Browsing Archive

May, 2009

Head of Household Matters

By May 19, 2009 Domestic Discipline

Alright, so I think everyone is aware that I am a large advocate of HOHs, and look back at a better time when there were more of them. ‘Head-of-household’ was a term that people of the non-spanking persuasion used quite frequently and quite consciously. Those were good times.

But you talk of men being the head of household NOW and people will look at you as if you just asked them for a weasel sandwich. I understand why. Times have certainly changed—whether or not they changed for the better is HIGHLY debatable, but they HAVE changed, and for the first time since the dawn of time one half of the population is now trying to do exactly what the other half had spent since the beginning of time getting good at. I think it’s not our role as women to be HOH—not that we don’t have power. I believe, in fact, that we have more power than anyone in our family—we are naturally attuned to everyone’s emotions and can either hold a family together or tear it apart, depending on how we use this power. But we aren’t head-of-household because we tend to get caught up more in the drama of life than in the practicalities. We tend to enjoy problems rather than try to fix it, except for the ones that don’t need fixing—we like fixing those.

This has been our role—our strengths, and our problems, since time was known as ‘time’, and it was perfectly natural. We’re social creatures for a reason, and we are truly in our element when we deal with feelings, connections, and health. But for everything else, we started along the line to put men in charge of that, maybe because we didn’t want their awful responsibilities to start with. I don’t know, but the men’s job as protector, bread-winner, alliance-maker, war-fighter, politician and handyman is not ‘fun’, and neither is the unpopular position of HAVING the “last word” on something. And so we gave it up to men and promised, in return to try to ‘obey’ them.

But now, women are really opposed to the whole “obeying” point. And normally not because they don’t think that someone in the relationship needs to be obeyed, only they’d rather have their cake and eat it, too. But the men so far, in the last couple of decades, have merely shrugged their shoulders, and found it in themselves to negotiate a position that they spent 1000 generations getting for themselves.

I recognize the original roles that my ancestors were good enough to render into a sort of tradition. And because of such, I went out on a limb to be traditional at my wedding. It was important to me that “obey” be in my half of the vows. Strangely, it wasn’t that easy. Do you know how long it took me to find “obey” in wedding vows on the internet? The majority of weddings now leave it out of the vows altogether. Some ignore any sort of logic and put it in BOTH vows. I even saw some women on forums who argued that only the man should have obey in his half of the vows, although I don’t know if this is just a “Yay! Girl Power!” thing, or if they actually married men who were so pathetically emasculated that they tolerated such vows.

It took two hours. AND I’m a good Googler. But every Christian denomination, even the conservative ones, has decided to avoid that vow like the plague, simply because it’s “not PC”. But my question is… Why? Why should having a man as head-of-household be a cultural taboo? It seems to me that it’s a natural desire…

But THAT is one of those opinions that I’ve put in my pocket, especially during most dinner conversations. And then, last week, I picked up “Mere Christianity” because it was recommended to me. I was very startled to see my opinions written down in a way that I couldn’t describe them, being that I have been a professional writer for only 2 years and CS Lewis had been, at the point of writing the book, publishing for 16 years. Obviously, he had it down by then and was quite skilled at his craft, and can actually make a persuasive argument, unlike myself. Here’s what C.S. Lewis had to say on the subject:

“…So much for the Christian doctrine about the permanence of marriage. Something else, even more unpopular, remains to be dealt with. Christian wives promise to obey their husbands. In Christian marriage the man is said to be the ‘head’. Two questions obviously arise here. (1) Why should there be a head at all—why not equality? (2) Why should it be the man?

(1) The need for some head follows from the idea that marriage is permanent. Of course, as long as the husband and wife are agreed, no question of a head need arise; and we may hope that this will be the normal state of affairs in a Christian marriage. But when there is a real disagreement, what is to happen? Talk it over, of course; but I am assuming they have done that and still failed to reach agreement. What do they do next? They cannot decide by a majority vote, for in a council of two there can be no majority. Surely, only one or other of two things can happen: either they must separate and go their own ways or else one or other of them must have a casting vote. If marriage is permanent, one or other party must, in the last resort, have the power of deciding the family policy. You cannot have a permanent association without a constitution.

(2) If there must be a head, why the man? Well, firstly is there any very serious wish that it should be the woman? As I have said, I am not married myself, but as far as I can see, even a woman who wants to be the head of her own house does not usually admire the same state of things when she finds it going on next door. She is much more likely to say ‘Poor Mr. X! Why he allows that appalling woman to boss him about the way she does is more than I can imagine.’ I do not think she is even very flattered if anyone mentions the fact of her own ‘headship’. There must be something unnatural about the rule of wives over husbands, because the wives themselves are half ashamed of it and despise the husbands whom they rule. But there is also another reason; and here I speak quite frankly as a bachelor, because it is a reason you can see from outside even better than from inside. The relations of the family to the outer world—what might be called its foreign policy—must depend, in the last resort, upon the man, because he always ought to be, and usually is much more just to the outsiders. A woman is primarily fighting for her own children and husband against the rest of the world. Naturally, almost, in a sense, rightly, their claims override, for her, all other claims. She is the special trustee of their interests. The function of the husband is to see that this natural preference of hers is not given its head. He has the last word in order to protect other people from the intense family patriotism of the wife. If anyone doubts this, let me ask a simple question. If your dog has bitten the child next door, or if your child has hurt the dog next door, which would you sooner have to deal with, the master of that house or the mistress? Or, if you are a married woman, let me ask you this question. Much as you admire your husband, would you not say that his chief failing is his tendency not to stick up for his rights and yours against the neighbors as vigorously as you would like? A bit of an Appeaser?”

Yep. I, too, was thrilled. I think there’s a whole lot more to it than that, mind you. But it’s definitely a worthy and dependable name to spit out in defense of men at the dinner table when your feminist friend comes to dinner, and comes with a small pre-set argument.

I am the last person who would say that women are not useful, or in any way a lesser person then men. I am extremely proud of my gender. I tend to look upon the most feminine, maternal people with a great respect and jealousy, and the more I am like them, the happier and more at peace I find myself. I feel taken care of, but on the other hand, I feel like everyone respects the role I’m able to provide, and James, my husband, feels more confident in his role by providing it.

Anyway, I just wanted to share that little bit of fun with you. I’ll post again shortly.

You Might Also Like

Living It vs. Reading It [Vol. I]

By May 6, 2009 Spanko Musings

What? This is going to come in VOLUMES? Are you kidding?

No. There’s a lot I have to say on the issue! I write romance novels, so I like I know how I write spanking scenes. But I’m also in a DD relationship, so I know how to take spanking scenes. And they’re different. You can’t read a story and think that’s just the way you actually spank someone, and the more you read the more you’re going to do it right.

In a lot of ways, spanking is like exercising. You can’t read yourself thin. You got to get on that treadmill and do it over and over and over again until your thighs stop rubbing together when you walk. Spanking is much the same way: you can’t become a good disciplinarian by reading about it.

Are you seriously writing to tell your audience that you shouldn’t be reading about all of this?

Well, I like to think I’m an information wizard, but I’m also a realist. I’m just here to INFORM you about the REALITY of the situation.

Lesson Number One: Over the Knee Spankings

Is the chair for sitting or for spanking?

It normally doesn’t look like this. Not discipline spankings. In fact—my mind cannot fathom what situation is going on here.

Over the knee spankings make a lot of sense, on the whole: you can put your leg over the woman’s to keep her legs from kicking all around at you, you can pin her hands back from covering herself, and you have your spanking hand wide open to accomplish its purposes.

Over the chair can get sort of… Hard. In writings, you see this all the time. Romanticspankings.com, for example, has a story called “The Spanking Chair”. I’d say 95% of spankings within erotic literature have the man giving the woman a spanking over the knee as he sits on the chair. I did it in my own, story, for god sakes! Pursuit of Glory has several chair spankings in it, which I admit doesn’t depict any of the downsides of chair spankings.

The Downsides of Chair Spankings

1. It’s hard to position the bottom right in the middle of your lap.

You’ll find there are ribs and all sort of things in your way. You’ll think “Wow.. My lap is wide!” Because it is. It’s not some sort of bar she’s leaning over—her mid-thigh to her chest area will be resting on two knees, and all of her weight will be on your knees. It might be tough on you, even, to support that sort of weight.

2. You really can’t hold her legs down that well, causing you to lose control.

If you try to pin her legs with one of yours, that means your other knee will be driving into her stomach, since there’s nothing else supporting her weight.

3. Blood will start quickly flowing into the face of the spankee.

Gravity. What are you gonna do? But seriously, if her face is lower than the rest of her body, that’s where all the blood’s gonna go, and it’s not pleasant. I’m sure there’s some countries that hang people upside down as a torture.

4. The spankee will find difficulty breathing.

This is mainly because most of your body weight is on his lap, going through your stomach area. It’s not impossible to breath, but you can’t breathe deeply. A knee’s jamming into your stomach, for crying out loud! However, this will probably take you mind off the pain a bit…

5. You can’t hold the spankee’s arms back, or else she will have even more difficulty breathing.

Your spankee needs her hands free to be able to put them on the floor to support her body weight. She might alternate hands to keep one on her butt and away from your hand, but she’s really going to need both of them to be free, or else her arms may wear out quickly.

Let me illustrate my point with some examples, may I?

  1. 1. This will simply not do it for discipline, folks. The hands are in a state of propel. They are free. They will cover the bottom, they will push her body away at the first signs of real pain.
  2. 2. See where the feet are? That’s right. Comfortably on the ground. Soon, they will propel her wherever she wants to go, because she is still in control of her body with her feet like this.

This is what’s going to happen. See…. Her head will become filled with blood and she’ll get a headache, her arms are both free…

This isn’t quite the same thing, is it? Because it’s a sofa-thing, not a chair thing. But it’s an AWESOME piece of furniture. I like it.

But I think you get my point, though, folks. Just because it works in your mind doesn’t mean it’s that easy to do in practice. Supportive/negative commentary, anyone? People need to know the facts about this position.

You Might Also Like

Keeping it outside the family

By May 2, 2009 Domestic Discipline

I think it is a common agreement among many in the spanking community that they do not let their DD or their spanking interests become public knowledge. No public spankings. In the unlikely instance that the police (or anyone else) ever came to the door on a noise complaint from a worried neighbor, an educated spanko will say, “Oh, we were just getting into it with sex games”. This is because most people just won’t understand real discipline spanking. They get “BDSM”. Ride on the back of that to keep from people considering you a “wife-beater” or “battered wife”. They’re not going to “get it”. Don’t even try.

What’s even BETTER known is, even if you would LOVE to tell your family what you do and how your relationship works, you don’t. You shouldn’t.

But it’s hard if you have a family member that REALLY needs it. Take James’ family. You’ve never seen so many girls in one family that need a spanking. It’s ridiculous. There’s…

  1. My sister-in-law. She’s just turned 21, and has more than 10 speeding tickets (all for going significantly (20+ mph) over the speed limit). She’s failed most of her college classes, dropped out, is late to everything and parties every night. She’s recently started smoking, too. When she speaks, she’s nothing but bratty, selfish and sarcastic. What’s really horrible about the situation is that she’s a good, hard-working girl who just needs a decent, hard-working well-adjusted guy to give her a spanking every day for a year or so, and she’d be fixed right up. She’s pretty too… Any guys out there up for a challenge? What’s harder about her, is James KNOWS for a FACT that when she was a child she was just as interested in spanking as he was (nothing creepy, just from her keen interest in specific scenes in books like Little House on the Prairie, Caddie Woodlawn, and other books where a discipline spanking is described). But, they haven’t talked about it at all for 12 years or so, and never in the context of a DD relationship. However, chances are that she’s still into it. Anyway… If a willing (and age appropriate J) guy wants to be set up in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area… I’d make arrangements for the right guy. That’s all I’m saying.
  2. James’ cousin. Barbara is a hard worker, and dependable when it comes to showing up to family functions. She’s a successful lawyer, and she’s good at her job. Too bad that she’s in her early 30s and there’s very little HOPE that she’ll ever marry. Even though she’s beautiful. Why? Because she’s the rudest person you’ve ever met in your life. You get used to it—her family brushes it off based on the fact that she’s OCD and slightly bipolar—but she’s not rude because of either of those things. You can tell that she’s just rude because she thinks that makes her cool.

    Don’t get me wrong. You can NOT spank OCD or bipolar out of someone, nor should you try, those are real psychological issues. However, neither of those FORCES a person to be rude, and when people tolerate that behavior it just reinforces it. I feel bad for her, because it seems like nobody has ever stood up to her about anything, instead they just refuse to get close to her.

  3. James’ other cousin. Hillary is nice, but very lazy. Her parents’ house is close to being foreclosed on, and her father lost his job, yet she still won’t get her own apartment or make any attempt to pay rent. Far more interested in buying a new cell phone. I don’t know if spanking can cure selfish, but I would sure like to see it tried!

    That’s most of James’ female relatives! At least in this generation. And they all need a spanking. But not just any spanking—one from a very, very patient guy who cares a lot about results and can see hidden potential. Someone who’s not perturbed by a fixer-upper.

James and I actually plan to break the “no telling family” rule one day. We think it would be good to eventually tell James’ mother that I do bring in some income, and at least some aspects of what I actually DO. But we want to wait until I’m pregnant with her SECOND grandchild (not the first, but the second). That way, we’ll have been married for about six years and she’ll be able to see that we’re perfectly happy and well-invested in our relationship and that it’s something that really, truly works. But we can never tell anyone else. Nobody else would have a chance of getting it. Certainly not MY parents. My brother would understand but he would tell my parents as soon as I told him.

I think the most horrible thing, as you can see, is seeing a problem, and thinking it could be fixed, but not being able to offer your advice. Like to James’ sister—she might really want a guy who spanks her. I’m 90% sure that she would. But that 10% leaves us in a world of doubt… SHOULD we tell her what we do? Maybe she would find some match on the internet. I don’t know what to do. I want to see her leading a better life than she is now. She needs to be reigned in, and her loser-boyfriend, who’s she’s not even that serious with—ain’t gonna do it. He can barely manage his own life!

Anyway, you can see how torn I am. I think about it constantly—should I open that door? Or should I do the sensible thing all spankos do—shut the door, lock it, bolt it, and put a heavy chair under the knob just in case.

Any opinions or commentary would be appreciated, folks. If you had a sister-in-law that you wanted with a good guy who would do the only thing that would work for her—to spank her—would you finally “Open the door” on the spanking secret? Or should I sew my lips shut?


You Might Also Like