I am quite sure that many of the ladies whose letters I quoted, in the article on the subject that you were kind enough to publish recently, make use of full restraint at times as an extra humiliation for much-dominated husbands, and it would be interesting to hear their views. Particularly in front of teasing visitors, to be rendered completely helpless dressed up in nappies and baby clothes would be a terrifying experience, for he would know that he was quite literally at their mercy, with no chance at all of escape. And if in addition, for instance, he were blindfolded, perhaps by a pair of Mummy's thick winter bloomers pulled over his head, so that he could not even see who his tickler and tormentor was, then I think he would experience the ultimate in shame and embrrassment.

Of course there is another side to the picture - the awful humiliation for a man of having his hands free, yet not daring to remove his petticoats and nappies because he has been forbidden to do so. In some ways, this could be even worse, and more shaming for him, and again it would be interesting to know the views of these domineering ladies who practice this form of discipline on their husbands. Or perhaps they might 'persuade' their hubbies to write and say what they think.
Yours sincerely,

W.G.

I agree that some kind of restraint is an essential part of dummy discipline and nursery training, because of the helplessness of real babies.But it should be baby restraint of course; baby reins (harness) or ribbons and bows. If you can afford a proper high chair for Baby, the fold-down section is in itself restraining. Of course being rendered immobile and unresisting is essential if Baby is to be punished by being teased to distraction by a group of cheeky girls, as in a few letters I have reproduced this year (see 'Two Teachers Who Believe in Petticoat Discipline', 'Petticoated Male Experience from Mrs. B.D.', and 'Humiliation in a Baby's High Chair').

Being blindfolded by a pair of thick cotton interlock ladies' bloomers is certainly a good household corrective for any husbands who cannot keep their eyes off the girls passing in the street while they are walking with their wives.
Susan

Over the years, my husband has been seen by many different people in his nappies and baby clothes, and I have learned to judge, from his reactions when he knows they are coming to visit us, just which ones cause him the greatest humiliation and distress. For instance, we have a neighbour, a very plump spinster in her late forties, who, before I placed him under nappy discipline, my husband always used to treat with insulting indifference. Now the tables are turned with avengeance!

I frequently invite her in for the evening, and she really gets her own back as she teases and ridicules my helpless squirming baby. She can have him on the verge of tears in a matter of minutes with her cruel taunts and jibes. Then he gets ridiculed all the more for being such a cry baby, and taken onto her wide and ample lap to be 'comforted', which he really hates. She has recently made him some bibs out of one of her discarded silk petticoats, and I can feel him cringe everytime I tie one on him, just because of their association with her.

Another visitor who always upsets him terribly, for quite different reasons, is our fourteen year old niece, Joan. She has known about his situation from quite an early age, and when she was younger she seemed to be rather sympathetic towards him. But now, as a very smart young schoolgirl, her attitude has changed completely. Just to look at Baby standing there in his little frock and petticoats is enough to bring a slight sneer to her pretty young lips. She has never called him 'Uncle', but always by the baby name which she first gave him of 'Boo-Boo', and to see this attractive young schoolgirl ordering 'Boo-Boo' to come and give her a big kiss, and to watch his shame-faced obedience, is an object lesson in feminine domination!

Yet another hated visitor is the woman who used to do our charring for us. In those days, before I had learned how to tame him through the use of petticoats and nappies, he was very supercilious with Mrs. M., but now the position is very different, and it is he who wriggles and squirms under Mrs. M.'s merciless teasing. Deliberately mocking him, she always addresses him as 'Sir', as she used to. 'Come along Sir - time for your bottle', she says, and the poor helpless wretch has to climb onto her lap in a flurry of frilly petticoats and nappies, and let her fasten a bib around his neck and feed him from a baby's rubber-nippled nursing bottle! She always makes a great show of 'burping' him, and his humiliation at being treated like this by a former servant is pitiful to watch.

I look forward to a lot more letters regarding the application of nappy discipline in future issues.
Yours sincerely,

A.C.
Bristol.

Well, here is justice indeed! Mr C. was obviously a very cocky and conceited chappie, and one can only give three cheers on reading that he is now tormented by three people whom he used to treat with studied superiority. A.C. gives no other details in her letter, but I am sure that her strong insistence on most belittling form of husband management has made him a really satisfactory hubby.
Susan