Cut off Pockets

Cut off Pockets (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

blinktoomuch -> Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 7:42:37 AM)
I once talked with a master who wanted all his subs to cut the pockets out of their jeans, and ever since this has intrigued me. Has anyone ever done this / made their subs to this? What's the purpose? I can't imagine living without pockets...

GreedyTop -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 8:01:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: blinktoomuch I once talked with a master who wanted all his subs to cut the pockets out of their jeans, and ever since this has intrigued me. Has anyone ever done this / made their subs to this? What's the purpose? I can't imagine living without pockets... I wouldn't. I like pockets, too.

KYsissy -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 8:06:03 AM)
I am guessing it is for easy access

xssve -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 8:09:42 AM)
So they can play pocket pool? Yeah, be easier yet if they wore skirts.

plesto -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 8:51:16 AM)
No pockets [sm=ugh.gif]

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 9:11:40 AM)
I guess I've found a new hard limit. I'm one of those females who has serious envy for male clothing, b/c it tends to be so practical. When was the last time you saw a pair of pants meant for males that didn't have pockets? Unless they were something special, like ski slacks? Whereas females are supposed to go around w/o pockets on a daily basis, and I have yet to figure out why. I know who to dress up and all, I don't have to have pockets in my evening or cocktail gown, but for everyday wear, hell yeah, I want a pocket. As far as the OP, I have no fucking idea, except weirdness. For easy access skirts work better, plus I've never met a male dom who didn't like skirts.

doctorgrey -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 9:44:01 AM)
I think I have a couple of pairs of strides with pockets removed. In case she needs to check my lose change. DrG

IronWithVelvet -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 9:44:34 AM)
Hmmmm. Maybe the no pocket thing is about denying the slave the ability to carry or even have their own possessions, like keys and money in order to keep them totally dependent upon and under the thumb of their Master. It would make it harder to bail out if you couldn't have or even have a place to hide or carry any emergency funds. Still scratching my head over this.

AthenaSurrenders -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 10:11:45 AM)
fast reply The OP is a gay male sub. So assuming the rule in question was aimed at male subs, jeans without pockets would be more discrete on a day-to-day basis than having them in easy-access skirts. That said, this would annoy me. I would constantly be putting my keys in there only to have them drop out my trouser leg.

mnottertail -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 10:14:09 AM)
well sew them shut where the pocket material meets the jean or slacks material, and the patch pockets can be sewn shut in the trim stitching at the top.

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 10:17:08 AM)
TY Athena, I (obviously) didn't bother to check the profile. In this case I think the gender is crucial. It makes more sense to sew the pocket shut. Other than that, I got nothing.

AthenaSurrenders -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 10:23:22 AM)
Unless of course easy access is the point, in which case sewing them shut would make it ever harder to get in.

Jaquin -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 10:32:36 AM)
I've heard about if you cut the bottoms out of pockets the person can slip their own hands in and be handcuffed; thus it just looks like your hands are in your pockets but you're actually bound walking around. Of course in the context I heard this it was in a jacket not in jeans.

mnottertail -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 10:34:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AthenaSurrenders Unless of course easy access is the point, in which case sewing them shut would make it ever harder to get in. Tear off the zipper, thats where the action is for that.

JanahX -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 11:04:34 AM)
Not sure what the point is - its not like everyone wont know that youre jerking yourself off anyways -

UnownedCOBeauty -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 12:18:32 PM)
So of course, my sweet, innocent little brain didn't think of sexual favors first when I read this question. The first thought I had was "probably because pockets make you look fat." That sounds weird, I know. But I've often wished that certain pants I've owned in the past didn't have pockets. They stick out at the tops or clump funny at the bottom. If you notice, women's dress pants don't have pockets, only 'mockets' that are sewn shut. They give the illusion a pocket is there but there's no bulk. Now, if the original Dom wanted his subs to cut pockets out and they were male, it could be for the same reason, especially if he likes his subs super feminine. But then you pervs started talking about sex and I thought "BRILLIANT!" Then I blushed three shades of red imagining it. Yes, if female, wearing a skirt would be the proper way for either party to explore in, say, a dark movie theater or a park bench. But if male, then pants or shorts sans pockets would definitely be the way to accomplish the same feat -- A risque tryst with a higher percentage of getting caught. Be still my beating adrenaline!

RaspberryLemon -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 3:09:55 PM)
Oh God I'd be so mad if I had to do that. I love having nice big pockets. Which is why I can't stand most women's pants--no pockets! Either that, or they have those teeny tiny pockets that you can't even fit a wallet or cellphone in. What's the point?! So incredibly impractical. That's why I always wear men's pants. Pockets pockets pockets. <3 So maybe he just made them cut out the pockets to piss them off. Heck if I know why they'd do that.

LanceHughes -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 3:34:49 PM)
(1) 'Tis a bit of a humiliation to be ordered to jerk-off while in public. (2) Some men do not like to sport a woody and to be told to "Get it up, boy," might be just the thing. We have thread after thread of: "How do I humiliate my sub without involving the public w/o their consent."

RumpusParable -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 7:14:21 PM)
I could see it as a fun on-going game.

Darkfeather -> RE: Cut off Pockets (9/4/2012 9:51:53 PM)
As for why most women's clothing have no or fake pockets, it started as more of a fashion/practical reason. Since most clothes of old were altered to fit in some way, pockets on women were seen as a means to ruin that perfect cut (put something in that pocket and the carefully tapered line gets ruined). More practically, the designers felt that since women had purses, they didn't need pockets to carry things. This is also why most men's clothing have large pockets, because we were expected to carry everything in them. There have been many attempts to change the status quo though(anyone remember fanny packs?)

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875