“Power is not a means;
it is an end.” - George Orwell
Hello all. Welcome back to
The Disciplinary Wives Club - Tribute.
Our weekly on-line gathering of women and men who are in, or would like
to be in, a Domestic Discipline relationship.
I hope you all had a great
week. Mine was fairly uneventful, which can be good. I have a busier, more adventurous agenda
planned for next week, so just a “heads up” that I won’t be posting next week.
Thank you to those who
participated in the discussion regarding spanking “friends with benefits”, and
other spanking experiences with people other than spouses and girlfriends. I didn’t expect that many of us would have
experienced spankings from platonic friends and that most of our experiences
would be confined to common “real life” scenarios like parental and school
spankings. That is where it seemed to land
for most of the group, though I do envy those of you have had wider-ranging
experiences.
This week’s topic extends
from the one a couple of weeks ago in which we talked about how we feel when
our wives do something to assert their authority, whatever that level of
authority may be. I had suggested that we
talk about our feelings about the authority, without trying to assign a label
to it, e.g. trying to distinguish between DD-style authority and FLR-style authority.
Applying such labels proved
to be too tempting, and we soon got into a discussion about the difference
between DD and FLR. Norton suggested
that it’s hard not to get into a discussion of those labels, though he also suggested
that ultimately they may make little practical difference:
“Though
the discussion may have "run right over Dan's request" re: semantics,
there doesn't seem to be any arguing about it. It's hard to avoid when
describing what level of authority your wife has in the relationship, but if
she has the authority to spank at any time, for any reason, it doesn't matter
much whether you describe your relationship as FLR or DD.”
Alan followed up with:
Sorry
if it was I who violated the guideline - it was inadvertent. But having done it
already, I will make one more point about the FLR concept. It seems extreme to
me (and unrealistic) in a relationship that often includes an alpha male. Yes, I
need my wife's discipline (and spanking). But she also wants me to be a partner
and to be strong and step up when needed and free to bring my strengths and
capacities to our relationship. I do realize semantics (and definitions) are
the issue here. But I also agree with Norton that these labels are hard to
avoid in discussing our wives' level of authority.
That led me to chime in with
an observation about Alan’s view of FLR and how to me it illustrates that the labels
are often troublesome, because we clearly don’t define them in the same way:
Alan,
I think this illustrates why I think the labels just aren't very helpful. You
say "the FLR concept" as if it is some well-defined and commonly
understood thing, and you see it as extreme and unrealistic, especially for a
couple with an alpha male. Yet, I *am* an alpha male and in a relationship that
sounds pretty close to how you describe yours, and yet I would describe mine as
something like "FLR lite". You and I don't agree on the label,
because we clearly don't attribute the same characteristics to "the FLR
concept." That's the problem with most of the labels -- they simply don't
conjure up the same image or list of attributes in your mind as they do in
mine.
That led Alan to this week’s
topic suggestion:
In
view of the frequent mentions of "semantics" and its role, in
particular with respect to the acronym F.L.R., I propose a possible future
topic. Call it the dictionary edition of the blog, asking discussants to tackle
the definitions, "as they use and understand them" of a few terms we
sometimes struggle with. Some examples might be FLR, DD, Female Led,and so on.
The idea would be to offer short concise definitions that actually capture what
any of us mean or understand to be the essential meaning of these terms. It
would be interesting for sure to produce an array that I expect would be wide
ranging.”
I haven’t gotten past my initial
desire, as expressed in the topic about authority, to avoid going down the “labeling”
rabbit hole, but I didn’t have anything better in mind for this week. Also, while I’m
not sure assigning various relationships or their attributes to particular
boxes is helpful or enlightening, I do get interested in the fact that any two
of us can assign a common label and yet have very different perspectives on
what that label actually entails. The
perfect example being that Alan and I seem to describe our own relationships in
much the same way, and yet I am comfortable labeling my relationship as sort of
“FLR-lite”, while he sees an FLR as “extreme”, especially for relationships
that include an alpha male, and seems to think it excludes being strong and free
to bring one’s strengths to the relationship.
Since I consider myself and alpha male and don’t think our FLR-lite
relationship excludes me being strong and a partner in the relationship,
whatever Alan and I mean when we use the acronym FLR, we clearly do not mean the same thing.
So, I’ll give a shot at
defining a few terms we toss around a lot, though I know in advance that I probably
will end up defining some things more in terms of what they are not than what
they may be in themselves.
Domestic Discipline (aka,
“DWC”) relationship: I could
start with the definition Aunt Kay used in some of the DWC publications:
The
definition of a DWC relationship is that the woman's role involves providing
moral and behavioral guidance to the man and he invests her with the absolute
authority to decide upon and wield punishments accordingly. The man's role is
to accept this authority and strive to gain benefit from it.
Although it’s a good starting
point, I instantly find things I can quibble with. For example, is my wife giving me “moral” guidance? My initial reaction is no. Yet, there was a time recently when she drew
a line about a word that she thinks shouldn’t be used, and I can see that being
characterized as “moral” position.
Aunt
Kay’s emphasis on “absolute authority” also seems to suggest an answer to the
question we so often debate, i.e. how much authority do/should our wives
have?
Though, her definition of “authority”
isn’t quite as sweeping as it might seem, since it ties back into the wife’s
role of providing “moral and behavioral” guidance.
That would seem to leave room for Alan’s
concerns that the marriage should be a partnership in which each can express
their strengths.
Though, I would say it
seems to me not to be a purely equal partnership, given that “moral and
behavioral guidance” can cover a hell of a lot of ground, and her authority to
punish in those areas is “absolute”. To me, that's fine -- there is nothing that says partners must be equal. In fact, the partnership definition that prevails in the law is similar to the way I think it works in relationships; the presumption is that partners have equal authority, but the partners can always agree to some different allocation.
My own definition of [F/m] Domestic
Discipline, to the extent I have to give one, is maybe a bit more limited than
Kay’s. Something along the lines of:
“A relationship between
committed partners [domestic] in which the wife has the authority to provide
discipline (primarily in the form of spanking and corporal punishment), to the
husband in order to change behavior, impose accountability and consequences, and
enforce household rules.”
Whatever a F/m DD relationship
is, it seems to me that it almost always entails these three things: (a) the wife imposes discipline on the husband; (b) the form of
discipline is usually spanking or other forms of corporal punishment; and (c)
there is some overarching goal of correcting or changing behavior and/or
holding the husband accountable.
While
Kay’s definition is prescriptive, mine is more descriptive, confining itself to
the elements that are common to what I think most would characterize as a DD
relationship. My definition doesn’t prescribe the extent of the authority the
wife wields, and it doesn’t take a position on whether rules are agreed upon or
imposed.
While my definition of Domestic
Discipline is concrete, it’s going to get wish-washy from there.
Female Led Relationship
(“FLR”): In my view, what distinguishes an FLR relationship
from a DD relationship is the relative authority the wife takes or is
granted.
Buts, it’s complicated. I tend to think of an FLR as DD “plus” some
level of authority and control, that’s not quite right, because an FLR doesn’t
necessarily have to include DD’s spanking/corporal punishment elements.
Also, I personally prefer the
term “Wife Led Marriage” to “Female Led Marriage”, as I think that the “female”
element may implicitly sweep in some gender-based elements that are more at
home in Femdom.
To me, the pertinent definitional
factor is that the wife leads in that particular relationship, not that females
lead or are superior in general. But, “Wife
Led Marriage” has never really seemed to take off.
So, my general definition of
FLR would be something along the lines:
“A committed relationship
in which there is an unequal allocation of authority and decisional power, with
the wife setting and enforcing rules, which the husband is required to obey. Although
the relationship is a partnership, the wife has an unequal share of authority,
including to set rules and expectations for the husband; he has no
corresponding authority over the wife.”
Though, since we are talking
primarily about DD relationships here, here’s a definition that’s more tailored
to a DD relationship that also is some form of FLR:
“A relationship between
committed partners [domestic] in which the wife has the authority to provide
discipline (primarily in the form of spanking and corporal punishment), to the
husband in order to change behavior, impose accountability and consequences,
and enforce household rules that are agreed upon or set by the wife. Although
the relationship is a partnership, the wife has an unequal share of authority,
including to set rules and expectations for the husband; he has no
corresponding authority over the wife. The wife’s authority to discipline and
punish includes the right to determine (within reasonable limits), why, when
and how such punishment is imposed. With
respect to non-disciplinary decisions, the couple still make most major
decisions collaboratively, but the wife may have the authority to decide on
certain issues when there is a disagreement.”
Now, one obvious issue with
my definition is that, to my ear, it sounds an awful lot like Aunt Kay’s definition
of a DWC marriage. In my view, however, it’s
hard not to include that what Kay and the DWC were advocating was, in fact, a
relationship in which the wife’s power was substantially broader than just
carrying out agreed-upon punishments for agreed-upon offenses. The best example is this blurb from one of the
pamphlets:
“Effective
discipline begins well before you ever reach the point of administering a
spanking. It begins with your awareness
of your own personal power and your belief that you are indeed the right woman
to handle this (which you are). From now
on you expect to be obeyed!
Think
about where you are. Your husband has
come to you and asked you to please take over his discipline. He has empowered you to assume the maternal
role and has agreed to take the child role with respect to discipline. He wants more than anything else for you to
be powerful, assertive and in control.
It is a beautiful thing, really.
He is practically begging you to reach into your internal strength,
which he correctly senses is in you, and take him to the woodshed when he needs
it. Believe me, not only can you do
this, it gets better and better.”
To my knowledge, the DWC never
used the term “FLR”, but I don’t know how that description is not of one,
given the heavy emphasis on an empowered wife and an obedient husband.
When I think about my own
personal vision for a DD-FLR marriage, it’s probably something like this from a
long-ago commenter named Amy:
“Our
DD is “rules based plus”, meaning if he breaks a rule or disobeys me his pants
come down, end of sentence. The “plus” part is I decide when it happens, and if
I say he has broken a rule, he has, no backtalk, no second chances. Rules based plus just made sense from the
beginning. He wanted rules and structure but wanted to choose when to obey and
what rules he would follow. He thought it was going to be an erotic game. I
straightened him out on that score and a few other things. Along the way I
found out things about myself I didn't know and ways to handle him I needed to
learn. We have very few disagreements now and these are settled quickly. I
sometimes wonder if he would have asked for all this if he had known where it
was going. It doesn't really matter because we are not going back.”
Femdom: In researching this term for this week’s topic, I
came across this from a “sexual health” website:
“Femdom, also known as
female domination or female dominance, is a type of BDSM roleplay where the
dominant partner is female. It involves power exchange dynamics where the woman
takes on the dominant role, and the submissive partner consensually submits to
her control. Femdom isn't just about female superiority or male degradation;
it's a mutually agreed-upon dynamic that individuals of any gender identity can
explore.”
I probably can’t do any
better than that. There are things in
that definition that illustrate why I don’t see FLR as a “Femdom lite”. I think
they are different in kind, not just degree.
To me, the difference begins with
the reference to “BDSM roleplay”. Both BDSM and Femdom have a heavy emphasis on
roleplay and “scenes”, i.e. something that by definition is distinguished from “real
life”. Domestic Discipline and FLR both
have a heavy emphasis on incorporating the dynamic into everyday life.
Further, Femdom (and BDSM)
seem to me to be inherently and pervasively sexual. DD and FLR obviously have sexual/erotic elements,
but it’s a very different emphasis. Femdom
is sex, while sex and eroticism are elements or byproducts
of DD and FLR. And, in Femdom, the sex itself has a Dominant/subservient aspect.
I also think the line about “Femdom
isn't just about female superiority or male degradation” is important.
Femdom isn’t “just about” those things, but it is about those
things. To me, there is a certain
attitude of “meanness” and a goal to humiliate or degrade in Femdom.
“Dominance and
submission”; “Power exchange”; and, “power differential” relationships:
I recall a long time ago
getting in an argument of sorts with a commenter who was very into definitional
exactitude and who insisted that DD was a subset of BDSM, since BDSM stands for
Bondage, Discipline (or Dominance), Sadism & Masochism.
I’m not going to try to define
BDSM, but I will say I don’t buy that DD is a subset of it. BDSM doesn’t have
any disciplinary component, and it’s more about role play than living a reality-based
lifestyle.
Dominance and submission is
harder. Depending on how we define, I
can almost buy that it is an umbrella term that could encompass DD. Here is an AI-generated definition that may
illustrate why:
Dominance
and submission (D/s) represent a consensual power dynamic where one person
(dominant) takes control or leadership, and another (submissive) willingly
relinquishes control, often prioritizing the partner's needs. While frequently
associated with BDSM, D/s can be a lifestyle choice focused on care, trust, and
structured interaction rather than just sexuality. The submissive willingly grants power to the dominant,
which in healthy dynamics, is met with care and responsibility, not abuse.
That conceivably encompasses
DD and also FLR, as I view it at least. To me, a key differentiator among these relationship is the role of spanking. Although a DD relationship doesn't necessarily include spanking, in the vast majority of DD relationships, spanking has a central place. With Dominance/submission, spanking is not necessarily a core component, but it does seem like it's at least a likely byproduct.
I have heard all these
relationship types that involve hierarchies of authority and power described as
“power exchange” relationships. I’ve
never quite liked the “exchange” part, because it seems to entail one partner
giving up power and the other taking it, and I’m not sure that’s how it always
works. But, I recently saw someone
describe it as “power differential”, rather than “power exchange”, which to me
seems a better fit.
Thoughts on definitions of these
terms? Other terms we run across in these
relationships that you’d like to define or kick around?
Have a great week.
