The Home Office is to waive the rule which insists on a full-facial photograph where the applicant is a leather-clad sex slave habitually used to peering through a mask. The proposed moves follows pressure from the Liberal Democrats who claim it is necessary to avoid problems encountered by people who are chained to a leash 24/7 and are only able to breathe through a narrow opening.
Currently everybody with a passport must identify themselves as either male or female on the document. But the Home Office has begun a consultation on changing the system to allow a category for the small minority of people who are unable to tick either box because they are only allowed out of a dungeon for short intervals.
The new ruling will insist only that the photos be in colour, against a plain background, and that the leather outfit and face-mask are the most recently worn. The leash must be fully visible at all times. Gimps and associated sex dwarves should also be facing forward, staring directly at camera through the narrow eye slots and must not be urinated on while the photograph is taken.
Although the lack of a golden shower may enrage some enthusiasts, it is thought essential to avoid problems such as lens flare. Lib Dem Home Office Minister Lynne Featherstone said ‘This new approach to passport processing uses cutting-edge biometric iris recognition technology so we cannot overstate the need for gimps to keep their eyes wide open and face the camera no matter how much pain and degradation they are currently experiencing. ‘
‘You’ll still need to get Section 10 countersigned by your gimp-master or dominatrix who must confirm that you are fully resident within the UK and are in a consensual sub-dom relationship with them.’
‘We hope these new guidelines will dispense with the requirement for gimps to remove their restrictive head gear when passing through immigration controls. ’Last night Nigel Farndon, a full-time gimp from Solihull, gave a guarded welcome to the ruling. ‘Having to remove the leather mask at customs checks was an infringement of my fundamental human rights which I found extremely humiliating. It was sheer ecstasy.’