Talk:Bondage suit

derogatory term, correct is "bondage suit"

The term "gimp suit" is rather derogatory - it is barely used by vendors of these garments - they prefer to call it "bondage suit". Check some BDSM shops on Google to see how they offer their stuff. The word may be a colloquial term during BDSM role play (much like the many other humiliating words), but it is certainly not an official term for these suits. It seems to be mainly used as a cuss word by non-BDSM people. From what I see in movies and websites, the term especially stands for a black suit of very tear resistant material (often reinforced by straps and barely stretchable) that includes integrated metal rings, belts, buckles and laces to fasten it and engage ropes or chains - e.g. to lift and hang the wearer under the ceiling. In this meaning it is definitely NOT identical with a regular catsuit or zentai.

I recommend to rename this page in "bondage suit" and use "gimp suit" as a synonym, or at least vice versa. 89.51.31.138 (talk) 01:06, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Isn't the "term of art" a Jemima Suit ... or is that just a rumour? 62.196.17.197 (talk) 14:32, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Minor usage problem involving possible specialized term

Out of respect for a subject whose terminology I'm not familiar with in detail, I'm asking someone else to correct the last sentence of the first paragraph:

...and includes integrated metal rings, belts, buckles and laces to fasten it and engage ropes or chains - e.g. to lift and hang the wearer under the ceiling.

I could have changed this to, "...to fasten ropes or chains to it," but then that leaves out the word "engage," which could have some specialized connotation I'm not aware of. Also, "to fasten and engage ropes or chains to it" doesn't work, because you engage something, not engage to something.

Sorry I can't do more than to point this out. Hope this helps, Geekdiva (talk) 07:26, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Lock Article

I just undid an edit by 82.38.15.181, since it was clearly vandalism. If you look at the article's history page, you see there is a lot of vandalism taking place, and in some cases it took a long time before it was reverted. Maybe all edits should be checked by trustworthy users, or if that's not possible locking the article would be best. --82.171.70.54 (talk) 18:34, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Ditto. I just replaced 'Charlie Edwards' with 'Doll fetish' reference to fix what appears to be vandalism

"Attachment points" claim

The article states that:

"While it sometimes differs from a catsuit, unitard, or zentai more in purpose than appearance, the typical bondage suit is black and of very tear-resistant material (often reinforced by straps and barely stretchable) and includes integrated metal rings, belts, buckles, and laces to fasten it and to attach ropes or chains, as to lift and hang the wearer"

I can't see any cite for this. Whole-body catsuits worn with masks/hoods might well be worn with a bondage harness (which certainly can come with attachment fittings), but I can't see any evidence for bondage suits with in-built attachment points. Also; what is this "black and very tear-resistant material" supposed to be? Leather would qualify, but latex or PVC certainly wouldn't. Again, cite please.

I've removed the paragraph until citations can be found. — The Anome (talk) 13:25, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Working through claims of practice from unbiased Philosophical, Cognitive Scientific, and Psychological approaches.

Using highly deliberative references to Cognitive Science, Cognitive Psychology, and Psychology of all parties (Dom/Domme, Wearer, and Third-Party Observer) to clean up this article's claims as well as give the article more epistemological validity without losing the intended narrow scope. There will be limited clinical psychological inferences to the practitioners. There will be a need for more sections such as types of bondage suits.

I highly encourage those that would have the article edited to start with the topics page for deliberation of how to approach the subject material in an unbiased manner. I will keep this article within my scope for any changes without notes then rollback to a previous version if there isn't a corresponding talk topic with deliberation. Please feel to deliberate upon about any edits that I (67.174.36.36/AccreditedGemologist) have made here.

As for the past edit to remove the "Sexual Objectification" and the change to "Objectify", redirection to Agalmatophilia, as probably being the most controversial edit thus far: The consensual pretend absence of a Personal Identity of the wearer removes the theory (Identity Theory) entirely from the scope of the role-play; hence the linked articles to paraphilias related to Agalmatophilia of Objectophilia. It is in contrast to "Sexual Objectification" which is stated as "the act of treating a person solely as an object of sexual desire." Without the stated wearer's Human Identity, within the context of the role-play, there is no "Sexual Objectification" or disavowment of the suit-wearer's Humanity by voluntary, consenting participants. Deliberation upon the use of "Sexual Objectification" and "Objectification" shall happen here in Talk:Bondage suit, if you find it within your volition. I found making the edit as it stands to be the most unbiased philosophical approach, including Anima and Animus (Jung) as well as Fetish (Object). If all goes well then a criticism section could be incorporated ranging from Psychological criticisms to Philosophical ones pertaining to the usage of Bondage Suits with links to references. AccreditedGemologist (talk) 11:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Causal Reasoning "B" may or may not be associated with "D", "S", or "M" in practice.

Causal Reasoning "Bondage" may or may not be associated with discipline, sadism, and/or masochism in practice as the participants are consenting to pretend-play (role-play with assumed roles). Any redirecting link suggesting "Sadomasochism" is definitively and always involved in the practice was willfully incorporated by from a moral justification viewpoint, disassociated from the clear fact that it is a suit-wearing Bondage activity. I will update further to see how it is plausible to remove sadomasochism as the sole definitive premise for wearing a bondage-suit and role playing as a gimp. AccreditedGemologist (talk) 04:20, 24 July 2024 (UTC)