Letter 4
(From Search)
Contributed by Sissy Nancy

Dear Sir,

It may be some consolation to the gentleman who wrote to you regarding the 'nursery treatment' accorded to him by his wife, to know that he is not the only husband to be dressed and treated as a baby. My own husband, for many years now, has spent much of his time at home wearing babified dress, fastened in nappies, and generally being treated as a rather troublesome and fractious infant.

It began soon after we were married, when I discovered one day to my horror, that he was a transvestite. Utterly disgusted, I threatened to leave him, whereupon he begged me not to, promising faithfully that he would not offend again. But I knew that, given the chance, he would still want to dress up, and so, after much consideration, I issued my ultimatum - I would stay with him, provided he agreed to wear whatever clothes I chose for him, and allowed me to take complete control.

Only too willingly he did so, but it must have been a nasty shock for him, when, a few days later, I ordered him up to the bedroom, and fastened him up in a very short, pretty little pink silk frock and a flounced and heavily belaced white cotton petticoat, and when he then had to lie on the bed, whilst I pinned him up into a big flannelette nappy, his humiliation and embarrassment knew no bounds! He tried to protest but was sharply reminded of his promise, and with a baby's dummy popped into his mouth to still further discomfort him, he was taken back downstairs to spend the rest of the day in his new attire.

Ever since; his nappies and the rest of his baby attire have been worn, whenever it amuses or pleases me to put him into them. To his great shame and embarrassment, several of my closer woman friends, have been made aware of this situation and he quite often spends an evening with us as our 'baby', being teased and ridiculed in his pretty infant clothes, until he begs most pitifully to be allowed to escape.

I must emphasise that this way of dressing him and treating him, is in no way a punishment. It was he himself who first elected to wear feminine attire, and his short frocks and little frilly petticoats are merely my choice of costume for him. Making him wear nappies is done simply, as a refinement of humiliation, and in order to keep him unpleasantly and most shamingly aware of my authority over him. It is always made quite clear, to any visitors who see him, that his baby dress is only a furtherance of his own wish to be dressed as a female.

If, for any reason, it is necessary to punish him, then I use methods somewhat similar to your correspondent. Some years ago, I bought a cot, which has been installed in our bedroom, and when 'naughty', he is put down into this, a special baby harness being used to strap him down in it, on his back. Of course, he is too big to lie in it comfortably, but must do so with his knees up, and his ankles and wrists are secured to the cot rails, making it impossible for him to do more than wriggle about uncomfortably until he is freed. His frock and petticoats are removed before he is put into the cot, but his nappies are retained, of course, and a pair of rubber baby pants pulled on over, and he lies on a heavy rubber sheet.

In this pitiable state, he is left for as long as I consider necessary. At intervals, he is given a feed from a baby's nursing bottle, and should he be foolish enough to disturb me by making any noise, he is gagged with my panties. The punishment may last for anything up to 24 hours, and if, during this time he wets himself, he is scolded for his naughtiness. But I do not change his nappy and he remains in babyish misery and discomfort until released from his humiliating bondage.

ln spite of the way he is treated, my husband loves me and respects me for being able to dominate him like this, and has come to accept his need to be governed and controlled in this way. He may squirm sometimes at the humiliation imposed upon him, but he would be lost without 'Petticoat Domination', and he knows it.
Yours truly,

J. L. (London)

So few wives seem to understand that if their hubbies secretly like dressing then this is a heaven-sent opportunity to take full control of them, and establish a regime of petticoat government from which there is no escape. J.L. seems to concentrate on the baby side of things, with her husband's outfits being very babyish, but I am sure she would see that he is useful around the house, and the visitors have probably seen him doing the housework in his silk frock and nappies.

I think that just about the best arrangement is for hubby to be dressed as a little girl or maid (and tightly pinafored in both cases) with baby discipline as an effective measure if he shows signs of complaint or disobedience. I understand that you can actually get larger wooden cots now, big enough for the biggest baby.

Return to Index
Letter 5