame in its fantasies so that it can concentrate on the crossdressing itself.

I agree with your excellent first paragraph about the nature of the petticoat punishment literature, and while your theory about the need to be desired as a feminine being is no doubt true in a great many cases, I still believe that there is an element of guilt assuaging in the minds of many. I think it is likely a larger part of personal fantasizing than it is of fiction, however. I know of no studies about this, but find no basis for the outright dismissal of the guilt theory.

Veronica

[Foxglove]

Even if the guilt theory is valid (and I don't know that I'm qualified to judge on that), I think it's understandable. CDers carry a lot of guilt for something that ultimately isn't their fault, and so it's easy to understand that they might look for ways to get rid of it.

[Gillian Gigs]

Whether you call it forced feminization, forced crossdressing, or petticoating, it all has its roots in the same place. Anything that is found on the fringe of a culture, or society will always be looked at through colored glasses. I can not count the number of times that someone has protested too much about something and then months later they came out of the closet about it, so to speak. Fantasy will always be a part of our psyche and some will try and say that one fantasy is ok and another is not. I will restate what I said before, if you have willing individuals then it is your own business, with someone who is unwilling is a totally different story. If you want lingerie, whips and ropes, with mirrors, I don't care, just don't tell me about it unless I ask! There are enough other sites to titilate anyone to whatever bent that they might have, and I am not about to say what they can or can not do, I am not anyones judge.

[LilSissyStevie]

I disagree with your conclusion that the guilt theory is absurd. A fantasy about forced crossdressing is still a fantasy about crossdressing. Many men have difficulty overcoming the feelings of shame and guilt associated with what many in society regard as a taboo activity. Fantasizing that it is out of your control for whatever reason, enables the mind to get beyond the shame in its fantasies so that it can concentrate on the crossdressing itself.

I'm not saying that CDs don't feel shame about CDing, I'm questioning the idea that FF fantasies have anything to do with it. Think of it like this: if someone feels shame about CDing, wouldn't they feel as much or even more shame about being a pathetic weakling bossed around by a female? I mean, imagine telling someone, "I fantasize about crossdressing, but it's OK because some chick is making me do it and I'm powerless to resist because she might punish me." I just don't think that anyone can delude themselves into thinking this makes crossdressing socially acceptable. But, then again, I sometimes forget where I am.