Saintprudence But custom-built equipment that must closely fit the human body (like a prosthetic limb or a specialized support device) requires a doctor's prescription.
Not here.
Wishing To Live In A Slightly Better World
I mean, it makes sense to at least prioritize people with legitimate medical need (as evidenced by things like prescriptions). If the manufacturers only have enough production capacity to serve those with such a need (which seems likely, given that for most custom-fit medical devices there are probably very few people paying full price for "recreational use"), that would make it very hard to get something without one.
Ines True, I should have made clear I was speaking of the USA.
Saintprudence True, I should have made clear I was speaking of the USA.
No, no, Prudence, you were clear, I was surprised about difference.
i see it a bit like the canabis legalisation that will soon happen in germany. if there are legal ways under strict conditions, the users/wearer can be better protected than with illegal ways, but in general i think it is right that parents would not have this possibility, but i would find it ok if a judge is allowed to order it.
audioguy58 “An anti-libertarian, totalitarian utopia.”
hopefully it remains a utopia, i really don't want such a police state 
and if i follow the discussion here, the rest of the topic could also be renamed "orthopaedic chastity belts" haha
Angelina at least the involuntary ones here (like me) would be protected a bit
But you said yourself elsewhere, that you are more or less bribed and therefore wear the belt. No legal system will get you all the conveniences (e. g. your own car) that you got in return for accepting the belt, without actually accepting the belt.
Legally only those wearers would be more protected who are actually forced to wear the belt, if there was such clarification of the laws.
Saintprudence But custom-built equipment that must closely fit the human body (like a prosthetic limb or a specialized support device) requires a doctor's prescription.
I don't know where you are from but I am pretty sure that's wrong.
You can of course find the orthopaedic technician you trust and ask him to build whatever you want and his skills can produce. The actual issue is not the prescription but costs involved. Made to measure medical braces etc can easily cost hundreds if not thousands of Euros. But if you have the money, there is nothing illegal about buying your own stuff.
yes, you are actually right, although it depends more on what i no longer have when i no longer wear the belt (a car would then still be a small problem). i just think i could accept it better if a judge says i need a belt than that my father simply decides so, as i said i am very divided on this.
Angelina
Maybe look at it this way:
As long as your are not by physical force kept in your belt, you are at least partially a volunatary wearer from where I stand. Yes, your father might reduce the financial support to whatever he is required to provide by law instead of being rather generous in that area, In that case I would call your wearing a result of bribery. If he threatens to disinherit you or something along that line, it is not bribery but coercion. But still if you value your freedom from the belt only high enough, you could be free. For that reason I would not categorise you as involuntary wearer but as bribed or coerced wearer.
In life we always have to sacrifice one thing or the other in order to gain something else. For the most time these choices do not include a chastity belt but they can be just as annoying.
So in everything I've read here, no one has been forced into the belt with physical force. every belt can also be broken open, so looking at it like that, i know how to get out. it's a matter of consideration for me, i wear the belt because i don't want the consequences of not wearing it, there are only a little more than 5 months left, after more than 4 years i will still manage the last stage. However, I describe myself as involuntary because on the one hand I cannot say no without fearing bad consequences and on the other hand I am not convinced of the belt, so I see no good reason for me to wear the belt.
Sin problem with cages are that they aren't effective on everyone especially if the wearer's desperate. It's easier to secure the testicles than the offending meat stick above it.
I'm sure there's a better solution out there, heck I think there are anti-hormonal drugs you could employ.
I think a healthy community culture and upbringing environment is a sufficiently effective prevention method however, and if anything that is effective for some, religion as a tool can work. When that fails, you get problems like the outreached communities (yes, even in our state of WA) that are currently being subjected to rape and fratricide
audioguy58 Secondly, Implied Warranty of Merchantability would come into play, meaning that the belt maker could be sued and/or face possible enforcement action from the Federal Trade Commission and/or state attorneys general if any individual consumer wishes to argue that the seller’s product is ineffective at its ostensible purpose. If you sell something as a toaster, it has to be able to toast bread. If you sell something as a mousetrap, it has to be able to catch mice.
Considering how sketchy technology laws and things like warranty has gotten, I'm sure they'd be able to weave their way out of trouble with disclaimers somehow if a CB failed to prevent pregenancy for whatever reason (e.g. belt is only specified against seminal injection through rigid syringes greater than 2mm, and is ineffective if the belt was unlocked for whatever reason)
audioguy58 I would like to live in an “information perfect” world where every aspect of your life was represented by fields in control blocks (“documents”) residing in cloud storage.
so like china? If you provide the governement with too much control you'll end up with their 1984 situation again. Even Australia, a country that is/was ranked higher on the human rights spectrum than U.S. is undergoing similar issues currently with increased control over what the police can do as of late.
audioguy58 any piece of information about me that you are legally allowed to look up would be available online for free.
That's saying a lot, and even if you can't legally get some information yourself as it would be considered stalking or something along those lines, you could always pay a private investigator, which does have the legal rights beyond a regular civilian
audioguy58 Encrypted security certificates would be everywhere
If there's a will, there's a way. Hacker communities will always enjoy this privilege the most.
Raquel In my family one of them makes every modification and enhancement of our belts.
I may have missed it, but what's that modification/enhancement?
curious Made to measure medical braces etc can easily cost hundreds if not thousands of Euros.
aren't there some that literally cost as much as a moderately sized family car?
Angelina i just think i could accept it better if a judge says i need a belt than that my father simply decides so, as i said i am very divided on this.
Don't readily give up your basic human rights just because someone else said you don't deserve it. Giving up control leaves room for bad actors to exploit.
zbovka I think there are anti-hormonal drugs you could employ.
That is among the most catastrophic suggestions I have read here. Messing with hormones has tons of side effects and I would argue that even the strictest belt with accessories is better for your health than messing with hormones, even more so when you have apparently no clue what you are actually doing to the body.
curious True, but at the same time there are over-the-counter hormonal drugs that anyone with money can purchase. Also the younger you are, the more stable your hormone system is, unless you already have a disorder of some kind.
I personally have a hormone inbalance which started showing symptoms at puberty, but after erm, "self experimentation" - I found the leading cause of episodic relapses is one of the ingredients found in diet-option softdrinks and sweets, likely the artificial sweetner. Does this mean that artificial sweetners should be banned? Absolutely not, because it clearly works fine for the majority of consumers.
zbovka Does this mean that artificial sweetners should be banned?
I you ask me, absolutely yes.
What most people not know: artificial sugar replacements actually increase hunger and therefore obesity.
These substances are used with great success in animal fattening, only the food and beverages giants want you to believe that sweet with zero calories is something good.
zbovka Don't readily give up your basic human rights just because someone else said you don't deserve it. Giving up control leaves room for bad actors to exploit.
i never intend to do that, i only made the direct comparison. that is, the comparison of having the belt "forced" on me by my father or that a judge orders it because there are legal grounds for it.
curious I you ask me, absolutely yes.
if you ask me absolutely no!
i agree with you on all health aspects, but i think education is the right solution. i don't believe in banning adults from any food or anything like that.
Angelina i don't believe in banning adults from any food or anything like that.
I do not consider it food.
Food has to adhere to certain quality criteria, or would you argue that selling food that contains lead or some other poison should be allowed just because it is up to the buyer to decide he he wants to buy food with poison included or not? Many people just don't have the knowledge to make an informed decision and precisely for that reason professionals assess the safety of food for consumption.
Now I would argue that artificial sweeteners do not belong in food - period. The same goes for many of the highly processed "food" products which have a nutritional value of near zero but the list of artificial ingredients is lengthy.
curious Made to measure medical braces etc can easily cost hundreds if not thousands of Euros.
So can chastity belts! Braces are not too expensive in the scheme of things. Prosthetics definitely are, because they often require articulating joints, which means motors, micro processors and a lot of proprietory tech.
Angelina
The problem here is, that the food industry is trying to come up with all sorts of artificial stuff that replaces real food because it is cheaper and they can earn more money. That stuff is insufficiently labelled on the packaging or misleading terms are used. E. g. Matrose extract sounds a lot like malt and people often think it is healthy. In truth it is used because it contains glutamate, a substance to boost the taste experience so that smaller amounts of the actual natural product that creates the taste in the first place can be used with the rest replaced by cheap substitute filling substances of low nutritional value.
Of course people should be able to make their own decisions, but in this field, not even I as a physician can decipher and fully understand all the ingredients used in many products and how they work together. You cannot expect ordinary people to get a science degree in order to eat good food, so some Form of regulation is clearly necessary. Especially because the food industry tries everything they legally can to improve their margin at the cost of quality.
For that reason, I would completely ban substances, Ike food colouring, artificial sweeteners, etc.
If your food has poor quality due to reduced content of good stuff, you should not be able to cover that up by adding colour for example.