View Full Version : The Principle of Constriction
Walrus Jones
02-08-2009, 10:28 PM
Not sure if I should post this here or in LLR, but here goes:
Footbinding, essentially, is constricting the growth of a foot so that it grows into a certain size and shape.
Wouldn't this be the case with other body parts? Particularly penises?
Essentially, what I'm saying, is that by wearing pants, men are not allowing their penises to grow to their full length.
Also, by wearing shirts and bras, women are not allowing their breasts to grow to their full potential.
Ideas?
igweyliogsuh
02-09-2009, 02:36 AM
Not sure if I should post this here or in LLR, but here goes:
Footbinding, essentially, is constricting the growth of a foot so that it grows into a certain size and shape.
Wouldn't this be the case with other body parts? Particularly penises?
Essentially, what I'm saying, is that by wearing pants, men are not allowing their penises to grow to their full length.
Also, by wearing shirts and bras, women are not allowing their breasts to grow to their full potential.
Ideas?
normal clothing is probably a lot less restrictive than the shoes they use for footbinding...
but who knows.
Bad_Intentions
02-09-2009, 03:13 AM
No, not the same. Unless it was so ridiculously tight. Even then I doubt it.
Orgasm Hut
02-09-2009, 06:59 AM
Lets think about this logically. With footbinding, the feet binding the feet grow to the size of the shoe and that's it right? (I've only just looked up footbinding.) Using Bras as an example as that's probably the most restrictive form of clothing. Girls begin to where them when they start to devlop? Yet their breasts continue to grow even with the presence of the bra daily.
'Nuff said
Lets think about this logically. With footbinding, the feet binding the feet grow to the size of the shoe and that's it right? (I've only just looked up footbinding.) Using Bras as an example as that's probably the most restrictive form of clothing. Girls begin to where them when they start to devlop? Yet their breasts continue to grow even with the presence of the bra daily.
'Nuff said
Without researching it, I'm thinking the foot binding was non-stop 24/7, while most people take off clothing/bras etc. to sleep , bathe etc.
Anima Mundi
02-12-2009, 05:29 PM
There is no way that pants or bras have enough force to constrict and stop the development of anything. The foot braces actually deform the bones in the foot.
dysik
02-16-2009, 10:35 AM
is this a joke thread?
footbinding was an extremely painfull and long process.
they used to smoke opium to get over the pain of their foot being bound constantly. and then still need opium to walk around on deformed feet.
and with jocks and bras, mayb if it was like 999999x more constrictive it could.
but you get a bigger bra or jocks if you cant fit them dont you?
mayb your too poor lol
There is no way that pants or bras have enough force to constrict and stop the development of anything. The foot braces actually deform the bones in the foot.
This.
Foot binding was performed by tying bandages so tightly that the arch of the foot was literally broken, not just by making women wear small shoes.
Orgasm Hut
02-16-2009, 05:56 PM
Without researching it, I'm thinking the foot binding was non-stop 24/7, while most people take off clothing/bras etc. to sleep , bathe etc.
Indeed, which is why I made that point. There's no way it is constrictive.
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.