• Sign up or login, and you'll have full access to opportunities of forum.

Classic Whipping Scenes Only

Go to CruxDreams.com
tumblr_p43dm6Jibf1s9cshlo1_500.gif
 
For me, in a classical whipping scene, I can sometimes do without total nudity.

Prisoners sentenced to a flogging or whipping depending on the historical moment, like the Austrailan penal colonies or New England in the 1700s, were not always in the nude. Only the parts to be punished were bared. So, a partly dressed (or partly undressed, as you like) woman, whipped on her bare trunk; or how I like, the bare back, can be very exciting for me.
She can keep you guessing what is under that dress and she is whipped.

Historical accuracy is rather important to me, as I gather it is to you, for the simple reason that it makes the story more believable. Personally though, I much prefer a woman to be completely naked in a whipping scene. I think until the time of Queen Elizabeth, that old spoil-sport, women were whipped completely naked at the cart's tail. She mandated that women only be bare from the waist upward. I've read that in the colonies (U.S.) of the 17th century, occasionally women were whipped naked: for instance Quakers were considered heretics in some colonies and were stripped bare and whipped. They might also be branded or executed. I suppose in any era, it would not be unusual for a slave to be whipped naked. So there's that. Personally, I always love it when an author acknowledges an historical actuality, or "rule," and then explains why, in this particular instance, it's going to be violated. I mean, just give me a reason to believe.
 
Historical accuracy is rather important to me, as I gather it is to you, for the simple reason that it makes the story more believable. Personally though, I much prefer a woman to be completely naked in a whipping scene. I think until the time of Queen Elizabeth, that old spoil-sport, women were whipped completely naked at the cart's tail. She mandated that women only be bare from the waist upward. I've read that in the colonies (U.S.) of the 17th century, occasionally women were whipped naked: for instance Quakers were considered heretics in some colonies and were stripped bare and whipped. They might also be branded or executed. I suppose in any era, it would not be unusual for a slave to be whipped naked. So there's that. Personally, I always love it when an author acknowledges an historical actuality, or "rule," and then explains why, in this particular instance, it's going to be violated. I mean, just give me a reason to believe.

Nice post. I agree!
 
I think until the time of Queen Elizabeth, that old spoil-sport, women were whipped completely naked at the cart's tail. She mandated that women only be bare from the waist upward.
Queen Elizabeth mandated that women be whipped bare from the waist upward? Why aren't they showing THAT on those BBC shows they put on PBS? Oh, you mean the other Queen Elizabeth...:doh::rolleyes::D
 
Historical accuracy is rather important to me, as I gather it is to you, for the simple reason that it makes the story more believable. Personally though, I much prefer a woman to be completely naked in a whipping scene. I think until the time of Queen Elizabeth, that old spoil-sport, women were whipped completely naked at the cart's tail. She mandated that women only be bare from the waist upward. I've read that in the colonies (U.S.) of the 17th century, occasionally women were whipped naked: for instance Quakers were considered heretics in some colonies and were stripped bare and whipped. They might also be branded or executed. I suppose in any era, it would not be unusual for a slave to be whipped naked. So there's that. Personally, I always love it when an author acknowledges an historical actuality, or "rule," and then explains why, in this particular instance, it's going to be violated. I mean, just give me a reason to believe.
Excellent information.
 
Back
Top Bottom