“Reasonable orders are easy enough to obey; it is capricious, bureaucratic or plain idiotic demands that form the habit of discipline.” - Barbara W. Tuchman
Hello all. Welcome back to The Disciplinary Couple’s Club. Our weekly on-line gathering of men and women who are in, or would like to be in, a Domestic Discipline relationship.
I hope you all had a good week. Mine was pretty sedate. Although it’s still August, I’m detecting a whiff of autumn in the air. There are even a few trees in the early stages of turning yellow.
Although I’m a little sad to see motorcycle
season winding down with several contemplated trips left untaken, I’m kind of
in the mood for a seasonal change. It’s likely
to be an unadventurous fall, as I’ve been putting off some surgery to repair an
injury from last summer, and it feels like it’s time to get it done, even though the recuperation process is kind of going to suck.
Although my week was easygoing as a whole, it got started with a bang. After a summer that passed with surprisingly little disciplinary action, on Monday I got a somewhat surprising, and surprisingly hard, spanking.
The surprise was really about the timing. I reported on this to this group, including this text making her intention clear, in my August 11, 2025 post.
A full week had gone by with no further mention of it. In typical Disciplined Husband fashion, I felt relieved but also disappointed at what seemed to be developing into another instance of inconsistent enforcement and “punishment delayed is punishment denied.” So, I was a little bit surprised when, on Monday, she announced that it was time for my bottom to pay the price for something that had truly pissed her off.
Part of me was glad for the follow-through. That feeling lasted until the first few swats with her bath brush. It was really, truly excruciating.
It’s yet another reason why delayed punishment is a problem. I do want consistency for its own sake. I think we both embody this whole lifestyle more deeply and effectively when punishment naturally and predictably follows bad behavior, particularly if she’s actually told me that I will be punished. But, it’s also in my butt’s interest that punishment happens fairly regularly if it is going to happen at all, because the spankings that come after a substantial period in which discipline slips simply hurt way, way more!
So, that’s one topic for this week: Have you experienced the phenomenon in which spankings hurt way worse if there is a long time between them? If so, is that additional pain enough to make you prefer being spanked more regularly?
Another topic raised by this incident is spankings we don’t agree with. In previous posts raising the issue, I’ve labeled these “undeserved” spankings, but that label could be a bit misleading in some situations. Including, perhaps the spanking I received this week.
As I related in the post a couple of weeks ago, the incident that got me spanked involved throwing away some boxes for some electronic gadgets Anne had bought. She had left the empty boxes in a dresser, in a room that doesn’t have enough available storage. I wanted to put some clothes in that drawer, so I threw the boxes out. As luck would have it, a few weeks later one of the units seemed to be failing. Anne had left a charger that came with the gadgets in one of the boxes, and I apparently threw it away, not noticing that it was in the box. So, when Anne went to recharge and reset the gadget, there was no charger and no instructions.
As the text above demonstrates, she was livid. Why? Well, her stated reason was the missing charger and instructions.
The real reason is almost certainly that this is an ongoing battle between us, with Anne having a reluctance to throw things out that approaches (in my opinion) a hoarding disorder, while she thinks it’s presumptuous, arrogant, and (in this case) careless of me to throw away “her” stuff without asking.
So, did I “deserve” the spanking I got? It’s debatable on one level, though maybe not on another.
In terms of the substance,
was I careless in not noticing I was throwing out a charger with the boxes? Perhaps,
though it was kind of “no harm, no foul”, as it’s not like we don’t have a
plethora of USB-C charging cords laying around, and instructions are easy to
find on-line. And, the plain fact is
that asking Anne to throw things out is often futile, so if I want clutter out
of the house, I have to toss it myself, often banking on the fact she won’t notice. While I see that as a justification, she sees it as part and parcel of the problem.
In many cases where we’ve had a disagreement and she’s spanked me, I somehow “saw the light” by the end of the spanking, literally coming around to her perspective on whatever it was that got me in trouble. Did that happen in this case? Not really.
I still believe that the
boxes should have been thrown out, and I think it is fair to observe that I
didn’t ask permission precisely because when I do ask, she almost always
comes up with some reason why something has to be kept or, better yet,
"donated", which really means it moves from one part of our house to
a staging area for taking it to a donation center, then it stays there for
weeks or months. Basically, me throwing things out without asking is in direct reaction
to her undermining efforts to throw them out at all. Again, I see that as justification; she sees it as the problem.
So, in one respect, we disagree on whether the spanking was "deserved".
Yet, in another sense, we don't. If you treat disobedience itself as spankable, independent of the objective rightness or wrongness of the underlying conduct, then I clearly did deserve one, because I do know how she feels about me throwing things out, and chose to ignore it. I ran the risk of doing something I know she gets angry about, I got caught, and my ass paid the price.
Honestly, it speaks well of Anne’s judgment that, over the course of twenty-plus years of Domestic Discipline, I can't think of a circumstance where I have been punished for something I really didn't do or something that I didn't know in advance was a problem for her.
There have been a few other cases in which I didn’t fully agree with the premise underlying her decision to spank. And, there have been a few times when a spanking was harder than I expected, given the nature of the offense. Admittedly, those times left me feeling at best unsettled and, at worst, somewhat resentful, as I pulled by pants up over my very sore bottom.
However, in virtually all
those cases, there was an offsetting increase in the respect I felt for her and
her disciplinary authority. I have a similar reaction to her spanking for something because it was an act of disobedience, regardless of my attempts to justify it.
Spanking for disobedience—independent of any agreement on the rules—probably moves us a little further over whatever the line is that separates DD from FLR. It’s hard to deny she is increasingly in charge of the relationship if the standard for whether something is spankable comes down to, “Because I said so.”
I'm OK with that. When I first discovered The Disciplinary Wives Club and became instantly obsessed, I recognized from the beginning that I had an attraction to the idea of being held accountable for bad behavior.
I also think that I had some awareness that I was most fascinated by stories where the discipline--and sometimes the entire disciplinary relationship--were imposed regardless of the husband's views on the matter.
What I don't think I appreciated much at all at that time was that DD was attractive to me not just because of the accountability aspect but, independently, because of the raw exercise of power and authority, i.e. by the the wives' insistence on obedience. I knew I desired discipline; I've come to learn I also desire to be made to obey.
There's another reason I'm OK with her spanking for disobedience regardless of whether I think the underlying conduct makes it objectively "fair": Her being overly concerned about “fairness” is one of the sources of the inconsistency that so many of us complain about.
When I addressed the topic of “undeserved”
spankings a few years ago, Alan had this comment:
My wife is an experienced disciplinarian who had experienced both sides of the brush, but the woman who introduced me to adult spanking was not so experienced. Early on in our relationship she was somewhat "hung up" on the idea of fairness, until it sometimes paralyzed her, preventing her from administering discipline that was badly needed. The notion of fairness was very important to her at the same time inhibiting her from doing what she knew was needed.
I see that in my wife, too. Too often, instead of ordering a spanking when she thinks it is deserved, she’ll ask something like, “Do you need a spanking for that?” or she’ll make a statement that’s really a question about her own authority, like: “Maybe you should get spanked for that next time.” It’s like she’s opening a negotiation regarding the scope of her authority, even though we’ve agreed many, many times that making ALL decisions regarding what should be punished is within her authority.
How does this work in your DD relationship? Is disobedience spankable in and of itself? Do the wives worry about “fairness”? Do they maybe worry about it too much? How much does your agreement about the underlying premise for the spanking affect whether it happens?
I hope you have a great week. FYI, I have an out-of-town event this upcoming weekend, so I may post later in the week.
To take your first question first, I’ve always seen it as a drop in my tolerance after an extended gap, rather than an increase in pain, but I guess it really amounts to the same thing - she doesn’t have to work as hard to get the desired effect. The second part is a bit more complex, I particularly picked up your point about DD heading towards the line separating it from FLR. I’ve always had some difficulty understanding that line and I think your discussion of simple disobedience clarifies it nicely. When we do or say some that is hurtful or damaging in some way, we get spanked for it. However, if there can be simple disobedience, that implies she has authority to make decisions across the board, which I guess is FLR. I think this defines us pretty clearly as not being FLR. She doesn’t make rules that I have to follow, instead we have more of a partnership where decisions are made together rather than unilaterally. I think the reason that I’ve always had a problem with this definition is that there are certain areas where she definitely leads (as well as some where I tend to lead.) Finance is an obvious example. That’s her field and she is much better at it than I am, but even then she’ll run every decision past me first and we’ll discuss it, even though in almost all cases I will agree that the end result is whatever she decided to start with. So I guess where I end up is that the “L” in FLR implies her making decisions alone, without necessarily having consultation and agreement, in which case disagreeing with those decisions can be regarded as disobedience, and therefore punishable. But with the style of relationship we have, that’s pretty much a null concept. She still has authority to spank whenever SHE thinks it’s justified; and to stay with the financial, we have long agreed that - for example - late paying a credit card and thereby incurring unnecessary interest charges, is spankable, but I’d see this as doing something (or failing to do something) against a mutually agreed rule and not as disobedience. I suppose I’d say that for us, “because I say so” isn’t in the lexicon. TG
ReplyDelete"I particularly picked up your point about DD heading towards the line separating it from FLR. I’ve always had some difficulty understanding that line and I think your discussion of simple disobedience clarifies it nicely."
DeleteYeah, I think a clear line probably is impossible to draw. There are just too many variables and individual couple dynamics. For me, an FLR doesn't mean, or doesn't have to mean, that she is making every decision or has the authority to make the final decision in every area. I would say Anne and my relationship has some FLR aspects, but on most big day-to-day decisions we either (a) make them as partners; or (b) they're made by the person with the greater interest or knowledge in that area. For example, in your marriage your wife makes most of the Financial decisions. In mine, my wife handles all the bill paying and bank account stuff, while I handle almost all the investment decisions. We never expressly decided to divide things that way; it's just always reflected our respective interests and skills.
To me, the "L" in FLR doesn't imply making decisions alone. It stands for "Led" and to me, while that entails leading and leadership, that concept doesn't entail doing everything alone or having unfettered authority.
But, it's an inherently indistinct line. There are aspects of the DWC that would suggest the wives having a lot of power. For example, in the Tips & Methods section, it says: "The first thing you must do is to explain the golden rule of your proposed (or existing) disciplinary relationship. He must render complete obedience to you with regard to disciplinary issues at all times and must be willing to carry out any and all orders you give him without question or hesitation. The first time he refuses to obey an order you need to stop and have a serious talk with him right then and there. If the husband is allowed to dictate when he will or will not obey an order, then that leaves some question as to who is really in charge, doesn't it?"
There are blurbs in the DWC handbooks that also emphasize that she is in control and that he has an obligation to obey at all times. But, it gets murky because of qualifiers like "regarding disciplinary issues." Maybe that significantly limits the authority but, since Aunt Kay also said the wife gets to set the rules, then is there really much limit on her authority? If you asked Aunt Kay or the other wives who were involved when the DWC was a real thing, I really don't know whether they would have thought they were in an FLR. Or, another way of proposing the question might be, did they even see the two as distinguishable? Maybe they saw both the authority (FLR) and the means of enforcing it (DD) as different aspects of one single dynamic?
Dan,
ReplyDeleteI can relate to your situation with the late punishment scenarios of our relationship. I find my wife at times delays punishment or forgets to punish when I misbehave. Like Anne, she has used the line, “well I didn’t think about it at that moment”. My last punishment included a switching. My first in a long long time. It hurt tremendously and the stripes lasted a day or two. My wife enjoyed punishing me this way, because it took little effort on her part. This along with a strapping was quite memorable and I was sore for three days at work. To add to the above, I always felt DD was significantly different from FLR. I agree and always thought that the L meant Led. If your wife doesn’t lead in most scenarios or for that matter any, than to me, your not in an FLR. You used the scenario of finances. To me, that just means you’re better at it than she is. I’m better at finances than my wife. If I don’t have the money than I don’t buy it. I haven’t paid interest on a cc in over twenty years. We have always made big decisions together, but she will ask my opinion on things and vice versa. So for us it’s strictly DD. I’ve stated before in my twenties, I could of benefited from a moderate FLR. I’ve also had my wife state to me, keep pushing and your going to get thrashed. I’ve reiterated to her that she shouldn’t earn and I should be punished. If you feel I’ve gone that far, than a thrashing is warranted. I applauded her for actions on my last thrashing. She took the bull by the horns and I reiterated my commitment to her surrounding discipline. I think she now realizes how bad they hurt (my diminished erection) and how my behavior changes immediately after a severe thrashing. My wife still looks at me as a protector and provider, so it’s not her natural first response when I screw up. It’s taken some time and effort on her part to transition. Anyone who think that it happens overnight, is only kidding themselves. I don’t think fairness is an issue with us, as my wife should spank at times and doesn’t. To your point about throwing the boxes away. I think that you definitely did not deserve a thrashing. My wife has hoarding tendencies as well. I look at is if she’s going to thrash me for something I don’t necessarily agree with; there have been many times I should have received one and I didn’t. Did Tomy ever feel he was actually in an FLR???
T
"Did Tomy ever feel he was actually in an FLR???" I've never really asked him, but I can think of a couple of comments he made here on this blog, and a couple of stories he's told me, that suggested that not only did Aunt Kay have very substantial authority, but the wives who were in the DWC network seemed to have some authority of each other's husbands, or at least the women were very open to each other having that control. He told me about one incident in which a DWC couple from England visited them, and the wife got angry that Tomy didn't wear his seatbelt when driving them around. She asked Kay if she could cane him, and she agreed. There also are the stories on the website, like Pretty Legs II, with lines like, "Oh, and in case you didn't hear my discussion with Glenda on the phone; when we go over there tomorrow evening for you to apologize, if she wishes to spank you too, you had better not object and embarrass me. As a DWC woman, and my friend, if she wants to punish you, she has my blessings." I wouldn't have written that and other similar story elements as just fiction, but it does seem like there were elements of the DWC that emphasized not only each individual wife's preeminent role, but that the women as a whole occupied an elevated spot in the hierarchy. Maybe Al, who was actually involved in the DWC for awhile, could comment.
Delete
ReplyDeleteYes, the “L” means led. The issue is the definition of led. There are leaders who make decisions and lead by command, and others who might steer and guide but ultimately make decisions jointly with others. I would put us in the second category - and I think T as well from his description. It’s arbitrary, but I guess I’m suggesting that an FLR is the former. We found the DWC just too late. They were reporting on their most recent get-together and talking about when the next one would happen, which never did. We would certainly have been interested in being part of that if it had happened. While the total obedience aspect might not have fit our relationship style, I think the idea that in such a gathering, wives might have authority to punish other husbands sounds reasonable. As you said, the DWC might have seen DD and FLR as two parts of the same thing. I would never expect to be spanked for disagreeing, but I might for the way l disagree - if I get snippy and “the four-year-old” comes out. TG
I might have discovered it a bit earlier than you, though I don't recall specifically a discussion of any specific upcoming get-together. They had a Yahoo group at the time I discovered them, but it was taken down pretty soon after that. I have a lot of regret around the fact that I didn't try to get engaged with them when it would have been possible. The reality is, I was just way too paranoid about confidentiality back then. Anne was probably the same, but I do wonder what might have happened had I been more open and then pushed her a little. Like I said, I really do regret that I let that opportunity for real-life connection, and possibly some really interesting experiences, slip by, all because I was paranoid about what others thought. I can defend it on the basis that it could have had negative career impact, and while that's true, looking back it was so unlikely to ever come out in that context. I put way too much weight on a very small possibility.
DeleteIn our FLR with DD household, we both agreed to and adhere to the concept of discipline as soon as possible after the offense, or when the offense becomes known. This includes being punished away from home, which is another topic, I know. This may be a carry over from my childhood when both parents carried out the punishment. There was no 'wait till your Father gets home' in our house. It has occurred that I got spanked again when Dad got home if the infraction warranted it, but again, that is another topic. Back to this weeks question, we strive for immediate punishment. Waiting or putting it off just seems wrong and I feel the discipline losses its effect if delivered too long after the incident.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the underserved spanking, it does happen, but it is quite rare. When drawing up our relationship agreement, it was a strong point in both of our minds that she was in control of discipline. We both were in favor of using bare ass spanking as the form of punishment. As close to the offense as possible, even away from home. She reinforced her control by insisting she had uncontested authority in determining if punishment was due, the position, implement(s), the severity, and the duration. I was not allowed to contest or even debate any of those points once she determined a punishment was needed. I was to accept the spanking and thank her afterwards. Of course I have been spanked at times when I felt it was unwarranted and even proved in the future that it was unjustified, but I do not expect or receive an apology or a mention of that fact or a free pass on the next offense. It merely becomes a spanking I received which was unjustified, now past and forgotten. This may seem harsh or unfair to some, but I truly love my FLR and would not choose any other form of lifestyle.
I wonder whether the "wait 'til your father gets home" thing was more common in some areas of the country than others? Where I was growing up, the moms were probably at least as involved in carrying out discipline as the fathers. I can think of maybe one friend, whose family had a big fundamentalist Christian bent in which the father clearly called the shots on pretty much everything, who almost always got punished by the dad. But, for most of us, the moms were probably at least as quick to pick up the belt as the fathers.
DeleteI go back and forth on how much discipline loses its effect if delayed. On the one hand, it's definitely the case that I start losing my feeling of needing accountability after about three our four days. On the other hand, there is something very affirming to the overall dynamic if I know that she will eventually deliver a spanking even if there has been a long delay, because that feels like she's kind of ignoring my feelings about accountability and delivering it regardless of whether I've lost the desire for it. But, to me, the real problem is that delayed punishment very often does become no punishment. But, it sounds like that is almost never an issue for you.
For me, the rare occasions when one might have seemed "undeserved" are massively offset by the number of times I haven't been punished and should have been. I know some don't think such offsetting negates the fairness issue, but there have been a few times where I've consciously bifurcated things in my mind, such that she believes she is spanking me for one thing, but in my mind I'm being punished for something else.
Wow! I may be in the minority here, but I think throwing away someone else's boxes without asking first if it's OK is impolite at best and inappropriate even in a vanilla relationship. In DD, it is definitely deserving of a spanking. Moreover, your refusal to acknowledge that should result in another spanking for attitude adjustment. Just my 2 cents, of course.
ReplyDeleteDelayed spankings are OK with me. Not preferred, but sometimes it happens.
Does it hurt more? Of course. If one hasn't been spanked for a few weeks, his butt is naturally going to be more sensitive.
Great topic and discussion, BTW! Graham
Not sure whether you're in the minority or not. Others might feel the same way, and that's fine. I would say that "someone else's" doesn't entirely fit the facts. She bought them, but it was for a common purpose, purchased with common funds, installed in our common property, and the boxes were stored in our common dresser. So, the description of them as "hers" doesn't quite fit the facts. But, I'm not relying on that as a defense because, in my attempts to turn back the tides of clutter, I'm sure I've thrown out other stuff that was more properly characterized as "hers".
DeleteI agree with you that it seems to be that an unspanked butt gets more sensitive. Others have attributed it to us simply forgetting how much a hard spanking hurts if it's been a while. I do agree that happens, but the proportion is very different.