tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-89021796327405618522024-03-07T14:29:16.262-07:00THE DISCIPLINED FEMINISTDomestic Discipline (DD) from a Feminist Point of ViewUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger43125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-37390649026368115842012-10-29T18:55:00.001-06:002012-10-29T18:55:33.457-06:00Excerpt: What He WantsIn the midst of pre-election frenzy, my apologies to Clare and Andrew at Variant for not posting the excerpt they wanted up sooner. Here it is! <br />
<br />This is the introduction to the latest book in the spanking series, "What He Wants."<br />
<br />Enjoy!<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
*******</div>
<br />
INTRODUCTION: <br />
<br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="margin-left: .5in; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Dear Vivian,</i></div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="margin-left: .5in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="margin-left: .5in; text-align: justify;">
<i>Thank
you for your books, they were really helpful in getting my husband to spank me
–my first real spanking ever, finally!!!!!<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>I guess my question is, what next?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>I mean, how do I get him to keep doing it?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It seems like he kind of loses interest.<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: black;"> (reader email)</span></span></span></span></i></div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="mso-element-anchor-horizontal: column; mso-element-anchor-vertical: paragraph; mso-element-linespan: 2; mso-element-wrap: around; mso-element: dropcap-dropped; mso-height-rule: exactly;">
<table align="left" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" hspace="0" vspace="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" style="padding-bottom: 0in; padding-left: 0in; padding-right: 0in; padding-top: 0in;" valign="top">
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="line-height: 39.8pt; mso-element-anchor-horizontal: column; mso-element-anchor-vertical: paragraph; mso-element-linespan: 2; mso-element-wrap: around; mso-element: dropcap-dropped; mso-height-rule: exactly; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; page-break-after: avoid; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-size: 39.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-text-raise: -3.5pt;">S</span></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify;">
o there it is.</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>We spend so much time fantasizing
about, agonizing over, getting up the nerve to ask our partner for that first
spanking.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>When he finally says yes, it
feels like our long journey to spanking bliss is over. Our problem is solved.
We live in breathless anticipation of the next spanking, expecting a
happy-ever-after spanking relationship to unfold as it does in our fantasies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
And
then, more often than not…nothing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>After that first spanking or two, it seems our partner’s lost
interest.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Sometimes, it even seems like
he doesn’t remember he ever spanked us in the first place. He promises
spankings and then doesn’t remember to deliver them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He says he’s too tired or too busy or “just not into it right
now,” and sometimes he says these things in a not-very-nice way. And there we
are, left in limbo, having had an oh-so-fleeting taste of the ecstasy of being
spanked by our partner, only to have it all disappear without explanation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The voices in our heads are
relentless, full of doubt, guilt, shame and pain.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“Why did he stop?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Is he
really just not into it?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Did he decide
the whole thing is stupid, childish, ridiculous? Am I really going to have to
choose between spankings and being with the person I love?”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Or, maybe worst of all, ”is there something
wrong with <u>me</u>? Did I do it wrong?”</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The good news is that you’re not
stupid, childish or ridiculous for wanting to be spanked, and there’s
absolutely nothing “wrong” with you. The bad news is that there is likely
something about the way you’ve been approaching being spanked by your partner
is causing him to not want to do it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>This book is about fixing the thing
that’s keeping your partner from wanting to spank you by sharing with you the
secret to keeping your partner interested after that first spanking. As with
most things related to spanking, the secret is very simple and very complicated
all at the same time.</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
This
secret is found in the title of the book.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>It’s as simple as asking one simple question, “What does my partner want
from a spanking?”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Because common sense
tells us that if we make the act of spanking us more enjoyable for our partner,
he’s more likely to want to do it more often and with more enthusiasm.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It’s as simple as that.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And as complex, too, because understanding
what he wants requires making some profound adjustments in how most of us have
been thinking about spanking.</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
Chances
are good that this is be the first time you’ve consciously thought about what
your partner wants out of spanking you.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>If that’s the case, you’re not alone. Even after decades of work on this
subject, it wasn’t until a few years ago that I realized that I’d never asked
that question, either. More to the point, maybe, I’ve rarely, if ever, heard
anyone else ask it, either.</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
That
this question is seldom asked is in some ways surprising.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>After all, those of us who want to be
spanked are, by definition, seeking to enter into a relationship in which we
want to submit in some very intimate ways to our partner and to his
desires.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And yet, rarely do we focus on
what those desires really are – or even that he might have them at all.</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
A big
part of why we don’t think about what our partner might want out of a spanking
goes back to the person we talked about a lot in the first two books – our
Fantasy Spanker.</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
We
all have a Fantasy Spanker. It’s the person in our fantasies who spanks us
whenever, wherever and however we want.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>He could be our fantasy version of our partner or our parent or a
celebrity we have a crush on or our high school principal or babysitter or some
faceless stranger with no particular identity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Whoever he is in our heads, the relevant point is that he has no desires
or needs of his own. In our fantasies, he’s entirely focused on what we want –
he’s essentially a pre-programmed “spanking robot” with no function other than
to fulfill our fantasies.</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
In <i>How
to Get the Spanking You Want</i>, we talked about how our Fantasy Spanker gets
us into big trouble when we try to get spankings in the real world from our
real-life partner.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Too often, we assume
that our real-life partner will do things the way our Fantasy Spanker does, and
that’s where things go wrong – because of course, our real-life partner is not
a pre-programmed robot, but an actual, living, breathing, thinking, feeling
human being who isn’t going to do things exactly the way we fantasize about.</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
So it
makes sense that that we might confuse our real-life partner with our Fantasy
Spanker, and that we might also forget that our real-life partner has his own
needs and desires with regard to giving spankings – and that those needs and
desires might be very different from the ones we’ve projected onto our Fantasy
Spanker.</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>It’s this lack of attention on what
our partner wants and needs from spanking us that I believe lies at the root of
so many failed attempts to incorporate spanking into relationships beyond the
first time or two. Oftentimes, we’re so focused on talking our partner into
spanking us and worrying about getting what <u>we</u> want that we tend to
forget that we have a responsibility for meeting his needs, too.</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l38 level1 lfo35; tab-stops: list .25in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span style="font-family: Wingdings; font-size: 14.0pt; font-variant: small-caps; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">*<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; font-variant: small-caps; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">From
“getting” to “giving”</span></b></div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
So is
the problem that we’re selfish, thoughtless people who don’t care about our
partners and just want things our way?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Of course not. Chances are good that you think about what your partner
wants in all kinds of other situations, even if this is the first time you’ve
thought about it with regard to spanking.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>And that’s probably not an accident.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>A big part of why the question, “what does my partner want from spanking
me,” doesn’t get asked much may be rooted in the nature of spanking itself.</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
Most
of us think of getting a spanking as a passive activity. When we think of
getting spanked, we usually visualize ourselves as the submissive, passive
recipient.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>When we get a spanking, we
don’t actually have to <u>do</u> anything except bend over and take our
spanking when we’re told to and maybe not make too much of a fuss about
it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And if we do resist or behave badly,
our strict, stern and commanding partner does the work of “taming the shrew”
and putting us back into a submissive position.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Because of the naturally submissive
nature of receiving a spanking, it’s likely that most of us have, however
unintentionally, consistently approached spanking from a “me”-centered
perspective.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Like the seagulls in <i>Finding
Nemo</i> constantly chanting “mine, mine, mine, mine,” we spend most of our
time focusing on how to get a spanking, how to get our partner to give us a
spanking.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Why he’s not giving us the
spanking that we want.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Perhaps you’re seeing that part of the
problem is built into the very language that we use to discuss spanking.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Look at that last sentence again:</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
<i>…we
spend most of our time focusing on how to <u>GET</u> a spanking, how to <u>GET</u>
our partner to <u>GIVE</u> us a spanking.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Why he’s not <u>GIVING</u> us the spanking that <u>WE</u> want.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></i></div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
When
we look at the language we use, it becomes clear pretty quickly that our
traditional view of spanking is essentially a one-way street where our partner
does the giving and we do the taking.</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
Perhaps
it is, therefore, no surprise that our partners quickly tire of this
arrangement, even if they might have started out being relatively enthusiastic
about the idea of spanking us. No matter how much our partner loves us or wants
to spank us, he’s still likely to get burned out in a situation in which he’s
expected to give and give without getting his needs met in return.</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>In this book, then, I’m going to
suggest that one of the lost secrets of creating a long-term spanking
relationship might be to begin by simply shifting our language.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What if, for example, we thought of
ourselves as “giving” a spanking to our partner – not in the sense of turning
him over our knee, but in the sense that we have an obligation to give him an
experience of spanking that fulfills his needs and desires as well as our own?</div>
<div class="GiveSpankingbodytext" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .25in;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>In my experience, this fundamental shift in
mindset, from “I want him to give me a spanking,” to “what can I do to <u>give
him</u> a positive experience during a spanking” is perhaps the single-most
powerful key to building a long-term successful spanking relationship.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This book is about teaching you how to make
that shift.</div>
<div style="mso-element: footnote-list;">
<br /></div>
<div style="mso-element: footnote-list;">
To order the book, please visit the link above or <a href="http://www.variantbooks.com/what_he_wants_presale.html">click here for the publisher's site.</a></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com16tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-47520555377849270022012-08-24T01:56:00.008-06:002015-09-30T15:36:30.442-06:00Announcing the new book(s)!At long last, Variant has given the official okey-dokey to announce two new books.<br />
<br />
You've all probably noticed I hardly ever update the blog. It's not for lack of interest. I just tend to think better in big chunks rather than incrementally (short attention span theater...). <br />
<br />
<b><i>What He Wants: His Seven Secret Spanking Desires </i></b><br />
<br />
Many readers who have used the techniques in the first two books to get their partner to spank them have written to me requesting a follow up book that talks about what happens after that first spanking. They want to know how they turn one spanking into a lifetime of satisfying spankings in the context of a committed relationship.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJSpWTtljPfFM_xIgTlZCrbmf6v9gGb5IrQ_IMencPz7vxPbhSa5P-5Sp6MpU5zov16YjxqE-4QHAQhPxEp2viacgpITPHm2N1YwAhHFE8GQqTgHNHcLyLj4D5lF8e8iN4hdJs2Q_Ed9i6/s1600/What+He+Wants+thumbnail+for+website.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJSpWTtljPfFM_xIgTlZCrbmf6v9gGb5IrQ_IMencPz7vxPbhSa5P-5Sp6MpU5zov16YjxqE-4QHAQhPxEp2viacgpITPHm2N1YwAhHFE8GQqTgHNHcLyLj4D5lF8e8iN4hdJs2Q_Ed9i6/s1600/What+He+Wants+thumbnail+for+website.jpg" /></a><i>What He Wants</i> is the beginning of answering that question, by talking about how to make sure that your partner gets what HE wants out of spanking you -- so he'll be more excited about doing it more often.<br />
<br />
<strike>The official release date for <i>What He Wants</i> is September 15, but you can pre-order the book on the Variant website and save a couple bucks at the same time</strike>. Book is now available! Click below to order.<strike><br /></strike><br />
<br />
Stay tuned for an excerpt when I get a bit more time to post one! <br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.variantbooks.com/what_he_wants_presale.html">You can get more information about pre-ordering What He Wants by clicking here. </a><br />
<br />
And there's a second new book, <i>The Little Book of Spanking Stories</i>, a<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqsAX3fx4gapZfxlNNO95u70yLk56BDkngN42kGZXsGRJLoFpFMVcL9FpE05O7_Dxweqzy9H6uMVdW6ZTbNRVpL7XqRYlCErDEZP1aqsCczJa-VAd4W6HC01trI_nvxwChCiZtrniRbXdE/s1600/spanking+stories+cover+2+inches+wide.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqsAX3fx4gapZfxlNNO95u70yLk56BDkngN42kGZXsGRJLoFpFMVcL9FpE05O7_Dxweqzy9H6uMVdW6ZTbNRVpL7XqRYlCErDEZP1aqsCczJa-VAd4W6HC01trI_nvxwChCiZtrniRbXdE/s1600/spanking+stories+cover+2+inches+wide.jpg" /></a> small collection of spanking fiction written by yours truly.<br />
<br />
Back when I was a struggling young person making my way in the world, a friend of mine suggested to me that I should write erotica. There was good money in it, she said, and a reliable market.<br />
<br />
I took her at her word, and began writing stories about what I found most erotic – the world of pleasure and pain, dominance and submission. In the pre-internet era, the market for stories of any kind was magazines, and I was fortunate enough to have my stories published in some prestigious publications, including Roy Turner’s iconic British magazine <i>Domina</i>, and the Australian spanking magazine, <i>Paddles</i>.<br />
<br />
It was only years later, when I mentioned to my friend that I’d taken her advice and written erotica to support myself during those early years, that I discovered that when she’d suggested, “erotica,” she’d meant Harlequin romance novels, not actual erotica stories. <br />
<br />
It’s a misunderstanding that served me well, as writing erotica stories for magazines with readers around the world all those years ago was one of many elements that helped me to deepen my understanding of the spanking and discipline fantasies and desires that I explore in my nonfiction books.<br />
<br />
The stories in this little book are a few of my favorites from that time in my life – some of them published long ago in magazines that are now out of print, others published here for the first time.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.variantbooks.com/spanking_stories.html">You can get more information about The Little Book of Spanking Stories by clicking here</a>.<br />
<br />
Enjoy!<br />
<br />
Warmest,<br />
Viv <br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-71192138659332036862011-04-25T09:52:00.004-06:002011-04-25T10:49:44.518-06:00What's a Little DD Between Friends?I recently received a question in my inbox from a reader asking if domestic discipline (DD) could work in a platonic relationship.<br /><br />This reader's partner wasn't interested in DD, and she felt trapped and discouraged at the prospect of having to choose between staying with a partner that she loved and accepting that her deepest desire would go unfulfilled, versus leaving her partner and fulfilling her deep longing for DD. Her particular question was whether it would work if she stayed in her marriage and also engaged in DD with a close friend in a non sexual, platonic way.<i><br /><br /></i>I suspect many of us have experienced something similar, finding ourselves in a serious relationship with a partner who isn't interested in DD and fearing that we have to give up our longing for DD if we want to continue the relationship. It's a heartbreaking situation to be in. (It's also a big reason why I agreed to write the books on how to get your partner to spank you. )<br /><br />As I've discussed in prior articles, I continue to believe that we all have, deep down inside, a primitive urge to act out biological sex roles -- which means that I feel strongly that almost any partner could likely be "triggered" to participate consensually in a DD relationship if the subject is approached appropriately.<br /><br />For this article, however, I'm going to put that theory aside, and focus instead on the reader's original question and the issues related to it: Is DD outside of marriage an act of infidelity? Is it even possible to have a satisfying DD relationship outside of marriage? Can two close friends engage in DD and get the same powerful, intimate results as a committed sexual couple would?<br /><br />To clarify, we're not talking for our purposes here about a simple, one-time spanking (the equivalent of a one-night stand). Whether or not visiting a professional dominatrix, disciplinarian, prostitute or even a good friend for an occasional spanking constitutes cheating on your spouse is a separate question (but I believe the short answer to that question is yes). We're talking here about entering into an ongoing, intimate DD relationship in which one person is consensually subject to ongoing discipline by a trusted other.<br /><br />As those who have read my prior articles know, I believe that much of the deep attraction of DD for many of us is that DD is, first and foremost, a powerful, ritual method of connecting one person's inner feminine to another person's inner masculine (in whatever gender configuration). That primal feminine-masculine connection is, by its very nature, fundamentally sexual.<br /><br />We are sexual creatures and whatever other civilized things we've been up to over the past several millennia, the fact remains that Mother Nature intended for us to reproduce, and to motivate us to do so, we have powerful, primal urges that are awakened through the sex act -- an act which, for the purposes of conception, virtually forces us into primal archetypal gender roles (the male giving, the female receiving). Whatever position one uses, whatever progressive sex roles one brings to the party, whatever high tech methods are used in the lab, the fact remains that to get pregnant, a man must ejaculate sperm (give) and a woman must take it in (receive it).<br /><br />The primal masculine-feminine connection means that one of the biggest benefits to a successful DD relationship is that DD literally "hot wires" our circuits by creating a direct connection between two people's primal sexual selves. In receiving a spanking, the spankee experiences the undiluted feminine energy of submission. In giving a spanking, the spanker experiences the undiluted masculine power of domination. The spark is struck, the fuse is lit, and bang... a sexual explosion ensues, whether it's acted on or not.<br /><br />I suspect that this direct connection between primal masculine and primal feminine is so innate to the power of DD that, if DD is even a little bit rewarding for those involved, that primal sexual connection is going to be forged regardless of whether the participants are romantically or platonically involved. If the two people involved weren't sexually attracted and romantically involved when they started with DD, it seems likely -- I would suggest even inevitable -- that they would become involved once things got underway.<br /><br />All of which means that it might inherent in the nature of DD that it simply can't be -- or at least can't remain-- platonic. And that entering into a DD relationship with a non-sexual friend outside of a relationship, however well intentioned, is the proverbial disaster waiting to happen. The spark to the powder keg of sexual energy that, once released, burns out of control, destroying the "vanilla" relationship that it was originally designed to protect.<br /><br />Perhaps there are exceptions -- cases of two people who have managed to create a long term successful DD relationship without sexual entanglement. But I'd be skeptical. It seems that in such a case, perhaps the relationship WOULD be sexual but perhaps not acted upon (which would make it, perhaps, emotional infidelity, if one believes in such a thing?). Or, most likely, the full power of DD isn't being truly explored within the platonic DD relationship.<i><br /><br /></i>Looking at that second option more closely, much of the benefit of DD seems to be that it's an incredibly powerful way to create intimacy between two people. If the ground rules going in are that the relationship must stay platonic, then almost by definition, all of our "cylinders" won't fire (to continue our automotive analogy). The platonic pair might get some of the catharsis and physical release of spanking, but they'd lose, I suspect, the mutual journey into and out of the liminal space of guilt, pain, punishment and forgiveness that is likely only possible with total surrender and the complete dissolving of boundaries and inhibitions. And this total surrender is almost certainly going to be precluded if, by definition, both partners are holding something back to avoid sexual involvement or surrender.<br /><br />All of which is why I believe that the answer is, no, it is likely not possible to have a truly satisfying long term DD relationship outside of a romantic/sexual committed partnership. And that any truly rich and successful DD relationship, regardless of the intentions of those involved, will likely become more intimate and more satisfying (and thus more necessary) than your primary relationship, and so would likely jeopardize the existence of that primary relationship.<br /><br />So we come full circle, back to what I believe is good news: that the basic masculine/feminine connection (again, in whatever gender configuration) is so primal precisely because it lives in all of us, however deeply buried. I continue to believe that the most reliable way to create DD in our lives is to build a deeply intimate, trusting, long term relationship with a partner. The more intimate and trusting that relationship is, the more likely it is that the reluctant partner will have the courage and love to dig deep inside and find their own primal sexual spark. And at the very least, the more likely they are to want to help us to express our deepest desires.<br /><br />These are the benefits and long-term rewards of fidelity.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-91865953819074787022011-01-08T01:39:00.004-07:002011-01-08T01:51:55.212-07:00When It's His IdeaJan 2011<br /><br />Dear Readers,<br /><br />Yes, I'm still here -- and the good news is that my batteries are a bit recharged and I've been working on the next book. I didn't want to mention it until I was fairly sure it would happen, since, like many creative people, I'm never quite sure if a project is going to make it all the way to completion until, well, it's almost all the way to completion.<br /><br />In the meantime, I appreciate everyone's patience and encouragement during my hiatus from the blog. After two books, I think I was DD'd out for awhile. But writing the book -- a collaboration with my partner articulating more of his point of view than mine -- has given me more food for thought. So I hope to share some of those thoughts with all of you in the months to come. Bear with me if the articles come slowly, however -- I am, as you have surely noticed by now, not a Constant Blogger by any means.<br /><br />Meanwhile, I'm publishing a letter I received below, along with my reply. Perhaps you all might weigh in with your thoughts for Kathy as well.<br /><br />Happy 2011,<br />Viv<br /><br />____________________________<br /><br />FROM KATHY, in response to the blog post <a href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/01/when-hes-wrong.html">"When I'm Angry"</a>:<br /><br />Viv,<br /><br />I recently met a man who is interested in DD and has been trying to teach me about it and show me why it is a good way to manage a relationship. I'm not completely convinced yet, and one of the big reasons I'm not convinced is exactly because of this issue you described. So I sent him your blog entry, told him about my concerns and asked for his opinion. His e-mail response to me was as follows:<br /><br /><a href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/01/when-hes-wrong.html">That </a>is an excellent description of the issue. The best way I know to handle it is SERIOUSLY.<br /><br />--Go into High Protocol … Ask permission to speak …<br />--Kneel, take lil' Master {his penis} out … lick him … suck him<br />--Then tell me what I did and how it made you feel.<br /><br />I can't guarantee anything,but I'm pretty sure that:<br /><br />--you will have my full attention<br />--that I will not get pissed off at you<br />--that I will not think you are out-of-line<br />--& I won't think you're being disrespectful<br /><br />There's a good chance I won't do it again.<br /><br />So seriously.....what do you think? I would love to let him know what someone else thinks of his idea. I told him that if I was all that angry, I wouldn't be able to do those things. If I was able to do those things, I wouldn't be very angry and I wouldn't NEED his apology all that much.<br /><br />His follow-up response to THAT was:<br /><br />"Keep in mind that D/s is all about Control, DD is about Self Control.<br />I think you can learn Self Control..."<br /><br />As a woman who has a lot more experience in a DD relationship, what is your take on his comments?<br /><br />MY REPLY:<br /><br />Dear Kathy,<br /><br />I'm sorry for the delay in responding to your email -- real life, as it often does, interfered!<br /><br />I've read your comment several times in an effort to formulate a response, as this is clearly very important to you and your partner. Your situation is also more unusual, as most of the time in my experience, it's the woman asking her partner for a DD relationship rather than the other way around. (At least that's true of the ones who normally write to me!)<br /><br />I must admit that my first response is a strong caution for you. I'm not at all sure that DD will have the power to elevate, transform and enlighten when the woman doesn't come to the relationship predisposed to the idea. I'll have to give that question some thought - perhaps in a future article.<br /><br />Making a DD relationship work is hard work. Very hard work. I've yearned for a DD relationship with a man since I was very, very young, and still, I find submitting to discipline and his authority one of the most difficult things I've ever done in my life and I fail most of the time. (This is why my books are about asking for spankings, not maintaining successful long term DD relationships -- which I'm still working on as well.) The idea of a woman entering into a DD relationship without being inherently aroused and excited by it feels dubious at best and unsafe at worst.<br /><br />I'm assuming that your partner is asking for spanking or other discipline to be incorporated into the dynamic? (There are couples who practice DD without spanking.) Being spanked -- hit, in essence -- by your partner is an extremely emotionally volatile situation even when you want it and have initiated the request for it. Experiencing that trauma without having a built-in attraction to it seems likely to lead to anger and shame on your part, and guilt on his part.<br /><br />Your situation also brings up an interesting question: the foundation of why most people in the DD world don't consider it abuse is that the woman is consenting to it, and in most cases, has asked for and initiated the relationship. If you spank or otherwise discipline a partner who wants to be spanked or disciplined,, even though she may protest at the time, there's an implied consent there. If you spank a partner who doesn't want it and hasn't asked for it in any sense, does that cross the line? I don't have a clear answer, but it's worth thinking about.<br /><br />I suspect your partner is encouraging you to try this because he himself understands and has experienced the transformative power of DD -- but, again, he's experienced it because he is already primed to want such a relationship. And while I do think it's possible to create a situation in which the submissive partner learns to appreciate the power of DD, it's a difficult road to travel.<br /><br />So I would ask you one simple question: Are you considering this solely for his benefit, or somewhere, deep inside, is there even a tiny flicker of sexual interest/arousal/excitement at the idea of having that kind of relationship with your partner? Because even a flicker can be fanned and suggests that once you and your partner experiment, you may find it ignites in a flame. If not, it's still possible, but my suggestion would be to tread very, very (very) slowly.<br /><br />This isn't to say that the foundation of DD has to be sexual. There are certainly couples out there who engage in DD and who claim, at least, that neither of them is aroused by it. Personally, I'm skeptical, given the potent sexual archetypes that are invoked by DD, but I think what they may be communicating is that the act of spanking doesn't inherently arouse them. Fair enough. But it certainly helps if there's at least an interest in your loins for such activities -- it helps get over the rough spots if there's a sexual charge to motivate you.<br /><br />You haven't mentioned whether or not you've experimented with dom/sub behavior in the bedroom -- if so, did you like it? That's at least some indication that you might like to take it into your regular life with him. If not, that seems like a safe place to start. No, it's not the same as DD, as I'm sure your partner is well aware, but it's a safe, non-threatening, loving place to experiment with some basic tests about how you'd feel being ordered around, spanked, dominated, etc.<br /><br />Your partner's suggestion for what to do when you're angry, while well meaning and probably exciting for him and possibly successful in the past with women who were already pre-disposed towards such a relationship, seems like it's going way too far, too fast.Your assessment that such a request/requirement from him when you're angry is likely to fail seems pretty much spot on. Perhaps, if you really want to try this, you might consider what YOU would want to do in such a situation and start from there, rather than starting with what he wants you to do (which is a fun idea, but not terribly realistic even for those of us who really really want to submit).<br /><br />I certainly don't mean to discourage either of you -- only to caution you both to go very slowly and to pay utmost attention to your inner cautions as you feel your way through this. And I hope your partner is loving enough to be able to respect your need to go much more slowly than perhaps he'd like to.<br /><br />I hope this gives both of you some food for thought. One other thing I'd mention is that your partner's willingness/ability to talk through your concerns with you is a good sign -- a heartbreaking number of people have the fantasy that DD will work without conversations just like the one you two are having right now. You're ahead of the game in that respect, for sure.<br /><br />Warmest,<br />VivUnknownnoreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-1532780766518660262010-05-14T22:12:00.006-06:002010-05-14T22:17:19.918-06:00Still here!Hi all,<br /><br />I realized the other day how long it's been since I posted a new article, and wanted to reassure those who have emailed that I'm still here and haven't in any way abandoned <span style="font-style: italic;">The Disciplined Feminist.</span><br /><br />I try to post only when I have something that I feel genuinely merits your time, and I think spending so much time on the two books last year tapped me for a bit. But I will return as soon as I have more insights to share, and in the meantime, I always read and respond to comments.<br /><br />I am also considering an offer to write a third book in the trilogy, but am not quite sure what that book would be just yet. If you have any ideas for what you'd like to see addressed in a third volume, please don't hesitate to email your suggestions!<br /><br />Warmest,<br />VivUnknownnoreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-37096840756944903632009-10-02T01:13:00.004-06:002009-10-02T20:49:07.631-06:00Barack and Michelle<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_vkRBIuuA8Z8t1DFoe_fKJhtqOmvVKVpvulL8TtgTg3StNZHAcj0O4N429FyY3FUD-zbYHSlm3RjToBjrgogY4JaiZDSb4uB43QtnJll2833BKBzd2MgDWXAgFaaPCJB2FGsb3vSPITkk/s1600-h/Michele+and+Barack.JPG"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 242px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_vkRBIuuA8Z8t1DFoe_fKJhtqOmvVKVpvulL8TtgTg3StNZHAcj0O4N429FyY3FUD-zbYHSlm3RjToBjrgogY4JaiZDSb4uB43QtnJll2833BKBzd2MgDWXAgFaaPCJB2FGsb3vSPITkk/s400/Michele+and+Barack.JPG" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5387897856863152178" border="0" /></a><br />A new article is on the way, but meanwhile I was struck by this photo of President Obama and Michelle for obvious reasons. (you can view the original on the White House site at <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/photogallery/In-Europe/">http://www.whitehouse.gov/photogallery/In-Europe/</a>)<br /><br />A political colleague of mine and I recently had a discussion as to whether or not President Obama is vulnerable to the temptations of the many women available to him. My (male) colleague pointed out to me that our president has the look of a man who is getting everything he needs at home. This photo suggests interesting possibilities in that area.<br /><br />Of course, the specific framing of the photograph probably says more about the photographer's leanings than it does about the Obamas.<br /><br />(And by the way, this speculation is purely in respectful and good fun and in no way implies any insider information on the relationship of the First Couple!)Unknownnoreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-71483297967034470672009-08-04T12:40:00.006-06:002009-08-05T20:49:11.842-06:00How to Give a Spanking: Advice from the Receiving End<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.variantbooks.com/spanking_series.html"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 200px; height: 250px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinIpw3EBEs6v9m6bBZgdRSVQYlExtwlHroavQ-Es7QkVS43DYK9UQIj-zu614qKtXgTpYvLqWxeMEECexGLnCMZbiIfo0n_crSUMP8BnzJOCNlW7hJKxLCmZMnKLabMk27aTyqJ7G9X5a4/s320/givespanking_tn.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5366181791257354194" border="0" /></a><span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">...</span> the companion book to <span style="font-style: italic;">How to Get the Spanking You Want.</span><br /><br />Finally finished, whew!<br /><br />This book is written for our partners. I wrote it because I felt there was a need for some "how to" spanking material written from the point of view of those who want the spankings -- after all, who is in a better position (!) to say what works and doesn't work when it comes to spankings than the people being spanked, right?<br /><br />Now that I've fulfilled my two-book contract with Variant, things will be getting back to normal around here and I'm looking forward to continuing to explore archetypes, sex roles and power as we've done at <span style="font-style: italic;">The Disciplined Feminist</span> for the past three (almost four!) years.<br /><br />I want also to take a quick moment to thank all of you who have emailed to express support and appreciation for these books, as well as all those who contributed to the research for the books, both recently and over the past 23 years that I've worked with these issues. The e-book experience has been a very rewarding one -- I may even write another one if I think of another topic! (suggestions, anyone?)<br /><br />I'd like to encourage anyone who has read either book to contribute suggestions, ideas and thoughts about how to make them better. It's always been my intention that both of the books be a positive resource for the DD (domestic discipline) and spanking communities.<br /><br />As I wrote <span style="font-style: italic;">How to Give a Spanking</span>, I realized there was one section of the book that felt like it ought to be a <span style="font-style: italic;">Disciplined Feminist</span> post. So I've included it below, slightly adapted to the blog...Unknownnoreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-12822355250791590652009-08-04T11:50:00.002-06:002009-08-09T12:35:07.586-06:00Awakening the Spanker WithinThis article is adapted from <span style="font-style: italic;">How to Give a Spanking: Advice from the Receiving End</span><br /><br /><br />If you took an intro sociology or psychology class in high school or college, you may be familiar with the concept of the “lizard brain.” The lizard brain is the original human brain – the one we had before we evolved to be the tool-making, book-writing, skyscraper-building, computer-using creatures we are today. The lizard brain contains all of our most basic impulses and instincts. It’s the keeper of our sex drive, our “fight or flight” instinct in the face of a threat (which manifests as that “adrenaline rush” we get when we narrowly avoid a car accident, for example), and other primal behaviors that enabled us to survive in the dangerous conditions of the prehistoric “caveman” era.<br /><br />Because the world we live in now is considerably safer for most of us (certainly for those of us reading this book), and because we now tend to rely on our intellect and other higher brain functions to deal with stress, we are often unaware of the presence of our lizard brain in our everyday lives. But that doesn’t mean it’s not there. After all, we still have that adrenaline rush, and we certainly still have a sex drive and a mating instinct.<br /><br />That lizard brain also gives us a primitive instinct for aggression, a vital response to a life-or-death situation in which, say, we’re hunting a woolly mammoth or fighting off the neighboring clan who’s trying to raid our village for food.<br /><br />Our lizard brain aggression is what makes us ball up our fists and want to hit something when we’re really frustrated, what makes little kids stamp their feet when they don’t get their way, what makes a hard workout session or a game of racquetball satisfying.<br /><br />Both men and women have this lizard brain aggressive impulse, although biology has seen to it that it tends to be more prominent in men. A peek back at caveman times will tell us why this is so.<br /><br />Back in prehistoric eras, before the advent of day care, nannies and stay-at-home dads, the sex roles were clear. Men were responsible for hunting the food, a dangerous occupation that required superior size and strength and aggression. And women, due to our unique ability to give birth to and nurse babies, stayed in the cave and took care of the kids and prepared the food, which required less aggression and more nurturing and compassion.<br /><br />In our politically-correct culture, many of us would like to think that those aggressive lizard brain masculine impulses have vanished, but the reality is, they haven’t.<br /><br />To give you some perspective on why there hasn’t been time to evolve too much beyond our caveman instincts, consider this: If the entire history of the world were measured as a year, then human beings in their most primitive form only appeared on the last day of that year at one second before midnight. That means that all of our prehistory and history, relative to the history of the planet, has only taken one second out of one year to happen. Everything from discovering fire to inventing the silicon chip, from primitive cave paintings to MTV, happened after 11:59.59 p.m. on December 31st of our “year.”<br /><br />What’s more, all of our civilized, politically correct habits and ideas regarding sex roles that most of us grew up with aren’t even a fraction of a tick on that same clock. For most of that less-than-one second, we have been under the primary influence of our primal instincts, which are essentially to survive and to reproduce.<br /><br />But don't take my word for it. Noted sociobiologist Leonard Shlain is just one of many authorities who concur: “Contemporary men and women are living relics of bygone days. In the short span of years that we have existed as a distinct species, insufficient time has elapsed to depart radically from the physiological and behavioral patterns we employed to respond to the conditions we found ourselves in at the dawn of our species.” (<span style="font-style: italic;">Sex, Time & Power</span>, pp.14-15)<br /><br />In plain language, this means that we may dress, talk and act like civilized men and women (most of the time), but fundamentally, we are still creatures of instinct. All of us, no matter how evolved or enlightened, carry within us the urges of primitive humans – and the sharply divided, primal sex roles that were necessary to our species’ initial survival.<br /><br />What does all this mean for you and your partner, in terms of spanking?<br /><br />It means that, male or female (but particularly male), we have inside you an aggressive urge, whether you realize it or not, whether we want to acknowledge it or not, whether we are peace-loving and politically correct or not. Our aggressive urge is there and it’s real and it’s not going away for at least another two or three million years – so we may as well make friends with it.<br /><br />Our modern society has done a great deal to shame men (and women!) out of acknowledging this natural aggressive tendency. In a well-meaning effort to “cure” men of the desire to do violence, we have told men that this innate impulse towards physical aggression is at best socially unacceptable and at worst, evil.<br /><br />The only acceptable way in which most modern men (and occasionally women) are allowed to show physical aggression is on the sports field, and even then, there is often a sense that this form of activity is a lesser activity that is not worthy of, say, a businessman or a man who’s more intellectually inclined (hence the pejorative term, “dumb jock.”) And then, of course, there’s the problem that many men simply don’t enjoy or have the time or opportunity to participate regularly in aggressive sports.<br /><br />This shaming of men (and women!) into believing that physical aggression of any sort of violence is unacceptable and evil means that if you are a man, you may have a great deal of internal resistance to the idea of spanking your partner. After all, those who have worked tirelessly to fight domestic violence and rape have told men that hitting a woman under any circumstances is wrong. Period.<br /><br />I’m going to suggest to you here, however, that even if you deeply believe in non-violence and non-aggression, even if you are a passionate advocate for domestic violence prevention, even if you have never before acknowledged this aggressive instinct hidden deep in your lizard brain, that you still have that instinct in there, waiting to be explored.<br /><br />And further, I’m going to suggest that if you have never acknowledged this natural, important and very human part of yourself that longs to do violence, you are probably feeling a great deal more stress and anxiety in your everyday life than you need to feel, if only because you have cut yourself off from what may be one of the most effective stress relievers Mother Nature ever gave us – the ability to discharge frustrations by using physical force.<br /><br />What’s more, as a man, you have almost certainly felt this aggression with regard to your partner. Again, even if you’d rather not admit it to yourself or to her.<br /><br />Every man who has ever lived in an intimate relationship with a woman has been frustrated with her at times (and she with him, but that’s another book!). Every man has within him the instinctive desire to express that frustration through aggression, just as his lizard brain tells him to. (“Get mad, use club…”) Therefore, I would suggest, every man has within him, somewhere, the desire to spank his partner.<br /><br />That’s a sweeping statement, I know, and perhaps an idea that feels alien and even frightening if you haven’t acknowledged or considered it before.<br /><br />But before you recoil in horror at your inner caveman, remember the context here: this is very, very good news indeed for your partner and your relationship, because it means you have within you the natural ability to give her exactly what she wants most.<br /><br />It’s true that, for some people, the lizard brain aggressive impulse may be buried so deeply they are never able to uncover it. But just the fact that you’re reading this blog (or this article, if your partner has handed it to you!) suggests that you are not one of those men. That you recognize on some level that you are capable of spanking your partner because of that lizard brain aggressive impulse. And by recognizing that it’s there, and by having a partner who is actively encouraging (begging?) you to express that part of yourself, you have the amazing and wonderful opportunity to uncover and experience this powerful and perhaps previously-taboo part of your psyche.<br /><br />To help matters along even more, physical violence generated by the lizard brain releases endorphins, the same chemicals that are released during sex. This is why workouts can give you a “high,” as can playing contact sports or even doing an aggressive business deal.<br /><br />What does this mean in terms of spanking your partner? That just tapping into your lizard brain aggression will probably tap into your lizard brain sex impulses, too. In short, you, as a man, are hard-wired to find spanking sexually exciting, even if you’ve never done it before and don’t think you’d enjoy it.<br /><br />A few words of caution here:<br /><br />Tapping into your lizard brain aggressive impulses doesn’t mean you get to go around whacking your partner whenever you feel like it, just because it’s your instinct.<br /><br />It probably shouldn’t go without saying that as satisfying and primal as spanking can be for you as well as for her, you will still need to exercise good judgment and restraint when spanking your partner. That means safe and responsible spanking, not coming home from a bad day at work and whacking your partner just to take our your frustrations. Spanking is a great way to get your aggressive instincts out, but it’s not a free-for-all to abuse your partner in the name of reclaiming your inner caveman.<br /><br />Second, depending on how strongly you’ve been culturally conditioned to see all violence as unacceptable, you may find it takes some work on your part to get in touch with your lizard brain aggression. If you try spanking your partner and it leaves you cold, don’t give up, thinking you must not have that impulse. You're human, so you do. You may need to do some work on your own, separate from your partner, to give yourself permission to acknowledge and accept your aggressive instincts. And it may take some time for those impulses to show up strongly enough for you to find spanking enjoyable and satisfying.<br /><br />And finally, you may find that once you do tap into your lizard brain aggression, you have a lot more of it waiting to be used than you realized – or that can be comfortably expended on spanking your partner.<br /><br />After a lifetime of repressing your aggressive tendencies, you may find yourself having difficulty controlling the aggression once you give it license to show itself. You might, for example, find yourself getting grouchy and snapping at people when you used to think of yourself as mild-mannered and easy-going. Or you might find yourself having impulses to put your fist through a wall or drag race someone out on the freeway.<br /><br />For many men, feeling aggression creeping into places where it’s unwanted feels frightening and dangerous. Their impulse is to stuff the aggression back down again where it can’t make trouble.<br />The problem with this is, of course, that putting the lid back on the pressure cooker doesn’t get rid of the pressure. It just makes the pot explode all over the kitchen. Bottling up your aggressive impulses is no safer than letting them run unchecked and ungoverned.<br /><br />Instead, if you find that you are having trouble controlling your aggressive impulses within acceptable bounds just with spanking activities, you will need to take responsibility for giving yourself other healthy outlets for your aggression. You might try martial arts or racquetball. You could buy a punching bag and hang it in the garage, or take up long-distance running. (note that all of this has the additional benefit of getting you into better shape and healthier, too!).<br /><br />The important thing to remember is that aggression is a natural part of who you are, and it deserves to be valued and acknowledged as a part of who you are. Spanking is a terrific way to honor this forgotten but ever-present part of our psyches.<br /><br />reprinted from: "<a href="http://beta.blogger.com/%3Ca%20href=%22http://www.variantbooks.com/spanking_series.html%22%3E">How to Give a Spanking: Advice from the Receiving End</a>," (c) 2009 Variant Books. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-83310488778896720492009-06-07T20:01:00.005-06:002011-03-18T10:54:33.248-06:00Spanking Artemis: DD & the Virgin Goddess<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjmOnA18Cs2-NSzvvED3CDFWE7JhR0ay7l4cq_rvAFptg8f7zzdUg4hGbHDolhgSel4jjYxs_SsjwBdvvmJ8q8be2F0RCSUUWRXVLy-DGk1QtcovsrvzNDPET-yqUwzei8jDooTm3XBdGgV/s1600-h/artemis1.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 228px; height: 320px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjmOnA18Cs2-NSzvvED3CDFWE7JhR0ay7l4cq_rvAFptg8f7zzdUg4hGbHDolhgSel4jjYxs_SsjwBdvvmJ8q8be2F0RCSUUWRXVLy-DGk1QtcovsrvzNDPET-yqUwzei8jDooTm3XBdGgV/s320/artemis1.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5344272513274179522" border="0" /></a><span style="font-style: italic;">"Before the inner feminine can safely emerge within the unconscious, she needs a strong, discerning masculine partner, who can maintain the boundaries, create a sacred space where feelings can emerge and be listened to. The intuitive wisdom that arises from the body, the creative matrix, needs a focused masculine that can release the creativity of the soul." -- Marion Woodman, Dancing in the Flames</span><br /><br />Very few concepts in archetype and myth seem to be more misunderstood than the concept of virginity.<br /><br />Recently, I've come to see that this concept as it's classically used in mythology may be one of the keys to unraveling the paradox that is DD (domestic discipline) and the related concept of feminine submission and power. The concept of virginity as it's classically defined may also be one of the key concepts required for making DD relationships work long-term.<br /><br />In our modern society, a virgin is widely interpreted to be a woman who has never had sex. For example, when most people hear archetypal goddess figures like the Greek moon goddess Artemis described as a virgin goddess, they assume that means that Artemis rejected sex and the company of men.<br /><br />Those of you familiar with archetypal studies know, of course, that the term "virgin" in Jungian psychology means something quite different and much richer and more intriguing than a intact hymen. Loosely translated, "virgin" in the mythological sense means "complete unto oneself."<br /><br />A virgin goddess, therefore, is, generally speaking, interpreted to be a model for femininity that does not require the presence or energy of a separate, external individual, male or female, to make her whole. A virgin in this more classical sense is, by herself, a complete, whole, healthy and integrated individual - whether she's had sex or not.<br /><br />Many years ago, when I first considered the idea of the virgin goddess as a model for healthy womanhood, I admit I was more than a little skeptical. Being a virgin "complete unto oneself" and needing no one else, seemed lonely and sad - the very embodiment of the "I hate men and I don't need anyone's help" hardened "feminist" who ultimately turns into the old lady living in the house on the corner with all the cats because she never found her true love and pretends stoically that she likes living alone. Sounded pretty pathetic to me. More like sour grapes than true psychological growth.<br /><br />And indeed, our culture seems to reinforce the idea that a woman being "complete unto herself" is not a good goal to strive for.<br /><br />One of the most prevalent (and perhaps dangerous) examples of this dismissal of the virgin archetype is in the movie <span style="font-style: italic;">Jerry Maguire</span>, where, in the most famous scene, the Tom Cruise character famously tells his love interest that "you complete me." Cue big music swell and requisite screen kiss and roll credits -- we're left with the clear message: to be a complete person requires finding an external "someone else" to live happily ever after with -- which in turn suggests fairly explicitly that no one, male or female, can be complete without another person.<br /><br />This speech, by itself, suggests that the concept of the virgin goddess (or god) is socially unacceptable in our culture -- something to be avoided and "fixed," not something to strive for.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Jerry Maguire</span> is, of course, only one particularly explicit example of a widespread cultural expectation that we need someone outside of ourselves to "complete" us or our lives won't be worth living. Many of the most powerful illustrations of this cultural expectation come from fairy tales. Virtually every well-known fairytale ends with the princess marrying the prince and living "happily ever after."<br /><br />Feminists rightly criticize these fairy tales for putting forward the idea that a woman needs a man to be complete -- and indeed, as these stories are popularly interpreted in our culture, they do seem to send the message that if we want to "live happily ever after," we better get busy and find us a prince (or princess). Otherwise, well, our future as the old lady with the cats awaits...<br /><br />I believe that a big part of the reason why building a DD relationship is so challenging is precisely because women in particular often come to the relationship expecting that the other person, through assuming the dominant role in a DD relationship, will "complete us."<br /><br />Many of us want the "strong, discerning masculine partner" referenced in the introductory quote to come from our real-life partner, rather than from our own psyches. As submissive woman, many of us plan to act out the one-dimensional feminine energy of submission, and expect our partners to act out the one-dimensional masculine role of dominance. Together, we complete each other (or so goes our brilliant plan!).<br /><br />Of course, everyone who falls into this trap, male or female, has their own reasons for wanting an external person to provide the other half of the masculine/feminine dynamic. I'm certainly no exception.<br /><br />For me, I suspect the appeal of the "<span style="font-style: italic;">Jerry Maguire</span>"/happy-ever-after model is, at least in part, that it feels like a way to avoid facing my fear of being seen as overly masculine. Pushing my masculine impulses off onto my partner by asking him to dominate me in such a dramatic way seemed like a clever way to avoid admitting how afraid I was of exploring those masculine impulses, and thereby becoming too much of a "man" (by that, read sexually undesirable/repulsive to my partner).<br /><br />But of course, what we really do when we put the responsibility for expressing our masculine side onto a partner is avoid responsibility for exploring our own psyches. In my case, I was asking someone else to express a part of myself that I've been afraid to express and explore on my own -- an act of cowardice, avoidance and entitlement that almost destroyed the relationship.<br /><br />Asking someone else to do what I wasn't willing to do myself is never a recipe for a healthy dynamic between two people. And ultimately, I resented my own attempts to squelch a vital part of myself, and my partner resented being asked to carry a burden that he should never have been asked to carry.<br /><br />The reality is that we are wrong to expect someone external to ourselves-- no matter how much he loves us-- to balance our internal psychic scales by providing masculine energy that we need to provide for ourselves. By dishonoring the "virgin goddess," we dishonor the relationship -- and more importantly, we dishonor ourselves.<br /><br />Women aren't the only ones subject to this potential pitfall. We have probably all seen or experienced examples of hyper-alpha males who want to dominate women largely to avoid facing their own insecurities about exploring their inner feminine natures (read so-called "weaknesses"). These are the men that seem like perfect DD partners at first because they take to it so naturally, and only later are revealed to be the ones who abuse the power that we give them.<br /><br />By expecting another person to provide the masculine (or feminine) energy in our lives, we risk dooming ourselves and the relationship to being fundamentally unsatisfying and incomplete, and potentially driving away our partner with unrealistic expectations and demands that no one outside of ourselves can or should be expected to fill.<br /><br />By relying on an external person to articulate our inner masculine (or feminine) we are looking for psychological wholeness and integration outside of ourselves -- which is the very definition of co-dependence and dysfunction. We are walking around half a person, completely reliant on someone else to provide what we need to provide for ourselves to feel completed, healthy and whole. And feeling angry, resentful and betrayed when our partner isn't able to do for us what we ought to be doing for ourselves.<br /><br />I suspect that for a DD relationship to really thrive and become the rich, archetypally fulfilling experience that many of us sense on a gut level it can be, both parties must release their expectation that the other person will fill in the missing piece of their psyche and "balance" their internal psyches with external actions.<br /><br />Getting (or giving) a good spanking is a powerful, spiritual experience -- but if it's our way of getting our partner to express our inner masculine (feminine) for us and avoiding our responsibility to find this balance internally, it's fundamentally dysfunctional no matter how good it feels in the moment.<br /><br />I suggest, therefore, that a healthy, sustainable DD relationship requires that women who long for submission with their mates may also need to actively work on exploring their masculine side (ideally outside of the relationship in a career or a hobby -- see "<a href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2009/04/going-to-extremes-alternative.html">Going to Extremes</a>"). And equally, that men who truly seek to explore the spiritual power of fulfilling their masculine side in a relationship with a submissive woman may find they're more able to get in touch with their true, healthy masculine by exploring their feminine side as well (again, perhaps outside of the relationship through volunteer work or other nurturing activities).<br /><br />And so we come back to the idea of the virgin goddess, fairy tales and <span style="font-style: italic;">Jerry Maguire</span>. I would suggest, then, that these stories are great models for teaching us how to become "complete" -- if we read them differently from the way popular culture often suggests that we read them.<br /><br />Jungian mythological interpretation tells us that every character in a fairytale is a part of ourselves. (See <span style="font-style: italic;">Iron John</span>, Joseph Campbell's <span style="font-style: italic;">Power of Myth</span>, the writing of Marion Woodman and Bruno Bettelheim, to name some famous examples of this very powerful approach.)<br /><br />This more self-contained way of interpreting fairy tales suggests that the union of male and female that happens at the end of stories like Cinderella and and <span style="font-style: italic;">Jerry Maguire</span> (which is, of course, a contemporary fairy tale) isn't about an external male hero coming to rescue and "complete" the female. It's dangerous, misleading and dis-empowering to read these stories literally.<br /><br />Instead, the true healing power of these stories lies in reading them as examples of how the woman (or man) whose various parts are represented in the story might go about finding the internal balance and union of the masculine and feminine parts of their psyche.<br /><br />When <span style="font-style: italic;">Jerry Maguire</span> and Cinderella are both read this way, they become very healthy models of psychological integration. The male/female characters do in fact "complete" each other in the sense that, just as in the opening quote, our internal feminine requires a healthy internal masculine to be completed and vice a versa.<br /><br />Our mission as "DD women" then, is to become virgin goddesses by finding our inner Prince Charming and honoring him by "marrying" him (read: integrate him into our psyches), before we attempt to partner with another person in the real world.<br /><br />Using this model, the dynamic of a DD relationship becomes far more complex than it initially seems when we envision it in our child-like fantasies. Instead of seeing the relationship simplistically as a scale in which she stands on one side as the feminine and he stands on the other side as the masculine, a fully realized DD relationship may require each person to balance their internal masculine and feminine on their own first -- resulting in two balanced people coming together to create a second, richer and more complex kind of secondary balance -- a masculine/feminine balancing a masculine/feminine in whatever combination works for each unique relationship.<br /><br />In short, I suspect that a long-term healthy DD relationship (and more broadly, perhaps any relationship) requires that a woman (or man) recognize the importance of becoming a virgin goddess (or god) -- complete unto herself (or himself) balancing and honoring her/his own internal masculine and feminine, before stepping into this complex and emotionally fragile dynamic with another person.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-44580981373722809192009-05-20T14:08:00.015-06:002009-07-03T11:14:59.688-06:00New book: How to Get the Spanking You Want<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKB34rzJrbFOJK2HuOX64j8mrfdjKiL77T1dKGBT4p00bGNleaS-MXQW9aZLtrywEzJ10uNx0O45nv8LgA0c6k1SB4KKW_Di414A3a-rzDYtMS9tPk-uE6wT3E0ukHni7_MMP0iXHRxd4M/s1600-h/cover2_tn.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 140px; height: 174px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKB34rzJrbFOJK2HuOX64j8mrfdjKiL77T1dKGBT4p00bGNleaS-MXQW9aZLtrywEzJ10uNx0O45nv8LgA0c6k1SB4KKW_Di414A3a-rzDYtMS9tPk-uE6wT3E0ukHni7_MMP0iXHRxd4M/s320/cover2_tn.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5338003336216353202" border="0" /></a><br /><br />...asking for it, getting it & making it better.... the first e-book by Vivian....<br /><br />Here's how it all happened...<br /><br />Several months ago, I was contacted by the people over at Variant Books, (they're a brand-new e-book imprint from a publishing company). Apparently, they're fans of <span style="font-style: italic;">The Disciplined Feminist</span> and asked me if I'd consider writing a book for them.<br /><br />At first, I thought the idea was crazy. I do enjoy writing about the subject of DD and spanking, but had never really considered doing an e-book about it -- and wasn't even sure I had anything "bookworthy" to say that I hadn't said already here on the blog.<br /><br />Then I gave some thought to my life history on this subject, much of which I haven't shared with readers of the blog since it didn't directly relate to the articles I've posted.<br /><br />But when I actually thought back, I realized I'd spent over 23 years (yikes!) negotiating my way through various types of spanking and DD relationships -- at all ages and life stages and with partners at all ages and life stages. I've spent the last ten years of my "real life" doing professional-level academic research on the psychology of gender roles and archetypes for various books, films, academic studies and other projects. Add in the three years during this blog where, largely because of that research and because of the particularly challenging relationship I have with my current partner I've questioned many of the assumptions that I and others have made about this very unique lifestyle we've chosen, and I started to think maybe I did have something valuable to say.<br /><br />Plus, given the post-election lull and my strong desire not to have do anything that requires leaving my little mountain hideaway, and my current ambivalence about jumping back into the political fray, and the issue that we've discussing on the blog about the importance of career-related work that's separate from my partner, I thought, why not give the book idea a whirl?<br /><br />I also thought about the emails I get virtually every week from people asking me for spanking advice. And since many of you know first-hand how slow I am at answering emails (largely because my email time is so limited and my little dial-up connection is so slow), I thought perhaps writing this book would be a great way to answer some of those emails in a more complete and accessible way.<br /><br />So when asked me for book topic suggestions, I immediately thought of "How to Get the Spanking You Want." Of all the emails I get asking for advice, well over half of them are from women (and some men) who want their husband or boyfriend to spank them, but don't know how to ask, and this question seems to pop up a lot on spanking and DD forums, too.<br /><br />What's more, when I did a search online for the best advice out there for people who want their partners to spank them, I was actually pretty horrified at what I found. A lot of it seemed pretty flaky, and even worse, dangerous and likely to backfire on the unsuspecting sub who tries it!<br /><br />Well, when all was said and done, we wound up with a contract for a two-book series. So...<br /><br />I'm happy to announce the upcoming release of "<span style="font-weight: bold;">How to Get the Spanking You Want: The Complete Guide to Asking for it, Getting It & Making It Better</span>," and the companion guide, <span style="font-weight: bold;">"How to Give a Spanking: (sub title still under construction)"</span>.<br /><br />"How to Get the Spanking You Want" is available now, and "How to Give a Spanking" will be available June 30. You can get more information and a copy of "How to Give a Spanking" at <a href="http://www.variantbooks.com/get_spanking.html">www.VariantBooks.com/get_spanking.html</a>. (7/3/09: Vivian's updated note: For those of you who have emailed me, I'm a bit behind in turning in the manuscript for the second book, but am working on it and will have it available end of July latest -- and probably earlier than that!)<br /><br />At any rate, I'm actually very happy with the way the project is turning out. I hope when all is said and done it will be a valuable resource for anyone looking for information on how to initiate a conversation about spanking with a partner.<br /><br />Stay tuned here for all the latest updates on this strange new venture!<br /><br />Warmest,<br />Viv<br /><br />PS -- And for those of you who are wondering, the answer is, no, that's not me on the cover... :-)<br /><br />UPDATE June 7, 2009:<br /><br />You can read an excerpt of "How to Get the Spanking You Want" at <a href="http://uncle-agony.blogspot.com/2009/06/how-do-i-get-spanking-i-want.html">Uncle Agony</a>, <a href="http://allthingsspanking.com/2009/06/02/never-say-never/">All Things Spanking</a>, <a href="http://spankoz.blogspot.com/2009/06/how-to-get-spanking-you-want.html">Spankoz</a>, and a reader review of the book at <a href="http://brambleberryblush.blogspot.com/2009/05/how-to-get-spanking.html">Brambleberry Blush blog</a>.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com15tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-46346139821143203732009-04-27T21:59:00.005-06:002009-05-14T12:36:27.818-06:00The Courage to Submit: An Unlikely Role ModelOkay, after several articles exploring all the serious psychology behind DD (domestic discipline) it seems time to lighten things up a bit.<br /><br />Note that this article will make much more sense if you first <a href="http://s88.photobucket.com/albums/k173/corpuncom/video/?action=view&current=vid0274a.flv">CLICK HERE</a> to view the video that inspired it.<br /><br />Of course, I enjoyed this clip immensely. For starters, it's a rare example of the sort of thing we women who are DD-inclined spend a lot of time fantasizing about: a real-life example of a young, attractive woman being spanked by a nurturing but stern older man.<br /><br />But beyond the erotic power of this video being about a real person in a real disciplinary situation, this video caught my attention in another, even more compelling, way. The more I watched it, the more I realized that Nancy, the "star" of the video, was in many ways, the person I aspire to be both in life and in DD/disciplinary situations.<br /><br />For starters, Nancy is attractive and very feminine. She is, we learn, a beauty queen -- Miss Booneville 2008. By definition, an archetype of femininity. That her excuse for her repeated lateness to school involves being a "lady" who needs extra time to get ready further reinforces this archetype. I'm reminded of John F. Kennedy's remark about Jackie's lateness to a social event: "Mrs. Kennedy is organizing herself. She takes longer than we do, but then again, she looks better than we do when she's finished." Powerful iconic images of femininity are invoked here. This is a young woman who, consciously or not, taps into many women's most deeply-cherished images of what it means to be female.<br /><br />Nancy's dilemma re: the extra inconvenience of being female is mirrored sympathetically by Principal Halter, who sympathizes with a smile that "he's spent half of his life waiting for women to get ready." Relieved, Nancy believes she's going to avoid a punishment because she has used her feminine wiles to charm her would-be disciplinarian. This is fantasy fulfillment, too, of course -- we often long for our disciplinarian to understand and forgive us our transgression because we are so charming, rather than holding us accountable.<br /><br />But deep down, most of us also realize that if we were to be forgiven without punishment, a big part of us would feel let down, unsafe, incomplete. Justice must be done for us to feel balanced. Nancy herself acknowledges with a small smile that even though half the student body is female, presumably with the same necessity to get ready that she has, "they're not late." She is admitting here her need for justice and fairness. In an indirect way, she is asking to be punished and admitting that she deserves it.<br /><br />It's clear that Nancy is nervous about what's to come, of course. Her body language and nervous smiles and winces make it fairly clear that she knows she's not going to get out of being punished. And yet when Principal Halter offers her the choice of a paddling or a half day's detention, she keeps her cool. Instead of flinching, panicking or begging for mercy, she does something that I, at least, found surprisingly courageous and adventurous for a 16-year old teenage beauty queen facing what is apparently her first paddling. She asks to see the paddle.<br /><br />How brave, how empowered this is! How inspirational, really, for Nancy to keep her cool in this most embarrassing situation enough to have the presence of mind to inspect the implement of her humiliation before making her decision. This is real-life girl power in action. It's clear that Principal Halter is also taken aback and perhaps even impressed by her chutzpah. His smile as he tells her to "have at it" and indicates the paddle on his desk seems to reflect at least a little admiration.<br /><br />But Nancy doesn't just "see" the paddle. She picks it up and tests its weight, obviously imagining how it will feel on her bottom. Then she experimentally swings it in a mock swat. In picking up the paddle and swinging it, she becomes an active, rather than a passive, participant in her punishment. In this moment, she empowers herself and shifts from victim to willing partner in her punishment.<br /><br />"Wow," she says as she holds the paddle, "I actually have your paddle in my hands." she jokes, with apparent genuine delight. Despite the seriousness of the situation, she finds humor and the self-confidence to see the fun of the situation. As Principal Halter laughs, she is able to share a moment of companionship with her "executioner." To take matters further, she is even able to come up with a pun: "This is disciplinary action," she says as she swings the paddle. Here is a girl who can laugh as she faces the chopping block - a modern heroine in the spirit of Mary of Scots telling her executioner that she hopes he has good aim.<br /><br />While still holding the paddle, Nancy announces that she will take the three swats and the half day of detention to "get it over with." That she does this while still holding the paddle feels especially empowered -- she makes her decision while holding the symbol of that decision -- claiming, in a sense, her pain. And notice the confidence with which she makes that choice. She never, not once, tries to negotiate for more leniency or plead her way out of her punishment.<br /><br />In addition, I was struck by the clear, confident way in which she says potentially embarrassing words like "paddle" or "three licks." She doesn't seem to feel there's anything shameful and degrading about discussing this subject. Instead, the whole attitude surrounding being paddled feels matter-of-fact and respectful.<br /><br />This is perhaps an issue unique to me, but even after years of discussing these things with my partner and writing about them on the blog, I still have difficulty saying words like "paddle," "discipline," "punishment" and "swats" out loud, feeling that somehow in doing so, I am debasing myself. This reluctance is a source of frustration to both myself and my partner, because it's difficult to have an actual, adult conversation about what I need and want without an awful lot of hesitation and stuttering and vague euphemisms. But here is a 16-year old girl who can say these words without hesitation or apparent shame. (Later on, she adds with equal confidence that she'll just have to "take her punishment.")<br /><br />Having been told that she has until Friday to decide for sure whether she'll choose the paddle or a full day of detention, Nancy smiles and genuinely, even happily says, "thank you" to the principal for offering her the choice as to how she wants to be disciplined. There doesn't seem to be any irony or petulance in her thank you. She seems genuinely grateful and appreciative of his time and energy in meting out punishment. And she seems more relaxed and confident on her way out the door than she did on her way in -- despite the fact that she's facing a certain punishment.<br /><br />Friday comes, and Nancy is back along with about six other students to receive her paddling. Although she smiles nervously upon entering the office and it's clear she's scared, she is consistently courageous and in charge of her own decision to take the swats. Even when Principal Halter gives her another chance to get out of it, she doesn't back out, although the look on her face suggests clearly that she's scared. And indeed, she does express doubt as to the wisdom of her decision.<br /><br />Nancy is the only girl to have selected a paddling instead of day-long detention. Waiting outside the principal's office along with the boys for her turn to be paddled, she is now in a situation where she will be pressured to act as courageously as the boys who are in for the same punishment. To get over her fear, she seems to find strength in her femininity. In an alternate take from the same documentary (<a href="http://s88.photobucket.com/albums/k173/corpuncom/video/?action=view&current=vid0242.flv">CLICK HERE TO SEE IT</a>), she offers comfort and support to a boy also waiting to be paddled -- putting her own fears aside to offer nurturing to him.<br /><br />When Principal Halter opens the door and asks her if she's ready, she pauses a moment to gather her courage and silently enters the office -- the picture of courage in the face of doubt, fear and impending pain and embarrassment. Nancy maintains her dignity and self-respect in a situation in which one might expect anyone, much less a 16-year old girl who's never been paddled before, to fall apart completely.<br /><br />Once Nancy enters the principal's office, we don't see what happens, but we get to hear the swats being administered. Although the swats sound pretty severe, other than a small "ouch," she takes her punishment bravely and apparently obediently.<br /><br />Walking out of the office after her paddling, Nancy even manages a small smile for the camera. I can't help but feel that while this is partly to cover her embarrassment, there's also an element here of pride in her having overcome her fears and going through with the paddling -- one of the few kids in the clip with the courage to do so.<br /><br />Although we do see her rubbing her bottom as she walks away, Nancy tells the interviewer that the paddling wasn't as bad as she thought it would be She has discovered that the fear of the unknown is worse than the actual object of fear itself.<br /><br />Most importantly, throughout the clip, it seems clear to me that Nancy in no way associates submitting to justly-earned punishment with a loss of self-respect or self-worth. In fact, it seems the opposite is true -- in submitting to discipline with dignity and courage, she has affirmed her self-worth and her identity as someone who can survive an embarrassing or painful situation and come out stronger on the other side.<br /><br />Nancy is, for me, the model of how to take a punishment and come out the other side a stronger, better, more attractive and feminine person than she was before. Her example is one that I would like to keep in mind and emulate in similar situations in my own life -- both literally when facing a spanking, and throughout my life when facing difficult or embarrassing situations.<br /><br />PS -- By the way, it probably shouldn't go without saying that Principal Halter does a terrific job in his role as disciplinarian. He's kind, sympathetic and nurturing -- but it's also clear from the get-go that there's no way he's going to let her out of her punishment or give her less than he feels she's got coming. And while this could be a very humiliating experience for Nancy, he consistently shows her with respect by including her as a partner in her own punishment rather than treating her like a passive victim. His matter-of-fact approach to inflicting the paddling, I suspect, does much to contribute to Nancy's ability to come out of the experience more empowered than when she went in.<br /><br />SPECIAL NOTE: If anyone out there has the capacity to download and save the file for this video so I can link to it internally on this blog rather than relying on Photobucket to keep the link up, I'd appreciate it. I know there are programs out there that can do this, but they're too large for my little dial-up connection to download!Unknownnoreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-17235090362148260512009-04-24T23:12:00.011-06:002009-04-25T00:47:20.495-06:00Going to Extremes: An Alternative Perspective on Women, DD & WorkSeveral months back, I wrote an article suggesting the not-uncontroversial opinion that women who desire to explore their feminine side may be better off avoiding male-dominated activities and career fields. (<a href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2008/06/does-dd-work-at-work.html">"Does DD Work at Work?"</a>) If we don't want men in the "blood hut," the argument goes, maybe we should stay away from the dragon hunt. The article suggests that, generally speaking, a woman participating in male-dominated activities may be asking for trouble in a relationship, because doing so violates male-female archetypes and gender roles to the point where a relationship -- particularly a traditional DD (domestic discipline) relationship is impossible to sustain.<br /><br />What follows is a radically contradictory perspective on the whole "women on the dragon hunt" issue. (As a woman, I categorically reserve the right to change my mind...)<br /><br />For the last few months, I've been inviting myself along on the dragon hunt by participating in intense martial arts training. I've done this in an effort to explore further my growing theory, touched on in the last article, that to be soft and feminine, a woman may be need to first create a foundation of strength. (<a href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2009/03/if-dd-is-glue-do-parts-really-fit.html">"If DD Is the Glue, Do the Parts Really Fit Revisited"</a>) Though the article in question was specifically about financial strength, I've often found that to test a theory, it's good to start by taking it literally. So off I went to "get strong" in the most literal sense of the word.<br /><br />Getting strong literally and physically was new to me. While I have in the past engaged in intense, hyper-masculine mental activity by working as a political consultant, doing anything physically intense with my body has been radically new territory for me.<br /><br />I've always been the sort of person who felt that gyms and exercise of any kind were the work of the devil and I wanted no part of it. Furthermore, I have always seen those physical activities as unfeminine and therefore not something I wanted to engage in. (I actually still believe this, but read on for why engaging in unfeminine activities might be the easiest way to get feminine.)<br /><br />"Getting strong" in the literal sense, then, has involved spending the past four months engaging in serious, hard-core daily weight training and aerobic conditioning, along with daily martial arts training emphasizing intense, real-world boxing and streetfighting techniques.<br /><br />The martial arts training I've been doing is heavy on the hand-to-hand combat. Most of the people I've been training with are men in their 20s who train seriously for martial arts competitions. To hold my own in this environment (and I'm proud to say that I am holding my own and more) requires pushing myself to new levels of physical and emotional toughness far beyond what I've ever done before. This extreme level of "playing with the boys" requires getting (literally) dirty and sweaty and doing lots of very "unfeminine" things in a very unfeminine, unforgiving environment. In short, it's participating in the dragon hunt on a very primal level.<br /><br />Recently, I've noticed that the more I push myself to express the masculine part of my nature during training -- ie, the physical and emotional strength required to keep up with the men, the need to "play hurt" and not show any weakness, etc. -- the more feminine, submissive and sensual I feel when I'm finished.<br /><br />When I'm paired with a sparring partner who challenges me to tap deeply into that masculine power, I leave feeling strong and energized, but also with an intense desire/need to express the DD/submissive side of my personality. I feel very similar to the way I feel after a particularly effective spanking.<br /><br />On the other hand, when I train with a weaker (usually female) partner who does not physically or emotionally challenge me to dig into my inner masculine, I leave the training session feeling weak, frustrated, angry and vulnerable in an unpleasant way -- exactly the way I feel when a spanking doesn't "work."<br /><br />In short, the more I allow my inner masculine to express itself freely and without judgment or reservation, the more I seem to be able to tap into my inner feminine and my desire to be soft, vulnerable and submissive. This reaction at first seemed paradoxical to me -- but given that virtually everything about DD seems to be in one way or the other paradoxical, I figured I must be onto something.<br /><br />I'm now wondering if I've been doing it all backwards when it comes to the struggle to balance my desire to be feminine and to experience the benefits of DD with my partner in private vs. my need to be independent and assertive in my career.<br /><br />A bit of backstory, for those just tuning in: As most of you know by now, I also work in politics as a communications strategist. Politics, like martial arts training, is an intense, testosterone-driven environment, albeit the less literal and more metaphorical kind. My DD partner also works with me as a political consultant, and as a result, I'm constantly feeling the need to hold back my masculine, aggressive tendencies in an effort to balance my desire to be feminine in the relationship with the need to play hard-ball with the political boys.<br /><br />What winds up happening, though, is that I get trapped in what's essentially a watered-down version of both. Perhaps a bit like Hillary during her campaign, I feel caught in the worst of both -- unable to be soft and feminine for fear of being eaten alive by political colleagues, and unable to be as aggressive as I feel I need to be for fear of damaging my private relationship with my partner. So instead, I'm perpetually trapped in the androgynous blank pantsuit that is neither male nor female, and thus disappointing and frustrating to both.<br /><br />But given my recent experiences playing hard with the boys at martial arts, I wonder now if the answer to balancing these two conflicting needs/desires is to push to the extreme in one area in order to create a corresponding need to express the other -- to push more towards the dominant/masculine in the appropriate areas of my life in order to create the opposite, submissive/feminine impulse in my private life.<br /><br />Those of you who have experienced DD firsthand know, of course, that the DD lifestyle is inherently an extreme expression of archetypes and gender roles. By its very nature, DD calls for an exaggerated expression of dominance and submission far beyond what's considered culturally acceptable or "normal" in current Western culture. But to use the analogy of a scale, an extreme weight on one side requires an extreme weight on the other to balance it. Without equal "extremeness" on either side, the scales aren't balanced, the center cannot hold -- the relationship falters. Perhaps.<br /><br />Of course, there are some couples for whom DD seems to work as a long-term dynamic without an extreme expression of masculine energy on her part to balance the scales. But for those of us women who continue to struggle to find a way to be comfortable in a DD relationship without feeling correspondingly unbalanced and powerless -- and I know from your comments that there are many of us out there -- finding a safe outlet for our inner masculine away from the relationship may be part of the solution.<br /><br />Perhaps the answer for those of us who struggle to submit in private is to find ways to go to the other extreme outside of the relationship. For some of us, that might be through our careers, if we work in hyper-aggressive, male-dominated fields. For others, it might mean exploring the limits of physical strength, as in martial arts training or other physically demanding sports like soccer or basketball in which it's appropriate to give our masculine energy free rein. For others, it might mean aggressive "Code Pink"-style involvement in activist politics -- confronting opponents at rallies, in debates, etc. It could mean building a house with Habitat for Humanity or learning how to repair a car engine. And there are no doubt still other examples.<br /><br />This balancing of extremes theory would not be inconsistent with the best thinking on archetypes and gender roles. Many of you are probably already thinking about how Carl Jung, the father of archetypes as a model for personality, suggested that becoming a healthy individual requires the balancing of these conflicting internal masculine and feminine archetypes. And many of you have commented on prior posts about the need for this balance.<br /><br />It would make sense, then, from a Jungian perspective, that an extreme expression of the inner masculine would motivate the need for an extreme expression of the inner feminine. Perhaps that's why my initial attempts at DD quickly went awry (as apparently do so many other women's similar attempts) -- they created in me an extreme desire to express my inner masculine, which I quickly squelched for fear of being unfeminine, which created an imbalance that toppled the whole dynamic.<br /><br />Perhaps the surge of rebellion that many women who participate in the DD experience isn't a rejection of DD as a lifestyle, but merely our inner masculine demanding balance.<br /><br />And perhaps the situation is then made even worse when we assume that we need to find that balance within the relationship, instead of outside of it.<br /><br />Men, of course, are often way ahead of women in this regard. The dominant,<br />successful alpha male who sees a dominatrix in private (separately from his work life) is so common as to be a cliche. But the aggressive, achievement-oriented career woman who allows herself to submit in her personal life -- well, the struggle to get there is what this blog's all about.<br /><br />On a personal note, this new information brings up provocative questions about my own situation with regard to my partner and my political career:<br /><br />If I hadn't held back and second-guessed with regard to the political work, if I had allowed myself to play as hard as I do during the martial arts training, would I have experienced the same corresponding desire to be soft and feminine that I experience now? Or would the addition of my partner into the mix change the dynamic so much that I wouldn't have been able to let my inner masculine out to play as aggressively as I can when he's not involved?<br /><br />Would it even be possible to play that hard with my partner without turning him off by the masculinity I'd be demonstrating? Could a man engage with a woman in combat, masculine to masculine -- and still be able to respond to her as a feminine woman when the battle is over? Or does the expression of a woman's inner masculine have to, by definition, be separate from any interaction with her partner?<br /><br />These questions I don't yet have good answers for, but of course, this whole Disciplined Feminist experiment is a work-in-progress...Unknownnoreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-39486714197205344392009-03-06T12:32:00.013-07:002009-03-06T15:01:58.811-07:00If DD Is The Glue Do the Parts Really Fit -- RevisitedThank you to all of you who have emailed and posted comments during the past few months!<br /><br />In the (relative) peace following the election cycle, I took the winter off to work on a new art series and a new book on strategic political communication, and with all that going on, didn't realize until recently that I hadn't posted a new article since October!<br /><br />Part of the delay has been a preoccupation with other projects. Part of it has been that I try only to post when I have something to share that might be of interest, and I haven't felt like I had any insights relevant to The Disciplined Feminist for quite awhile. Now perhaps I do.<br /><br />After a year spent trying with mixed success to live together in a more traditional arrangement, my partner has moved back to the city to pursue career opportunities available to him there, and I'm still out here in my beautiful mountain hideaway working on my various projects. Our DD relationship is suspended indefinitely while we try to work on the larger issues that need resolving between us. I still have hopes that we will be able to get past our current difficulties, but the future between us remains uncertain.<br /><br />And while I don't believe that DD is responsible for the problems between us, neither do I believe, as I once did, that DD is the solution to those problems. That's not to say that I don't believe DD is a powerful and effective lifestyle choice. Only that I'm starting to realize that, at least for my partner and myself, it's not the "fix" that makes things better. It's the reward that comes from having made things better in other ways.<br /><br />In a prior article, written during the time when DD was working so well for us, I wrote that I believed that DD could serve as a way of building trust and communication between two people when all else has failed. (see <a href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/01/if-dd-is-glue-do-parts-really-fit.html">"If DD Is the Glue, Do the Parts Really Fit?",</a> Jan 07).<br /><br />Given the experiences of the past year, however, I'm no longer convinced it's true that DD can "save" a troubled relationship -- at least not long-term.<br /><br />Recent experiences have largely convinced me that for DD to work, it must be built on an existing foundation of love, trust and mutual respect. I now suspect that as wonderful as DD is as a lifestyle, it can't create love, trust and mutual respect if those things aren't already present in the relationship. DD can help, perhaps, to resolve minor day to day glitches in communication, adjust minor power imbalances and bring increased intimacy to a relationship already based on love and trust, but it can't fix the larger problems that lurk beneath the surface.<br /><br />In short, I now suspect that while DD can be the icing on the relationship cake -- the tool that smooths over the rough spots and takes a good relationship to a whole new and richer level -- it can't be the "glue" that holds the relationship together, as I once thought.<br /><br />In retrospect, it's easy to see the error in my earlier cause & effect reasoning. Just as scientists often draw false conclusions by failing to adequately screen for external causes in their results, I look back to when things were going so well between my partner and me and see that what made everything click into place for us was not DD, but a series of events that occurred just before we started our DD relationship. I mistakenly believed that it was the DD that made everything work for us. It was actually the series of circumstances beforehand that made the relationship work -- which in turn allowed DD to work.<br /><br />When I first moved out to my beautiful mountain retreat, it was largely because my relationship with my partner had fallen apart. Indeed, we were in much the same situation we're in now -- hurting, angry, barely able to sustain a conversation without one or the other of us getting angry and upset and hanging up the phone. Wondering how on earth to untangle the complex web of professional, financial, emotional and psychological ties that bound us together, so that we could go our separate ways without ruining each other's futures -- but still loving each other so much that neither of us was willing to end it completely.<br /><br />So I left to give both of us some much-needed space. And in leaving, I pursued my professional path and he pursued his. As a result of this estrangement and separation, we became financially independent from one another. After being dependent on him to create professional opportunities that paid the bills, I got my confidence back that I could take care of myself and create those opportunities without his help. He, in turn, felt less pressure to create opportunities for me, and thus more able to focus on the emotional, nurturing, erotic parts of our relationship. We fell back in love -- more so than we'd ever been before. We talked about marriage, about sharing a home. I once again brought up the subject of DD. He agreed. Paradise ensued. (I started the blog to share my new-found wisdom about how to have the perfect relationship.) I felt like the luckiest woman in the world.<br /><br />And then we decided to take the DD part of our relationship one step further. We both longed for an even more traditional, archetypal dynamic between us and wanted to make that happen.<br /><br />Our arrangement was that I'd quit my political career and work on the more feminine pursuit of art, ceding the alpha power position entirely to him. I'd be the arty feminine domestic goddess who was able to pursue my artistic passions without the pressure of having to make money at it. He'd be out in the world, fighting the dragons, affirming his own archetype of provider and protector. It would be bliss -- the recipe for a perfect relationship.<br /><br />Let's be clear here -- working for a living is not something I have ever enjoyed. Even when I enjoy the work itself, I deeply dislike the pressure of having to do that work to pay the bills. As such, I have always fantasized about having a successful man swoop me up, carry me away to his castle and take care of all the money issues for me while I did whatever I wanted to with my life. It's the Cinderella fantasy. (And I don't for one moment believe I'm the only "modern" woman who still entertains it!)<br /><br />So we moved in together and I bowed out of one of the most interesting and dynamic election cycles in our history to focus full-time on my new art career and on being a nurturing caretaker to an alpha male. He worked around the clock, paid the bills and slew (slayed?) the dragons.<br /><br />During that year, my art career took off -- I had solo solo shows in major venues, reviews of my work in prestigious arts publications, won national competitions. In short, I had all the success I could have dreamed of in my first year as a serious artist.<br /><br />But art doesn't pay the bills. For all my success, the more I worked to build my art career, the more financially dependent on him I became. The more dependent I became, the more resentful both of us were at the power imbalance. I resented not having a dollar to call my own. He resented that I wasn't contributing financially. Not to mention that the more financially dependent I was on him, the less able he was to pursue his own career aspirations.<br /><br />Things deteriorated between us very quickly, until we were back to the way things were before we started DD -- on the brink of falling apart. This time, he's the one who moved away -- back to the city to focus on his career. I stayed up here in the mountains, not sure what to do. Things got so bad and so scary between us that in the last few months, I've woken up to the reality that I need a way to take care of myself financially in case everything falls apart and I'm left with no way to pay the bills.<br /><br />So I've started working on my political career again, in addition to my art. And as I create new financial opportunities that will once again make me financially independent, things are getting better between my partner and me again, albeit very slowly. He calls me again just to say hi, I send him sexy emails. We're back to the point where I'm once again dreaming of a future with him, and a revival of us DD relationship. Not there yet, but I have hope again.<br /><br />Way back when, when we started DD, I assumed that it was the DD that made everything so magical between us. But looking back, I wonder now if perhaps my analysis skipped a step.<br /><br />It seems that what makes our relationship work isn't DD per se, but rather our individual financial independence, which in turn makes each of us feel safe and confident enough with ourselves to be able to engage in a healthy DD relationship. In short, if he's paying the bills, neither of us is happy, and DD along with everything else falls apart. If we're both doing our share to contribute, both of us are happy with each other -- the relationship -- and DD -- works.<br /><br />I had hoped that the traditional female role of nurturing my mate and creating a home would be sufficient contribution to the relationship to compensate for not bringing in any money. Perhaps for some people, it's enough. It may be that I myself don't really, in my heart of hearts, value traditional feminine labor enough to believe it's enough of a contribution to offset not making money. Or perhaps my partner doesn't value it enough, either. What I do know is that if I don't have my own money, our relationship doesn't work. If I have my own money, it does.<br /><br />Oddly enough, the conditions required for a traditional dominant-submissive power dynamic between us seem to be that I break archetypal tradition and pay my own way. I'm not sure how to reconcile my experiential reality with my belief that relationships do better when traditional sex roles and archetypes are honored. It seems that in order to have a traditional relationship, I have to take on some un-traditional sex roles. A paradox.<br /><br />But then again, everything else about DD is a paradox -- why shouldn't this be?Unknownnoreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-69797772587390874622008-10-26T12:30:00.015-06:002008-10-27T23:35:52.697-06:00What a Woman WantsThere is an ancient Arthurian myth which seeks to answer the question in the title of this post -- what does a woman want. (To read the full text of the story, <a href="http://www.storiestogrowby.com/stories/gawain_rag_england.html">click here</a>.)<br /><br />The summary of the myth is that in order to save his life, a knight must within a year's time give a wisewoman the answer to the question, what does a woman want? The knight searches far and wide and asks everyone he meets for the answer. Ultimately, the answer he comes up with for the wisewoman is that what a woman wants above all is Sovereignty. In the myth, this answer is correct, the knight's life is spared and the wisewoman turns into a beautiful young woman whom he marries.<br /><br />It's worth noting that this legend dates back to at least the 13th century. Even during an era when women were essentially property with no rights at all, the popular culture of storytelling acknowledged that sovereignty was a primary need in a woman's life.<br /><br />Since myth is generally seen as roadmap into our personal consciousness, the general consensus is that the sovereignty in the story refers not to institutional or governmental power, but to personal sovereignty. That what a woman wants most of all is the right to make her own decisions, feel her own feelings and create her own life out of her own heart's desire. This is Virginia Woolf's Room of Her Own, dated 500 years earlier.<br /><br />But what if part of a woman's heart's desire is to submit to another? What if she wants the sovereignty of the story, but also wants the comfort, security and feminine experience of submission?<br /><br />As I've struggled over the past few months with the problems my partner and I are having incorporating domestic discipline (DD) into our relationship, I have thought often about this particular myth and what it means in my own life. My primary need for sovereignty is a big stumbling block for me in making DD work, as it clearly is for many, if not most, modern women drawn to the DD lifestyle.<br /><br />I've written at length in prior posts about how many in our culture are still children functioning as adults, and I wonder if the issue of sovereignty vs. submission goes right to the heart of this cultural problem.<br /><br />We live in a culture which, too often, encourages us to think in terms of having it all -- of being <span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">entitled </span>to it all (whatever "it" is) without pointing out that there's a price to pay for everything we get. Corporations and Madison Avenue tell us we "deserve" a new car, we've "earned" an iPhone, we're "entitled" to premium cable service. They don't tell us that the price for these things is environmental devastation, war, exploitation of third world countries and, closer to home, stress, overwork, estrangement from our families and credit card debt.<br /><br />The corporate culture, with its profit-at-all-costs imperative, promotes this attitude of have-in-all entitlement, of course, to sell product -- and in the true spirit of corporate America, they do it without regard to the societal chaos it causes.<br /><br />As a result, we don't seem willing to accept that we can't have it all. We expect that we can have the super-charged career, raise a family and still have time for personal development and recreation. We expect that we can be parents without having to take on the responsibilities and sacrifices required to do so responsibly ("why should I have to stop going to the movies just because I have a screaming four year old"). We want the career opportunity, but resent being asked to work overtime or give above and beyond to impress those above us on the ladder ("Can you believe my boss actually asked me to work late on this project? Geesh."). And on and on it goes.<br /><br />So as I struggle with my desire to have both sovereignty and submission -- or perhaps better put, my stubborn and steadfast refusal to give up any of my personal sovereignty to get something that I say I want so much -- I wonder if my insistence on having both is an example of me being a member of our entitlement culture. I wonder if I'm being the willful, immature six-year-old who doesn't understand that she can't have everything she sees at the toy store and ice cream on the way home, too.<br /><br />On the other hand, if the language of myth is to be believed, sovereignty isn't so much a desire as it is a requirement for human fulfillment. And if other myths, equally old and powerful, are to be believed, a woman's desire to submit is a requirement for female fulfillment (see <a href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/11/feminism-power-of-giving-way.html">"Feminism: The Power of Giving Way"</a>). Is it possible that to be a fulfilled woman requires two apparently contradictory and incompatible things -- sovereignty and submission. And that our attempts to reconcile two apparently irreconcilable conditions is what's driving women in our culture slowly into depression, dysfunction and despair?<br /><br />I know it's doing that to me in spades. In my struggle to have everything I feel I need, I am caught between the proverbial irresistible force and immovable object, between two imperatives equally strong, neither of which I feel I can be a complete person without. Is it really possible to genuinely submit to another while still maintaining my right to make decisions about my own life? Do I really have to choose between being feminine and being a complete human being, and is it even possible for a woman to be one without the other?<br /><br />As is often the case, however, the answer may lie in the question. Perhaps my sovereignty lies in making <span style="font-style: italic;">the choice</span> to submit, rather than having that choice forced upon me. And perhaps losing part of my sovereignty is a necessary consequence of the choice I've made to submit in the first place. A difficult and terrible choice, but a choice nonetheless. And a choice that's been hard-won over the past few decades by those who have fought courageously for women's rights.<br /><br />After all, unlike during other eras, no one is forcing me into DD. For that matter, no one is forcing me into a relationship. If I really want pure sovereignty over my life, I could choose to live alone and be accountable to no one -- a choice that women in the past didn't have when they were forced to marry, forced to stay at home, and forced to submit to their husbands and fathers.<br /><br />The reaction to this forced femininity/submission in the '70s was equally un-empowered. Despite popular perceptions to the contrary, '70s and '80s feminism was no better at giving women choices. It denied women sovereignty as much as the old ways did.<br /><br />Modern feminism forced women by virtue of popular pressure to act like men, to work in jobs as to do, to look like men and wear their clothes, to reject traditional roles of mother, wife and lover of men, to eshew the trappings of submission and domesticity.<br /><br />This forced "liberation" is no more sovereign than the original enslavement of women. We're still enslaved, we've just switched masters. I have no more sovereignity following the angry, dogmatic prescripts of contemporary "feminism" than I would have back in the '60s vaccuming in my heels and pearls in a TV sitcom. To put it another way, being a house slave or being a field slave makes little difference -- you're still a slave.<br /><br />It's true, I think, that what women really want is sovereignty, and we still don't have it, we're still by and large miserable and confused about what it means to be a woman, and still struggling to make our relationships with men -- DD or not -- be what we feel intuitively they should and could be.<br /><br />Is it possible that all of our struggle is because we don't realize that our power is in having gained the right to choose to surrender and the right to choose to pay the price that such surrender requires?<br /><br />It's a reality that any relationship -- DD or no -- requires a certain amount of surrender and loss of sovereignty. We can't be in a relationship with someone and not give up the right to make every decision and do everything our way. That DD is a bit farther along on the spectrum than most modern relationships means that the issue of sovereignty -- the amount of surrender required -- is more extreme, and thus issue becomes more prevalent, the cost more apparent. The choice more clear.<br /><br />As usual, I don't have the answers. And don't claim to. But it's something to consider -- that the right to choose to give away one's sovereignty may in and of itself be a sovereign act.<br /><br />NOTE: I recently received an email asking for help with regard to the subject of rules. I've tried to answer, but the email bounced back. Please email me back with a valid email address and I'll do my best to help! -VivUnknownnoreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-59330478398640898482008-06-16T22:38:00.006-06:002008-06-16T23:45:18.568-06:00Does DD Work at Work?I hope those of you who have been following the torrid, melodramatic story of my partner's and my experiences with DD (Domestic Discipline) will forgive if I diverge from the main storyline of how we're doing overall and follow a tangent in this article. I realize I'm leaving off the main narrative at a particularly messy point, but quite frankly I have no idea how we're doing overall and thus I don't have anything new or useful to add on the larger issue just now anyway. Rest assured the moment I acquire any wisdom on the larger issues from the last post, I will share it post hence! Meanwhile...<br /><br />This article addresses instead a topic that's tangentially related to my partner's and my issues: the question of whether or not DD is effective and appropriate in a professional, as opposed to a personal, relationship.<br /><br />To give some background on my own experiences, my partner and I met as professional colleagues in the political arena -- we both are both high-level political consultants and have worked together in various capacities for almost 10 years in what is arguably one of the most stressful, challenging and ego-bruising environments imaginable. We became romantically involved about halfway through that 10 years.<br /><br />Extending the DD element of our relationship into our professional lives seemed a natural fit -- something that would make work spicier and more fun for both of us. After all, he's got more political experience than I do and has been a mentor and teacher to me over the years in our mutual work. And he's a natural alpha male at work -- always the leader regardless of the situation. (And of course, discipline at work fueled a lot of old fantasies about stern headmasters and desks...)<br /><br />But looking back on the troubles we've had over the past year and especially the past few months, I wonder if mixing work and DD wasn't one of the biggest mistakes we've made. Taking the submissive role at home in a sexually-charged male-female dynamic is very different from taking the submissive role in a professional environment -- particularly one as dominated by male energy (meaning aggressive, masculine) and power-driven as politics.<br /><br />Here's why.<br /><br />I'm willing to go out on a not very shaky limb here and say that I am good at what I do. (So is he, by the way.) There are skills that we have that virtually no one else on the Democratic side has, and we're well compensated as a result. But to be good at what we do requires a certain dynamic that seems inherently opposed to the dynamic required for DD to work.<br /><br />The problem with incorporating DD into our professional relationship is that being good at my part of what we do requires a certain amount of, shall we say, Hillary Clinton energy. That is to say, the emphasizing of my more masculine self. To do the work I need to do the way it needs done often requires me to be ruthless, bossy, stubborn and sometimes downright nasty. (I am a big Hillary supporter, by the way, lest anyone take offense. But that doesn't mean she doesn't have those qualities in spades. Believe me, she does. Particularly when on one is looking...)<br /><br />The reality is that politics at any level is high stakes. You only get one shot at winning and there are very few do-overs. Not to mention that if we want to keep getting work, we have to win. All of which means that if we're at work and I think I'm right and he's wrong, I have a professional obligation to stick to my guns and not back down just because I might get "punished" for it. Careers are at stake -- both ours and the candidate's -- and our clients pay us to be right, regardless of what it does to our personal relationship.<br /><br />This past campaign was particularly contentious (we lost when we should have won, by the way, which is no coincidence, I think -- our candidate and the country paid the price for our mistake). My partner and I have always had disagreements over strategy, but this is the first time we had them in a context where we also had a DD relationship.<br /><br />Suddenly, my digging in and not submitting when he insisted he was right became a betrayal of our DD pact. I wasn't being professionally aggressive; I was being disobedient. I wasn't being a hard-core strategist in the trenches fighting for our candidate and doing whatever it takes to win; I was being disrespectful to my mate. He got angry; I got confused and resentful and felt like I was being asked to play with my hands tied behind my back. I felt I wasn't able to do my job without compromising my relationship and couldn't have a good relationship without compromising my job performance.<br /><br />The "obvious" answer here would be to say, yes, good point. Keep DD out of the workplace. Women should be allowed to interact with men as equals in their professions, however submissive they choose to be at home. But I'm not convinced that's the true answer.<br /><br />I must say here that (and please don't send me hate mail for the following. I'm just going to delete it anyway...) this is one of the many reasons that I'm not entirely convinced that women belong in the professional world at all, particularly in such masculine-energy professions as politics.<br /><br />I've written a bit in the past about the need to reclaim our natural archetypal roles in our culture and about how out-of-balance our culture is because we've bought into the "feminist" idea that to have power, women need to act like men (and to be "good guys," men need to act like women). (see "<a href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/11/feminism-power-of-giving-way.html">Feminism: The Power of Giving Way"</a>)<br /><br />I (and others -- I'm not making this stuff up out of whole cloth, you know...) have also written about how the male archetypal role includes, first and foremost, taking care of his family by going out everyday and slaying the dragon and bringing it home. In our world, winning a political campaign is about as close to slaying a dragon as a man can get. Other examples are, of course, making a big business deal, launching a new company, winning a sporting event, etc.<br /><br />As good as it sounds to say that women should be allowed to pursue any professional they choose, I'm not convinced that we women are doing ourselves and the men in our lives a favor by demanding the right to go along on the dragon hunt. It doesn't leave much territory for men to claim for themselves and that doesn't seem any more fair than a man inviting himself into the Blood Hut.<br /><br />More importantly, going along on the dragon hunt requires sublimating our more natural feminine tendencies. There's not a lot of room for emotions and feelings on a dragon hunt. It's about logic, it's about brutality, it's about conquest. It's where men's archetypal energies are given full rein -- and have every right to be given full rein without them having to stop and soothe our worried brows.<br /><br />Alternatively, if we go along on the dragon hunt, we could choose to suppress our feminine natures and become as hard and ruthless and brutal as the men are. This is the 70s model of feminism -- suit up and play hard, just like a man would. And a lot of us have done just that. Certainly, that's what I do when I put on the Man Suit to become hard and ruthless in my political work. And the world rewards me for it, just as it rewarded (to some extent) Hillary for doing it. But I believe it's ultimately too high a price for a woman to pay.<br /><br />I'm not saying I have definitive answers here and I realize I'm treading on dangerous ground when it comes to advocating that women maybe shouldn't have equal access to every profession.<br /><br />I'm tempted to say that the answer is that we should respect men enough to let them go on the dragon hunt alone, and respect ourselves as women enough to recognize that our power lies elsewhere, far from the dragon cave.<br /><br />But... what does that mean for a woman who does want to pursue say, politics? How does a woman keep her femininity intact and still excel at her chosen profession? Is it possible? Should it be possible? Or is my even asking the question just more of our culture's collective refusal to grow up and acknowledge that we can't have everything we want just because we want it?<br /><br />I'm trying to officially "retire" from politics, but even after only a few months, I'd be lying if I said I didn't miss it dreadfully -- the rush, the pressure, the thrill of the hunt. I just don't know how to reconcile my desire to hunt the dragon with my deeper need to reclaim my feminine energy and respect a man's right to go on the hunt solo - or even if those things are reconcilable. Is the desire to play hard-ball politics just a product of cultural conditioning (a la Hillary and others) that says that's the role I should aspire to and I'm not being empowered if I don't? Or is it my inner masculine genuinely demanding to be acknowledged?<br /><br />I don't know.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com26tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-575092193031418492008-04-08T21:02:00.017-06:002008-04-08T22:42:05.862-06:00On Men & ViolenceIn my last post, I wrote about a new and fierce resistance that has suddenly cropped up in my willingness to honor our DD covenant. In the intervening time since I last published, this resistance has grown progressively stronger. Despite having experienced first-hand the benefits of DD, many of which I've tried to chronicle here, I am quite simply suddenly terrified of being disciplined, spanked or otherwise.<br /><br />Since mutual consent must be at the heart of the DD experience, that part of our relationship has been suspended for the past two months (longer actually). This suspension is by unspoken agreement -- my partner, to his credit, senses he's stepping onto volatile and uncertain ground in trying to discipline a terrified and resistant woman. And at the moment, he definitely does not have my consent, much as I wish otherwise.<br /><br />Tensions in any relationship tend, as we all know, to build up if not dealt with. And now, deprived of the only way we've ever found to work through tensions, we've been fighting more and more -- and the fights are getting uglier and uglier. In fact, we're almost back to where we were when we started this whole DD thing a year or so back -- distant, angry, unable to communicate with each other and utterly unable to trust enough to make the first move on either side.<br /><br />And so it was that one day last week, we lay in bed trying not to have another blow-up over yet another thing. After about ten minutes of arguing, I had asked him if we could please stop for the night, as I was tired and emotionally drained and to upset to hear what he was saying anyway. I wanted to read my book and calm down for the night, not spend it railing at the man I supposedly love. Rightly or wrongly, my partner chose to ignore this request, and summarily grabbed the book out of my hands and struck me repeatedly across the shoulders with it. (I will skip the awful scene that ensued.)<br /><br />The following morning, I woke up still upset from what I perceived as a gross violation of our covenant (which included, specifically, that random, non-ritualized violence and particularly above-the-waist violence of any kind was strictly off limits). My bad mood and his resulted in another argument, this one ending up with him dumping a glass of water over my head while I was still in bed and then subjecting me to a tirade of verbal abuse while turning on the cold water when I tried to take a shower.<br /><br />(NOTE: He, of course, has his own version of these events in which I am more the villain of the piece, but since this is my blog, well, heck, I get to tell the story my way. <g>)<br /><br />My first instinct, quite honestly, was to get the heck out of there, away from him, to sort things out and figure out how to end the relationship once and for all. There is DD and </g>the honoring of traditional archetypes in a relationship<g>, I reasoned, and then there are demeaning, abusive and violent tendencies which infringe on my self-respect, dignity and right to be safe in my own home. In my opinion, he clearly crossed all of the above boundaries.<br /><br />His actions over the past week are to me, violations of a sacred trust that couples must enter into when starting a DD relationship. His behavior was, by virtually every contemporary cultural and psychological standard, abusive, inappropriate and unacceptable. And while my partner has apologized, sort of, for the "book incident," he has yet to do so for anything else. If anything, our arguments are continuing to escalate, and each of us continues to dig in our heels about the rightness (righteousness?) of our respective actions.<br /><br />And here is where the story would end, were this a regular feminist blog. Supportive and indignant readers would write in with hotline numbers and words of encouragement about how to reclaim my sense of power by getting out of an abusive relationship, and I would head for the nearest bookstore or library to load up on books about "Healing from Domestic Abuse." My partner would be relegated forever to the ranks of "abusive men in my past" and there would be -- could be -- no quarter given by myself, my friends or the feminist community for his actions.<br /><br />But the reality is, as reality often is, a bit more complicated -- especially when you're in a DD relationship and especially when you work as actively with primal archetypal energies as my partner and I do.<br /><br />A few posts ago, I wrote about the theory that female energy is inherently submissive (<a href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/11/feminism-power-of-giving-way.html">"Feminism: The Power of Giving Way"</a>). In this article, I argue passionately that we as women need to be courageous enough to honor our own internal archetypes of submission and "taking in" in a culture that does not allow women to be who they truly are.<br /><br />But if I'm going to argue that fundamental to the core of feminism is submission than I have to acknowledge that fundamental to the core of masculinity is domination. In modern society, this domination is most often expressed in cut-throat business deals and killer racquetball games at the club. But underneath all of that civilized veneer is the reality that, at its most primal heart, domination is still about one thing -- violence and brute force.<br /><br />Men are by their very nature beings who express themselves physically (especially when it comes to strong emotions). That's why they play rough, physical sports. That's why they punch each other on the arm when they're happy. That's why, failing all else, they yell obscenities at the TV when their team is losing. These aren't stereotypes -- they're expressions of archetype.<br /><br />Just as it would take more than a few social movements to "cure" women of the desire to be taken care of and conquered, it would take more than a few "Iron John" workshops to eliminate in men the instinct to clobber over the head anything that feels like a threat to them. We may not like this, but as with many things in our lives, not liking it doesn't make it any less true.<br /><br />Women, for the most part, don't resort to violence when they're angry. Lacking the physical strength of men, women have learned over time to settle disagreements with the "talking cure." But men, however, dressed up and civilized we may pretend, are still men. Their first instinct when angry, if the men in my life who speak frankly about this are to be believed, is to hit something -- or someone. Again, we may not want to admit this, but that doesn't make it less true.<br /><br />Now add to the mix a culture that, in its completely necessary and understandable need to stop an epidemic of violence against women, has labeled any and all acts of violence by men not committed while playing a sport as unacceptable. Throw in a generation of Phil Donahue, Alan Alda and Bill Cosby, and you get disaster waiting to happen.<br /><br />When a generation of women finds their fundamental archetypal energy suppressed, we pull inward to deal with our pain, taking it out on ourselves as is part of the feminine psyche -- with depression, eating disorders, chronic fatigue syndrome, burn out, etc.<br /><br />When a generation of men finds their fundamental archetypal energy suppressed, they will deal with it as their nature demands -- by striking out, by hitting things, by hitting people. And so paradoxically, despite perhaps the most concentrated and vigorous attempts by women's groups, psychologists, etc. to reduce domestic violence, here it is on the rise again. Surprise, surprise.<br /><br />But the Victorians could have told us -- what we suppress is driven underground -- and resurfaces in ever more destructive ways.<br /><br />DD is, of course, meant to be a harmless, safe (and even sexy and fun) discharge of this destructive energy. What better way to avoid incidents like the ones I've described above than to give a man permission to spank a woman to tears when he is angry with her? To tell him that, yes, you ARE at heart a physical, violent being and I -- as a loving woman who wants a strong, honest, whole man -- am giving you the greatest gift in my power to give --permission to express and <span style="font-weight: bold;">honor </span>those allegedly "shameful" tendencies in a safe, mutually consensual way (added bonus that these "shameful" tendencies are a huge turn-on...).<br /><br />To add to the personal narrative here, it must be said that my relationship with my partner has been under a great deal of strain recently. We've just started living together for the first time. He is, for the first time, 1000 miles away from his children and misses them desperately. He is in a key leadership role on a hotly-contested congressional campaign that's getting national attention -- and at the very moment he most needs my help, I tell him that I'm sorry but I can't take the stress of politics anymore and I'm retiring to become a working artist and would he please be supportive of that even though I'm committing arguably the worst sin I can commit in a man's world -- abandoning him on the battlefield when he needs me the most, but hey, don't be mad, honey, okay? More than enough pressure to drive anyone to extreme acts, to be fair.<br /><br />There are, of course, men who are not driven to violence as my partner clearly is in times of extreme stress -- men who have their violent tendencies much more firmly in hand. But at least for myself (and I stress FOR MYSELF), I can't help but wonder if the price I pay for having the kind of man I want in my life -- someone who is deeply in touch with his primitive instincts and his raw sexuality, someone with an innate "alpha" ability to command others, someone who triggers all my archetypal female desires and instincts -- is that that same man hovers more closely on the knife's edge of real violence than a more "civilized" man would.<br /><br />Perhaps, at least for us, DD works so well precisely because we walk along that knife's edge -- and collapses in on its own repressed energy when we suppress it, as we've been doing for the past few months due to my resistance.<br /><br />I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that had I not been resistant over the past two months, the incidents of random violence would not have occurred. Does this make what he did my fault? Absolutely not. Does that make what he did acceptable? Absolutely not. Am I owed a sincere apology for his having violated my person as he did? I believe so. And do I owe him an apology for having deserted him on the battlefield, when he counted on my support, thus triggering his most primitive responses? I believe that, too. But these, to me, are the easy questions to answer.<br /><br />The harder questions are the ones we mostly don't ask. If I claim the right to be a woman in times of distress (read emotional, illogical, even hysterical at times, though I hate to use the word), than what right do I have to deny him the right to be a man at those same times under those same pressures? Have we drawn the lines of unacceptable behavior in a relationship so strictly and unforgivingly that we haven't left room for men to be men without accusing them of abusive (hence unforgivable) behavior? Is it perhaps time to revise our "one strike and you're out" approach to domestic violence, acknowledging that however well-intentioned, it actually makes things worse by increasing the pressure in all the wrong places?<br /><br />I don't know the answers to these questions. What I do know is that modern feminist thought would make this a clear case, and for me at least, this is one case that isn't at all clear.<br /><br /><br />PS -- Thanks to those of you who've emailed in the last little while. I'm behind on responding, but will try to reply as soon as possible. Also, there's an article in the current issue of "Bitch" magazine written by Jessica Wakeman about domestic discipline. I haven't read it yet, so I don't know how accurate it is or what Jessica's ultimate take on DD is, but my partner and I were interviewed for it awhile ago and she seemed genuinely interested in learning about our weird ways... (For those who are interested in that sort of thing, my pseudonym in the article is apparently "Greta.")<br /></g>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com23tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-82149508078808374172008-02-07T20:24:00.000-07:002008-02-08T10:59:58.767-07:00Resistance, Blame and Responsibility<span style="font-family:georgia;">The scene: I'm in the kitchen cooking dinner, banging pots and pans around. My ever-observant partner asks what's the matter. I don't actually know, mind you, but I decide that whatever it is, it's his fault. So I let him have it -- a long list of whiny, bitchy grievances that I have a bad feeling I'm half-making up as I go along.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">My tirade has the, apparently, desired effect. My partner starts to get angry, then, to his credit, does what I've asked him to do. He stops and instead says, "Go get the paddle." </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">Many women in DD (domestic discipline) relationships will recognize this moment as the single most challenging one in creating a DD lifestyle. I'm angry, I'm sure I'm right. I am Woman, hear me roar and there's no way in hell I'm getting the paddle. I turn my back on him and walk out.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">My partner, being either very foolish or very brave depending on one's point of view, follows me. "It's not an optional thing," he reminds me. I say nothing. "That ring's supposed to mean something," he adds, pointing to the silver band that I wear as a symbol of my consent to a DD lifestyle. (see "</span><a style="font-family: georgia;" href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/02/ritual-and-little-help-with-long.html">Ritual and a Little Help with Long-Distance DD"</a><span style="font-family:georgia;">).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">It only takes a split second -- I'm barely aware of my thought process or my actions. But before I realize what I'm doing, the ring that I've fought so hard for the right to wear, the ring that symbolizes the hard work, trust, tears and heartaches that have gone into creating this fragile thing called a DD relationship, is off my hand and tossed onto the counter. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">There is a beat of stunned silence on both of our parts. Neither of us can quite believe I've done what I just did. Taking the ring off is something I've promised -- sworn -- never, ever to do in the heat of an argument. Only upon thoughtful reflection and discussion is that supposed to be on option. I have violated the most sacred trust of our relationship. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">Even in my anger, I'm sick to my stomach. As my partner leaves the room, I'm convinced that he's leaving for good. I want to go back inside and tell him I didn't mean it, but the truth is, in that moment, I did, and I can't, in all honesty, take it back. I don't feel ready, willing or able to submit to a spanking now, even if the cost of not submitting is the end of the relationship.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">It's over.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">But he doesn't leave. And hours later, when I'm exhausted and on the way to bed, we finally talk. Sort of. It takes hours -- tears, yelling, awful things we probably both wish we hadn't said -- before we actually "talk." We are acting out the very scenario that DD is supposed to prevent -- hurting one another in anger.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">Finally, I confess to the truth. I've taken the ring off because I feel I don't have the right to wear it. Because in the heat of the moment, I virtually ALWAYS say no. Despite the fact that I'm the one who lobbied for this arrangement, when push comes to shove, in the most critical moment, I seem to always fail. My well-meaning, if misguided, "feminist" imperative gains the upper hand and determines that submission is not an option, no way, no how.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">I cry and admit that while I wish I hadn't taken the ring off, I can't wear it. </span><span style="font-family:georgia;">If I can't hold up my end of the bargain (pun intended) and submit to his authority when it matters most, when I'm angry and we're about to have a terrible fight, then I have no business wearing a ring that promises otherwise. To do so makes me a fraud, a liar, a hypocrite -- not to be trusted with the sacred responsibility of a DD relationship.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">He listens patiently. Hugs me and tells me he loves me.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">And then he puts the ring back on my finger and tells me to go get the paddle. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">Surprised and confused, I ask him if maybe he hasn't understood what I've said -- that I can't be trusted to submit, that there's no point in continuing with DD.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">He smiles, takes me back in his arms, and points something out that I had never considered before.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">That losing one's nerve when facing a punishment isn't an indication of a lack of trustworthiness. It's a normal human reaction to the reality of paying for one's misdeeds. Children, he points out, struggle desperately against even the mildest punishments (he has a daughter from a prior marriage who howls and fights when given corner time as though she were being skewered!). He reminds me that resisting a spanking is part of the process of coming to terms with our angry, terrified inner child who desperately needs boundaries, but hates the idea of submitting to them. And that this resistance has nothing to do with whether or not I'm "worthy" to wear the ring.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">He expects me to resist, he tells me. The spankings he gives me hurt -- a lot. They are meant to hurt, to be a deterrent -- and I am meant to be afraid of them. That's the point of discipline -- to create a negative consequence that makes us think twice about acting out. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">The ring, he points out, is a symbol of my larger commitment to our chosen lifestyle. It is not a promise to be 100% submissive all of the time, no matter what. No one could do that, he tells me, and certainly not someone who is angry and afraid of a spanking.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">I had never thought of this issue in quite this way before. That submission isn't a constant thing, but a moment-to-moment, fluctuating dynamic that is more or less possible depending on state of mind. The key is to make it right eventually -- if not in the moment, then later.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">As a side note, he also pointed out that since we're living together for the first time, "it's different now. It's more real." And that the reality of more in-the-moment consequences is bound to up the stakes and the pressure on the relationship, making resistance on my part even more inevitable.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">The second lesson from this experience didn't occur to me until a few days later. In the days following this incident, I reflected on how much responsibility women in DD relationships often take on in terms of making those relationships work. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">More often than not, it's the woman who initiates a DD relationship. I suspect this is as it should be, given the need to have a woman's full consent before whacking her with a paddle. But being the initiator of a DD relationship can mean that a woman feels a disproportionate amount of pressure to be perfect in her submission in order to prove to her partner (and herself) that the lifestyle is a positive experience for both parties. After all, it's hard enough sometimes to convince a man to administer discipline without us kicking and screaming and making him feel like an abusive bastard for trying to do so.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">So when things go wrong -- as they inevitably will -- we blame ourselves for being less than perfect. When we resist discipline -- as we inevitably will -- we can wind up feeling like failures at best and untrustworthy hypocrites at worst. This was our idea, we reason, and so we feel we have no right to do anything other than fully consent 100% of the time.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">But my partner's very wise words made me realize this is an unfair burden that I was putting on myself and on the relationship. Just because DD was my idea doesn't mean I'm always going to be "good" at it all of the time. In fact, most of the time, I probably won't be "good" at it at all, because if true disciplinary spankings are given properly, they are painful and unpleasant experiences that our instinct makes us want to avoid in the moment, even when our higher functions tell us the benefits are worth the pain. And if we're sure we don't deserve a spanking, our inherent sense of justice makes us even more likely to resist.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">This lack of perfect submission isn't an indication that I'm not fit to take part in a DD relationship, but rather it's a healthy, natural, appropriate expression of my free will and separateness as a person. To submit 100% all of the time with no resistance and without questioning the fairness of the punishment would make me a doormat, a person with no capacity for self-preservation or independent thought. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">I am fortunate to have a partner who is able to see that my resistance is normal and appropriate, who doesn't hold it against me when I am not able to submit to punishment in the moment.<br /><br />I'm also fortunate to have a partner who doesn't let my in-the-moment resistance get me off the hook for the spanking I have coming. I am grateful that he is able to honor our agreement even when I can't. To me, this is how a DD relationship (or any relationship) should work. That when one partner stumbles and can't hold up his or her share of the burden, the other steps in and takes it from them.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;"> Spanking given (with extra swats for having said no and for taking the ring off), peace restored, ring back on my finger.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">Lesson learned.<br /><br />PS -- As most of you have noticed, I tend to post new articles much less frequently than many blogs do. This is partly because of my schedule (I work in Democratic politics, so this year is particularly hectic), and partially because I don't post unless I feel I have something worth posting about. To that end, if any of you would like me to email you when a new article is posted, please let me know and I'll be happy to do so.<br /></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com20tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-87290812019683361292007-11-23T12:14:00.000-07:002007-11-27T15:49:22.292-07:00Feminism: The Power of Giving WayA wrap-up of my project sooner than expected means getting back to the blog sooner than expected. Thanks again... deeply... for hanging in and expressing concern about the diminishing frequency of posts.<br /><br />As an inaugural to Phase II of the blog, below you will find the article that I had always intended as the intro to the blog, laying out some principles of male/female energy that I believe underlie not just DD, but male/female relationships as a whole. Perhaps it will serve as a helpful reference point for a deeper understanding of the issues we all grapple with in regards to power in relationships and a furtherance of the very cool dialogue all of you have been adding to over the past year.<br /><br />This article is a bit long and involved, which is why I've been putting off writing it. What follows is essentially a quick summary of a decade's worth of work on this subject -- radically simplified. Unfortunately, even simplified, the concepts required are fairly complex in places, so to do any sort of even basic justice to the idea requires a bit more length than is ideal for a blog.<br /><br />Some of you will hopefully find it useful.<br /><br />---<br /><br />From time to time, I am asked by various writers, researchers and filmmakers to talk with them about how I reconcile my feminist views with my preference for a DD lifestyle. Understandably, this seems like a paradox to most people (even many in the DD world -- hence the title of and reason for The Disciplined Feminist in the first place!).<br /><br />The interviewers are invariably surprised when I tell them that I don't see any contradiction between feminism and assuming a submissive role in a relationship with a man. They are momentarily confused, but then (ah ha!) they hit on the Big Explanation that Makes It All Make Sense To Them. They suggest that DD is consistent with feminism because I'm exercising my feminist imperative by "choosing" this way of viewing male/female relationships. (ie, we all have the Right to Choose, which is what makes us feminists).<br /><br />Most people do see feminism as a choice issue above all else. Whether it's something as inflammatory as abortion or the more garden-variety choices of whether or not to marry, have children or pursue a career (or going further back in history, the right to vote), we seem to have defined feminism as the power to choose one's own destiny. A woman is either a feminist or not (your choice), depending on... well, what choices we make. We then advertise our feminism to the world with, again, our choices.<br /><br />I would submit, however, that fundamentally, a true understanding of feminism at its deepest level has little or nothing to do with choice. While the ability to shape our destinies is a nice byproduct of a more egalitarian society, it is not and should not be confused with feminism.<br /><br />Putting aside any contemporary, political definitions of feminism (are there any other kind, I wonder?), I suggest that feminism, at its core, is fundamentally about reclaiming the value and worth of being female. The word "feminine" forms the root of the word and thus -- as most linguists and anthropologists would agree -- the root of the concept.<br /><br />To be a feminist is to insist that the mere act of being female -- of being <span style="FONT-STYLE: italic">feminine </span>-- is a sacred experience. To be a feminist is to reclaim the power that contemporary Western culture has stripped away from women beginning in the pre-Christian era right up to the present extremist right wing religious movement in America. It is to say that feminine power, the feminine experience, is as worthy of honor and expression as the masculine experience.<br /><br />To be a feminist is to claim the sacred right to be female.<br /><br />All very well. But what does that mean? What is the sacred right to be female and what does it mean, then, to be feminine?<br /><br />ARCHETYPES 101<br /><br />(apologies to those of you who already know this stuff)<br /><br />As part of my personal journey, I've spent close to a decade now studying Jungian psychology, with an emphasis on archetypes and a special emphasis on the "heroine's journey" as it reveals itself in myth, fairy tale and contemporary storytelling. For those of you not familiar with all that stuff, that's a long, semi-fancy way of saying I'm interested in how human beings, collectively and at their deepest levels, experience what it means to be a woman. (If anyone is interested in exploring these issues and wants a recommended reading list, let me know and I'd be happy to recommend books that have been helpful to me along the way.)<br /><br />As any of you who have studied archetypes and myth know, this is an extremely rich and complex subject, and by invoking it here, I run the risk of oversimplifying something that deserves a far more comprehensive explanation and treatment than is possible in a blog article. This is intended as a starting point for discussion, not a definitive or exhaustive examination of feminism and archetype (which is a life's work!). So please don't write and tell me that "it's more complicated than that." Yes, it is. But at the same time, it's also simpler, too.<br /><br />Archetypal myth work is based on the premise that the reason story has been fundamental to all human civilizations since the beginning of time (even back to cave paintings and stories by the fire before written language) is that story is humankind's way of passing on our collective experiences to the next generation and articulate our deepest, most profound experiences.<br /><br />This type of work is based on the idea -- supported by 2000+ years of history and anthropology -- that the same themes and patterns of story emerge across all cultures, language barriers and time periods, and that this pattern is the key to understanding our deepest, most authentic selves.<br /><br />THE HERO'S JOURNEY<br /><br />Joseph Campbell is one of the most famous in this field -- he posited that all men must go through a set sequence of life challenges, what he called "the hero's journey," to become complete, integrated human beings.<br /><br />As many, many have pointed out since Campbell (including Campbell himself), the male journey and the female journey are fundamentally, clearly different. If one looks at the earliest, pre-Christian myths available to us, there is a startlingly clear and distinct difference between stories in which a man goes on a quest or journey and a woman goes on a quest or journey.<br /><br />When a man goes on a journey, he generally (and this is, again, very simplified) leaves the home of his father with a specific mission in mind (to get the Grail, to slay the dragon). On his way, he encounters physical obstacles and must prove his character, his bravery and his worth in order to secure the prize and return home to claim his rightful place in the kingdom. The way in which the hero proves his worth is outwardly-directed. He fights, he climbs, he struggles through walls of thorns or battles raging rivers. He breaks through things, breaks down things, thrusts outward with his lance or his spear or his fists. Only once he has overcome all physical obstacles in his path through the use of force does he earn the right to return home and become king.<br /><br />To become integrated, a man on his hero's journey must extend himself outward into the world. This is why calling someone a "man of action" is one of the highest compliments you can pay a man and why being a "self-made man" is one of our society's highest goals.<br /><br />This "hero's journey" is manifested in our culture most obviously by a man's quest for professional success, athletic prowess or sexual conquest. Making the deal, scoring the goal, bedding the woman are all outwardly-directed acts designed to elevate status and prove to the world (and more importantly, himself) that he's fit to be king. (Side note: This is also why a smart woman knows that any man worth having will put his work before his family -- and a smart woman wouldn't ask him to be any other way)<br /><br />Most people are familiar with the hero's journey. Hollywood's been making money off it for years -- it's the standard structure of most mainstream action/adventure movies ("Die Hard," "Raiders of the Lost Ark," "Dirty Harry," and of course, "Star Wars" which was overtly based on Campbell's work), as well as spy, western and detective novels and comic books.<br /><br />THE HEROINE'S JOURNEY<br /><br />Because Western culture has elevated the masculine as superior to the feminine, most people aren't as familiar with the heroine's journey. (There are movies about the female journey, but they tend to be indie films.)<br /><br />Our patriarchal culture has done a lousy job of educating us on what these feminine-centered myths are (but a really good job of supressing them!), so I'm going to take up a bit of space to tell one of the most famous -- the Descent of the Goddess is the grandmama of all heroine's journey myths and for the record, it pre-dates Christianity and patriarchal power structures, so it was not written to "keep woman in her place" as many later fairy tales were.<br /><br />For those of you interested in this sort of thing, it's worth pointing out that the other big famous heroine's journey myth is the legend of Persephone and Demeter, but the Descent of the Goddess came first and many believe it forms the basis for the Persephone/Demeter myth.<br /><br />THE DESCENT OF THE GODDESS<br /><br />So then, a brief retelling of the Descent of the Goddess (again, apologies to those of you who already know this!):<br /><br />Inanna is the Queen of the Overworld, where things aren't going very well for her. For a variety of reasons (depending on the version of the story), she is motivated to visit her twin sister, Erishkigal, the Queen of the Underworld, who is grieving inconsolably from a broken heart.<br /><br />To honor her sister, Inanna puts on her finest robes and presents herself at the entrance to the Underworld. However, to gain entry, she must pass through seven gates. At each gate, Inanna is required to remove one article of her fine clothing -- her crown, her robe, her shoes, etc. When she finally gains entrance to the Underworld, she is completely naked.<br /><br />Even then, her sister Erishkigal won't see her and is offended at Inanna's presumption at intruding on Erishkigal's domain. Erishkigal orders Inanna hung by her hands and whipped until the skin falls from her bones and she is just a skeleton. There Inanna's body hangs for three days and and nights, dead.<br /><br />Inanna's best female friend in the Overworld becomes worried when Inanna fails to return from her journey. The friend goes everywhere asking for help to rescue Inanna, but the only one who agrees to help is the God of the Sea. The Sea God fashions two sexless creatures of clay and animates them. The two clay creatures go down to the Underworld and present themselves to Erishkigal. Erishkigal is in such deep grief that all she can do is weep in her dark cave.<br /><br />The two clay figures do not speak to Erishkigal. They merely witness her pain and hear her cries -- but this is key because everyone else has been too frightened of her to get anywhere near her. She's been crying alone in the dark for ages.<br /><br />Just having a witness to validate and acknowledge her pain is so healing to Erishkigal that she is able to function again. In gratitude, she asks the two clay creatures what she can do to repay them, and they ask that she can restore Inanna's life and allow her to return to the Overworld.<br /><br />Erishkigal complies. Inanna's body and life are restored to her, Erkshigal's broken heart is mended, the two sisters have a loving reunion, and Inanna returns to the Overworld a stronger and more complete individual to preside over a peaceful and just kingdom. In short, she lives happily ever after.<br /><br />HOW ALL THIS RELATES TO FEMINISM<br /><br />Contained in the story of Inanna is, many would argue, the essence of what feminism really means. Our journey as women is different. It is not to find ourselves by expressing outward into the world by force or penetration, but by surrendering inwards, and giving up false power (ie, Inanna's fine robes, our attempts to act like men) to find a more authentic power (ie, connection with our true selves). Being strident, bitchy, overly assertive or masculine are the contemporary "robes" that we must be willing to be stripped of if we're going to find our true feminine selves.<br /><br />Analyzing the lessons of the heroine's journey contained in the Descent of the Goddess is a life's work (and many have made it just that), but for our purposes, the thing to notice here is that the way in which Inanna -- ie, the feminine -- seeks wisdom and wholeness is exactly opposite from the way a hero would (remembering that we're taking Descent of the Goddess as representative of feminine mythology). The solution to the hero's problems is to go forth and conquer; the solution to the heroine's problems is to go below and submit.<br /><br />Inanna does not find power by going on a hero's journey; she finds power by claiming the right to undertake her own unique feminine journey. And she finds it by yielding rather than attacking. Instead of fighting her way through the gates or defeating those who would hang and beat her as a hero would, Inanna submits completely and without protest to the indignity and pain of the experience. This is the only way in for her.<br /><br />Inanna returns to the physical world a healthy, empowered, complete woman. She does this not by fighting, but by submitting, by going without struggle into the depths of herself and surrendering her pride, her modesty and her physical power. Then -- and only then -- is she allowed access to her truer nature and her true pain. Had she struggled, she would have been denied entrance to the Underworld and by extension, denied knowledge of connection with her true Self and the opportunity to heal her broken heart.<br /><br />The power that comes with yielding is not a weaker or inferior form of power, but rather a different one (albeit one that's threatening and alien to our war and aggressive-centered culture). Inanna is not weak. She is a queen -- a real one, not a false one who rules by trying to be a king. The fact that feminism has been sold to contemporary women as requiring us to act like men is a cruel, abusive and confusing lie that does more to DIS-honor the feminine spirit than the honor it (how much honor can there be in claiming that to be worthwhile, you must reject and act in direct opposition to your truest self?).<br /><br />THE PART ABOUT SEX<br /><br />There are those who suggest that myths are not a valid enough basis for claiming that female energy is inherently submissive resist this idea at all costs. This resistance is understandable, given that the idea that feminine energy is about yielding can seem very frightening to those of us raised to believe that equal means masculine, and given the reality that there are plenty of predators lurking to take advantage of any yielding we do.<br /><br />However, any doubt that female energy is primarily inwardly directed and yielding seems quickly dispelled when we look at something much closer to home and completely outside the scope of cultural manipulation, etc.-- sex.<br /><br />The most basic place to find contemporary, non-mythological evidence of the difference between the heroine's journey and the hero's journey is in the sex act. The male's role in the sex act is to act outwardly. His penis protrudes out -- literally -- into the world. To consummate the act, he penetrates into the woman -- an act of aggression and force.<br /><br />The female's role in the sex act is, of course, opposite of the male's (hence yin/yang and other concepts of balance). Our sex organs are internal, not external. No matter how "feminist" (in the misunderstood way of using the term) a woman is, to consummate the sex act, we must submit to being penetrated, entered -- acted upon -- by our "hero." Yes, there are other ways to find sexual pleasure, but it all still comes down the basic, biologically hard-wired Sex Act: a man takes action and a woman submits.<br /><br />It is no accident that particularly in goddess-centered spirituality (but also in the mystic texts of mainstream religions like Christianity, Buddhism and Judaism), the sex act is considered a sacred ritual for connecting with God. A male and female joined in intercourse is our most profound symbol of unity, wholeness and the elevation of the human spirit. And it is inescapably an act which cannot take place unless the female submits to penetration by the male.<br /><br />In short, to find the sacred, each must play our part. The male must act and the female must submit. Put another way, the male must give and the female must receive for the spark of life to be ignited.<br /><br />There is no real "choice" here. If you want to have sex -- arguably the most basic and primal expression of gender -- and you are a woman, submission and yielding of physical control is required. And if you want to have good sex, I'd argue that a yielding of psychological control is required, too. If you want to find true completion in a relationship or within yourself, that same yielding of physical and psychological control is equally required, albeit in more subtle and complex ways.<br /><br />So, too, is "choice" an illusion when it comes to defining feminism. We don't have a choice as to how our archetypal selves feel and act or what they require to feel whole. 2000+ years of history and our basic biological makeup tells us who we are at our most primal levels and no amount of kicking and screaming and post-modern protest is going to change that -- at least not in our lifetimes. Archetypes and inner truths don't care about the Pill or the ERA or wage parity. They care about the deepest, truest parts of our nature that strength back to before recorded history.<br /><br />A woman's journey is inward, a man' s journey is outward. A man's journey to wholeness requires outward action; a woman's journey to wholeness requires "taking in," absorbing or yielding.<br /><br />We can choose not to go on the journey, of course, or we can choose to go on the wrong one, and in that sense, there is always choice. But to truly claim our power as women -- to truly be "feminist" -- requires an act of surrender akin to stripping off our pretensions (right down to the skin on our bones) and allowing ourselves to submit completely to the wisdom of our subconscious.<br /><br />HOW DD RELATES TO ALL THIS<br /><br />DD is, of course, a fundamental, deeply ritualized and externalized re-enactment of the heroine's journey, of this sacred joining of in and out, force and submission. By allowing our bodies to be stripped and beaten, our wills to be humbled and our tears to flow in the presence of a loving witness, we are <span style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">literally </span>re-creating the Descent of the Goddess with each punishment. I would argue that this is why the experience is so deeply psychologically resonant, for women in particular, but men also (that's another article).<br /><br />Those who are disturbed by this construct of male/female power have, over the years, done much to rationalize why it just ain't so. They insist that men and women aren't so different and women certainly don't have to submit to be self-actualized. But just because we're not comfortable with a truth doesn't make it less true.<br /><br />Can the heroine's journey, the act of yielding, go wrong? Be abused? Absolutely. Just as the hero can get eaten by the dragon, so too can the heroine be taken advantage of and exploited in her act of submission. But just because there are dragons out there that eat heroes doesn't make the hero's journey any less valid or necessary to spiritual fulfillment. And just because there are those out there who would (and have) sought to use the yielding power of the feminine to debase, subjugate and abuse women doesn't make those truths less valuable, less sacred, or less true.<br /><br />Going through the motions in the real world, we are all Inanna, struggling to find our way without the benefit of a transcendant journey of descent into the depths of who we really are. And deep in all of our hearts, weeping alone in her cave, is our own private Erishkigal, waiting for us to come and heal her broken heart.<br /><br />THE TRUE POWER OF THE FEMININE<br /><br />The power of the yielding submissive feminine is in the dignity of Jackie Kennedy walking behind her husband's casket, the compassion and courage of Princess Diana holding the hand of an AIDS victim or the eloquence of Maya Angelou sharing her story of rising above her abusive childhood.<br /><br />The power of the feminine is not confined to women. Martin Luther King and Gandhi knew the power of yielding and used it to change the world by fighting violent discrimination with non-violent resistence. Jesus knew it when he went willingly to the cross and submitted quietly to the violence of his tormenters (and for that matter, Mary knew it when she let him go).<br /><br />Any time anyone, male or female, chooses to nurture instead of attack or forgive instead of seeking revenge, it is the power of the true Feminine changing the world.<br /><br />My deepest wish for all of us this holiday season is that we open ourselves to the power of these ancient truths and that we all take a moment to find gratitude for the blessing of our awareness of the sacred power of DD to help us find our way to our own Underworlds and discover for ourselves the awesome power of true Feminism, and that once there, we glory in our true Selves and celebrate our differences. (And if we are blessed to have found a companion to help us get there, so much the better.)<br /><br />Happy Holidays,<br /><br />VivUnknownnoreply@blogger.com24tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-67359320644786179262007-11-02T22:47:00.000-06:002007-11-02T22:55:01.347-06:00Update and Some Good Questions<span style="font-family: georgia;">Thank you so much to all of you who wrote saying, "Hey, where the heck are you? Are you okay?" and other sorts of things.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">The answer is that, yes, I'm still here, and I'm very much okay. However, I'm in the homestretch of wrapping up a big contract (I work in politics and sometimes things get very hectic). As a result, there hasn't been as much time as I'd like for things like updating the blog. I'm working hard to clear my schedule and get back to my mountain retreat for at least awhile, and should be able to do so by the end of December -- at which time, I will probably start to have a great deal to write about as my partner and I have decided to try living together as a DD couple. This will be our first opportunity to really dig in and explore the relationship dynamics of DD on a day to day basis and I'm looking forward to sharing that experience with all of you, if you all can hang in there long enough!</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">In the meantime, I received a very thoughtful email from a new reader that I thought perhaps would be of interest to some of you. I'm sharing it with her consent, in the hopes that some of you might have responses to her questions. I myself have many responses, as many of her questions go right to the heart of the reason I started The Disciplined Feminist in the first place. However, I'd rather not let her email languish in my inbox until I have an opportunity respond, so perhaps some of you can begin the dialogue? </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">----</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;"> Hi</span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;"> </span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">I started reading your blog about DD and it really is fascinating. I am 34 and contemplating the whole DD thing but haven't told hubby yet until I am sure it is a path I really want to take.</span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;"> </span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">The adult/child idea is very interesting. I do not think I am an emotional adult and have spent years pretending to be one, which is why DD appeals to some part of my inner-child. I think perhaps you really do have something there - it makes a lot of sense from a psychological viewpoint. It is often women who are strong, feminist and intelligent with a moral conscience and well developed sense of 'justice' who want to seek "punishment" or consequences for their misbehaviour. Most probably due to the strong feelings of guilt associated with doing what they know to be "the wrong thing" and the hope that in being punished their guilt will be washed away. However, I suspect it is also the "strong moral conscience and well developed sense of justice" that stands in the way of really embracing the principles of the DD lifestyle.</span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;"> </span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">DD seems to have just enough of 'whatever it is that is missing from the modern relationship' to get the average, sensible, reasonably intelligent, emotionally-starved modern woman interested, and yet also has just enough inconsistencies, double standards and patriarchal overtones to give that same woman an uncomfortable gut feeling that there is something 'not-quite-right' about it too. At least that is how I am feeling about it, and the reason I am struggling and asking complete strangers questions!</span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;"> </span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">One question I have is, do you think that maybe what makes the whole DD power struggle and double standards an issue is that it goes against fairness, equality and all the feminist teachings that most Generation X women have grown up with?</span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;"> </span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">Also - I came across an interesting fact, did you know that the most common form of medication prescribed in the traditional marriage/Early baby boomer generation was VALIUM? Perhaps that makes being submissive easier????? </span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;"> </span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">I find there are two main aspects of DD that I find difficult to process, the first is FAIRNESS, and what to do when I am angry with something HE has done - I could see myself in your comments about "When I am Angry". </span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">The second is that I have children, mostly girls, and I look at what DD "teaches" and whether it is what I would want my girls to learn - do I want my girls to grow up to be submissive women who hand over the reigns of their life, their happiness, their emotional well being to a man ? The truth is, if they find a man who is worthy, respectable, strong, honest and displays all the positive masculine values and holds his own behaviour to a very high moral standard, then </span><em style="font-family: georgia;">perhaps</em><span style="font-family: georgia;"> that would be ok, if it made her happy. BUT how likely is that to happen these days??? The finding a man with those traits I mean? (Even "Dr Phil" had several affairs in his first marriage! and I wouldn't want to be Robyn would you?) So honestly, I think my girls, with that teaching, would get eaten alive in a modern world.</span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;"> </span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;"> Still, I am a 34 year old woman with a Masters Degree in Education, seven children and a husband who is a far cry from an "Alpha-male". I grew up with a weak father and a matriarch for a mother, so I could just be trying to go to the other extreme!</span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;"> </span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">Goodness human beings are complicated! Really what we all want is to be HAPPY! </span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-88583163302295094912007-09-04T21:47:00.000-06:002007-09-04T22:24:48.986-06:00Adult vs ChildApologies for the delay in posting this month's (August) article. I deeply appreciate those of you who comment and participate when I can't to keep our discussion going -- and I especially appreciate those of you who emailed me to make sure I was okay and that my slightly longer than usual absence wasn't indicative of any personal crisis. (It isn't. Just new job, long hours, high stress, etc.)<br /><br />Several of you wrote comments in response to the prior article that included your thoughts on whether or not women who engaged in DD were adults. This an intriguing issue and it seems worth exploring a bit further.<br /><br />In interest of stirring up a bit of controversy up front to make things interesting (!), my short response to this is that, no, I do not believe that women (myself included) who engage in DD are adults.<br /><br />As I've written before in other posts, I believe DD to be, at its heart, a reaction to a deeply felt need for boundaries and accountability that is often absent in our culture, most notably as the result of so-called "progressive" parenting (<a href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/01/dd-as-reaction-to-me-generation.html">"DD as a Reaction to Me-Generation Parenting"</a>) that emphasizes individual expression and personal freedom over boundaries and consequences. I've also mentioned in prior articles that DD seen in this light is an extremely healthy way for our infinitely-creative psyches to get what's missing in our lives in a way that feels safe, fair and straightforward. (see just about every entry!)<br /><br />(DD does, of course, have other archetypal origins, and some day I'm actually going to write the article that explores those...)<br /><br />My underlying theory here is that DD is first and foremost a re-parenting process -- a method of gifting our inner child with the experiences of being held accountable to rules and boundaries. That means that the role of the submissive partner in a DD relationship is at its core that of the externalized inner child. Spanking, scolding, corner time, grounding -- all experiences that are, of course, strongly associated with childhood rather than adulthood.<br /><br />Being able to safely give up our adult selves to experience this powerful cycle of guilt, justice and forgiveness is, I believe, at the heart of what makes DD so appealing to many women. It's also what separates true DD (real punishments for real misbehaviors) for S&M sex play or disciplinary fantasies). I believe the need for some of us to have it "be real" to be effective is our strongest clue that something developmentally significant -- essential even -- is going on for us.<br /><br />I believe that to fully understand and benefit from the DD experience requires us to let go of the illusion that women who have a strong need to DD are adults. We are not. If we were, we would already have progressed through the developmental stage that DD fulfills a need for.<br /><br />Our society has systematically done away with most of the primitive tribal rituals that used to help people transition from childhood to adulthood -- mostly ritual pain experiences that are now viewed as barbaric but serve a critical developmental function of helping us to make the transition to adulthood. As a result, we have an entire culture of people, male and female, who live as adults, are legally considered adults, and have adult bodies and responsibilities, but who fundamentally do not have the emotional maturity and capacity of a fully grown being.<br /><br />For all kinds of reasons, including social conditioning and weak parenting, they/we are lacking the internalized "strong parent" that is required for the child to become an independent, emotionally self-supporting, confident individual.<br /><br />Some might be offended at the idea that women who crave DD are child-like. I hope those of you who are feeling a bit offended might re-think any perceptions our society has instilled in us that children are stupid or simple. Children are, in reality, vibrant, creative beings who actively seek out what they need to strive and grow into healthy adults. And women who seek out the loving solution of DD as a way to become healthy adults are demonstrating a striking amount of courage, creativity and resiliency that many others in our culture with similar needs (and that's probably most of us) don't demonstrate. <br /><br />Most readers will probably agree that DD is one of the most elegant, simple and effective ways of meeting our unmet developmental needs -- of literally turning those of us who look like and live like adults into actual functioning adults by allowing us to turn back the clock to childhood to get the type of discipline and structure we need to complete our journey.<br /><br />As I experience DD in my real life -- along with that empowering feeling of taking such literal and simple responsibility for my actions -- I can feel myself filling that long-unmet need. I'm literally growing up before my own eyes.<br /><br />Becoming a real adult instead of a pretend one.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com23tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-59904336490969059272007-07-02T13:03:00.000-06:002007-07-10T17:24:24.208-06:00"Maintenance" vs Discipline: A Question of Conscience<span style="font-family:georgia;">Most of the spankings in our relationship in the past few months have been "maintenance" spankings -- meaning, spankings that aren't motivated by any particular misbehavior but are intended rather as a general attitude adjustment or stress reliever.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">I suspect that the emphasis on maintenance spankings in our relationship is largely because my partner and I are still struggling with the Big Problem we have with regard to DD (Domestic Discipline): I rarely misbehave in a way that, to me at least, is unambiguously my fault. (see </span><a style="font-family: georgia;" href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/01/when-hes-wrong.html">"When I'm Angry"</a><span style="font-family:georgia;">).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">I virtually always believe that my behavior is either not inappropriate at all, or if it is inappropriate, is a response to something nefarious and egregious that he did first, and thus my misdeed is at the very least, equal to his and therefore justifiable -- and therefore shouldn't merit a one-sided discipline. (and no, there's no way in h*ll I'd even consider spanking him. That would, I believe, completely ruin the archetypal male/female energy of DD and undermine his role as an authority figure much the same way that a child spanking a parent would).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">At any rate, the reason that I generally receive maintenance spankings is most likely that they're safer than disciplinary ones because they don't require a judgement about fault or blame and can be given "just because."</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">Our habit, therefore, has become to ignore anything that would require an actual, specific disciplinary response and focus on periodic, general-purpose maintenance spankings instead.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">This is, of course, a problem in a DD relationship, as there's a reason that it's called "Domestic Discipline" and not "Domestic 'Just Because'".</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">In addition to the problem of the </span><a style="font-family: georgia;" href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/07/perfect-paddle.html">Perfect Paddle, </a><span style="font-family:georgia;">I suspect that the emphasis on maintenance spankings is equally responsible for the disappearance of all those wonderful empowered feelings I used to get from DD that have been noticeably absent since my return to my partner's city.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">The disciplinary "bad girl" component of a spanking, for me, is crucial to the overall experience. I need to feel the knot in my stomach (and nervous tingling elsewhere) that tells me that I've done wrong and now I need to pay. I need to feel the embarrassment and humility of knowing that I've "got it coming" for a specific mistake I've made, that what's to come is not a favor or a way of helping me relieve stress (not directly anyway), but a fair consequence for an error that I've made. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">And I need the security of knowing that when things go wrong in the relationship, there are specific, concrete consequences rather than the vague, silent tension that exists when there is no specific discipline given. And in the moment, I need my disciplinarian to be stern, distant and without visible compassion, not loving and supportive (that comes after).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">Feeling guilty, then punished or disciplined, and then subsequently cleansed and forgiven, is so much a part of the cathartic, transformative experience of DD for me that without it, it's pretty much just theater. Perhaps minimally satisfying in the moment for its sexual subtext, but without any lasting psychological or relationship benefits.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">This cycle of guilt/discipline/forgiveness is one of the many elements that separates DD from more deliberately erotic and sexual forms of pleasure/pain play, and puts it closer to the cathartic ritual pain practiced by many religious movements throughout the ages (starting well before the Catholic monks) as well as traditional parent/child punishments.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">As human beings, most of us have consciences -- and a desire to cleanse them periodically. Unfortunately, our culture has precious few outlets for clearing one's conscience. The Catholic Church has the Rite of Confession, but most of us, of course, aren't Catholic. For most of us, unless we receive a speeding ticket, a library fine or a reprimand or other disciplinary action at work, there are very few healthy mechanisms in contemporary culture for expunging adult guilt for a transgression (and precious few mechanisms for kids either, thanks to so-called "progressive parenting" -- see </span><a style="font-family: georgia;" href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/01/dd-as-reaction-to-me-generation.html">"DD as a Reaction to Me Generation Parenting"</a><span style="font-family:georgia;">)</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">Much of the power of DD -- whether we realize it consciously or not -- comes in its ability to formalize and provide a safe, contained way of cleansing our consciences for wrongs that we've done to ourselves and those around us. To remove the element of guilt/punishment/forgiveness from the DD experience by giving too many spankings "just because" risks removing the basic psychological element that makes DD "work."</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">That's not to say, of course, that there isn't a place for role playing, erotic spanking and other non-disciplinary activities -- of course there is and those things can be a lot of fun, but at their core, they generally (though not always) lack the psychological element of conscience-cleansing that's inherent to DD. As an example, my </span><a style="font-family: georgia;" href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/07/perfect-paddle.html">"Perfect Paddle" </a><span style="font-family:georgia;">was indeed perfect -- for sex play and fantasy, but not for discipline. (and has accordingly been shelved by mutual agreement between my partner and myself)</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">The difference between DD and these more sexually-oriented activities is that DD speaks directly to the very real, very human need to pay for one's crimes. And I suspect the growing appeal of DD has much to do with the lack of socially-acceptable ways for adults to pay for our transgressions, in a culture where anything goes and too many people seem to believe they have the "right" to treat anyone any way they please without consequences. (If you want to experience this lack of personal responsibility directly, just try asking someone to put their dog on a leash or not park their SUV in a compact spot and see the reaction you get.)</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">Deep down, the wiser, better part of us knows we don't have the "right" to behave badly just because we're adults, whether we push that knowledge away, cover it up with aggression and bravado, or acknowledge it. Those of us who recognize our need for DD are fortunate to be at least a little bit more in touch with our social and personal consciences than many of those around us -- which gives us a better-than-average shot at being better, more decent human beings than we would otherwise be.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">Whether or not DD is ultimately a viable lifestyle option remains to be seen -- the surge of interest in this lifestyle seems the beginning of a social experiment in human behavior, sex roles and power in relationships. Time will tell whether or not the Big Problem of how to deal with the dominant partner's transgressions will be DD's undoing.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">But divorcing DD from its fundamental role as a mechanism for regularly and safely experiencing the cycle of transgression, justice and forgiveness is doing the lifestyle and the people who take great personal risks to practice it a grave disservice. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">If there is an answer to DD's Big Problem, it lies somewhere beyond removing one of the primary elements that make DD such a potentially healthy relationship choice.</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com34tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-54303583405568602832007-07-01T20:06:00.000-06:002007-07-10T17:27:18.341-06:00The Perfect Paddle<span style="font-family: georgia;">After much consideration, I have arrived back in the same city as my partner (though not yet in the same household, we're not quite ready for that) with the intention of staying through the summer to see how things develop between us, both in Domestic Discipline (DD) and in the rest of our relationship.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">As is par for the course with us, getting back into the rhythm of DD is not without its bumps and hiccups -- though this time, I'm happy to say not because of any reluctance of his part or mine. On the contrary, he's embraced the DD lifestyle with a consistency and enthusiasm heretofore unseen in our relationship.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">A week or so before I left, I happened to find a paddle at the local thrift store. It was one of those paddles that's clearly not a cheese board or a game paddle, but a bona-fide spanking paddle meant for the infliction of corporal punishment.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">The paddle looked to be perfect and my heart gave a bit of a flutter when I picked it up. It's just thin enough to sting, not thud (stinging being my sensation of preference), wide enough and long enough to fully cover the area in need of correction, with a good solid grip suited for a man's hand. It's made out of hardwood, so despite its thinness, it's not likely to break at an inopportune moment.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">The first time I was asked to "Go get the paddle," I presented it proudly, imagining how much richer our DD experience was about to become.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">And as soon as I felt it on my backside, I knew I was right. We'd found the Perfect Paddle.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">By "perfect," I mean that it felt just right. And by "just right, " I mean that it hurt exactly as much as I imagine in my head that a spanking will hurt, and it hurt in exactly the way that I imagine a spanking will hurt. For the first time, my real-life spanking experience matched almost exactly the spankings of my fantasies.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">Spurred on by my enthusiasm, my partner has subsequently used said Paddle of Perfection on a regular basis in an effort to get our relationship back on track.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">It's failing miserably.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">The Perfect Paddle feels "perfect" and "just right" in imagination and application. But it fails in every really important way. It leaves no marks or bruises. The pain stops as soon as the spanking stops. There is no day after (or as before, week after) soreness to remind me of the session. Heck, there's barely even a "minute after" -- two minutes after the spanking (before corner time's even started), it's as though the spanking never happened.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">I expect it's different for everyone, but for me at least, the psychological benefits of a spanking come largely in its aftereffects. Every time I see the bruises or sit down and feel the twinge of pain and ache on my backside, I get a little jolt of that miraculous DD-juice -- self-confidence, personal power, a wonderful feeling of being loved and cared about by my partner. I go a week or so -- minimum -- on a spanking like that and still feel empowered, loved and a bit like I'm walking on air. But without those aftereffects, the power of DD, at least for me, is nonexistent.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">And yet.... that paddle feels so perfect....</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">It's an interesting lesson for me on the difference between sexual fantasy and reality. Fantasy is wonderful, but it's rarely the key to personal growth.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">The spanking of my fantasies, so long craved and searched for, carries little to no power in real life. And the thicker, "thuddier" paddle that wields such power on my psyche in real life rarely appears in my fantasies.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">I expect a lot of things are like that, especially in the DD and D/s world. The perfect DD partner of our fantasies might well be completely ineffective and disappointing in real life and the guy you'd never think knew his way around a paddle might be the most effective disciplinarian we'll ever meet. And of course, I've had any number of D/s scenarios that seemed wildly exciting in my head turn into a big snore when tried out in the real world.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">The Case of the Perfect Paddle is a valuable lesson in remembering that DD, when practiced between two living, breathing people, is about reality, not fantasy.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">And it's an even better reminder that DD is a living, fluid thing, and that there are dangers in clinging too much to how we imagine it ought to go. In having overly specific or rigid expectations of how DD "ought" to work, we may miss out on experiences and nuances that are richer and more valuable to us than the scenarios in our imaginations.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">And so it's with a heavy heart that I will request, humbly, that my partner set aside the Perfect Paddle (except for in future potential play situations, which we haven't yet explored) and once again take up the dreaded thicker paddle that strikes fear in my heart, but creates those lovely bruises, aches and pains that seem to hold the key to my better and higher Self.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">But maybe I'll wait until I've had just one more spanking with it... :-)</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-75710797287336315302007-06-06T22:28:00.000-06:002007-06-06T23:28:59.271-06:00Hamlet Needs a Spanking: DD and Indecision<span style="font-family:georgia;">When I was in high school, I was fortunate to have one of those wonderful teachers who genuinely loved and understood Shakespeare and knew how to get her students to love and understand it as well. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">As a result of her teaching, I'm one of the those fortunate few who laughs at all the right places during Shakespearian plays not because the person next to me does, but because I actually get the jokes -- a gift I'm forever grateful for.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">The tragedies were my favorite and I was fascinated at the idea of the fatal flaw that undoes the classic hero. I understood about Othello's jealousy and Macbeth's ambition, but when my teacher suggested that indecision was Hamlet's fatal flaw, I was stumped.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">How in the heck could indecision rank up there with jealousy and ambition as something that could wreck your life?</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">I don't know where that teacher is now, but if I did, I'd email her and say, "Oh, I get it now." No wonder Hamlet's the most famous of Shakespeare's tragic heroes. I'd take jealousy or ambition over indecision any day.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">After yet another long separation, I spent the last two weeks with my partner. Predictably, despite all our problems and my doubts about the future of our relationship, all it took was about five seconds in the same room with him and I fell in love all over again (and predictably, suffered total amnesia about all of our problems). And all it took was one "welcome back" spanking for me to remember why I'm going through all this trouble to keep this relationship in the first place. We may suck as a contemporary couple, but we kick *ss on the DD front when we're doing it right.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">But it's becoming more and more clear to me that, at least for us, this long distance thing isn't going to work. I suspect a couple has to be much further down the road with DD, and have a much more solid foundation of trust and good communication, for long-distance DD to work. And as regular readers know, we've got anything but that.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">So I'm now faced with the decision: to stay where I am, snug in my little mountain hideaway, safely distant from the everyday dramas of a relationship that may not work out but without the possibility of using DD to make things better, or do I go back and try to work through that murky pit of past trouble that I wrote about in a prior post.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">And that's where I began to realize the perils of indecision, because of course, every time I decide one way, I realize what I'll be giving up and so I swing the other way. I've been doing that for weeks now, if not months. It's driving him crazy, and honestly, it's driving me crazy, too. (too bad spankings don't make me more decisive)</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">As I was shifting back and forth (and back and forth) again this afternoon, trying to figure out what to do, I realized with abrupt clarity how many of my decisions are motivated by a need to avoid pain. And in the next instant, I realized another reason why DD is such a potentially healing and powerful force in my life.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">The trigger that causes me to swing one way or the other on this decision and other major life decisions comes when the excitement of the positive parts of the decision momentarily give way to the mourning for whatever it is I'll be losing. And that pain is so scary that I immediately swing the other way to make it go away. Which is does, for a little while, until the relief of having reclaimed what I had lost goes away and the pain of the loss on the other side seeps through. Then it's back the other way I go. (For those of you who are wondering, this will eventually lead back to DD.)</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">Looking back, I'm realizing only now how much of my life has been mismanaged out of a desperate desire to avoid pain -- irresponsible spending ("I have to have it now!"), quitting school - twice ("School is boring."), walking away from worthwhile projects and professional opportunities ("This is taking way too long and I hate getting up early."). But the end result of avoiding short-term pain is suffering far greater long-term pain -- be it too much credit card debt or unfulfilled educational or career goals. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">And that's where DD comes in. (See, I told you I'd get back to the topic.)</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">DD is all about experiencing short-term pain to avoid long-term pain. Spankings and other discipline hurt now, but they keep things from building up, both personally and in the relationship, that will hurt a lot more for a lot longer if they're not dealt with. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">And predictably, even though I know this to be true, I dread discipline of any kind, and when the time comes to accept it, I'll do whatever it takes to stall and avoid it. (My partner, to his credit, is beginning to figure out that he's not doing me any favors by allowing me to get away with these tactics.)</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">To have the life I want, I have to learn to let go of things, to make </span><span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" style="font-family:georgia;">sacrifices</span><span style="font-family:georgia;"> for long-term goals, to do all the things that, in short, grown ups know how to do, but that I was never taught as a child because no one ever discplined me when I got lazy, put things off or quit when the going got tough.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">I believe that, whatever the problems in our relationship, DD will help me to learn those things. Often, I think I focus too much on whether or not DD is helping the relationship, and I forget how much it's helping me.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:georgia;">Tonight, I'm pretty sure it's time to go home -- largely because I want to be the person that I am when DD is in my life, and I can't have that where I am now. Tomorrow, I may feel differently. But DD is teaching me that the ultimate decision needs to be based on what I want overall in my life, not on avoiding the inevitable short-term pain that comes with picking one </span><span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2" style="font-family:georgia;">option</span><span style="font-family:georgia;"> over another.</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-39335646680046359332007-05-04T22:20:00.000-06:002007-05-08T22:41:28.166-06:00Boundaries: Finding the "Sweet Spot"I received an email from a regular reader today who was having trouble posting comments to this blog. He emailed me (and I hope I'm not violating any confidences here!) that he'd tried unsuccessfully to post in the past and when his comments failed to appear, he thought perhaps I'd rejected them because he was male and didn't want men's opinions on the blog.<br /><br />For the record, this is not the case! In fact, just the opposite is true. I see a serious lack of the male perspective in online DD material, and would love to have much more input from the male/dominant point of view.<br /><br />In light of this unfortunate misunderstanding, I've revised the email policy posted in the sidebar.<br /><br />My reason for the initial "no emails from men" policy has been that I tend to have a serious problem enforcing personal boundaries. Particularly in the areas of sex and relationships, I tend to ignore those helpful instincts that tell me when a situation is unsafe or unhealthy until it's far too late to safely extricate myself from it.<br /><br />It's only recently that I've begun to realize I have not only the power, but also the obligation, to keep myself safe by enforcing personal boundaries -- hence the prior "no email from men" policy (and the trouble in my current relationship...). But erring on the side of overcompensating isn't healthy, either -- hence the correction to the policy. So provided I don't become inundated with strangers emailing to ask me what color underwear I prefer, I'm happy to accept emails from any and all.<br /><br />But the whole incident got me thinking about something very related to DD: boundaries.<br /><br />As I've explored a bit in the past (see<a href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/01/when-hes-wrong.html">"When I'm Angry"</a>), the biggest weakness of DD seems to be that the dominant partner has the ability to enforce personal boundaries and the submissive partner doesn't. And in many cases, the dominant partner also claims (largely erroneously) the right to decide what the acceptable boundaries are not just for himself, but for his partner as well.<br /><br />Like many women passionately committed to living a DD lifestyle, I've done back flips trying to rationalize why either A. this isn't the case, or failing that, B. this isn't a problem.<br /><br />Putting aside for a moment the possibility of discipline going both ways a la the Spencer Plan (the subject for another post), the flat out truth is here is very simple:<br /><br />A. it is the case and B, it is a problem. At least for me.<br /><br />The issue of boundaries is, unfortunately, fundamental to why my current DD relationship seems to be imploding at lightning speed.<br /><br />As long as I don't enforce my boundaries, we're blissfully happy. When I do call attention to something in the relationship that violates my sense of self, he gets angry. If I press the point, I risk discipline. And because I know that there is always the possibility that I will be disciplined for defending my boundaries, my need to protect myself keeps me (rightly) from being able to submit fully to his discipline.<br /><br />Fundamentally, while I completely trust that he won't abuse his power during the actual disciplinary process, I don't trust his judgement when it comes to determining who's at fault for an "incident" -- me, him or both of us. And trusting the judgement of one's disciplinarian is so fundamental to the feeling of safety and love that healthy DD creates that the experience doesn't hold up long-term without it.<br /><br />Interestingly enough, I was fully aware of this weakness (minefield? powder keg?) in our relationship before I even suggested DD. In fact, it's one of the reasons I suggested it in the first place. I decided that if I was going to have to back down most of the time anyway to keep the peace, I may as well fill the emotional need I had for DD in the process and turn a negative into a positive.<br /><br />Wanting my partner so much, and wanting DD so much, I naively thought that the benefits would be so overwhelming that they would make up for this deficit in our core relationship, and that in a sense, we'd both get what we wanted. He'd get to be "right" most of the time, and I'd get the safety and security of DD.<br /><br />Wrong, wrong, wrong.<br /><br />There is no benefit, DD or otherwise, that is powerful enough to make up for a lack of respect or a diminishment of self. If there were, there would never have been a women's movement (or a civil rights movement or an organized labor movement). Women would have been happy to be cossetted, protected and cared for in exchange for putting up with being talked down to, excluded and dehumanized.<br /><br />But it doesn't work that way. The innate human need for self respect is too powerful.<br /><br />Am I then suggesting that DD is, after all, inherently abusive and sexist?<br /><br />Absolutely not!<br /><br />I continue to believe that, when it's in the context of a healthy, mutually respectful relationship, DD speaks to a basic, archetypal need in those who seek it -- first, to fulfill unmet childhood and developmental needs, (see <a href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/01/dd-as-reaction-to-me-generation.html">"DD as a Reaction to Me Generation Parenting"</a>) and second, to balance the male/female archetypal energies that our culture has twisted beyond <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">recognition</span>. (I really need to get around to finishing that post...)<br /><br />But because there are no external forces checking the behavior of the dominant in a DD relationship, the only check on the system that prevents abuse is self-control, an internal responsibility on his part and a willingness to admit freely when he's wrong. Lose any of those and the relationship -- and the woman specifically -- are in dangerous territory.<br /><br />As Ollie wrote so beautifully in his comment on "When I'm Angry," (and I'm paraphrasing here), power corrupts. And in a situation where one human being has ultimate say over right and wrong, few of us, male or female, could resist the temptation to avoid taking responsibility for our mistakes.<br /><br />This is all too human an impulse. In fact, I think it's safe to say that most women attracted to DD are attracted precisely because we recognize our urge to avoid responsibility and want to be forced to accept it.<br /><br />I imagine myself with a paddle in my hand, and while I'd like to think I'd be fair, truthfully, I doubt it. If I were that good a disciplinarian, if my judgement were that sound, if I were that emotionally balanced, I likely wouldn't have such strong need for an external disciplinarian, and my interest in spanking and discipline would likely revert to a strictly sexual one.<br /><br />Fundamentally, then, the issue of boundaries goes back to the prior post -- it seems that for a traditional non-reciprocal DD relationship to work, the trust has to be firmly established prior to the introduction of DD. The respect of boundaries has to go both ways -- and his way is harder, because he has to do it of his own free will. Otherwise, there's simply too much temptation to abuse the privilege of power.<br /><br />Perhaps the ongoing attempts by myself and others to negotiate a successful DD relationship can be compared to finding that "sweet spot" during a spanking -- it hurts in all the right -- and none of the wrong -- places.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8902179632740561852.post-52209284821212366362007-04-23T20:54:00.000-06:002007-04-24T15:50:57.885-06:00When DD's Not EnoughRegular readers have no doubt noticed a sharp decline in the frequency at which new articles appear on this blog. My apologies.<br /><br />The truth is, I haven't written because I've been reluctant to face what's most on my mind these days with regard to Domestic Discipline (DD).<br /><br />A few months back, I wrote a post questioning whether a relationship is real if the only thing holding it together is DD. (<a href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/01/if-dd-is-glue-do-parts-really-fit.html">"If DD is the glue, do the parts really fit?") </a><br /><br />At the time, I concluded that the answer was yes, because for a relationship to thrive, what was required was trust and communication, and something, be it DD or a more traditional method, has to provide a framework for that trust and communication or the relationship won't survive.<br /><br />I'm no longer at all sure of that position.<br /><br />Back in March, Bonnie posed the question on "<a href="http://bottomsmarts.blogspot.com/2007/03/guest-post-by-opb-neapolitan-marriage.html#links">My Bottom Smarts"</a> as to whether you'd leave a relationship if the other person wasn't interested in DD. But it's the opposite question that's on my mind now. Do I stay in a relationship that seems to be fundamentally unhealthy for both parties just to keep DD in my life?<br /><br />As many of you know, my partner and I spend most of our time apart. This isn't for professional reasons, as with many couples. Rather it's because after six years of being together, when our relationship became so difficult and painful we couldn't be in the same room together without hurting each other, I left. And he agreed that I should leave.<br /><br />I moved 800 miles away to get some time to think things through and start over. Ironically, once I did leave, the pressure was off, and we had the time and space to find each other again -- largely through an exploration of DD -- both through extended phone and email conservations about our expectations from a DD relationship, and then during the extended times we've been together in the last year.<br /><br />As with many couples, things improved rapidly for us when DD became part of our lives. Almost overnight it seemed, we went from tears, fighting, accusations and anger to intimacy, love, communication and talk of marriage and life commitment.<br /><br />But now, our separation is more extended than it has been in the past and since for us at least, DD does not seem to work when we're not physically together, things have fallen apart again in a serious way. Once again, it's hard to believe we're the same two people who were so close last time we were together. I feel as though he's a stranger most of the time, and I don't seem to be able to find back the wonderful person with whom I have such a unique and powerful bond. And I suspect he feels the same way.<br /><br />When my partner and I added DD to our relationship this time around (we'd tried it before, but that's another article!), we realized we had a lot of clearing the air work to do. To accomplish this, we did the traditional "clearing the slate" ritual -- an extended, intense disciplinary session meant to expunge the hurts and betrayals of the past and start us on a new, healthier path together.<br /><br />This ritual was helpful, to some extent. That level of ritual pain is powerful and it can't help but be cleansing in many ways. But the reality is that one afternoon of DD, no matter how intense and emotional, isn't going to erase years of mistrust, hurt, anger and miscommunication. That's not realistic, but more the stuff of romantic DD fantasy. Also significant is that the slate clearing was about me making up for what I did. We have yet to find an effective, DD-themed mechanism for making up for what he did -- one of the potential flaws of a traditional DD relationship. (see <a href="http://disciplinedfeminist.blogspot.com/2007/01/when-hes-wrong.html">"When I'm Angry") </a><br /><br />No matter how many spankings are given or how much time is spent in the corner, at some point in a relationship, you have to sit down across the table from the other person and <span style="font-style: italic;">talk </span>with them about what's going on between you. And that's where the problem is, at least for us.<br /><br />The truth is that neither my partner nor I are particularly good at communicating with each other about our feelings. (except where DD is concerned) When we talk about the issues in our past, I get emotional; he withdraws. I get more emotional because he withdraws; he withdraws even more. And so it goes.<br /><br />And as a result, nothing really gets resolved between us. This lack of closure and resolution is why DD is such a welcome change for us. No leaving things to simmer and fester -- a spanking clears the air and gets us back on the right track.<br /><br />But spankings now don't seem to help us with things in the past. And for us, there is a lot of pain in the past. Big Pain. Not "don't leave the toilet seat up" kind of pain, but big, Lifetime Movie of the Week pain. A sticky, seemingly bottomless pit of mistrust, anger and hurt that I'm not sure can be cleared up with any method, DD or otherwise.<br /><br />My new answer then, to whether a relationship is legitimate if the only thing holding it together is DD is, sadly, probably not.<br /><br />It may be that for DD to work as it's intended, it has to start from a place of trust and communication, rather than standing in as a substitute for those things. It may be that trying to use DD to rescue a relationship full of pain and anger and miscommunication is like putting a band-aid on an infected wound. It covers it up, but it doesn't make the wound go away.<br /><br />And so I've been contemplating the possibility that's breaking my heart: That this wonderful, beautiful relationship that feels so right, so complete and so safe in so many ways (in many ways beyond DD) may not be the right one after all.<br /><br />And with that, of course, comes the fear that I may never find anyone else again who understands this need in me as completely as my current partner does. I may find someone else willing to spank me, sure. Easy enough. But as we all know, DD is much, much more than that. Will I be able to find someone else with such a solid grasp of the psychology involved on both sides of a DD relationship? Who understands why living this way is so important to me and what my life experience was that made it so? Who comes to DD with such exquisite sensititivity and respect for my personhood? Doubtful. But possible.<br /><br />Even more than the obvious heartbreak of losing my partner and all the wonderful parts of our relationship when it's working, it's devastating for me to think of forever losing a chance at being the person that I am when DD is working. The sense of empowerment and confidence. The feeling of finding my truest feminine self in a way that I haven't found anywhere else. To give that up terrifies me and keeps me hanging in, trying to make this work long past the point where I probably should have realized it's not going to.<br /><br />If he asked me to marry him today, would I say yes, despite the ongoing problems, despite that murky tar pit of Big Pain in our past? Probably -- almost certainly -- yes. And that scares me even more. That I want and need DD in my life so much, and that I'm so afraid this is my only chance at having it, that I'd be willing to make a lifelong commitment to a relationship that's so fundamentally flawed just to keep it. Yikes.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com16