This is an archive of past discussions about Chastity belt. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The article describes chastity belts as if they were only worn by women despite the appearance on the page of an image from a 1911 patent explicitly designed for men. --87.244.100.5 (talk) 00:28, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
Before the mid-20th-century, they were mainly anti-masturbation devices, or attempts to suppress "nocturnal emissions", rather than chastity belts as such... AnonMoos (talk) 02:04, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Like the lead of the article states with WP:Reliable sources, chastity belts "were historically designed by men for women, ostensibly for the purpose of chastity, to protect women from rape or to dissuade women and their potential sexual partners from sexual temptation." They weren't designed to protect men from rape or to protect their chastity. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 06:12, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
However, the first line is "A chastity belt is a locking item of clothing designed to prevent sexual intercourse or masturbation". The article is clearly confused and poorly written. --Eldomtom2 (talk) 16:43, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
And does "A chastity belt is a locking item of clothing designed to prevent sexual intercourse or masturbation" mean that these belts were created for men? No. Right after that line, we quite clearly clarify that "Such belts were historically designed by men for women, ostensibly for the purpose of chastity, to protect women from rape or to dissuade women and their potential sexual partners from sexual temptation." There is no need to have "by men for women" in the first sentence, but the first sentence can surely be amended to state "designed by men for women to prevent sexual intercourse or masturbation", and then the second sentence can be adjusted to not be redundant. Either way, I don't think that any reader is going to be confused when it comes to who these best belts were meant for/who used them, and we go by what WP:Reliable sources state with WP:Due weight. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 18:41, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
And the reason that the lead currently doesn't state "by men for women" in the first sentence is because of the modern versions of the chastity belt. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 18:47, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
But this circles round into the issue of claiming that chastity belts were only designed for such purposes when they were designed to be worn by women, while the page itself contradicts that. --Eldomtom2 (talk) 22:03, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
The article contradicts nothing. It tells us what a chastity belt is. It then tells the sex the chastity belt was historically designed for. It then tells us its relevance in the modern world (men wearers and BDSM). I'm not going to keep debating this. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 17:08, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
"It then tells the sex the chastity belt was historically designed for." Except it shows that historically they were not solely designed for one sex. You are dodging the point.--Eldomtom2 (talk) 20:57, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
No, it does not "show that historically they were not solely designed for one sex." I am not dodging anything. You are not listening. You got an answer with the very first reply in this section. "Chastity belt-like devices" (wording that the Wikipedia article currently uses at one point) is not the same as chastity belts...unless you have WP:Reliable academic sources stating so. Unless you have WP:Reliable academic sources calling certain historical chastity belts "chastity belts for men", there is nothing left to discuss. Unless you have WP:Reliable academic sources stating that these belts were historically designed for men to protect their chastity, there is nothing left to discuss. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 23:24, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
