Full Body Chastity Cages
May 24, 2007 5:32 PM   Subscribe

Being the virile demigod I am, sometimes the average chastity belt isn't enough to keep me from having sex. Fortunately, the kindly metalworking folks @ Permanent Bondage have created a series of full body wire cages to help me contain my savage lusts. A couple more photos here. Oh yeah, some of these links may be perceived as NSFW.
posted by jonson (41 comments total) 4 users marked this as a favorite
Sometimes you have to lock up your jonson.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 5:34 PM on May 24, 2007 [1 favorite]

posted by Belle O'Cosity at 5:34 PM on May 24, 2007

Yikes. I like the trapdoor though, kind of like backwards footed pajamas.
posted by artifarce at 5:36 PM on May 24, 2007

Bring out the gimp.
posted by yhbc at 5:36 PM on May 24, 2007

Oh my.
posted by grouse at 5:38 PM on May 24, 2007

Looks like something I would have killed while I was The Nameless One.
posted by Cyrano at 5:39 PM on May 24, 2007

Oh god, my eyes...
posted by anthill at 5:41 PM on May 24, 2007

Chased? How can I be chased when I can hardly move in this getup?
posted by cortex at 5:46 PM on May 24, 2007 [1 favorite]

Ahahaha! I love the guy whose face is blurred out. He's like, "HELL no. My kids still think I build aviaries."
posted by katillathehun at 5:49 PM on May 24, 2007 [1 favorite]

There's an awful lot of holes in these chastity cages.
posted by DU at 5:51 PM on May 24, 2007

10 bucks these people are native speakers of German.
posted by Mayor Curley at 5:56 PM on May 24, 2007

but is there enough room for my ample ass?
posted by Jikido at 6:00 PM on May 24, 2007

It's times like these that I regret using my real name as a username.

So, nope, no relevant stories here. Move along.
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 6:19 PM on May 24, 2007

Totally cool and I'd own (and use) one in a second (if it were free and I had someplace to put it)... but, like the other drool-worthy, totally medieval looking, uber-expensive bondage stuff I've seen, it's not exactly versatile or practical. I mean, in addition to the issue of variable prisoner size (already raised by Jikido) it'd be tough to use in conjunction with flogging or single tail whipping. Maybe you could do a bit of cropping and paddling or spanking, but it's not really designed for that either. There's no nipple access that I can see and I'm not clear on what's up with the little crotch guard area; is there a zipper there or what?. You can access the mouth, but you're limited in what can be done with it, cause the cagee is held in an upright position. In addition, you couldn't leave someone in this thing for more than an hour or two, I expect, and they couldn't be left unattended at all. On the other hand, I love the way the arms are caged separately.

All in all, it made me want to go visit Daddy S's store in San Francisco.
posted by Clay201 at 6:24 PM on May 24, 2007 [1 favorite]

Perfect for chastising the disobedient wife.
posted by papakwanz at 6:27 PM on May 24, 2007

Clay201 scares me.
posted by misha at 6:38 PM on May 24, 2007

Look out, Clay, you're freaking the norms.
posted by cortex at 6:40 PM on May 24, 2007

Wow. I still can't shake the image of walking in on my parents in the missionary position at age 12. This certainly puts things in perspective.
posted by itchylick at 6:44 PM on May 24, 2007

Wow, fucking hot says I, but overkill. All you really need is one of these, right? Also, page me when they sell a pharmaceutical version.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 6:47 PM on May 24, 2007

Okay, I looked at some more of the pictures. Why do you need a rubber suit AND the wire cage?!? Wouldn't one or the other do well enough?
posted by yhbc at 6:50 PM on May 24, 2007

ummm... wtf? go to the main webpage for an interesting interview...

Mark: When I was born, I was adopted by a couple who were doing behavior research on a private grant. To make a long story short, I was never treated as a child. I was a research tool. Sheela was also adopted by the same couple.

Jenson: That still doesn't explain the rubber bondage thing.

Mark: From as early as I can remember, I was always dressed in rubber. I was usually in some kind of confinement, like a rubber sack or a different container and I was tubed most all of the time. I thought everybody was treated this way. Sheela was adopted to be my trainer/master.

Jenson: But you two must be pretty close in age. How did that work?

Sheela: I'm 2 years older. I was raised to dominate Mark in any way they could think of. I thought this was normal also. We experienced mostly rubber fetish and bondage, plus the dominance and submission thing very early on.


Jenson: I want to know about your childhood. I can't even imagine what female domination would be like from such an early age.

Mark: We weren't considered children, but more programmable beings. The research was to explore how far they could change the personality with exposure to extreme pleasure and pain. They didn't have to re-program us because we weren't programmed yet.

Sheela: When Mark was about 8, we convinced him he had no arms or legs. For a year he was kept in a special suit with gobs of tubes attached, and he was impaled on this shiney metal shaft. They would use different liquids to stimulate him. I was always the one to deliver the pain or pleasure. That was to connect him to me as my thing, or pet.To this day he will do anything I ask without hesitation.

Jenson: What about intercourse? Was this part of the program? This is what I think of when you mention sex.

Sheela: Whenever Mark's penis wasn't tubed or in some kind of rubber suit, it was in a chastity device. So I don't ever remember normal intercourse being an option. We did what they wanted and always had fun.

Jenson: Always had fun? Was this a good childhood, or was it bad?

Sheela: I wouldn't call it a childhood, but I would call it good. I remember having orgasms for hours. They did some cool shit to us.

oh and:

* Former Washington Times business editor Bill Jenson now writes independently, focusing on the fetish experience in North America.
posted by geos at 6:55 PM on May 24, 2007

Okay, I looked at some more of the pictures. Why do you need a rubber suit AND the wire cage?!? Wouldn't one or the other do well enough?

So. A virgin then, eh?
posted by jonson at 7:20 PM on May 24, 2007

The interview seems phony to me. A little too calculated to titlillate a target BDSM audience, perhaps?

Just sayin. . .
posted by rdone at 7:24 PM on May 24, 2007

the sitting cage makes me think of the end of after hours
posted by rmd1023 at 7:26 PM on May 24, 2007

Actually, jonson, at first I thought maybe there was a safety factor involved - you know, that wire's gotta be sharp in spots, maybe a rubber undercoat would provide some protection - but immediately rejected that hypothesis, for (I hope) obvious reasons.
posted by yhbc at 7:28 PM on May 24, 2007

I don't think any of these people need to make it harder for themselves to fuck.
posted by Eideteker at 7:38 PM on May 24, 2007 [4 favorites]

Best part is the shot with the dildo on his face.

But really, overkill.
posted by Roman Graves at 7:51 PM on May 24, 2007

Those guys ought to be locked up.
posted by Dave Faris at 8:01 PM on May 24, 2007

I'm gonna break my rusty cage, and run.
posted by Tube at 8:31 PM on May 24, 2007 [1 favorite]

The interview seems phony to me. A little too calculated to titlillate a target BDSM audience, perhaps?

A little?
posted by delmoi at 9:09 PM on May 24, 2007

Thank God I'll have something to wear to IML in Chicago this weekend.
posted by ao4047 at 9:54 PM on May 24, 2007

I'm really not sure what to make of that interview. It sounds completely implausible (a research grant? Someone in the G or at a university signed off on this crap? Not in this dimension). But neither can I buy rdone's theory that this is part of the sales pitch, that it's calculated to thrill the customers. Mainly because it involves really, really underaged children; something that's going to make your average BDSMer either very nervous or very angry or both. Maybe it's cause we're sensitive to being labeled demented and dangerous and have gone through a lot to gain some pretty basic social and legal accommodations. Maybe it's because we're terrified of bringing down the wrath of the man. Maybe it's because we're, on the average, no less reactionary than the rest of America. Maybe it's because we just really, really can't stand the idea of someone abusing a child. But for whatever reason, if you even mention the idea of a child being involved with BDSM to a random group of kinky people, you'll find it's an extremely touchy subject. I realize the interviewees are in SF and I'm in Alabama, but still... I don't believe that SFians are, as a group, cool with this.

My best guess is that these two just can't resist making up stories about themselves or embellishing their backgrounds, to the point that they'll tell complete whoppers that are seemingly guaranteed to get them called out. Unfortunately, I've run into this phenomenon many times in BDSM circles. I know a guy who swears he learned interrogation techniques while working for the CIA in Afghanistan and another who claims to leave women hanging by their arms in his barn for days on end. A friend of a friend once claimed to have been "trained" in a "European House" a la The Story of O. Viola Johnson claims to have had real fangs growing in her mouth at one point. (She says she's a vampire). There are lots of examples that are less dramatic but far more ubiquitous. I don't really know why it should be so common-place in our particular cultural niche (though I have my theories), but it is. I've often wondered whether baseball card collectors, yoga practitioners, and beanie baby enthusiasts experience a comparable phenomenon or the problem is unique to perverts.
posted by Clay201 at 10:09 PM on May 24, 2007

The space between that bars makes that thing seem so much more roomy than my cubicle at work.
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 10:54 PM on May 24, 2007

One thing that has always puzzled me about the bondage scene is the amount of money involved in purchasing all the gear if you're into anything more than duct tape and rope from Home Depot; it seems astronomical for all but the most affluent BDSMers out there. Any thoughts from those of you here? Are the maintenance costs of keeping it interesting, um, restricting, or does it not really matter?
posted by mdonley at 11:52 PM on May 24, 2007

Clay201 writes "I'm really not sure what to make of that interview. It sounds completely implausible (a research grant? Someone in the G or at a university signed off on this crap? Not in this dimension)."

I don't believe it either, but to be fair, they said it was a private research grant, which I took to be "twisted rich person paid money", not "university or government paid money".
posted by Bugbread at 1:01 AM on May 25, 2007

Why can't you wear a hair shirt like everyone else?
posted by Smart Dalek at 4:13 AM on May 25, 2007

Are the maintenance costs of keeping it interesting, um, restricting [...?]

Yes. Just like some people desire the latest techno-gadget but cannot afford it. You buy what you can when you can afford it, and slowly build a collection. Some learn to make things themselves. Leatherwork can be an expensive hobby, but if you're into bondage, it pays for itself relatively quickly.
posted by desjardins at 5:24 AM on May 25, 2007

Another thing - I'm a regular in the bondage.com forums (under another username) and I've realized I'm so used to the instant acceptance of nearly all things kinky that some responses here surprise me. I forget that not everyone is blase about this stuff.
posted by desjardins at 5:26 AM on May 25, 2007

i don't think that interview is about *lying* so much as it is about getting so far into your fantasy that you don't think of it as being anything other than truth. in other words, although their story is obviously extraordinarily unlikely (and unlikely to produce anything other than gibbering, fucked up sorts rocking back and forth in an insane asylum), it is the fantasy they live, and so think nothing of telling it as if it's true.

it's unfortunate that people do that, since it provides fodder for true psychos to rationalize their crimes upon the innocent. ("it didn't hurt them--they liked it.")

the chubby guy cage reminded me of Henry VIII's armor at the Tower of London. 'cept Henry's had a *huge* codpiece. that was a fun conversation to have with an 8 year old, i'll tell you.
posted by RedEmma at 10:21 AM on May 25, 2007

I would totally own one of the cages as an outdoor art installation...if only to confuse the Pinks...but as an actual tool for pleasure...na. That's a "fer looking at" toy.

The interview? I call big ol' shenanigans there.
posted by dejah420 at 10:44 AM on May 25, 2007

i don't think that interview is about *lying* so much as it is about getting so far into your fantasy that you don't think of it as being anything other than truth.

I agree with this to a large extent and would, in addition, extend it to cover the more egregious tall tale tellers I mentioned above. In fact, I'm beginning to think that these people spent so long hanging out in internet forums and fantasizing about what they wanted to do before they got to do it for real that they became incapable of enjoying their kinks without the fantasy intertwined. And the fantasy is always larger-than-life in a very B-Movie, hack Sci-Fi/Action/Fantasy sort of way; a guy will claim to have been a member of a secret society and know how to paralyze a person's arm with one karate chop, but he won't claim to have interviewed a descendant of the Marquis De Sade and discovered evidence of a previously unpublished manuscript.
posted by Clay201 at 6:56 PM on May 25, 2007

« Older Fauxhawk or faux character?   |   Falling in Love with Things Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments