Is this really consensual?

If you have no interest in any sort of Taken In Hand relationship, you are unlikely to enjoy consensual ‘coercion’ or consensual non-consent. If you are then corrected or controlled by a man, you will not be consenting, obviously, and should not be treated that way. Being taken in hand is not for everyone.

But it is for some. And for those individuals, being taken in hand, whether physically or purely psychologically, is something they passionately want. If you want something with all your heart, you are consenting. On this site, we advocate only consensual relationships, and you should keep this in mind as you read.

Because part of what many Taken In Hand readers find exciting is control, authority and correction, and not just as a game but in reality, we do not always mention consent. If what you want is to be controlled and corrected by the head of your household, the last thing you want to read is a lot of posts telling you to call the police if your man steps out of line. If you have been happily married for 40 years, you don't need to keep going back to basics about it being consensual and safe, because that is just obvious. Not mentioning consent and safety every other line does not mean it is not safe and consensual. If what you want is to be taken in hand against your will, the last thing you want to read are endless disclaimers stressing that it is all consensual. But make no mistake, we are talking only about consensual relationships and we abhor abuse.

Most consent-giving is done tacitly, through tiny non-verbal and indirect verbal signals, not directly. Sometimes a direct, clear yes or no is necessary, but especially in a long-term Taken In Hand relationship, it often isn't necessary. That there is no explicit consent does not mean that there is no consent. It is often a “complex dance with each reacting and adapting to the other’s reactions,” as one Taken In Hand writer has said.

In a Taken In Hand relationship in which a woman wants to be taken or taken in hand against her will, to you as an outside observer it could look nonconsensual even though the woman herself would not in any way thank you for rescuing her from the man who is taking her or taking her in hand. She might be resisting, she might be submitting but screaming for it to stop, she might be crying. It might look really bad, and yet still be consensual. If this is difficult for you to understand, even after reading the articles I list below, you will probably not like this site.

If you haven't done already, please read the following series on consent. The first article explores the idea of consent generally; the second explains the paradoxical idea of ‘wanting non-consent’ (consensual non-consent).

Part 1: Is there consent?
Part 2: She wants to be taken in hand against her will?!

See also this article.

Finally, please take the Taken In Hand tour.

the boss

The Taken In Hand tour start | next

Have you seen these articles?
Do you need more attention in your relationship?
Wanting a masterful man
The alpha male and masculine power
Could you be a slave, owned, property?
Force of will
The worm turns (a little late, but better late than never!)
If I asked for the moon...
When rape is a gift
Liberated through submission
Love-based service

2005 Jan 27 - 10:37 | login or register to post comments | latest article | previous article | next article |

Very Convincing

I don't buy it about little subliminal things indicating consent. I understand about consent being given once and thereafter being unnecessary to revisit that issue unless something drastic happens.

But initially there should be spoken consent and discussion before a woman is popped over a lap and summarily spanked. This IS supposed to be about communication, isn't it?

"Pat"

by "Pat" on 2005 Jan 27 - 15:00 | login or register to post comments

More than one way to communicate

I think that sex is pretty much like spanking. Unwanted sex is a form of violation and violence, just like unwanted spankings. In fact I think forced sex is much more of a violation to me than a forced spanking. But if it is indeed a violation both are completely wrong. That said my husband never out right asked me, "Do you want to have sex with me?" and I never out right asked him or gave him explicit consent. We did have sex for the first time, and many many times after and continue to have sex very regularly. How did he know I wanted to have sex with him the first time? It was completely consensual, and has been every single time since. He could read the signs, with out any verbal cues from me at all. There are many ways to communicate without actually talking. My consent to have sex with my husband has always been completely implicit and non-verbal.

I think it is risky to have sex or spank without explicit consent. The repercussions can be far reaching, and potentially life damaging to both parties involved. But some people can read their partners well enough to know. My husband certainly could tell that I indeed did want sex. So I assume that there are those who know their partners well enough to try spanking them with implicit consent. It is a risk and if you want to be completely safe and risk free you should obtain very clear spoken consent. If you want to be completely safe and risk free you should get explicit consent each and every time you attempt to have sex or spank your partner. You may even want to get it in writing if that makes it more comfortable for you.

To the boss: thank you for writing this. I completely agree, this site is supposed to be about consensual relationships only. I for one would not be here if I thought you were promoting anything but discussions about adult consensual relationships. This is a great site and I hope it stays that way. Thank you for all your hard work.

Take care,
Tevemer

by Tevemer on 2005 Jan 27 - 21:46 | login or register to post comments

Live and let live - or- Give it a rest

"PAT"

Writing is an art form, subject to the perceptions of the reader. Even the Bible can be interperated in an evil or negative way. Seems to me you do your very best to try to find the very worst in the posts on this site. You see dark and dangerous, and I see kind loving relationships that have stood the test of time. Couples who seek to meet each others needs, however unconventional those needs may be.

No one here adovocates abuse in any form. There are many times when I find someone's experiences not to my taste. I do not expect the world to conform to what I think is acceptable.

As for your big fears that someone inexperienced will read something here and assume the worst, maybe you should read the newspaper, or check the covers of some magazines. There are groups out there openly promoting harmful behaviours that would maybe benefit from your abrasive viewpoints.

If Taken In Hand is so offensive to you, maybe you should spend your time somewhere else.

And to the boss. Great job on that article.

Missyme

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2005 Jan 28 - 00:27 | login or register to post comments

You are so correct!

Thank you for a beautifully written and reasoned article.

It does become boring to keep hearing about the need for consent in relationships when its repeated expression could obstruct the flow of an otherwise beautiful article.

The boss has now repeatedly and explicitly stated that those deciding to enter into a Taken In Hand relationship must CHOOSE to do so for it to be considered a Taken In Hand relationship!

Mature individuals deserve a space to discuss different sorts of relationships, without always reading a response about how a given article could cause evil or stupid men to violently injure naive and/or star-struck women!

Is it possible for someone to read one of the more poetic and emotive articles on this site and get the wrong idea? Sure.

But every article in a martial arts magazine does not devote space to warning practitioners not to attack the innocent, nor does every article about fast cars need a disclaimer about always following the posted speed limit!

Let us use this beautiful forum for adult conversation. There are plenty of excellent and well written forums in which physicians, social workers, and the general public discuss how to help battered women. There are many economic, legal, and ethics forums in which learned individuals discuss various types of consent and coercion.

The Taken In Hand website should not be expected to be something that it was not intended to be.

Thanks,
Michael

by Michael on 2005 Jan 28 - 03:49 | login or register to post comments

Who really cares about consent here?

Just because we don't go on and on about it, that does not mean we have lost sight of it.

And what about those who don't want to have to give consent directly? Why should those who want to be taken or taken in hand against their will not be able to engage in that consensually non-consenting way if they want to? Why should women be forbidden from living under the real authority of a man if they want to? Who is to say that direct, explicit consent is better than other ways of consenting that both parties involved prefer to explicit consent-giving?

In saying that consent must be explicit, you are trying to deny people the choice of unstated consent. Trying to deny others the freedom to choose a Taken In Hand relationship on the spurious grounds of ‘consent’ is a mistake. Those who really care about consent do not try to deny others the freedom to choose the kind of relationship they want.

by the boss on 2005 Jan 28 - 12:52 | login or register to post comments

Consensual non-consent

the boss wrote

Why should those who want to be taken or taken in hand against their will not be able to engage in that consensually non-consenting way if they want to?

Hmmm, very Zen-like, but what else can one say in our often limited language?

How can you willfully surrender your will to decide if you will be controlled?

I don't know the answer but I believe it is possible. Just say "it's a miracle"!

by RichM on 2005 Mar 20 - 01:24 | login or register to post comments

Blanket consent is still consent

the boss:

Most consent-giving is done tacitly, through tiny non-verbal and indirect verbal signals, not directly.

I see nothing wrong in the concept of a blanket consent covering all that the man wishes to do to keep his woman in hand. It only takes a conversation about the kind of relationship they desire and for them to give informed consent for the other to fulfil the role they desire in the relationship. Thereafter, there is no need for any tacit signals of acceptance, nor any need to ask specific consent. Consent has been given and the momentary will of each is not important.

by Interesdom on 2005 May 18 - 18:12 | login or register to post comments

Implicit consent

When I said that most consent-giving is done tacitly, through tiny non-verbal and indirect verbal signals, not directly, I did not intend to imply that there is anything necessarily conscious going on in terms of consent in such interactions. What I was trying to point out was that most of what is happening is unconscious or subconscious, implicit, tacit, inexplicit, not explicit, consciously-negotiated.

When two individuals know each other, it is perfectly possible for real consent to be given and understood without any need for explicit consent. And it is.

(I agree that for those who want a relationship in which there is real control and consensual non-consent, it might well be completely unacceptable to insist that consent be explicit or indeed that there be any overt or even subtle signals. It depends on the person.)

by the boss on 2005 May 20 - 11:41 | login or register to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.