Question re paddling on wet clothing

Perhaps you can help: I'm about to write a passage where two girls are paddled on wet shorts after cheating on a cross-country run in teeming rain.

I remember in Paul Scott's novel 'Jewel in the Crown' a young man being subjected to an illegal judicial caning on wet trousers, the idea being that the marks would fade quicker and the perpetrator would avoid repercussions.

Is this true? And would it be equally true of a paddling? Anyone ever come home soaked to an angry partner after maxing out the credit card or pranging the car?

Thanks in advance.

In my experience being spanked over wet clothes greatly reduces the amount of surface sting and bite, while maintaining most of the thuddy "oomph". Depending on the implement, you're most likely to see a reduction in marking, but that also depends a LOT on things like the implement itself (some things leave bruises versus raised welts), and the amount of force being applied.

And of course would depend on the clothing. Over a wet bathing suit for instance would result in a lot more sting than if the paddling was over a fully clad body, like if someone had been caught out in a downpour while fully dressed and got soaked.

I've been punished on the bare after having worn wet panties for 10 minutes. For reasons I don't know, it was WAY worse.

I suspect the material of the punishing implement would play a part. I believe that a leather strap or paddle used on a wet bottom tends to 'stick' slightly, transmitting force more efficiently to the area of impact.

The type of material the shorts are made of could also make a difference - water would make thin material stick to the skin of the bottom, making it effectively skintight with no cushion of air between cloth and flesh, but heavier material, or multiple layers, might absorb enough water to act as padding.

The other factor that might affect the development and duration of marks would be that wet clothing could act as a cold compress applied to the bottom, reducing bruising.

This is one of many areas that would benefit from research (which I would, of course, be happy to carry out, given adequate funding and a supply of suitable experimental subjects).

Yes indeed; where is government development funding when you need it?

Thank you, posters. Your spankological expertise has given me much food for thought.

Sandismith's experience isn't that surprising because after wearing the wet panties her bum would be appreciably colder than usual, and injuries do hurt more when the body part in question is cold. The cold compress effect should only work if the clothes are left on afterwards, though if the spanking created enough heat the water would evaporate in clouds around the bottom.

Back in the day, I wrote a story for Bared Affair in which a mother conducted a "wet bottom" experiment on her 18 year old daughter. She took a wooden hairbrush, a bottle of cheap after shave and made her daughter lie across her lap, which she'd covered with a towel. She then proceeded to wet one cheek with a liberal dose of after shave while leaving the other side bone dry. Then she paddled her bottom with the brush alternating cheek to cheek with each stroke. After the spanking, the girl reported that without question the wet side stung much worse than the dry side. And to the naked eye, it was clear that the surface of the damper orb had reddened noticeably more than that of its cohort. But perhaps the experiment would have been more conclusive if water had been used instead. It was unclear in the reporter's mind if the more severe discomfort could be attributed to wetness, or how much did the more stringent solution play in the extra stinging sensation? But I had forgotten all about writing that until this thread jogged my memory.

Remember a couple letters to Mr magazine that mentioned how much more painful a spanking on wet skin was. One involved a mother pulling her daughter out of the shower and paddling her before she toweled off, another had something to do with how using aftershave on a bare bottom increased the sting of a hairbrush Of course we know those letters to Mr were a product of staff members' imaginations; still, no reason a staff writer could not have had or seen the experiences they described.