Angelina who should be this authority in your proposal?
It would seem such a law dictates a hierarchy: Husband first, followed by father, mother, brothers and sisters starting with eldest brother, in-laws. If a person has no available relatives, a government-sponsored monitor would take charge of their chastity.
Angelina no judge should be allowed to order/permit it just because of the fear of the parents. there must be reasons otherwise every girl wears a belt even if she is a good girl.
Based on the “you be the judge” thread, it would seem to be the opinion of the forum is that “having sex outside of marriage, ever” counts as good reasons!
All my made-up cases thus far involve sex. Maybe I should pose a masturbation-only case!
Angelina I have only formulated the suggestion for women because it is most accepted here on the forum that girls/women wear a belt. but you can also apply the law to boys, transsexuals or other gender identities.
I genuinely appreciate your recognition of trans people 
.
Saintprudence It would seem such a law dictates a hierarchy: Husband first, followed by father, mother, brothers and sisters starting with eldest brother, in-laws. If a person has no available relatives, a government-sponsored monitor would take charge of their chastity.
sounds very well thought out, almost like an order of inheritance 
Saintprudence All my made-up cases thus far involve sex. Maybe I should pose a masturbation-only case!
I admit I haven't read the thread yet because I've been online here for far too long and won't do it until tomorrow (or tonight), I think cases of masturbation can also play a role, for example when the daughter skips school to masturbating at home or something
Angelina I admit I haven't read the thread yet because I've been online here for far too long and won't do it until tomorrow (or tonight)
It’s already kind of a mammoth thread because I got pretty creative! And I can only guess your reaction to some of them .
Saintprudence And I can only guess your reaction to some of them
who knows, i'm full of surprises 
This topic to talk about theorical mandatory usage.
To recap, and download the thread about a chastity-friendly society.
On a theoretical level, my summary opinion, and taking into account that this is more fiction than real possibility:
Belt use for single women between 15 and 65. Obviously trans and lesbian women.
Trans and lesbian relationships must identify the head of household.
Sanctions for non-compliance should be aimed at social progress, for example owning a business or higher education.
Medical exam every six months, or weekly in educational centers, for single women.
Probably, although not mandatory, the norm would de facto oblige married women since not all husbands would accept that their wives were the available option. Certain places such as universities, schools, bars would imply mandatory use also for married women.
Keyholding hierarchy would be: father and husband/ legal guardian, older brother, younger brother, grandfather, uncle, friend with judicial authorization, mother.
The system of use and accessories depend on the keyholder, although the woman has the option to appeal if she believes there is abuse. Quick trial in 24 hours. Loss of keyholding liability.
Women undergoing separation and divorced, mandatory. Minimum one year of separation before you can get divorced.
Ines Keyholding hierarchy would be: father, legal guardian, uncle, older brother, younger brother, friend with judicial authorization, mother.
Are you certain "younger brother" should be on that list??? I don't have a younger brother and I don't thing there are any younger brothers in my extended families but I have seen some in other families and I just don't know if that would work well...
What about a group or small community of straight women. Like a accountability church or something so long as it's boring and not some sort of sorority party...
Megan What about a group or small community of straight women. Like a accountability church or something so long as it's boring and not some sort of sorority party...
Well, it is a good idea, but I was making a projection, and, although I do not consider myself a feminist, I do think that a society with this law would be very patriarchal.
That is why I included, with a low level, the authority of a younger brother.
Megan I think it would depend on the age of the younger brother - I wouldn’t trust anyone under 18.
i think a younger brother can also be a keyholder, but he as well as an older brother or friend/uncle should not stand in front of the mother.
for unmarried women I would say
Father, mother, older sibling (whether male or female), younger sibling (whether male or female), a person designated by the court.
Ines The system of use and accessories depend on the keyholder, although the woman has the option to appeal if she believes there is abuse. Quick trial in 24 hours. Loss of keyholding liability.
so in the end a court would decide if a chastity bra or thighbands are ok?
Angelina for unmarried women I would say
Father, mother, older sibling (whether male or female), younger sibling (whether male or female), a person designated by the court.
I think that’s ok, but there would have to be a minimum age for the younger sibling to be responsible for the key holding.
hanna_anders I think that’s ok, but there would have to be a minimum age for the younger sibling to be responsible for the key holding.
yes, i agree with you. the only exception would be if the wearer of the belt clearly wants a person (even under the minimum age) to get the keys. but then the wearer has to assure in writing that he takes responsibility for the complete deal.
@Greatcornbow here you can give your opinion and put your laws.
It is a female thread.
