A shrewish woman who has completely destroyed her husband's self-esteem and emasculated him by constantly correcting and humiliating him for the last 30 years might do well to be a bit more silent on occasion, as suggested by Laura Doyle. The point of that would be for the woman to stop controlling and correcting her husband, to give him a chance to take the reins.

But in a Taken In Hand relationship, the man is in control, and as I said in the teaser on the front page, a man in control would be wise to ensure that his woman feels ‘heard’. In my opinion, accepting a man's authority should not mean ceasing to have a voice in the relationship. If only one mind were doing the necessary thinking and problem-solving, the other would be superfluous.

I think it is important to remember that we are all fallible human beings, and as such, we all make mistakes, including men, and we all have human fears and wishes that can't just be discounted. The man might well make all the decisions; the woman might well be expected to try to obey even; but I think it would be expecting too much of any human woman to require her to keep her fears, concerns, and wishes to herself. I should have thought that the more control there is, the more important it is for the man to encourage the woman to tell him her opinions, wishes, objections, and fears. This kind of relationship should mean more communication, not less, I think.

Off topic side note: Louise, I had to chuckle when I read this:

Somebody on a yahoo group told me that she didn't think I was submissive at all, and I think perhaps she was right.

This is exactly the thought a number of other Taken In Hand women have had. I think your post nicely illustrates why some of us occasionally wonder if “submissive” is a good label to put on ourselves. From one POV, wanting a man's control implies that we are, but there are so many things the word can mean that do not fit.

Louise, I think you are a good example of someone who is submissive, is turned on by your husband's show of authority, but most definitely has her own mind and has limits.

This doesn't exclude you from being submissive except according to the oneupmanship "more submissive than thou" game some people play.

Everyone, but everyone, has limits. That goes for the men also. The reason some are able to claim they have no limits is that they have found themselves a relationship with a dominant man who has the SAME limits.

So if he is equally turned off by whipping you till you bleed as you are at the thought of experiencing that, you might think there are no limits. The same goes for other more edgy areas of S & M...or for being told what to eat for dinner and what clothes to wear.

When someone suggests something that is beyond the woman's limits, that is where the woman, with every right to do so, says No.

Well, the boss, actually, one partner's mind might not be necessary in a very one-sided relationship..just her warm and available body might be enough. But clearly that isn't what most women aspire to being. And if they care about the relationship and where it is going they will speak up if the husband is making a huge mistake.

As for shrews, just like any other bully, male or female, learning to behave properly in a relationship is a good idea.

"Pat"

Surely though, the whole point is that the lovingly dominant man won't ask anything harmful of his loved one? Whilst insisting she eat something she doesn't like can hardly be classed harmful, neither is it particularly loving. To my mind that's entering the realms of being domineering, dicatorial and at worst a downright bully. That certainly is not how I interpret loving dominance. Insisting on harmful/distasteful outcomes is simply not within the remit of what encompasses loving dominance. If however he prevents her from doing something he KNOWS will result in harm to her, that's a totally different matter ...and that's where the difference lies I think.

Whilst insisting she eat something she doesn't like can hardly be classed harmful, neither is it particularly loving. To my mind that's entering the realms of being domineering, dicatorial and at worst a downright bully.

I believe it was I who made the comment that my man could tell me what to eat for lunch or what to make for dinner. Yes, he could and I leave that option open to him because (as I said elsewhere in the article) I know that he does not take control of things just to be in control.

Technically, one could say that he could tell me to eat brussel sprouts or a big pile of salt or a spider, but I know this man and I know he doesn't do things just to show that he can make me do them (except in bed and that is a whole different ball of wax, LOL).

All I meant was that if he wants to walk in the kitchen and say (which he has), I am having a craving for ABC, please make that for dinner tonight." Then I will make it and I will not bitch and moan about how he is making unreasonable demands on me or how he just thinks I am here to serve his every whim or whatever. If I can't for some reason, then I tell him and we figure it out.

If however he prevents her from doing something he KNOWS will result in harm to her, that's a totally different matter ...and that's where the difference lies I think.

This is more along the lines of what I was talking about when I was saying that he could tell me what to eat. The big one that I could really see happening is one of us getting tired of my mood swings caused by my food addictions and deciding that I need to stop drinking coffee or whatever.

Then we would discuss how to best do that. Yes, in that case we might be sitting in a restaurant and he might tell me not to order dessert or not to get the coffee or whatever. He might call me in the middle of the day and ask me what I ate for lunch. If I was having trouble, he might tell me what I can and can not eat or what not to buy.

I do not know what he would actually do, these are just some of the things that I can think of might be in the realm of possibility. The point is, that he could decide whatever path he chooses, though of course I would have input; it is my body and he has very little first hand knowledge of recovering from an addiction. But it would be in his ultimate control and I would follow his judgement and we would work within the framework he institutes. If it wasn't working we would modify it.

His control and decision making power always hinges on his working toward my and our relationship's best interest. I trust him to do that and that is why I give him my trust, because he earned it.

Otter*

I can't imagine being silent, nor can I imagine my loving hubby wanting me to be. He is always asking me what I think about this or that.

He has made many decisions over the years, and I have given my opinion, fears, concerns, or even information he did not have. There have been a few--very few--times when I felt strongly about something and was upset. He really listened then, because I am not prone to temper fits or controlling behavior.

There have been mistakes made, or things neither of us anticipated, but that is life. The mistakes weren't made out of selfishness or lack of care for me or our family.

This is such a good topic for me. I am a submissive woman. I have spent a life time seeking a dominant man who would take me in hand. However; what I continually did was picked domineering men, which were self absorbed bullies. At 48 I turned to the BDSM community because there did seem to be a faction of men that were dominant but understood the difference between "dominant and domineering". I feel fortunate that I have found a man who has agreed to help me find my limits and push them, while discovering the difference between my wants and my needs.

I will interject this note of caution...within the BDSM community there are many men claiming to be dominant who are in fact domineering egotists.

With that being said. When trying to determine my needs, my wants, or what my limits are. Sir always gives me a voice. He generally starts with an article, a scenario, or gives me a topic for an essay. We talk about what I have read or how I feel. (He rarely asks anymore what I think about it. As my thinking processes makes him crazy, but that is for another thread.)

The point is he does not act immediately on or make any decision concerning any of the information I give him about how I think I feel about something. Early in our relationship I wondered why he even asked at all, but as time has gone by. We will be interacting and I will find myself in a position of where I want him to take more control. The next thing I know he is taking the control in such a way that I submit to where I thought my limit was. (Referring to soft limits) He then takes it just a little further and I find that my needs have been met and my limit has expanded.

I find it fascinating the way he collects information, puts it together and then brings it back to me in such as way that I respond receptively. I believe what this process is teaching me is what my hard limits are, what my wants and needs are, and how to effectively communicate them.

So I do not believe silence is golden. I think communicating is essential to any relationship. How and when man uses the information he is given is his choice. If it is always disregarded or minimized and the woman never sees or feels that she is heard, then for me I would have to really look at the core of the relationship.

I think you`re totally right about having to trust your husband about certain decisions. We always talk over major decisions too and he always listens to my concerns. If I`m really worried about something he thinks it over and then decides what to do. But even if the outcome is not exactly what I wanted it to be ,I feel comfortable about it because he took the time to listen to my opinion.

Frank,
I have always understood this term to mean that the decision has been made for now. I have never thought that it did not mean that it could be revisited if the partners are not happy with it after. A decision on eating the final piece of cake is final I suppose. Once it is eaten there is no going back to get that piece again. But most longer-term decisions can be revisited and modified, changed and tweaked. By saying I give my husband final say, it only means that I have agreed to respect his decision if he says he has made one. If something is going wrong after the decisions is made it is not wrong for me to point out what I see happening. He has a tremendous amount of respect for me and my judgement. Often he will defer to what I see. In the end though I see it as a tool for him to have control when he feels he needs it. This allows him to make put our relationship first, no matter who is "right". For so many things in life there really is no right or wrong answer. You rarely ever know once you make a decision if the path you chose was the right one or not. You can never know what was down the path not taken.

I think you are bang on when you say it is about participation. That was my experience. My husband never fully participated in our relationship until after he took me in hand. If it made either of us participate less I doubt it would be right for us.

Not all of us who are submissive to our husbands are meek mice. There is no way to quantify submission. There is no better way, only what is better for me or better for you. And the control of the husband only goes as far and as long as the consent in the relationship is there. There is always a way out. Good post thanks for sharing it.

Take care,
Tevemer

While I believe myself to be submissive at heart, I prefer not to use that word with others. The reason? In my opinion, the word seems to have been co-opted by the BDSM community to mean a certain set of very specific attitudes and behaviors, not all of which describe my own submissive nature. One of the reasons that I could never embrace BDSM - having spent several months reading and conversing with others about it - was that there just seemed to be so many rules, so many unspoken - and sometimes spoken - assumptions about what "being submissive" meant.

So I do believe that I have a submissive heart, but within a loving relationship, that submissiveness will likely play out in rather difficult to describe, and certainly impossible to contain, ways.

Sharon