HOME | DD

Description

[A story of how a modern society fell to male domination, non-consensual bondage and torment of women of all kinds. Dates and some names omitted due to records being lost in a fire.]

No-one would have believed in the first years of the twenty-first century that the country was on the cusp of a revolution in gender politics. Decades of enlightenment had brought men and women closer to equality than ever before, and the few that still treated the fairer sex with anything less than deferential respect were generally criminals, abusers and perverts. The modern zeitgeist left no room for any difference between the genders. But over years, slowly at first and then like a crashing wave, the fragile balance was toppled – or, for those who toppled it, redressed. In our time’s sensibilities, the revolution seems backwards, barbaric. But rare is the man who truly feels he is on the wrong side. To them, their actions seemed right, natural, inevitable. And who among us can say with confidence that he would not feel the same, were he to live through it?

This is the history of the Law Enforcement Gender Reform Movement.

*
Personal equipment issued to Community Peace Officer, rev. 4

Warrant card
Badge
Uniform
Standard issue communicator
Standard issue medical kit
Standard issue compliance tool, external
Standard issue compliance tool, internal
Handcuffs, 2x (RS819 conformant)
Zipcuffs, 2cm width, 5x
Zipties, 2cm width, 20x
Duct tape, roll (RS1909 conformant)
Safety shears (RS1891 conformant)
Modesty hood (RS575 conformant)
Adjustable ball-gag (RS148 conformant)
Standard issue sensory isolation earbuds
Standard issue recording apparatus
“Handbook of the Natural Order”, by E.F. Manhartt
*

Little is known about E.F. Manhartt, the figure at the heart of the Movement. The name, thought to be a pseudonym, first appeared as the author of a blog. Interviews with early readers of “Nature’s Vanguard” paint a picture of a diverse but pedestrian array of content. Articles about and fanfiction of John Norman’s books, crudely but evocatively drawn fetish artwork, excerpts from interviews with bondage models and actresses who’d played “damsels”. Reports of the juvenilia are impossible to verify, as the blog was scrubbed from the internet in the early days of the movement, but they are consistent and suggestive.

The earliest extant content attributed to Manhartt is a treatise on femininity and bondage. He derides feminist ideals of equality, lists obvious physical differences: studies finding women’s strength to be on average 30-40% less than men’s, that 90% of women have a grip strength lower than 95% of men, that even female athletes excelling in sports like judo and handball were still weaker than 75% of males. Any man, he asserts, who has ever play-fought with a woman knows this. Evolution built us to take and be taken. And yet in daily interaction this difference largely manifests only in men opening jars.

Nothing that hadn’t been said before, and to this historian a somewhat trite and unpersuasive screed. But something about Manhartt’s writing eventually captured the imagination of his day. Perhaps by that point the pressure was so great that any outlet would serve, and chance alone handed Manhartt the reins.

According to him the refusal to recognise those differences was a well of tension and strife in the world. Men were allowed to revel in their strength, define their masculinity by it, rewarded for working to strengthen it. But they were not allowed to actually use it, at least not in pursuit of their fundamental motivation. Meanwhile, women, according to the axiom of equality, were also supposed to revel in their strength, though (Manhartt claims) they knew subconsciously that they were weak in comparison. Femininity, he says, is the opposite of strength. Vulnerability. Passivity. To be led. To be used. Woman is receptacle, and man is instrument. Manhartt thought that to ignore this was to frustrate men and confuse women, that the cognitive dissonance thereby induced led them to valuing wickedness in a partner, in an attempt to satisfy a primal desire to be subjugated.

This, then, was his thesis. That biological roles were ignored and should be restored. After making the case, he turned his attention to solving the problem. He pointed out again that men were able to augment their strength, were encouraged to. Society rewards men for their efforts in the gym, he said, but how were women to augment their vulnerability? It’s paradoxical. By making yourself more vulnerable you’re exercising agency. By exercising agency you’re showing strength. The only way, he claims, that vulnerability can be enhanced, is from outside, without consent. Here Manhartt lays out the culmination of his theory: that women not only should not be respected, but that they should be dominated, overpowered, bound and used. “A woman’s hands,” he said, “are like the lug nuts on a car. If they aren’t fastened securely, the wheels come off.” And the wheels of society were, in his opinion, beginning to rattle.

*

National Police Service/CPC form 27/B, Detainee Intake Record, specimen from archive

Date: - | Detaining officer #: 9818498 | Precinct: 20-2

Detainee name: Cassandra Mason

Date of birth: - | Age: 22 | Adult: Yes | Attached: No

Attractiveness: 8/10 | Compliancy: 7/10 | Regulation dress: Yes | Health: Good

Report: Cassandra’s workplace reported that she had been off sick for four days, and suggested a CPO check on her. She opened the door to me, bare-legged and barefoot but wearing a loose t-shirt long enough to cover her crotch. Although her legs were sufficiently exposed under the law, I noted that the t-shirt was, in my considered opinion, offensively loose. She did not immediately turn to present her wrists, even though my badge was clearly visible. I pulled her out of her flat into the communal hallway, threw her against a wall and cuffed her. With her safety and mine assured, I began the interview, asking her if she understood my role and why she must be restrained, which she affirmed. I then asked for identification, which she claimed was inside her flat, but I was unable to confirm this since the door had slammed when I dragged her out. I explained to the subject that, being unable to identify her, I had to treat her as suspicious. I cuffed her ankles, gagged her, and searched her thoroughly, finding neither weapons nor identification nor a key, but confirming that her panties were the only underwear she wore. Accordingly I pulled her shirt up behind her head and dropped them down to her ankles before inserting and locking my compliance tool, setting it to trot. Her response was excellent. I judged that a modesty hood would not be necessary for this subject, and escorted her to my vehicle, making sure her neighbours understood the situation as we passed. I recommend she be remanded in custody until such time as someone can be dispatched to force entry to her residence, find her identification and check for contraband.

*

The treatise doesn’t seem to have made much of a splash, but Manhartt was undeterred. Over the next few years he produced more and more material on the subject, eventually zeroing in on the law enforcement system as a seed for his revolution. This was, he argued, an organisation that already overpowers and binds people non-consensually, including women, as part of their mission. All that would be necessary would be to expand and refine the scope of those activities, redirecting the long arm of the state along healthier lines. Once this adjustment was made, the rest of society would fall into place naturally. He began to publish reams of material talking about arrests, how they go, how they should go. He interviewed women who’d been arrested about how it had made them feel, focusing particularly on what it was like to have their hands bound behind them, to be unable to protect their face or their groin. Most agreed that it had been exciting, and that they’d experimented further in private. He even got into vicious arguments about handcuffing technique:

“Palms out is THE ONLY WAY. In five minutes I could teach the dullest teenage girl to conceal a key and free herself, if her dunce of a captor has allowed her access to the keyhole. To cuff her palms inward is tantamount to cuffing her hands in front of her. BANNED.”

His following started to grow around this time. More and more regulars showed up in his comment threads, a community crystallised, began producing fan-art and exporting his ideas to other kink discussion venues. Initially seen only as a fun fantasy, certain members eventually bought in to Manhartt’s ideas fully, began considering how to pivot a ragtag band of fetishists into a political movement. Their discussions were secret, but we do know that over the next three years the community produced an astonishing amount of memes based around women bound and/or gagged. It is speculated that this was a calculated effort to bring bondage into mainstream thought. If so, we cannot deny that it worked.

*

Introducing United Detention Appliances’ latest product, the IFWA-100!

The IFWA is an Integrated Food and Water Appendage designed to allow detainees to self-feed, freeing Officers for other work, while also serving to train and motivate detainees as an essential component of a comprehensive rehabilitation programme. It is modular, simple to install and maintain, sanitary and cost-effective.

How it works: the IFWA is installed in a cell, with the user interface accessible to the detainee at about waist height and the service panel accessible to Officers. It can be supplied by refillable flasks or central plumbing. On intake, an Officer configures the IFWA to suit the new detainee’s needs and explains its function to her.

The user interface is a rounded, semi-rigid cylinder, 12 inches in length. A loop of cable extends beneath. Kneeling in front of it, the detainee puts her head under the cable and takes the interface in her mouth. Sensors along its shaft detect the envelopment. When the detainee takes the tip in her mouth and holds it, the IFWA dispenses water. When the detainee slides the interface in and out repetitively for a sufficient number of cycles, the loop will contract, holding her head in place for a time, and the interface will pulse and dispense a warm, nutritious gel. Once she has consumed the full serving, her head is released. Accordingly, the detainee is given exposure to and experience of a common real world scenario, and learns to push past her limits.

Officers can configure the number of cycles necessary, the depth necessary, the hold time and the amount of gel dispensed with each feeding. A training program developed by UDA behaviourists is included, starting with an easy three inch cycle and progressing incrementally every day to a full eight inches with a thirty second hold time, but all parameters are fully accessible and institutions are encouraged to adjust to their own needs. No limits exist other than that imposed by the physical size of the interface, so obedience incentives for difficult subjects can easily be created.

*

It’s difficult to exactly trace the steps from blog to political power, with so many of the discussions and negotiations occurring in secret. But within five years of the first treatise, the Law Enforcement Gender Reform Movement was founded as a political party. Tom Preston was its secretary and spokesman and became the face of the movement, although Manhartt continued to write and was cited often in party doctrine. It has been suggested that Preston was Manhartt, but without evidence we can only call this a conspiracy theory.

Certainly the two men tailored their messages to different audiences. Where Manhartt was an unapologetic kinkster, Preston laboured tirelessly to appeal to a broad church. He emphasised traditional morals. Crime, he said, would go down drastically as his party offered men easy employment and outlets for their passions. He made economic arguments. He promised a very generous stipend to women, and he subtly but persistently reminded men of what they were missing out on, what his party could offer. The LEGRM was treated as a joke initially. Ironic support swelled. Preston sniped at mainstream politicians, saying that they would never change anything. Few could disagree. Ironic support became sincere support. They grew into a fringe party, then a small third party. Before long they were standing candidates everywhere, and gender reform was a topic of discussion at every dinner table. Most agreed it was wrong. Few could really articulate why.

Still, it seemed the LEGRM had hit its peak. They were a thorn in the side of the two major parties, but it was difficult to see how they could be anything more. Until, one week before an election, photos and videos appeared on the internet of the right wing party’s leader engaging in a great variety of submissive and highly embarrassing sexual acts.

He resigned in disgrace immediately, but the scandal collapsed his party’s vote. Pundits scrambled to predict the outcome. What would the right wing voters do? Stick with a party that shamed them? Vote for the left wing, their enemies, to keep the LEGRM out? Abstain? How many would take a chance with the Movement? The markets did cartwheels as polls came in. Still, projections suggested that without a significant share of the female vote, the LEGRM couldn’t win.

On the night they secured an 18 seat majority, and exit polls showed 45% of women voted for them.

*

Transcript of CPO training session conducted by Sgt. Walker

Walker: Cadets! Today you will be learning the approved procedure for an encounter with a female subject. Assisting us today will be Lucy. Lucy is 26 years old and works in my office as an IT technician. Say hello, Lucy.

Lucy: H-hi.

(various greetings and chatter, laughter)

Walker: First question. Do any of you think you can tell whether Lucy agreed to take part?

Unknown: Does it matter?

Walker: Brady, you’re a smart-ass, but that’s exactly the answer I wanted. It doesn’t. Now, when you’re engaging a subject, the first thing you want to do is walk up to them, look ‘em in the eye, and present your badge. Like so.

(laughter and applause)

Walker: And that’s exactly what the subject is supposed to do, turn around and present her wrists, so we can ensure her safety and ours. Lucy clearly knows what’s good for her. How many times have you been detained, girl?

Lucy: I’m… not sure, sir. It’s pretty regular. Two weeks ago was the last time.

Walker: I’ll bet. Your problem is that you’re too damn cute. You should find yourself a man. Now, let’s try that again, but this time don’t present, just stand there. Ready? Here we go.

(laughter)

Lucy: I’m so sorry sir, it’s just a reflex now.

Walker: That’s alright. We’ll try something different. Stand facing away from me. Cadets, occasionally you might come upon a subject who’s unaware of you, from behind. It doesn’t happen all that often but we like to do it when we can. Anyone ever get you like that, Lucy?

Lucy: Yes, sir.

Walker: How did it make you feel?

Lucy: Very frightened, sir. I didn’t know it was a CPO. I thought… something terrible would happen to me.

Walker: Very good. That’s exactly why we like to do it. A reminder of what’s possible. Now, watch.

(there is a grunt, a yelp and a thud, then the ratcheting click of handcuffs)

Walker: On your feet now. There you go. Face the class. See how fast she’s breathing? Watch her chest. Nervous, Lucy?

Lucy: A little, sir.

Walker: Excellent. Now, you all should have observed there my points of contact. I grasped her firmly by both arms, made sure my feet were in a strong stance, and I made sure I pulled against her balance. You’ll find it’s quite easy to toss a woman around when you approach it in the right way. Especially if she’s wearing heels. We’ll run through it again in slow motion later. Now, once you’ve got her you do two things. You explain that you are a CPO and make sure she understands why she has to be restrained. And you appraise her outfit. Albright, talk me through that.

Unknown: Well… er… it’s a skirt, sir, I’d say about six inches above the knee, so well within limits. She’s wearing a blouse, which will make the search easy, heels, and her legs are bare. She looks very nice.

Walker: Spot on. He complimented you, Lucy.

Lucy: Thank you, sir.

Walker: After that you’ll probably interview her. How that goes will depend on the situation. Once you’re finished there’s no more need for her to talk, so you’ll gag her, and then you’ll cuff her ankles. Open wide, Lucy.

(indistinct sounds, then more ratchets)

Walker: Why do we gag our charges, Brady?

Unknown: To protect their right against self-incrimination, sir. Court appointed lawyers can handle communication.

Walker: Gold star for you. Now all that’s left is to make sure she isn’t carrying any contraband. Now, how exactly you search is up to you. I like to start inside her shirt, working by feel alone, starting at her waist then up, over and then under the bra, like so.

Lucy: Mmmmmm!

Walker: Then her legs from the ground up, making sure to check her inner thighs very carefully. Tease over the underwear. Wait for a response. Then back to her upper body. Here I’ll unbutton her blouse, pull it back off her shoulders, make sure I didn’t miss anything. Her bra can be left in place or pulled up over her head, like this. You might test her nipples at this point. See how she’s melting against me? If you get excited, it’s a good idea to push up against her and let her know. And finally I’ll come back down here, yank her skirt down and her underwear and then inspect manually.

(appreciative noises from class and Lucy)

Walker: And once you’re done you can either pull her clothing back or leave it there. That’s entirely at your discretion, probably depends on the girl. How compliant she’s been, what she looks like. What shall we do with Lucy?

(a clear consensus to leave her as she is – she sighs)

Walker: And that’s the standard procedure. Every subject you run into will go through this, no matter what the circumstances. After that it begins to diverge. If you’ve detained her as a suspect, or she resisted arrest, or was carrying contraband, or is dressed outside of regulation, you’ll take her away for detention. If you’ve established that she has a problem, you’ll solve it. If everything’s in order, you’ll free her and send her on her way, freshly reminded that she has a place in the world. Next, we’ll cover the use of compliance tools.

*

Pandemonium erupted after the election. Social media exploded, human rights groups filed lawsuits immediately, international condemnation rained down. Preston responded by doing almost nothing. He made meaningless, feel-good speeches, pursued a policy of incremental improvement, played down gender as a matter for later. The party’s one radical change was a moratorium on women leaving the country, which sparked a vicious court battle. Government lawyers deployed innovative arguments about women being a strategic resource in a time of declining birthrates, and asserted a right to control exports. The court eventually acceded, issuing strict instructions that the moratorium only be temporary, but stopped short of asking for an end date. Outrage fatigue set in, and as life carried on, people became comfortable with the new government.

Preston began making minor changes. He introduced tax breaks for any film production with a bondage scene in it, and rebates for any TV channel that aired a scene. He ran mixed athletics tournaments, with particular attention given to wrestling (men won 100% of the matches). Rules on gender representation in advertising were relaxed, leading to fashion and perfume brands racing to out-edge each other. Girls bound, gagged, hogtied, groped became a common sight on screens, on billboards, in magazines.

Fragrance and underwear adverts of the era

When government nudge theoreticians judged the time appropriate, Preston made his first two big moves.

*

Extract from Tom Preston speech, 14th Aug

“…and, erm, that concludes the update on infrastructure funding. There’s one more thing I want to get to, a tweak to custodial regulations in the police and Prison Service. Now, er, the way it works now is that our officers have a great deal of latitude in how and when to restrain suspects, and prisoners, and so forth. And in court it’s up to the judge. We’ve been looking at the statistics on that, and our behavioural scientists think there’s some troubling biases at play, we think two offenders who are equally dangerous will be treated differently if one is male and the other is female. So, er, in the interest of fairness, we’ll be tightening up the guidelines. So, for example, from next week, any female, you know, suspect or what have you, anyone who’s in custody, their hands need to be restrained behind them whenever they’re outside a cell. So that includes visiting hours, yard time, court appearances and so forth. And we’ll see how that goes, whether it needs to be laxer or, you know, more strict. We think there’ll be many positive effects from this, that it will focus the detainees’ minds on their situation and aid rehabilitation, and what have you, and make our brave officers safer, and also draw more attention to court proceedings, which can only be a good thing, eh? Questions? Yes, Ms. Lowerton…?”

*

Preston’s poll numbers dipped following the announcement, but went straight back up four days later when he announced the first payment of a stipend to women, half a day’s wage paid once a week to compensate for “all the, you know, inequalities and such that our society has yet to eliminate.” Media and discourse remained split on the new measures, with conservative groups generally in favour of anything that seemed tough on crime and progressive groups labelling the restraint protocol as gratuitously sexist. By this time court hearings were broadcast live on the internet, and a watershed moment in society’s acceptance of the protocol occurred when a famous pop star was arrested for drunk driving and appeared in the dock. The stream from a camera dedicated to her shot to the top, with tens of millions viewing it over the days of the trial. Clips and memes flooded the airwaves and people began discussing who among the week’s defendants had worn the cuffs best. Preston’s great gamble had paid off, and society’s transformation was now inevitable. The LEGRM, Legroomers as they were sometimes known now, began ramping up their program of feminine subjugation over the next year.

*

Review of “Our Girl”, United TV Times magazine

The new reality TV sensation continues to sweep massive ratings on screens across the country. Who expected this when we first tuned in? What seemed yet another drab human interest piece became suddenly electrifying when the star, ------- -----, a promising and highly admired young actress, was set upon by masked men ten minutes into the first episode. Was this part of the show? Were we watching a genuine studio invasion?

All became clear once our girl was hogtied and thoroughly gagged, and the presenter began to explain the rules of the real show. ------- had failed to read her contract very diligently, and she found now that she had signed up to a performance art tour de force with audience participation like never before seen. Viewers would vote at the start of each episode for a torment to be inflicted upon the unfortunate damsel, and at the end for an added restriction in her bondage for next time.

This week, in addition to her hogtie, our girl wears a cruelly phallic gag, a pair of sensory isolator earbuds, a hood over her head cinched tightly at the neck, tape fixing her hands into useless balls and even a string tying her big toes together. Under the watchful eye of the nation, she’s locked away in her own little world. For half an hour she lay naked on the floor in a freezing room, shivering and gasping and fighting against the devilish tool between her legs. The public has revealed a thoroughly cruel streak, but we at UTVT must admit that we couldn’t take our eyes off the spectacle. Next week the producers promise to offer a whole new position for -------, and we’re not even at the halfway point of the season! With every week this show airs, the government’s loosening of human rights laws seems a better idea.

9/10

*

First, married women and those with children were accorded new recognition as “Attached”. These were granted more lenient treatment under the law, and an additional stipend. Citizens were required to register for the vote annually, but exemptions were created for the Attached and under a range of conditions designed to include men and exclude women. Eventually, once the court system was wholly captured, Unattached women would simply be denied the vote, while Attached women would be included on their husband’s ballot. Traditional titles would be enforced accordingly, and using “Ms” on official documentation was grounds for investigation. Additionally, reproductive rights would be curtailed. Although abortion would be a political football within the LEGRM for decades to come –conservative factions insistent on banning it altogether, while moderates favoured more nuanced approaches – female-oriented birth control would be outlawed days after the familiar RISUG method of male contraception was approved for general use.

Second, the use of bondage on female prisoners and detainees was expanded and intensified. Legislation on rights was neutered, and a system emerged where a woman whose hands were secured behind her back upon being taken into police custody would find they remained there until the final moment of her release. Most prisons also fitted their charges with ankle cuffs and blindfolds at intake, offering looser restraint as a reward for good behaviour and threatening strictness as a punishment: gags, hogties, sensory deprivation, compliance tools, even mummification. The government spent lavishly on technology to address issues created by the restrictions.

Third, a new force was created to augment and partially replace the police. The Community Peace Corps recruited men only, with a remit to act as a point of first contact for all non-serious crimes, help promote civility and clean up the streets. Women who were particularly enthusiastic would later be allowed to join an auxiliary corps that helped with administration and occasionally fieldwork involving dissidents. Pay was low but sufficient, staffing numbers were very high and barriers to entry fairly low. In effect the CPC functioned as a component of a socialist system, providing widespread employment to men of all stripes, and it, along with the female stipends, became a key driver of economic growth. Initially warranted only the power to issue fines, once the organisation was large enough the Legroomers would begin using it as the primary instrument of male domination in the state.

*

A Brief Guide To Your Compliance Tools – CPC pamphlet

As a CPO, you have been issued with a set of compliance tools, internal and external. You will have seen a demonstration of their use on a subject, and developed an appreciation for their capabilities. But how do they work, exactly?

The tools are principally housings for Lündgren inductors, which have the capacity to excite sensory neurons at short distances in various ways. In particular, the tools are designed to inflict pain and pleasure.

Your external tool is intended for use before a subject is subdued. Two buttons on the side can be depressed to activate it in LO or HI mode. LO will cause pain comparable to a heavy punch within an area extending six inches from contact. HI will cause pain comparable to a cluster headache within an area extending two inches from contact. It functions much like a taser or stun-gun – press it against the subject and activate. However, the compliance tool is safe for use anywhere on the subject’s body and for any length of time.

Although departmental guidelines do not forbid the use of the external CT once your subject is subdued, your supervisor may frown on this practice.

Your internal tool, meanwhile, is intended for “set and forget” use on a subdued subject. After conducting a thorough search, you may wish to ensure the subject’s mind is occupied. Select a program on the CT, insert it, press the button at the base to lock it and she will find herself unable to think of much else. For additional effect, you might use your sensory isolation earbuds and your modesty hood.

Four programs are available: Walk, Trot, Canter and Gallop. Each includes a steady pace of pleasure pulses punctuated by stabs of pain. On Walk, 95% of subjects are able to answer basic questions, while only 50% are capable of arithmetic. On Gallop, the figures are 5% and 1% respectively. Refer to Appendix B for a detailed table and departmental guidelines for program selection.

*

Late period opposition poster created by activist Gina Fredericks. Shortly after it was published drugs were found on Miss Fredericks’ person in a routine search, and she would be sentenced to gender rehabilitation.

Inevitably, sweeping new powers were granted to CPOs. In any official encounter with a woman, they were to cuff her hands behind her back. Wide latitude was granted to apply other restraints. Gags and bound ankles were common, and a particularly uncooperative and attractive girl would often find herself hogtied in the back of a patrol vehicle, hosting an internal compliance tool set as high as it would go, forgotten about except for the camera broadcasting her blisses and agonies to the internet.

CPOs would continue in their official duties, fining men for minor crimes like littering, but would now conduct arrests on women. They would carry out wellness checks on any Unattached woman not seen in public recently, and investigate anonymous tips. The regular police were not available to Unattached women, and if they wished to report a crime they needed to go through the CPC, who would escalate to the police, if necessary, after a thorough investigation. Unattached women thus became in many ways almost outlaws, with CPOs routinely ignoring all but the most serious offences against their persons.

They would also enforce the fashion laws, rules setting out requirements for women’s clothing. Twice a year the regime would convene an assembly of couturiers, journalists and models to determine the allowable styles for the season, with their decisions approved or vetoed by a board of elected officials. Most seasons demanded skirt lengths of no more than such-and-such, but there were fluctuations. Sometimes there was no requirement for legs to be exposed, but generally this was offset by a stipulation that tops be sleeveless, or low-cut, or cropped, or that trousers were tight enough, or that heels were worn at all times. CPOs would stop women on the street to check their clothes, and offenses were punishable by a stay in jail.

Perhaps the most savoured duty was the “introduction”. Girls’ birthdays were registered, and on the day of her majority, a CPO was dispatched to check on her, make sure she understood the fashion laws and hid no contraband. We have records of debates between Legroomer factions supporting and opposing changes to the age of majority, but it’s unclear whether any were ever carried out. What is known is that introductions were able to find that an infraction had been committed about 60% of the time.

*

Release candidate interview, Gender Rehabilitation Centre

Q: State your name for the record, please.

A: Gina Fredericks, sir.

Q: Why are you here, Gina?

A: Because the magistrate felt the Centre would help me adjust to better serve society, sir.

Q: Of course. But why did he feel that?

A: It’s not for me to answer about a man’s motivations, sir. He said it was because of my recalcitrant nature and persistent rejection of hierarchy, and I assume that’s true. But he could have felt so for any reason. He could simply have not liked the way I had my hair. Sir.

Q: And would that make his decision any less valid, Gina?

A: It would not, sir. That would be his right.

Q: Yes. Do you feel you have been rehabilitated, Gina?

A: I do, sir, with all my heart.

Q: Well, we’ll see. Your posture is excellent, I must admit. When you remember how you were before you came here, how do you feel?

A: Shameful, sir. Foolish. I fought so hard for an impossible, contradictory ideal. I made my life so much more difficult than it needed to be.

Q: Equality. Why is that contradictory?

A: Sir, men are strong and I am weak. The strong lead and the weak follow. The strong protect and the weak submit. The strong take and the weak give. This is the way of nature and to fight against it is to fight against your own heart beating, sir.

Q: I see. What would you do, if I were to decide you should be released?

A: I’m not sure, sir. It would be difficult knowing what to do without direction. First I’d buy some new clothes, then I suppose I would try to get a job. I’d hope one of my co-workers would marry me.

Q: You wouldn’t go into a bar alone and submit to take you into his cuffs and under his protection?

A: Going to bars alone is illegal, sir.

Q: Still, the state very much turns a blind eye, and it’s an easy way to find someone.

A: It’s illegal! Sir!

Q: Very well. Tell me, Gina, which treatment do you think best helped you in your time here? The hypnosis? Time in the isolation chamber? The neural correction techniques?

A: I think what helped most was just reading my books. True change has to come from within. The, uh, the water… the water therapy did the most to, um, focus my mind, I think. But I would never have made the breakthrough without the books, sir.

Q: You’ll have noticed that I’ve chosen not to gag you. Why do you suppose that is?

A: Well, sir, again, it’s not for me to say. But it would definitely be difficult to interview me if you had.

Q: Yes, my thoughts were along those lines. How would it make you feel, if I did gag you?

A: What value is a woman’s mouth without a man’s gag? An organ to eat and speak, thoughtless, base functions, signifying nothing. Only a man’s decision to seal or unseal it gives it meaning, sir.

Q: Well. You certainly have done your reading. Any other of our founder’s words you’ve found of particular help?

A: My favourite is “Seed engenders life wherever it goes. Even sowed in a mouth or throat, it delivers warmth and comfort, vitality. When a receptacle is filled, it is content in its purpose. The only waste is not to sow at all.”

Q: We’ll stop recording here, I think.

*

The government pushed hard for full employment. Businesses were expected to hire well beyond their actual needs, and workers spent a great deal of their time idle. Men without particularly valuable skills tended to simply join the CPC, but most women didn’t have that option. And although the stipends had increased sufficiently to provide a basic life for an unemployed woman, it would be a very sparse existence. So half the workforce laboured under increasingly stringent conditions imposed by management. Corporal punishment for minor infractions was common, and women were often “stored” when unneeded, whether simply cuffed to a table leg or sequestered in a more specialised way. One food critic describes a common arrangement in restaurants: he and his party entered to find a waitress to each table. On empty tables, the girl assigned knelt, in full uniform, with her hands tied behind her back and a gag between her lips. They selected their pick, and she was released to entertain them.

Incidentally, it seems to have become customary in particularly high class establishments for men to bind their female companions and feed the helpless women themselves, to avoid overindulgence. To do otherwise was seen as an insult to the food. Cinemas would often insist on female patrons being gagged as a measure against their natural talkativeness, and various other customs blossomed in businesses and communities across the country. One norm that was never violated was the idea that a woman on her own should never decorate herself with restraints – this was seen as presumptuous, as if she were taking a decision she didn’t have the right to take.

The LEGRM continued tightening social control. Women’s communicators censored information and delivered reports to male guardians. Their financial independence was curtailed, with a male co-signor needed on bank accounts and credit cards, seen as an important step to avoid frivolous use of the stipend. Driving became a male-only privilege. Women were placed under curfew. The regime’s indoctrination efforts continued to bear fruit, and each new restriction delivered additional support.

And so Manhartt’s vision came to fruition. Serious crime plummeted, mental health improved massively, the economy and birth-rate boomed, and support for the Movement was unanimous – at least, among the enfranchised. A golden age lasting decades followed.

But it was not to last. The rest of the story we’re all taught as schoolchildren, albeit a Bowdlerised version. Eventually, more than 70% of men were CPOs. They spent all their days processing women, and women spent all their days being processed. Productive work slowed to a crawl, the broken window fallacy reared its ugly head, the economic house of cards collapsed, famines and riots erupted. In a bloodless coup, major industrialists seized control, the CPC was disbanded and women liberated once more. The nation woke as if from a dream.

But, like any dream, we remember fragments still. If you, dear reader, are a man, I have no doubt that you know the basic knots. You have a pair of handcuffs, somewhere about your house, given by your father on your 13th birthday. You’ve played cowboys and damsels.

And if you are a woman, you surely still clasp your hands behind you every time a good-looking man catches your eye.

Some customs bind us too tightly to forget.