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

Loincloth

Go to CruxDreams.com
Love the last pic.... especially how the one on the right has some girl fur peeping over the top...a hint of what will be revealed when that loincloth is at last ripped away...removing her last vestige of modesty.
 

culus

Magistrate
I don't like loincloths!
I believe that for more humiliation, the crucified future must be completely naked for all of his ordeal from his condemnation then his flogging, his "via crucis" and his crucifixion.
Yes, I agree wholeheartedly. The prisoner to be crucified should be stark naked throughout the entire ordeal so that his or her body can be displayed as obscenely as possible. The public should not be deprived of the pleasure of gawking at the sexual organs, breasts and anus and the prisoner afforded not even a shred of modesty in the journey to eventually being spread and hung upon the cross.
 

whiteguy685

Onlooker
In general, I don’t care for loincloths, but there is one exception. That being when it is wrapped low around the condemned’s waist, and tied loosely at one side. Once the condemned is raised and the struggling begins, it’s only a matter of time before the knot loosens further and the loincloth slides down and is draped uselessly between the condemned’s legs and the cross
 

PhilX

Magistrate
Loincloths are erotic when they are skimpy or as in Christ's case miraculously just about holding up, but I doubt they hardly existed on crucified victims. Possibly in bog-standard crucifixions, i.e. those done hastily or with large numbers to be executed, victims were quite likely roped up to make-shift crosses with what they were wearing. However with showcase executions where humiliation was part of the punishment (to add to the deterrent factor) victims would have been stripped completely naked. What is the point of removing clothing but leaving something like a loincloth to retain the victim's dignity? The idea of that sort of kindness or consideration on behalf of the laughing semi-drunk execution squad is ridiculous.
 

Boyo boy

Executioner
Loincloths are erotic when they are skimpy or as in Christ's case miraculously just about holding up, but I doubt they hardly existed on crucified victims. Possibly in bog-standard crucifixions, i.e. those done hastily or with large numbers to be executed, victims were quite likely roped up to make-shift crosses with what they were wearing. However with showcase executions where humiliation was part of the punishment (to add to the deterrent factor) victims would have been stripped completely naked. What is the point of removing clothing but leaving something like a loincloth to retain the victim's dignity? The idea of that sort of kindness or consideration on behalf of the laughing semi-drunk execution squad is ridiculous.
I think they're a nice aesthetic to not being completely naked and having a flowing white cloth being the only covering. It's not about practicality but artistic appeal.
 

PhilX

Magistrate
I think they're a nice aesthetic to not being completely naked and having a flowing white cloth being the only covering. It's not about practicality but artistic appeal.
Yes I agree about the aesthetic, skimpy coverings are very titillating maybe just because of the anticipation that they will be ripped away at some time very soon.

For me an ideal would be that during the parade through the streets bearing the cross or the crossbeam the victims would be wearing skimpy rags or loincloths that tantalisingly revealed glimpses of what lay beneath, feeble covering to hardly protect the skin from the constant goading with whips all the way. Once at the crucifixion site these coverings would be torn off so that the full nakedness could be seen by all once the cross was raised up. Best of both world!
 

tiwongp2014

Spectator
The loincloth should be long enough to cover the genitals during the flogging, so that the audience can have a glimpse of the private parts every now and then when the victim kicks. However, it should be completely removed during crucifixion to give maximum degrading.
 

Boyo boy

Executioner
Yes I agree about the aesthetic, skimpy coverings are very titillating maybe just because of the anticipation that they will be ripped away at some time very soon.

For me an ideal would be that during the parade through the streets bearing the cross or the crossbeam the victims would be wearing skimpy rags or loincloths that tantalisingly revealed glimpses of what lay beneath, feeble covering to hardly protect the skin from the constant goading with whips all the way. Once at the crucifixion site these coverings would be torn off so that the full nakedness could be seen by all once the cross was raised up. Best of both world!
For me now that I’m actually thinking about it it: it provides some sense of elegance with the more flowey Christ like ones. It’s a nice contrast I think with the white and then the darn cross and pain and suffering.
 
Top Bottom