"At the heart of every frustration lies a
basic structure: the collision of a wish with an unyielding reality." - Alain de Botton
Hello all. Welcome back to the Disciplinary Couples Club. Our weekly meeting of men and women who are in, or interested in being in, Domestic Discipline or Wife Led relationships. I hope you all had a great week.
Mine was a little schizophrenic, and I'll warn everyone in advance that this will be another week in which I'll probably ramble a bit and a topic may or may not emerge. We began on a very strong note for the week in terms of moving forward with more "Wife Led" principles in our marriage. I want to give my wife full credit for stepping it up in terms of exercising control. In fact, in addition to just acting more like a Dominant Wife in many ways, she really wore my ass out last week. As you will recall, last week we discussed our new empty-nest status, her new resolve, our efforts to really take the plunge, etc. In the end, I kind of made the first move. I had come up with a weekly report card, summarizing each day's compliance with some core rules, some of which focus on my relationship with her (showing respect, obeying when she tells me to do something), etc. and some that focus on my own self-identified areas needing improvement, like being productive at work, keeping up with certain work tasks, exercise, diet, etc. On Saturday morning, shortly after drafting my most recent post for this blog, I filled out the report card, and left it on the kitchen table for her to see before I left to run some errands. When I got back, she brought me her comments on the report, moving pretty seamlessly into Dominant mode. The form I came up with includes a place for me to state whether I think a spanking has been earned; another for her to state whether she is ordering one; and, a choice between levels of severity. We both agreed one had been earned, and she chose "moderate," which probably was appropriate, given that my week included a few slip-ups, but nothing really bad.
As it turned out, she wasn't able to carry out the sentence that same day, but did so on Sunday. But, what she delivered really was not "moderate." I don't know whether I would classify it as "severe," but it seemed a hell of a lot more than "moderate." I was definitely still feeling it a couple of days later. The fact that she had chosen the "moderate" box on our form had given me some hope; not just about avoiding a very sore bottom but because I do feel like there really should be some scale of punishments to fit varying scales of crime. Yet, my wife has always, from almost the very beginning, been very binary where severity is concerned. I'm either not spanked at all, or it is very hard. Nothing in between. We'll see if that changes over time as our new reporting system takes hold, but perhaps it won't.
"Zero tolerance" was in the news a lot this week, and it's also a concept we are working through in our new reporting system. Originally, I envisioned an actual grading system similar to that used in thousands upon thousands of schools, with a graduated scale from A to F. Since some of the criteria I was going to be graded on were personal goals around work and fitness, I was going to be self-grading involved. And, that is where things always seemed to break down. On few days (probably none) was I absolutely perfect, and on some but not many the only truthful grade was an F. Averaging things out every day, except on those occasions when I clearly earned an F on a criteria, I usually found myself gravitating toward something in the C to B- range. Which, if you think about it is probably about where most of usually live our lives. In fact, before the educational establishment decreed that anything but an A for showing up would hurt a kid's self-esteem, a "C" grade was, by definition, average. But, I'm not aiming for C-level performance at work or on things like fitness and health. So, I decided that maybe the grade choice should be far more binary -- I either met the rule or I did not. So, the filled out form I submitted to her ultimately had only pluses and minuses. I think that is similar to the system ZM has been experimenting with. I asked which she preferred, and she agreed that a straight up or down is better than a more nuanced A to F.
So, that's what we're doing. And, I do think that over time, knowing that I have a binary choice to perform or not perform and that anything in the middle may get me spanked will lead to better outcomes. Yet, despite putting this great new system in place, this week I went on to have several instances of carousing too much, missing workouts, and blowing off my diet. How do you reconcile those two?
"Zero tolerance" was in the news a lot this week, and it's also a concept we are working through in our new reporting system. Originally, I envisioned an actual grading system similar to that used in thousands upon thousands of schools, with a graduated scale from A to F. Since some of the criteria I was going to be graded on were personal goals around work and fitness, I was going to be self-grading involved. And, that is where things always seemed to break down. On few days (probably none) was I absolutely perfect, and on some but not many the only truthful grade was an F. Averaging things out every day, except on those occasions when I clearly earned an F on a criteria, I usually found myself gravitating toward something in the C to B- range. Which, if you think about it is probably about where most of usually live our lives. In fact, before the educational establishment decreed that anything but an A for showing up would hurt a kid's self-esteem, a "C" grade was, by definition, average. But, I'm not aiming for C-level performance at work or on things like fitness and health. So, I decided that maybe the grade choice should be far more binary -- I either met the rule or I did not. So, the filled out form I submitted to her ultimately had only pluses and minuses. I think that is similar to the system ZM has been experimenting with. I asked which she preferred, and she agreed that a straight up or down is better than a more nuanced A to F.
So, that's what we're doing. And, I do think that over time, knowing that I have a binary choice to perform or not perform and that anything in the middle may get me spanked will lead to better outcomes. Yet, despite putting this great new system in place, this week I went on to have several instances of carousing too much, missing workouts, and blowing off my diet. How do you reconcile those two?
Well, part of it is our system has been in place for only a week, and I was traveling much of the week so there were limited opportunities for her to keep me in line on a daily basis. Conversely, there were lots of opportunities to misbehave. This was a week that was just chock full of opportunities to misbehave. I was traveling on business for multiple days. I had multiple client dinners with clients who were just not teetotalers. And, we are depressingly slow at work, so my lapses in "productivity" were basically inevitable because I just didn't have much work to do. So, I am filling out my report card this morning, and it looks pretty damn bad, yet I think over time this will go in a better direction to the extent we get it firmly set.
I also had a couple of conversations this week that touched, in very different ways, on where things may go as I go further down this road of experimenting with a more truly Wife Led relationship. I had another one of those work opportunities involving speaking truth to power and, once again, after feeling deep inside that gnawing resistance to giving offense or going against the crowd, I spoke my mind. I wasn't mean or aggressive, but I made sure my view (which was contrary to the majority of the other execs I was engaging with -- that happens a lot) was fully heard even if it was ultimately rejected. I've been trying really hard to get more comfortable with uncomfortable encounters, which when you think about it is what most of us are hoping for from our wives. It's the essence of the conversation we had a couple of weeks ago about being "not nice." It's about setting aside your personal squeamishness and insecurities around doing things that may result in someone taking offense or feeling they are being treated unfairly, and instead simply doing what needs to be done. We want our wives to step up to that kind of "taking care of business" approach, yet I know from personal experience that it is not always an easy thing to do.
As I've noted previously, I am fully "out" to only two other people (other than my wife); one a vanilla friend and another is someone in this lifestyle but on the other side of the paddle. I talked about my current work situation with the latter of those two recently, telling her that there seemed to be some irony in the fact that at the exact some time I am consciously stepping down in the pecking order at home, I've been rising in the chain of command in my career. She didn't see it as paradoxical at all, for a couple of reasons. First, she pointed out there is a natural human tendency toward compensation, and she found it not at all surprising that as I started taking on a more humble role at home it might manifest in becoming even more driven and assertive at work. Second, if being held to standards and becoming more personally disciplined works as planned, then it really should result in elevated performance at work, which at certain levels does come to demand increased levels of "straight talk" and also more comfort with operating among people with very strong opinions. Therefore, it should not be surprising that being subject to more discipline is yielding higher performance. Duh, that has kind of been the idea all along. But, it plays out in an interesting way at my level, because performing among my peers requires speaking up and advocating positions vigorously while respecting the contrary views of your peers.
Having thought about it more, I would add a third factor to her observations, namely that being subject to strong leadership actually provides the follower with a strong, positive example that they inevitably take with them to those instances in which they themselves are leading. She leads by example, and I end up emulating that behavior at work.
If done right, this could lead to a virtuous circle in which being subject to strong leadership at home actually helps me become a stronger leader at work and in which being disciplined by someone else helps me exercise more self-discipline over time.
I was thinking about this more this morning, in relation to a somewhat nasty exchange I had a few weeks ago with a commenter who was coming from a much more Femdom orientation with its usual fixation with "topping from the bottom." It occurred to me that one reason I am comfortable with Domestic Discipline but have a visceral, negative reaction to Femdom is that on some level the two really are mutually incompatible. The goal of most DD wives is not to have more submissive, servile weakling in their house, but a more competent, more responsible, more highly performing partner. When done right, Domestic Discipline and being "led" by one's spouse but not dominated by them, actually reinforces and helps build real manliness--which is or should be all about being a strong individual who displays everyday heroism and hard work and performs as a strong role model for his sons and daughters at home and his peers and superiors at work. Femdom, on the other hand, at least the strong versions of it (there are gradations in all these power sharing relationships) is or can be all about reinforcing weakness and servility and timidity, none of which are attractive to about 90% of the female population. When done right, Domestic Discipline is about making stronger men, while Femdom accepts male weakness as a given and creates a power structure to reinforce it.
Now, I recognize that what I just said may seem a bit incompatible with my current move toward a relationship that is more Wife Led, since it really does involve me stepping away from some of my "manly" tendencies to take a more secondary and, admittedly, more subservient role. But, it goes back to some themes I discussed with the Dominant Wife friend referenced above. Being in charge is such a hard-wired part of me, bringing some balance to my life requires a very conscious step in the opposite direction. Second, if my wife is to help me become a more successful and more disciplined partner, she has to have sufficient authority to check me when either my Alpha nature or my lack of personal discipline wreak havoc or keep me from my goals. But, the overarching goals are (a) better behavior and stronger performance; and (b) personal growth on her part in that she gets to develop her leadership skills and experience the joy that comes with personal power. But, at no point is it about making me less of a man. It reminds me of something our one-time prolific commenter Marisa (who I really miss, by the way, along with Holly and some of our other female commenters who have gone missing) said many posts ago:
I also had a couple of conversations this week that touched, in very different ways, on where things may go as I go further down this road of experimenting with a more truly Wife Led relationship. I had another one of those work opportunities involving speaking truth to power and, once again, after feeling deep inside that gnawing resistance to giving offense or going against the crowd, I spoke my mind. I wasn't mean or aggressive, but I made sure my view (which was contrary to the majority of the other execs I was engaging with -- that happens a lot) was fully heard even if it was ultimately rejected. I've been trying really hard to get more comfortable with uncomfortable encounters, which when you think about it is what most of us are hoping for from our wives. It's the essence of the conversation we had a couple of weeks ago about being "not nice." It's about setting aside your personal squeamishness and insecurities around doing things that may result in someone taking offense or feeling they are being treated unfairly, and instead simply doing what needs to be done. We want our wives to step up to that kind of "taking care of business" approach, yet I know from personal experience that it is not always an easy thing to do.
As I've noted previously, I am fully "out" to only two other people (other than my wife); one a vanilla friend and another is someone in this lifestyle but on the other side of the paddle. I talked about my current work situation with the latter of those two recently, telling her that there seemed to be some irony in the fact that at the exact some time I am consciously stepping down in the pecking order at home, I've been rising in the chain of command in my career. She didn't see it as paradoxical at all, for a couple of reasons. First, she pointed out there is a natural human tendency toward compensation, and she found it not at all surprising that as I started taking on a more humble role at home it might manifest in becoming even more driven and assertive at work. Second, if being held to standards and becoming more personally disciplined works as planned, then it really should result in elevated performance at work, which at certain levels does come to demand increased levels of "straight talk" and also more comfort with operating among people with very strong opinions. Therefore, it should not be surprising that being subject to more discipline is yielding higher performance. Duh, that has kind of been the idea all along. But, it plays out in an interesting way at my level, because performing among my peers requires speaking up and advocating positions vigorously while respecting the contrary views of your peers.
Having thought about it more, I would add a third factor to her observations, namely that being subject to strong leadership actually provides the follower with a strong, positive example that they inevitably take with them to those instances in which they themselves are leading. She leads by example, and I end up emulating that behavior at work.
If done right, this could lead to a virtuous circle in which being subject to strong leadership at home actually helps me become a stronger leader at work and in which being disciplined by someone else helps me exercise more self-discipline over time.
I was thinking about this more this morning, in relation to a somewhat nasty exchange I had a few weeks ago with a commenter who was coming from a much more Femdom orientation with its usual fixation with "topping from the bottom." It occurred to me that one reason I am comfortable with Domestic Discipline but have a visceral, negative reaction to Femdom is that on some level the two really are mutually incompatible. The goal of most DD wives is not to have more submissive, servile weakling in their house, but a more competent, more responsible, more highly performing partner. When done right, Domestic Discipline and being "led" by one's spouse but not dominated by them, actually reinforces and helps build real manliness--which is or should be all about being a strong individual who displays everyday heroism and hard work and performs as a strong role model for his sons and daughters at home and his peers and superiors at work. Femdom, on the other hand, at least the strong versions of it (there are gradations in all these power sharing relationships) is or can be all about reinforcing weakness and servility and timidity, none of which are attractive to about 90% of the female population. When done right, Domestic Discipline is about making stronger men, while Femdom accepts male weakness as a given and creates a power structure to reinforce it.
Now, I recognize that what I just said may seem a bit incompatible with my current move toward a relationship that is more Wife Led, since it really does involve me stepping away from some of my "manly" tendencies to take a more secondary and, admittedly, more subservient role. But, it goes back to some themes I discussed with the Dominant Wife friend referenced above. Being in charge is such a hard-wired part of me, bringing some balance to my life requires a very conscious step in the opposite direction. Second, if my wife is to help me become a more successful and more disciplined partner, she has to have sufficient authority to check me when either my Alpha nature or my lack of personal discipline wreak havoc or keep me from my goals. But, the overarching goals are (a) better behavior and stronger performance; and (b) personal growth on her part in that she gets to develop her leadership skills and experience the joy that comes with personal power. But, at no point is it about making me less of a man. It reminds me of something our one-time prolific commenter Marisa (who I really miss, by the way, along with Holly and some of our other female commenters who have gone missing) said many posts ago:
Yes. That "humbling function" allows you to let go of that ego, accept authority and become the ( mostly) wonderful, charming and loving men you really are. It frees you to be yourself and that is what we are after. That is also why spanking without the mental and emotional parts of it doesn't really work. The message never gets through because you are not prepared to hear it before you have been humbled.
Very well said, and it illustrates why I am interested in the "mental and emotional parts" that I think being subject to my wife's direction and authority bring to the table but that spanking by itself does not seem to fulfill even when severe.
So, there may or may not be a topic in there, but I welcome others to respond. Particularly all of our Disciplinary Wives. I am curious whether you agree with me that what you are really looking for is a husband who is more, not less, manly but with the attributes that used to entail, i.e. taking responsibility, working hard to set a good example, etc.
Finally, one quick note on comment moderation. For current posts, I have left comment moderation off except for brief periods in which trolls seemed to be taking a particular interest in this blog. But, I have always left it on for comments left on posts that are more than 14 days old, mainly because commercial parties love inserting links to their websites in comments on older posts knowing those posts may not be monitored. I mention this only because I don't always check the "awaiting moderation" queue daily, so if you comment on an older post, it may be a few days before I see your comment and approve it for posting.
Have a great week.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi Glen. As I've said before, my wife has really always spanked very hard. Virtually every spanking is pretty severe. So, when she ordered that the upcoming spanking would be "moderate," I assumed that meant something less than her average spanking, and that we really didn't have to define it much beyond "less hard or shorter than usual." Nope. You apparently were right those terms are inherently vague. I did ask her immediately after how exactly that qualified as moderate. She raised the issue yesterday, saying we needed to discuss what moderate means. I said again that I couldn't define it with precision but at the most basic level it means something not as hard or shorter in duration, than her usual.
DeleteHer response was something to the effect of, "Well, maybe you just haven't had something that is really severe." Gulp. :-)
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteYes, it could have that result, given abject failures in just about every single category. Your definition of moderate does demonstrate how vague these labels are. I had been classifying "severe" as something that would cause difficult sitting for several days, as it does take a pretty hard spanking to accomplish that. But, both you and my wife seem to see that differently!
DeleteIt sounds to me that she is doing just fine. And if I am correctly reading between the lines, she is fairly patient in terms of keeping up with the intensity of your enthusiasm for a particular lifestyle permutation.
ReplyDeleteYes, although that may cast her role a little too passively. It was really she who started pushing in directions like "service" domination, i.e. ordering me to do certain tasks or chores, and she also was the one who started to refer to herself as a "Dominant" and to push things in a more D/s direction. While I probably have been the one with intensifying enthusiasm for her exercising additional control, she has been active in taking things in a more sexualized, D/s direction.
DeleteAh so. Then I have to modify my uninformed comment that "she is doing just fine." to "You Rock Sister!"
DeleteDan
ReplyDeleteRather than comment on you and your wife's situation, let me speak to what I expect from Peter.Before we married, I was reluctant to give up what was a thriving career and yet at the same time as a child of two working parents, I would never think of bringing a child into the world, especially since the need for two incomes would not be a factor, since we both believed a stay at home mom we felt was how we agreed was what we wanted. So we married!
Before I got pregnant, we were equal partners. We each held our own checking accounts as well as a joint account. All chores were divided equally. Saturday while I did the laundry he would change linens on the bed and dust. Gardening we shared.We each had separate friends, as well as joint friends. After our boys were born, ( twins ) I stayed home and slowly as the sharing of chores and friends seemed to slip away. A move , which was good for the boys entailed a 75 minute commute for Peter. The social aspects of his job seldom included me. Time passes and well we grew apart. Sex seemed to be something that we might do now and then. When the boys were 7 I had enough. We went to marriage counseling. I had to write down what it was I wanted, as did he. Rather than bore you with a list that may or may not apply to anyone else I will say only much of it had to do with how I needed to go back to shareing big decisions, e.g. buying a boat was the one that broke this wife's back. Basically I wanted back the man I said "I do" to so long ago. I wanted the man who noticed the lawn needed mowing, the man who remembered he had said he would pick up the twins and not left them waiting 2 hours. The man who said now and then go watch your program I 'll put the boys to bed and finally perhaps remember to bring me a bunch of violets so I will know in all our messy life he too recalls with fondness that first date.
I dont consider discipline punishment but as a reminder to Peter now and then. If I hit too hard at times it is only that Peter needed a stronger reminder at times. A few months ago, after I delivered a reminder that left more than the usual bruises Peter kissed me and said looking at the bruises in the mirror " Guess I was a real asshole lately. In closing that is the real man. Those words were better than a thousand sorries.
Anna
Hi Anna,
DeleteI loved your comment about Peter's response when looking at the bruises in the mirror. His simple statement showed that he fully understood that it was his actions/attitudes that caused the bruises. Once we "own" our behaviors and attitudes, we are well on the way to improving them.
DD is such an excellent communications tool. Last night, as my wife was punishing me for something that we have been through several times before, she said "I just really want to get through to you," and I believe and hope that this time she did.
Bruised bottoms are certainly painful (both to receive and to give), but much less so than the pain of spending countless hours talking, complaining, and arguing with each other and still not managing to effectively communicate.
-ZM
Hi Anna. Discipline as a "reminder." I like that.
ReplyDeleteA lot here this week, but one thing struck me as unusual coming from you, since you have always been one to point out the variations in almost any singular topic or theme. To characterize "FemDom" as you did dismisses the countless diversity in FemDom approaches. It seems with DD, it has been stated here so often that DD can be so different for different couples.....and accurately so. So why would anyone assume that if DD can have different goals, motivations, and styles, that the same would not be true for FemDom?
ReplyDeleteI know I and others have said here and elsewhere that while the stereotype FemDom style resembles your description, another very popular style is that of the Lady/Knight, which also recognizes that some women don't want a less manly partner, but prefer a strong and competent 'knight'.....but one who is willing to lay the spoils of war at his Lady's feet at the end of the day.
We consider ourselves FemDom as well as DD, and Rosa has never expressed any desire to 'break me' into a lowly sycophant. If I was that way, she'd probably have no interest in me.
Anyway, as for you other points, I think that the whole consistency and strictness issue can only ever be suggested by the submissive partner, but the success of such a system will depend almost entirely on the enthusiasm of the dominant partner to want it to happen and provide the measures to ensure that it does. We subs can confess, discuss, and rationalize all we want, but unless the Top takes to it with their own motivation to drive the relationship, it will always just sort of meander or even just hover in inconsistency.
You can see evidence for this in the posts written by women who clearly are the driving force behind the DD and the posts from guys who are trying to figure what exactly will trigger a more strict and consistent regimen from their spouses. My own relationship reflects both aspects of this since Rosa can be both very driven or bogged down with constraints of one kind or another......and the consistency of the DD aspect will rise or fall in direct proportion to those fluctuations in her.
Well, I did point out that there are variations, expressly: "Femdom, on the other hand, at least the strong versions of it(there are gradations in all these power sharing relationships) . . ." Perhaps "stereotypical" would have been a better word than "strong," but I don't think it would have been quite true to what I was saying, because "stereotype" seems to imply something that is widely maintained but not actually accurate. I think what I described is, in fact, accurate with respect to *some* though not all Femdom relationships. Now, what I probably should have modified is "When done right, Domestic Discipline is about making stronger men, while Femdom accepts male weakness as a given and creates a power structure to reinforce it," inserting something like "while SOME variations of Femdom accept . . ."
DeleteAs I've always said, these relationship types are all variations on certain themes, though those variations do matter and I think often hinge on the overall goal and, to some extent, the extent to which what the parties get out of focuses on self-improvement or relationship improvement, as opposed to something more fundamentally grounded in sexual fantasy. I think DD relationship can have Femdom aspects. Even more so what I have taken to calling Wife Led, or what I used to call Female Led until I started getting concerned that using that term was part of what was attracting some of the Femdom and BDSM trolls. There are definitely big overlaps between Wife Led and Femdom practices, and probably to some extent the motivations, though I them in Femdom there seem to be stronger erotic, fantasy, role play elements and also elements of female supremacy or female authority. I do get the Lady/Knight model -- I just think it is closer to what I am describing as Wife Led than to the strong or, as you say, "stereotypical" version of Femdom.
I agree with the last two paragraphs. I used to believe that it might be the case that if you want your wife to be more dominant, you should start by being more submissive. But, I just don't think it works that way in the real world. Instead, at some point for it to really work the woman has to come to actually want it, believe it serves her interests, and act accordingly.
I think your clarifications are solid. And I like that you mentioned that those same variations can work their way into Wife-Led DD as well. I was going to go back and add something like that to my own response and smiled when I saw your response saved me the trouble! LOL
DeleteThere is definitely a stronger erotic element to BDSM. No question. BDSM is by its nature intentionally erotic......with its difference being the means by which the eroticism is achieved. DD is a blend, or perhaps spectrum of the practical, personal, and erotic with erotic not even being a necessary component. (i.e. those who seek out disciplinary sessions with professionals where there is no prurient element exchanged between the two.)
Good exchange! (yet again)
While this probably over-states things, BDSM seems intrinsically sexual, while DD is more tangentially so. In other words, you can't really remove the sexual element of BDSM. That is what it is. It is at least theoretically possible to remove eroticism from DD, though I think most of us concede it is in there somewhere in our relationships in varying degrees. I wonder whether it is ever wholly absent, but it's more of a side-effect than an intrinsic goal.
DeleteDan, I think there is a fair amount of social scientific data to support your belief that most women are attracted to "manly" men, just as most men are attracted to feminine women. Back in the 90's I was active in a few different spanking message boards, chat rooms, etc., where men and woman explored their interest in spanking together. In those days, there tended to be a free mixing of people interested in M/F, F/M, and F/F spanking. (M/M spanking was a world apart). We chatted about it, we wrote collaborative, interactive stories about it, and we "played" together. I learned a lot from that mixing.
ReplyDeleteI can tell you, the most common variant of DD is male dominant/female submissive because that variant appeals to most people's sense of traditional masculinity and femininity. Women outnumbered men by far in spanking forums. Of the men there, the majority were into M/F, and almost all of the women were into M/F.
Your question about "manliness" reminded me that in those early days, I and other guys who found ourselves more drawn to the female dominant/male submissive variant felt quite defensive about our "manliness." Just because we wanted to be subject to female discipline and authority, that did not mean we weren't manly men, we would tell ourselves and other people. And that was true. Manly men can be interested in F/M spanking.
There was, however, good reason for our defensiveness. M/F spanking has a primal "I Tarzan, you Jane" feel about it. On the other hand, F/M spanking is perceived as a reversal of traditional gender roles, or as a humiliating regression of the man to the status of "naughty boy." Most women find that a turn-off. As one woman said, "I could never respect a man I could spank."
Fortunately, not all women are turned off by F/M spanking, but guys who benefit from it should feel lucky because those women are in the minority. And, let's be honest, in the moment a husband is over his wife's knee being paddled, he is not in "manly" position. That's why it's "humbling" to our male pride, and that's why it would be embarrassing to be outed as a spanked husband. Even the expression "she wears the pants," implies an element of emasculation.
But that doesn't mean that, beyond the moment of discipline, a spanked husband is really any less manly than any other man. Moreover, most women in FLR's or Femdom relationships don't want their men to be "submissive, servile weaklings". But I disagree with your characterization of guys in "Femdom" relationships that carry female authority farther than simple DD as "servile weaklings." Many people see any man who would submit to a spanking in that negative way. That's unfair. But when you characterize men in relationships that carry that "humbling" of male pride farther than DD that way, I think you are being unfair too. Sometimes manly men get spanked. Sometimes they wear aprons too. And I don't think the ones who get spanked should cast stones at the ones who wear aprons.
Hello Anonymous. There is a lot to unpack here, much of which I agree with, and some that I don't think accurately reflects what I said.
Delete-- I do agree that most women are attracted to men with "manly" traits. I'm not quite as sure about men's attraction to more "feminine" women. I find the latter harder to define, and I also don't know whether what I find attractive is true of most men. I am, and always have been, attracted to women with forceful, almost "manly" personalities. Often older women in positions of authority, such as teachers and a few female executives. I really don't know whether that puts me outside the norm.
You state, "F/M spanking is perceived as a reversal of traditional gender roles, or as a humiliating regression of the man to the status of "naughty boy." Most women find that a turn-off. As one woman said, "I could never respect a man I could spank."" I suspect that is generally true. Though, it seems to have limits or at least lots of exceptions. It's surprising how many otherwise vanilla wives seem to be "persuadable" to try F/m DD, even if it is not something they have a pre-existing attraction to. The "naughty boy" thing seems to repel some women and attract others. I can think of multiple instances in which women have told me they are "Looking for a man, not a little boy or a man with Mommy issues . . ." or words to that effect. I suspect you are right that many women, perhaps most, feel that to one degree or another. Yet, others seem attracted, or at least open, to DD precisely because it has some maternal aspects, nurturing and guiding their sometimes misbehaving man-child.
I wonder if a group comprising self-identified "spankos" accurately represents the views among those who are motivated more by the power exchange than the spanking itself. I was invited to a Facebook group comprised mainly of female submissives in DD relationships. What is surprising to me is how similar the motivations are between the M/f participants there and the F/m commenters here. Now, they do seem perplexed that they have been joined by a male who submits to spankings but who otherwise shares the personalities they find attractive in very dominant men.
Where I disagree with you is your statement you "disagree with [my] characterization of guys in "Femdom" relationships that carry female authority farther than simple DD as "servile weaklings." Even more so than KD (see my answer to him above) you are reading something into my statement that is not there. I don't know how you could maintain that "Mistress/slave" models of Femdom do not reinforce "servility." Hence, the "slave" appellation. And, many of the Female Supremacy versions are more or less openly dismissive of males in general as weak partners, to be treated as meek, submissive servants. That is kind of the whole idea and point, openly sought and delivered by the participants in those forms of Femdom. Interestingly, you are the one suggesting "apron wearing" is equivalent to "servile" and that I view anything that extends the exchange of power further than DD is emasculating. I never said anything of the sort. What I said was that to the extent one form of relationship seeks to help men become stronger and better performers, while another assumes their relative weakness as a given and reinforces that weaknesses as part of the assigned role, then they are incompatible. That is a very different proposition than the one you are putting in my mouth.
I would say I am a "manly man". However, the spanking is the only point at which she is in charge. It's only a brief swap for her to address whatever is bothering her. With regard to "manly" positions, the one I tend to favour most is when I bend about 45 degrees and lean on the bed or other object. This is just enough to get my bottom to poke out and stretch to make the spanking hurt, but not enough to look submissive. Sometimes, we might do it with me standing up straight.
DeleteGreat conversation. I have an ancillary branch of thinking on this.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion it requires a certain degree of emotional and intellectual development to even be open to experimenting with alternative lifestyles in the first place. In terms of DD, yes the female submissive is more readily socially acceptable. But overall, at least in my experience with the DWC, with a few minor exceptions, the folks we met were undoubtedly above average.
I am not implying that people who don't want to try things are stupid. It's the combination of both intellectual and emotional maturity that allows openness in the first place.
I definitely agree. That alone could account for why this blog's readership tilts so heavily to those over the age of 50. I do know one DD couple that is substantially younger than that, but the parties are two highly educated professionals living in a very socially liberal city. Knowing about alternative lifestyles in the first place requires a bit of exploring and intellectual curiosity. As I've said, I had never even heard of the concept of DD until I was in my late 30s, and I'm not sure that I would have had the emotional and intellectual openness to propose it if I had been much younger than that. And, being open to anything other than the cultural norms in your community requires some level of comfort in your own skin.
DeleteHi Dan,
ReplyDeleteThere is a lot of semantics bouncing around here. I consider my relationship strongly DD with her in full authority on discipline but otherwise we pursue " normal" roles. But I understand many would call it "femdom" or even "wife led" because the authority to discipline is in reality a lot of power exercised by her. I do agree that many women are conflicted about spanking a husband or boyfriend but while that may indeed be a " feminine" trait in part , it is also one that is powerfully conditioned by our culture. Dan's observations in the Facebook group bear out my belief that both male and female spankee's share very similar traits but females submitting to authority is much more culturally reinforced ( which seems ironic in the age of (#me too). The other point I want to endorse strongly is that none of this really works unless wife or girlfriend has internalized the role of disciplinarian and it's effects. I have been fortunate to have two women who recognized very quickly the benefits of spanking me. But that doesn't always happen.I continue to believe that as female roles and female power evolves in society, there will also be many more women comfortable with assuming the disciplinarian role in a committed relationship. I suspect it's happening with younger women already
Alan
Hi Alan. I agree on the semantics bouncing. It's not like there is some official club handbook that can be consulted for reference, none of these terms are self-defining, and there is much overlap between them. And, while I never like resorting Potter Stuart "I know it when I see it" distinctions, there is a bit of that involved in drawing a line between, say, FLR arrangements and Femdom. They definitely overlap, yet they aren't quite the same thing either.
DeleteI agree that the being antsy about women spanking men is culturally conditioned. On the other hand, I think in the M/f relationships there often is just as much secrecy, because they are concerned others will see a M/f spanking situation, especially one with power exchange aspects, as domestic abuse. So, it's not like that arrangement is without its cultural complications either.
I think you are right women will become more disciplinary as they get more power at work and in society, though we could both be wrong. I do think more women are recognizing that when you look at real decision making power and responsibility in the home, many of them already kind of rule anyway. So, moving toward the FLR just sort of formalizes what is already there and appoints her as the tie-breaker if there is a dispute over a decision. I have talked to one fairly young (mid-30s) disciplinarian who says she suspects that some of her friends are also really the leaders in a Wife Led Marriage, and while none of them have called it that to her, they seem more or less open that they pretty much rule at home and tell their husbands what to do. To me, that leaves it an open question as to whether the power arrangements will become more open, whether the spanking will, or both. I've always felt that it is easier for people to be open about spanking than about power exchanges, because the former can be written off as just kink, while the latter seems to violate all sorts of our norms about egalitarianism and equality.
Both men and women are frequently frustrated by the unwillingness of partners to spank them, whether in erotic play or as discipline. A female friend confided in me about her intense frustration that her husband will not spank her or even discuss her need for it. Alan, you mentioned it is ironic that "females submitting to authority is much more culturally reinforced (which seems ironic in the age of #metoo." I'm not sure the cultural reinforcement is so clear cut. I think that feminist consciousness raising about the problem of violence against women may actually inhibit men from fulfilling the wishes of women who want to be spanked. Even if a wife requests it, it looks too much like abuse to many husbands. It may also feel too much like Neandrathal behavior to them. (Women also feel conflicted about their desire to be spanked because it puts their sexual desires in opposition to their feminist values).
ReplyDeleteIn one way, F/M discipline is less problematic because it seems more enlightened, given that it seems to correspond to Alan's observation about the evolution of "female roles and female power...in society." Also, when a woman disciplines a man who is bigger and stronger than she is, the consensual nature of it is clearer than it might be when the physically stronger partner administers discipline. When women are reluctant to spank their partners, it is either because they are turned-off by male submission (sex surveys have shown that a majority of women are), or because they feel, often rightly, that men who ask to be disciplined are selfishly asking their partners to service a kink. Unfortunately, many men who are frustrated by their partner's reluctance to accept their submission lack the self-awareness to understand when they are being selfish. People offering to submit to their partners often believe that their proposal makes then the giver in the relationship, since they are giving up equal power, but if you think about it, the spankee is asking for the spankers attention. That's why Fifty Shades of Grey was so popular among women: though Anastasia's submission to Christian Grey may appear demeaning, her sexuality was at the centre of the story, and Christian was lavishing attention on her.
I think that for a DD relationship to work, whether is F/M or M/F, there has to be an exceptional level of communication between the partners. I think Tommy Nash's observation that people in successful DD relationships show a high level of "intellectual and emotional maturity" is correct. That's because if that maturity and openness is lacking, a DD relationship will fail.
Boy, don't know who wrote this but I agree with almost all of it as observation and description: illustrates I think the many conflicting, contradictory and ambiguous forces confronting our culture and relationships. Ultimately each couple has to work it out themselves and many do. At the risk of coming off as an elitist I believe that " high level of intellectual and emotional maturity" is an enormous help.BTW I can envision a moment when F/M discipline becomes very PC as female power and authority increase in society as a whole while awareness of domestic violence mostly against women increasingly shocks and disgusts.. Out side of cult films I don't believe there has been any film project depicting an F/M relationship that is comparable to 50 shades or Secretary, 9 and a half, etc .( I am excluding the dominatrix films ) When that does happen we are entering a new era
ReplyDeleteAlan
I agree with all this. And, I do note it would be helpful if anonymous commenters would at least adopt a pseudonym. Alan, I think you're right that few if any movies have really explored F/m relationships, but I can think of at least one series that has gone down that road a little. Last year, I posted about some scenes from season 1 of Netflix's series The Crown that had some pretty explicit D/s and power exchange themes and references. Not spankings, but very express references to female power and the conflicting fantasies and realities of males submitting to a strong female. The lawyer series Suits also had a story line involving a male partner and a female headhunter that was very explicitly F/m sexual in nature.
DeleteHi Dan and Alan. I am sorry that I didn't identify myself. I have found this site fairly recently, and I have posted a couple of times under the pseudonym DJ and a few times only as Anonymous. I will try to remember to identify myself as DJ from now on.
DeleteAlan, I wouldn't expect to see any major films on the scale of 50 Shades or Secretary depicting an F/M relationship because that is a much more minority interest. The phenomenal success of 50 Shades surprised many people, but it really isn't that surprising when you consider that M/F spanking has always been a fairly common motif in romance novels for women. I don't think any romance novel has ever featured an F/M spanking, although I have read that some writers in the genre are consciously injecting feminism into their novels now.
Dan, I agree with you about the Crown. It was a fascinating study of an actual historical example of female power, and there was indeed a subtext exploring D/s power exchange in which strong men were humbled by the requirement that they submit to their female superior. It was humbling for politicians like Winston Churchill, who had to submit meekly to a scolding from the young queen at one point, and doubly humbling to Prince Philip who had to bring himself to kneel before the woman who was also his wife. Philip had very traditional ideas about marriage as a patriarchal institution, so it was struggle for him to accept his wife as his superior, and Elizabeth was very consciously domesticating and reining him in. I seem to recall there was even one scene in which Queen Elizabeth remarked to advisor, when Prince Philip's partying with his upper class friends was getting out of hand, that they were behaving like "naughty boys" in need of a metaphorical "spanking".
DJ
There is also a great line in which Elizabeth's tutor is advising her to berate Churchill and one of the other ministers for hiding Churchill's health problems from her. She asks why men of such accomplishment would put up with it, and he replies: "Because they're English, male and upper-class. A good dressing down from nanny is what they want most in life." Now, interestingly, Churchill also tutors Elizabeth on how to assume and project power, advising her of the importance of using her voice and making it clear that SHE is the one taking a position and not just following him. There are obvious parallels between all this and the discussion immediately above. It may very well be the case that the male teaches or guides the female on how to dominate, even where it involves dominating him. But, in the end it works only if she actively picks up the mantle of leadership and makes it her own.
DeleteOne female acquaintance (admittedly one with some very left-wing leanings) told me she believes the popularity of 50 Shades is best explained in terms of a wealth fetish more than for its BDSM themes. Personally, I think it's a combination of both. It wouldn't be what it is without the kinky sex, but it's also true that women wouldn't be nearly as attracted to Christian if he was, say a FedEx delivery driver or a Starbucks barrista, instead of a billionaire who flies his own helicopter.
Excellent points, Dan. Yes, it is an interesting twist that Churchill tutors the young queen on how to become his superior. And the implication of upper class males being conditioned to accept a "a good dressing down from nanny" undoubtedly hints at corporal punishment, which was a big part of a good, English education.
DeleteYour left leaning female acquaintance is right about 50 Shades. It was excoriated by leftists like Chris Hedges for making a fetish of wealth. You are also right that it combines both a wealth fetish and BDSM themes. That isn't surprising either. If you look at romance novels, going all the way to classics by Jane Austen, the hero of the story is always a wealthy, successful man who is able to provide well for the heroine. Making Christian a billionaire just exaggerates a common romance theme.
DJ
Great insights here. I think if films and TV shows began routinely featuring the character of female disciplinarians it would become normalized.
DeleteIn general ALL of our society adopts, to some degree, what they see in the media. And that includes the majority of the more "intellectually and emotionally mature." I wish I could argue that the more "advanced" personalities were immune. But I can't.
True, and that's not necessarily a bad thing. Look at how astonishingly quickly the country's views on gay rights took a sharp turn, from openly hostile less than a decade ago to a Supreme Court decision validating gay marriage. My own kids now see being gay as about as interesting as being left-handed. I think a lot of that is attributable to, of all things, TV series like Will & Grace with openly gay characters. So, for all the knocks on popular culture, it can in fact drive massive change in a very short period of time.
DeleteOne huge role of media in driving cultural change is determining what is taboo. When I was young, there were very few openly gay people, at least in the rural northwest. Now being gay is completely accepted by much or most of society, and the percentage of people who openly identify as gay has increased significantly. As Dan said, for younger people, if someone is gay it is no longer even that interesting.
DeleteCurrently I live in a country where it is still very taboo to be gay, similar to how it used to be in the USA. Here, people with same-sex attaction generally either try to repress their feelings entirely, often with catastrophic results, or have “conventional” (by local standards) marriages with secret – or at times maybe not even all that secret – gay relationships on the side. Only a few are able to overcome the stigma of being gay and live openly.
I am far from an expert on any of this, and I certainly don't know if being gay is a result of how people are initially "wired," their environment, their relationships with others, some combination of the above, or something else entirely. However, from the limited amount I know and have observed, I doubt that much of the increase in percentage of gay people around the world is driven by a corresponding increase in same sex attraction. What has changed is that being gay is now much less taboo than before and media has played a large part in that.
I expect that because it is still considered quite taboo, many with DD, FLR, or other dominance-related interests, desires and needs end up never sharing those feelings with their partners, either completely supressing their passions, or perhaps even seeking to scratch that itch outside their marriage/relationship. Furthermore, I think that that because DD/dominance/BDSM/FLR/etc. are still not that widely talked about, there might be many additional people who would be interested in it if they were exposed to it. BTW, yes I DO know the difference between these somewhat related but very different activities such as DD and femdom, but in this case I just lumped them all together!
All this is to say that there is no way to know how many people might actually be into these things in one form or another. It may not be as many as we readers of this blog may like to think, especially since we all probably suffer somewhat from confirmation bias, but still it could be a huge number. It will be interesting to see what develops if the mainstream media makes it a little less taboo.
-ZM
Hi ZM. I am among the doubters that the number of people who interested in DD, or at least actively practicing it, represents a significant proportion of the population. Without any intention to brag, this seems to be one of the more popular M/f DD blogs out there. It averages around 900 - 1000 hits a day, spiking to around 2000 a day on some weekends. There are about 250,000,000 adults in the United States. So, 0.000004 of the population is interested enough to find a blog that pops up in any search relating to M/f domestic discipline. And, that actually overstates things, because many of the visitors here are, like yourself, not living in the U.S. So, the denominator is actually must larger than 250m. I just don't see any evidence that some significant, let along large, number of people are into this. Now, have some much larger number of men been spanked purely as sex play -- I'm sure they have, but I bet that still is not more than 15%, tops. I tried to do some research, and I found this from the Washington Post about some study on sexual fantasies:
Delete“Among women, it was found that sexual fantasies of being dominated, being spanked or whipped, being tied up, and being forced to have sex were reported by 30%-60%,” according to the study. ” … The fantasy of being dominated was significantly greater for women than for men, on average, whereas the fantasy of dominating was statistically stronger for men than for women, on average. One caveat: This was a survey of Canadians 18 to 65. Presumably surveys of residents of a retirement community or a devout churchgoers would produce different responses. Another: Those who volunteer to participate in sex studies tend to be more sexually experienced. Or, as the authors put it: “This sample was not representative of the general population.” Also, there is a difference between fantasy and reality. The majority of our female participants with masochistic fantasies specified they would NOT want to live it,”
You add up those caveats, and it seems that only some pretty small part of a fairly sexually adventurous demographic were both interested in fantasies anything like what we do and actually willing to try it. And, that is just those who are interested in erotic forms of these activities. In terms of using it for real disciplinary purposes . . .
Also ZM, if the world is a competitive place and our wives are using DD to make us stronger performers, then we should not WANT more men to discover the benefits of DD. Let's keep it to ourselves and continue to outperform our competitors! ;-)
DeleteHahahaha. Yes, great idea on keeping it to ourselves and outperforming everyone else!
DeleteRegarding the statistics, I too expect that the numbers are really low, I was just saying that because the whole subject is taboo, it is that much harder to ever truly know precisely how many are into it in some form or another.
-ZM
And of course ‘Billions’ has some very explicit Femdom scenes between Chuck and Wendy ... what is it with lawyers? ��.
ReplyDeleteI haven't watched Billions, but keep meaning to. And, yes, I have no doubt that lawyers are massively over-represented among DD and D/s practitioners, probably with most of them on the receiving end. It's a profession that is all about controlled aggression and dominance, which almost has to show up in a lot of compensating submissive inclinations.
DeleteAgree with Glen - politics elsewhere please.
ReplyDeleteCK
Hi Dan,
ReplyDeleteThis week may not have one specific topic, but what you wrote is just loaded with different topics that I found interesting.
First off, I am glad that my (actually my wife's) plus and minus daily reporting system seems to be working for you. We have fallen down in a big way on weekly check-ups because of a full house during summer and I can clearly see the impact on my productivity. I think self reporting is very difficult and for me it really isn't that effective. When we get back in the groove, it might be better for her to quiz me about specifics of the day and then based on that, she can assign a plus or a minus. Probably it wouldn't have much to do with what I say, but rather with my demeanor. She is really perceptive, so I would guess she would generally do better at assessing my performance based on a quick 1 minute talk than I could ever be.
During this extended “boot-camp” time, the idea is for her to be pretty much zero-tolerance, but that is really hard to maintain, especially because she too is busy, and as I said, we are never alone. Having said that, I really would like to step this up a bit, to help me be more on top of things. For example, our last hallway light bulb went out last night. Based on my proclivity for procrastination, it is not hard to envision it not being replaced anytime soon even though I have the light bulb, I have the knowledge, and if I care enough, I could easily find 5 minutes to fix it. In cases like this, she shouldn't even have to mention it. If she notices it is still out in several days, she really should just go ahead and punish me.
I liked what you said about learning to lead effectively by being effectively led. Especially this phrase: “If done right, this could lead to a virtuous circle in which being subject to strong leadership at home actually helps me become a stronger leader at work and in which being disciplined by someone else helps me exercise more self-discipline over time.” This!!! This is what I am hoping to achieve.
The “manliness” discussion echos what I wrote here last month (I guess I just wrote it about a month too early!): “On the other hand, in our relationship, I openly acknowledge my flaws, weaknesses, bad habits, and failures, and recognize the impact these have on those around me. Together my wife and I work to make me a better man, CEO, husband, and father. Yes, she temporarily reduces me to a little boy in the process, but ironically, I think willingly submitting to her discipline is the most manly thing I could ever do, because it helps me to 'own' my behavior and to become the best man I can be.”
I loved the quote from Marisa about the “humbling function” and its critical role in making discipline effective. I can certainly relate to this right now, since humiliation played a huge role in last night's punishment, more so than any other time so far. I felt like it really helped me to get in a state of mind to be ready for correction and to truly hear her.
There is no doubt that the actual punishment sessions aren't very manly, and in fact I think the effectiveness of the punishment is directly related to how much I feel like a little boy (or girl) during the process. If humiliation is included, then it even more humbling and less “manly.” This humbling can be hard to accept and is probably hard to watch, but I do think it is important and even though it may not look or feel very manly at the time, it is playing a key role in making me a better man. There is good precedent for this methodology as it is similar to the philosophy of military boot camp... Break a person down and rebuild them from the bottom up... I guess my wife and I are just focusing a lot on the “bottom” part. ;-)
-ZM
I tend to feel manly taking it. A man who would refuse such pain comes across as less manly to me.
Delete"First off, I am glad that my (actually my wife's) plus and minus daily reporting system seems to be working for you. We have fallen down in a big way on weekly check-ups because of a full house during summer and I can clearly see the impact on my productivity." I've had the same problem. I thin the plus and minus system will work for us, but we also fell down in a big way, because of family commitments, travel, etc. And, my productivity was for shit all week. It's becoming a bit of a problem.
DeleteZM,
ReplyDeleteDude, if you have the time to write all that, you gotta have the time to change a light bulb.
They have a segment on a sports show I like to watch called "Come on man!" It features athletes making goofy mistakes. Just saying..... :)
Tomy
Very funny!
DeleteESPN C'mon Man"
ReplyDeleteTomy,
ReplyDeleteHahahahahahahah. You totally made me laugh, and you are so right. I guess it all comes down to desire.
-ZM
ZM, Joe2 here,
ReplyDeleteSpeaking as a man, do not change the light bulb. Think of the electricity you are saving. Also, you won't get irritated when she forgets to turn the light off.
That's true and you can read by the light of the barbecue.
Deleteam a Disciplinary Wife whose husband has been lurking on this blog for a long time (he is not allowed to post without permission), and he begged me to start reading. I have to agree that this is one of the best blogs I have ever seen, and since you are asking for more disciplinary wives I have begun commenting. This post has so much in it that I can't respond to it all at once. Wonderfully written, too.
ReplyDeleteMy first comment is about the report card idea and the binary grading ... and binary consequences. Like your wife, I only spank one way: hard! That is partly because Andy is a spanko and would tend to enjoy anything less than severe. But it also because punishment should be punishment: It should hurt (emotionally or physically or both) and it should be severe enough to teach a lesson (at least temporarily, as in my view men tend to need a lot of "reminders" about how to behave). And as a Disciplinary Wife, it is my place to decide what is severe enough and when the lesson has been learned.
We also both believe that a task or behavior should be graded on a binary level: It either is up to our agreed-upon standards or it is not. Anything else just leaves too much open to opinion. Andy does a pretty good job of meeting our standards, but he has a tendency to forget the little things. For instance, he will clean the kitchen very nicely but not wipe up the water that is all over the sink top after he is done. So I enter a spotless but wet kitchen. Is that up to our standards? No! So I order him to bend over the kitchen counter and he gets a dose of the wooden spoon. Then he dries off the counter and all is well! Sometimes, if I am feeling magnanimous, I will say, "Would you like to dry off the sink now or get spanked and then dry it off?" That sends him scurrying!
Which brings me to my main point: Andy needs quick consequences for his misbehavior. A weekly report card would never work with us. He just doesn't learn that way; it is too cerebral to think back several days to what happened, or to combine a large number of behaviors into a weekly grade. Frankly, I don't think that way either. Instead, we deal with individual behaviors as quickly as possible: "Are you late getting home from work?" "Yes, dear, the traffic was horrendous." "Did you call to let me know?" "No, dear, it slipped my mind." "It slipped your mind? Well, slip off your pants; you won't be needing them for a moment."
You can be sure he will call the next time. If it was part of a weekly grade, no way. For the same reason, we don't do maintenance spankings. We both believe that punishment works best when it is visceral: Misbehavior, correction, lesson learned. When we have to delay it because of the circumstances, we deal with it as soon as possible. And we do not combine behaviors; when I have to address more than one misbehavior with Andy, I spank for the first thing, send him to the corner to contemplate, and then put him back over my knee to spank for the next thing. I know it may work differently for other couples but that is how DD works for us ...
Helen, I believe there are a lot of men into F/M spanking who would like DD to work similarly with their wives.
ReplyDeleteDoug
An interesting comment, Helen. How did disciplinary spanking begin with you and Andy, did he suggest it or was it your idea?
ReplyDeleterichard
Helen, I like your common sense approach to being a Disciplinary Wife. I would guess that you don't have children in the house, so being spontaneous is both possible and best suited. Glad you have decided to join the group, and look forward to hearing more on what works for you and Andy.
ReplyDeleteJohn
BRAVO !!!!!! LOVE HOW YOU THINK!
ReplyDeleteANNA
Dan,
ReplyDeleteYou have written eloquently on how it is possible and even preferable for a husband to be a strong leader at work and a humble servant at home. You identify a difference between a Femdom marriage and a Wife-Led Marriage, and this may be true. For Andy and me it is somewhat different: We don’t have a Wife-Led Marriage. We have our different roles and areas of responsibility. One of his roles is as the provider for our family, and that means he must be successful at work—and to be successful as a chemical engineer (and in most careers) he must be seen as an assertive leader. Then he comes home, which is my domain, where he functions as what we call a “servant-leader”: he is exercising his leadership by turning it over to me! This is entirely consensual on his part; in fact, he gains great benefit by not having to feel responsible for the details of maintaining a home. Instead, he has a list of chores and does them. If they are done correctly, he is praised; if incorrect, he is punished. My husband craves what he calls the “simple life” of being at home with me. A life of “Don’t think, just do.” A life where he doesn’t have to be in charge, doesn’t have to be in control. It enables him to recharge his batteries for the next day of being an Alpha Career Man. Does he feel weak at home? Not at all! Though an outside observer might think so if they could see him standing in the corner with a pair of my panties down around his knees and a bright red bottom! While I sip a glass of wine and watch TV! But for us there is no conflict.
One very important thing that we work on is the transition for him from work to home—and I recommend that all couples develop some kind of transition ritual. He does some deep breathing exercises on the drive home that help him release the stress of the day. And when he gets home I greet him more like a 50s Wife then the Queen of the House. I have a drink ready for him. He takes off his shoes and sport coat and tie (in a ritual that reminds us of Mr. Rogers!). We go sit on the couch and cuddle a bit. Sometimes he will talk about his day; sometimes he is silent. I will tell him what I am making for dinner (I love to cook and have not assigned that task to him). He is treated like a King! As well he should be: My provider/protector had a hard day at the salt mines!
Now that we are empty-nesters, we have added a piece to the ritual that signals his ceding his leadership to me for the rest of the evening: He takes off his trousers. Or sometimes I undo his belt buckle and gently remove them myself. There he is: wearing my panties … ready to do my bidding. He stays in shirt and panties the rest of the night (unless I have special plans for him). Oftentimes when his trousers come off I will touch him through the panties; that slinky material makes it extremely pleasurable for him. Arousal brings energy—and I want him to feel energized so he can do the chores I have planned for him! Is there anything cuter than a husband vacuuming with a panty-covered hard-on?
Maybe this conflict you are feeling is because you are defining a Wife-Led Marriage as you never being in charge—including at work. Because we don’t consider our marriage Wife-Led, we don’t have that issue. I do not tell him how to do his job. Can you see how our “delineation of duties” resolves this issue? I think it may even be possible that some reluctant wives would be more willing to take charge if they knew they didn’t have to take charge of everything. I wouldn’t know how to make my husband a better employee; I never go there except for the Christmas party. I would feel uncomfortable taking on that responsibility, and I might feel like he was abdicating his role … and becoming weak. Which, as you say, few women want.
No, I have what I want: A big, strong, protector-provider who works hard all day and then comes home and gladly serves me to my heart’s content!
Hi Helen. There is a lot of great stuff in here. Thanks for sharing. What your comment best illustrates is that each couple needs to try to get to something that works for them. Period. Some men want to be thoroughly dominated at home. Some just want to give up some control at home to make up for all the energy they have to put in at work.
DeleteWe are probably somewhere in the middle, which was always kind of the point for us anyway. When we started DD, it was very expressly about balancing things out, both with respect to the relationship and as individuals. I was too Alpha. She was too beta. I needed to be able to let go of the Alpha thing, because it is stressful as hell living like that all the time. Conversely, she had leadership ability and personal power that weren't being explored because she had been socialized to be the good Catholic daughter and then wife. And, for lots of years that was all we were aiming for. It's only been recently that we both wanted to explore a more significant kind of power exchange, with her taking on more of the "commander in chief" role and me being more explicitly humbled and reduced in stature.
And, we have the same dynamic you point out that it is important that I be an Alpha at work. In my profession, it's really an occupational requirement to a large extent. But, it can become destructive even in that context if it impedes teamwork. You mention "servant leadership." It is a concept I really love, and I think it is what distinguishes the truly elite leaders.
At home, it is more mixed. Like you and Andy, we have roles we gravitate to and we haven't tried to change those. She cooks, and I do the dishes. I probably do more of the laundry than she does, but it isn't really something we've allocated. She handles most of the bill paying and managing bank accounts, while I manage most of our investments and retirement plans.
At work, it's mixed. We both have careers, though mine dominates in terms of contribution to the family finances, and it's a more intense and competitive role. For the most part, we stay out of each other's careers and I think that is mostly a good thing. But, we are experimenting with her taking on a bit more "supervisory" responsibility for even my career. As I've said before, while I need to be an Alpha at work, that too can cause problems if it goes too far. I've also been having a hard time with burnout and productivity recently, and it is good to have someone I have to "report to" about those failings, as I'm at a point in my career where I don't really have that reporting structure. So, like ZM, I have been asking her to hold me accountable for certain work issues as well. But, it's a work in progress and there will be a lot of trial and error to get to the right balance.
I can see what you mean, Helen. If a man is submissive to everyone, it is no big deal if he is also submissive to you. If he is submissive to you alone, it shows that he thinks you are someone special. Keeping your husband in shirt and panties at home is a good idea, no doubt who is wearing the pants then!
ReplyDeleterichard