Love and fear

Years ago, I recall, I first heard the saying, “Where there is fear there can be no love, and where there is love there can be no fear.” Even then, my immediate gut-level response, as a sexually submissive woman who adores powerful, dominant men, was: “Well, why the heck not?”

While love and fear might be incompatible emotions for some people, for others those two things are perfectly compatible. But there are only two sorts of loving relationships in which I find fear is an appropriate emotion for me; one is as a sexually submissive woman, in my romantic love for a dominant man; and the other is as a devout pagan, in my religious love for the Gods. (And for me these two are intimately connected, in that I'm seeking a man whom I could adore as an aspect or expression of the God that I worship.) I am simply incapable of being deeply and erotically attracted to a man unless there is an element of fear there; specifically, fear of his physical, masculine strength and how he might use it. That is the sort of fear it takes to awaken my submissive nature and my sexual desire.

But there is no way I would ever want a man to actually injure me; a few welts and bruises might be fine, but no serious injury, and nothing permanent. If I got the idea that there was even a one percent chance that he might seriously harm me, I would be out of that relationship in a minute. I have always been very protective of my health and wellbeing, and I always will be. This is not any sort of self-destructive urge on my part; it's just about the erotic thrill of being dominated and intimidated.

But if I trust that he will not really injure me, then what does that leave to be afraid of? It's an interesting dilemma; and one obvious answer someone might come up with is “pain.” One can certainly cause lots of pain without real injury; so I can imagine that could be an effective way of inducing fear. But I'm not so sure that it would bring out my sexual submission, because I'm not really all that much into pain; although some pain is fine. I'd prefer that we could find other ways of arousing my submissive inclinations.

For me, that is happily accomplished by all sorts of harmless ‘bullying’ tactics, where a man can physically control and forcefully intimidate me without causing any injury or even much real pain. That includes pushing, wrestling, swatting, and so on. The way that works, I think, is like this: my conscious mind knows that I love and trust this man completely, and he would never really harm me; but my subconscious mind knows no such thing at all, so it's reacting from purely visceral animal instincts of fear and submission. And somehow, it's the very dissonance of those two different emotional levels that makes it so thrilling for me. If you take away either the fear or the trust, then it would lose its appeal.

Within a Taken In Hand sort of relationship, it is understood that this sort of force will not be injurious to the woman, and that the dominant man already has her blanket consent to engage in this sort of rough play. But even so, there are still some people who are alarmed at the idea that a woman would have reason to fear the man she loves, or that she would deliberately seek out a mate that she would be afraid of.

But some have compared this pleasurable fear to the enjoyment some people get from riding roller coasters or watching horror movies. Or one might also compare it to the thrills of skiing, skydiving, wrestling alligators, or other risky sports. I'm not personally someone who seeks thrills via fear – at least, not in any way other than that of being forcefully conquered by a strong dominant man. But I do think there's something similar going on there, in that moving through one's fears can be quite an ecstatic and transformative experience.

I have noticed that it's mostly men who are driven to the thrill-seeking adventure sports, whereas women are more often drawn to finding their thrills with dangerous men; or at least with men who have an aura of the ‘dangerous’ about them. This also shows up in myth, where the heroes engage their destiny by jousting with dragons and other monsters; whereas feminine figures often have frightful encounters with terrifying male lovers.

Into this latter category I would place the rape of Persephone by Hades, and the story of Eros and Psyche; as well as a number of stories involving gods with mortal women, such as Zeus with Semele. It also figures into fairy tales, like Beauty and the Beast; and popular monster movies like King Kong – with the ferocious giant beast gripping poor little Fay Wray firmly in his huge, hairy fist. Popular romantic folklore includes the vampire who preys on women's passions and their blood; vampires are considered the epitome of sexy male dominance by many women. There is also the legend of the incubus – the demonic male lover of mortal women who stealthily creeps into women's bedrooms at night, and ravishes them as they dream.

The power of these dark visions lies in their potential for pushing us beyond all our emotional boundaries, and thereby bringing about a profound psychological awakening and spiritual transformation. In most cases that potential is not fully realized, of course; but that is the pull and the fascination that these alluring nightmares have on our subconscious minds, I believe. They seduce us into a numinous experience, along the lines of Rudolph Otto's “Mysterium Tremundum et Fascinans.” (That is, the terrifying and fascinating divine mystery that draws us in, even against our will).

This is also one way in which a woman's fear of a dominant man can be an essential erotic element of a loving romantic relationship. It's just not as straightforward as a simple fear of pain; nor is it really about the fear of a dominant man's disapproval if he were to be disobeyed. Rather, it's the primal fear of being overwhelmed and swept away by something dark, powerful, and mysterious – something that can move a woman into a deeper dimension of vulnerability and awe than she has ever experienced before. A fathomless abyss is reached, a place where she has no real choice but to surrender and to trust, to yield in trembling rapture to the compelling power of the man she loves. When he pushes her over the edge, she falls; but it's a flight of ecstasy that engulfs and consumes her, while he remains firmly in control. When that dimension is opened in a relationship, there is an immense deepening of both trust and love. The man's dominance becomes more profound and more compelling, and the romantic dynamics of conquest and surrender begin to glimmer with the potent spiritual aura of the ancient religious mysteries.

That's what I'm seeking in my quest for a dominant man, anyway. Like Psyche herself, trembling in the night as she slowly approaches the bed of Eros with the light of her only candle, I'm moving toward some great unknown that could utterly consume me. It's a quest that requires every ounce of my courage and my trust. But the potential reward is worth everything that I have, and everything that I am.

DeeMarie

Taken In Hand Tour start | next

Have you seen the following articles?
Is there consent?
The carrot or the stick?
Foreplay
Do you need more attention in your relationship?
Is she afraid of losing control? Topping from the bottom?
The importance of conquest
Does it have to hurt to be Taken In Hand?
Stereotypes
The carrot or the stick?
The sexuality of ‘non-sexual’ dominance

2004 Nov 24 - 06:18 | login or register to post comments | latest article | previous article | next article |

Slaying monsters

You do get some female monster-slayers in myth as well. In Hindu myth, it's the goddess Durga who slays the demon Mahisa. And in the Chinese story The Serpent Slayer, it's a girl, Li Chi, one of the serpent's intended victims, who slays him, and then there's the African story Nana Miriam, with another girl who kills the monster. I like female monster-slayers, the image of the helpless heroine waiting to be rescued has never appealed to me.

by Louise C on 2004 Nov 24 - 07:49 | login or register to post comments

Fear, love and respect

The coupling of fear and love coincides with the rational woman's ancient need to bond with a mate able to protect her and her children from harm. The locus of the union of fear and love resides in the realm of respect.

Although not totally helpless, if they are to reproduce and not disappear from the human gene pool, normal healthy women go through seasons of particular vulnerability.

Conversely, literary heroines are not known for their reproductive capacity. Instead, much like an old wooden match, they strike on something, burn brightly, and quickly disappear. The stories they inspire are much like those that might be written by a primeval worshiper of old wooden matches celebrating the striking of a match - while ignoring its potential usefulness in mating with a tallowy wick and lightening a much longer burning candle.

by Noone on 2004 Nov 24 - 15:15 | login or register to post comments

Romantic Fantasy

As a woman who has made it through 17 years of marriage, I am far more likely to take seriously the statements made by an experienced person who has walked the walk. Do come back after a decade and a half of marriage, and tell us how exciting it is to fear the man you love.

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2004 Nov 24 - 15:32 | login or register to post comments

Heroes and monsters

Well, sure, there are some instances in myth of female characters who battle monsters; but so what? Those are just the exceptions that prove the rule. Overall, male heroes, hunters, warriors, and monster-slayers are much more common. That's because men are naturally bigger and stronger than women, so they were the ones who went out hunting and fighting and protecting the womenfolk; that just makes good biological sense, when males have such a big advantage in strength. Fighting is a man's job, and our ancestors were well aware of that. Any culture that had sent its women out to fight would have done that only as a desperate last resort; it would have been a culture caught in its own death throes.

The gender differences in myth also showed up in puberty rites, by the way. Puberty rites were sort of like a second birth - making one into a new person, ready to join the adult community. For boys this meant proving their courage and strength for battle or the hunt. Boys being initiated into manhood were often confronted with monsters - either real or imagined - in initiation rites that were designed to push them to the edge of terror. Maybe this originally started as a way to test their readiness to join the hunting parties; but it persisted for a long time, even in some agricultural societies. This was a way for them to prove their manhood; and there are still echoes of that in masonic rites, fraternity hazing, and etc.

By contrast, girls did not need to do anything to 'prove' their womanhood. That came about just by virtue of reaching menarche, their first menstrual period; at that age they were considered ready for marrying off to a husband. Her childhood ended and her new adult life started when she left home and joined her husband's household. For the girl, then, the marriage rite itself was the puberty initiation; and one can well imagine that it would have been frightening, especially in societies where she learned little or nothing about sex prior to being deflowered by her husband.

In ancient Greece, a girl who died before being married was considered especially tragic; and in that case her funeral rites often became her wedding rites, as she was dressed as a bride and then 'married' to a god of the underworld. (This may have been modeled after the myth of Hades and Persephone, or vice versa.) The idea that marriage is a woman's initiation rite can still be seen today, where the center of attention at the wedding is always the bride. But today, there's generally a longer time between puberty and marriage; some cultures preserve a puberty rite for girls separate from the marriage, as in the "quinceanos" (fifteenth birthday) celebration, which is a major ritual in Mexican culture (and perhaps other Latin American cultures as well).

So there's something deep and biological in this worldwide motif - that a boy becomes a man by proving his courage and strength, and learning to fight; but a girl becomes a woman by virtue of submitting to a man, and being penetrated by him. It's no wonder, then that we find those differences reflected in common myths. The men slay the dragons and the women find themselves in danger from lovers who may be monsters (or monsters who may have amorous intentions). Sometimes it turns out that the monster is not really all that monstrous after all - as in the myth of Eros and Psyche, or the tale of Beauty and the Beast. But sometimes the male and female myths are combined, so that the hero comes along and slays the monster and marries the princess, and all like that.

But perhaps the older, more primal version of the myth was the one in which the monster itself was her mate, and she was at his mercy. In that case, the myth of the hero slaying the dragon and winning the princess could refer to his need to subdue his own inner demons before trying to take his bride in hand; that is, the monster that he is saving her from is none other than his own "dark" side. I like that interpretation, because I want to look into my man's eyes and see both his noble warrior and his fire-breathing dragon there. It's his inner monster that fills me with fear and awe, and it's his chivalrous knight that I trust to protect me; and in the dynamic tension between that heart-pounding fear and that loving trust is where my deepest erotic longing is kindled.

For those who are into mythology, and what it can reveal about masculine and feminine psychology, there are a couple of books on that topic by Robert A. Johnson. One is "She: Understanding Feminine Psychology" and the other is "He: Understanding Masculine Psychology." The first explores the myth of Psyche and Eros, and the second explores Parsival and his quest for the sacred feminine, in the form of the holy grail. I can't say I agree with all his ideas, or even most of them; but he is one of the few guys out there right now with the courage to say that men and women are different in some very fundamental ways.

In any case, the topic of mythology was just a tangent to the main subject of this article; that is, how a woman's physical fear of her dominant man can not only be erotic and enjoyable in itself, but can also enhance the trust and intimacy in a loving relationship.

by DeeMarie on 2004 Nov 24 - 17:01 | login or register to post comments

Romantic Reality

To: A Taken In Hand Reader

You almost make it sound like an ordeal that you've "made it" through 17 years of marriage. Are you happy? Are you excited? Is your marriage filled with passion? If not, then why be married?

I would venture to guess that you probably had some idea of what qualities were absolute necessities for you in marriage, what things were undesirable, and which were desirable but negotiable, etc. Hopefully, you figured that out as well as you could before getting married. That's what I've tried to do, anyway. I've come to know myself very, very well; and it's abundantly clear to me that I will never be able to fall in love with a man whom I am not afraid of. Been there, tried that; it doesn't work.

I've had no shortage of intelligent, kind, thoughtful, and caring men in my life; and I've loved them dearly and they became my close friends. But the erotic spark was just not there. That's because I need a powerful, dominant man who is willing to use his masculine strength, to get a little bit rough with me, to conquer me and force me to submit to him. That is an absolute necessity for me, because it's the magic key that unlocks my feminine surrender and my erotic desire for the man. I have no interest in being involved in yet another sweet but passionless relationship with yet another best friend. This time I'm looking for some serious heat.

by DeeMarie on 2004 Nov 24 - 23:26 | login or register to post comments

Reality check

When I said I made it through 17 years of marriage I was not talking about it as an ordeal. I'm talking about living through all that boring real life stuff that goes along with the hot spicy passion you seem to think marriage should be about all the time. You know, you're still going to have to cook dinner, pay bills, do the laundry, etc. And I'm saying that it's a great romantic fantasy, finding this man who scares you because he's willing to rough you up.

But most decent guys are not willing to "rough you up." It's the abusers who do that kind of thing you describe, grabbing your wrists and pinning you against the wall. You can't easily get a dominant man who isn't abusive to do that. You can get a guy to be a spanker but this stuff, sorry, it's a real hallmark of abuse and the guys who are willing to do it are the ones you better watch out for.

What I meant was that I can take seriously what a person who's been married a good while says about marriage and the dynamics, but it's hard to take it seriously from someone whose head is filled with romantic dreams and no reality testing.

I honestly think there are dominant guys around who might be good for you but that the kind of thing you describe is just not realistic and you are going to wait a very long time before you find Mr. Perfect.

Speaking of which, Shel Silverstein had a great poem on the pitfalls of perfectionism. It is called "Almost Perfect, But Not Quite." Suggest you read and rethink.

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2004 Nov 25 - 01:38 | login or register to post comments

Heroines and monsters

Well, it's true there are fewer stories with women heroes, but that doesn't make them any less valid as myths than the ones with males doing the monster slaying etc. The myth of Durga is, after all, one of the most important myths of one of the most important world religions.

I've just never found stories with passive heroines very appealing. When I was a child, I always prefered the fairy tales with kick-ass heroines, and I devoured girls comics that were full of stories about girl detectives, spies, treasure hunters, French Resistance members (dear Mamzelle X, she was my favourite). Even today,I still prefer stories with adventurous heroines. The image of the passive woman just doesn't appeal to me, and I don't think it's any more valid than the image of the active woman.

But then fear isn't an appealing emotion for me at all, I don't like being afraid of anything, and tend rather to admire heroines who can overcome fear themselves rather than waiting for a man to come and rescue them.

And exceptions don't prove rules, they test them, that was the original meaning of the word 'prove' when that saying was coined (see The Mother Tongue, by Bill Bryson).

by Louise C on 2004 Nov 25 - 06:10 | login or register to post comments

Almost perfect, but not quite

I just read it, wonderful poem, and so true. It's absolutely right, nothing in life is ever perfect, wait for perfection and you'll wait forever.

by Louise C on 2004 Nov 25 - 06:20 | login or register to post comments

Reality Check from an Experienced Husband

In reply to "Reality Check": I can speak from the experience of a long-term happy marriage.

My wife and I have been married for 22 years and have been living together for 25. It was only about five years ago that we reached a point where we could be comfortable with the kind of fear and dominance that DeeMarie describes.

Ironically, it took about 17 years of marriage before she began to develop (or perhaps discover) her need to be dominated and to be just a little afraid of me.

For the first couple of decades, my wife needed to be my equal and was uncomfortable with me dominating her, either physically or emotionally. Then, for reasons that are unique to us, she gradually crossed a threshold of bonding and deep trust that allowed her to slowly drop her guard to the point where she now wants to sometimes be afraid of me and feel me use my strength on her.

We have grown into a place where she needs me to be dominant most of the time and, in return, she can be dominant on those occasions when I need it.

BTW: There is nothing magical about 17 years, except for us. Her father died when she was sixteen. When she and I had been married for 17 years, I crossed the age that her father had been when he died. Without either of us realizing it (except in retrospect) she was then able to trust that I wasn't going to die and abandon her.

Her need to be an equal subsided and her desire to be mastered and taken care of was able to flower.

by carlf on 2004 Nov 25 - 08:01 | login or register to post comments

Reply to Experience

Carl, that's interesting, and I have no doubt that in some cases it can take close to two decades until certain needs and desires surface. Obviously 17 years isn't magical for me, it is just how long I've been married.

But do you use your strength the way Dee describes, and did you first do it without your wife asking you for this? Because I see some serious problems with men who do this. It is not just dominance, when it is offered unasked for. It slides over into the realm of intimidation because a woman held in that way, not knowing what is coming, would have every reason to fear a beating, not just a spanking.

In any case, after so many years your wife certainly knows whom she is dealing with and if the nature of the relationship changed she has no reason to fear you will turn into a monster. Not so for someone who wants a man who will dominate her with these intimidating tactics from the get go. I think it's a great way to attract an abuser.

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2004 Nov 25 - 15:13 | login or register to post comments

It's not always the man...

I have to reply to the comment regarding supposedly abusive men. Though no doubt there are men out there who will prey upon a woman who desires a dominant man, I think often abuse can creep up when a man harbors the *desire* to be head of the household, to lead the marriage and finds he is terribly mismatched and unable to properly express this need. All humans get frustrated at times, some people do not express this properly and it turns into yelling or worse, when the real problem is with the power structure in the relationship. Hopefully you find this out BEFORE marriage, but so many people do not until they are facing divorce court. I am not speaking of wife-beaters, but rather the men who yell and berate to the point the wife leaves. You cannot emasculate a man and expect him not to fight to protect what makes him a man and not a different looking version of yourself as a woman!

I am divorced and remarried myself, my 1st marriage was nearly 10 years with a man who lacked any passion and refused to head our household. Eventually the allure which I tried to project upon him I realized was false. In remarriage, I have found a mate who wants the same arrangement I desire. We have been together six years now and are gradually working out the arrangement the original poster outlines. He is a very dominant, former military man, which is perfect for me. The prior marriage for him did not work out, for the wife constantly belittled him, and attempted to turn him into little more than a yes man. Which resulted in many fights due to their incompatible nature.

My point is simply that characteristics some might find abuse, verbal or otherwise, may often be signs that the person is NOT with the right mate and not able to understand or reflect that with a person with similar expectations of the roles of marriage, they would not act out in that manner. Though supposedly warned I might be subject to a bad temper, etc, my husband has never once harmed me. In fact he treats me like a queen--I am one of those lucky gals who receives suprise gifts, cooking, time to see my girlfriends while he cleans house, etc on a WEEKLY basis...and I NEVER would deign to demand or ask for these. He is king however and that is what frees him to feel like he can GIVE me this treatment, rather than have it demanded of him. One woman's trash is another's treasure I guess, and I like it that way.

SOrry so long, but many men have been misconstrued as unfit husbands or with abusive tendancies (not talking about the ones locked up in jail either--yes, there are men who DO deserve what they get), when the reality is it takes two to tango and many times, the supposed abuse is a two-way street which has culminated after many years of frustration dealing with a bitch of a wife. Adultery and physical abuse should not be tolerated, but you cannot expect a man to be your hero and not be willing to back that up with support and obedience if necessary as well. It's like expecting someone to be President but not giving them any decision making power. I am, BTW, a very strong woman who runs a company who also is completely capable of taking care of herself. I just choose not to, I choose to be with a man STRONGER than myself even! But if we as women want to be respected, we must give that. I wish women would start to take on some responsibility for their way of treating others and their role in making relationships work.

by Adevilsbluerose on 2004 Nov 29 - 15:52 | login or register to post comments

Re: Reality Check

Well, I can honestly say that I know exactly what Dee Marie is saying, and I agree wholeheartedly. I like to be a little afraid of my partner. I've just come out of a serious relationship in which my partner was most of the things that Dee describes. Not, however, abusive as our unknown writer seems to think goes along with it. In fact, early on, he was always concerned that he was hurting me because he is a very strong guy. But as time wore on, and he learnt my emotional and physical thresholds, he showed me that he was a deliciously wicked, fun, unpredictable and contradictory lover.

I wasn't scared of him when I was doing the dishes, nor when I did the laundry or fed the cat or paid the bills. But the fact that I didn't entirely know what he would do to me at any given point thrilled me whenever I thought about it and, yes, frightened me a little as well. This fear was sexual - I trusted him implicitly and knew that I would come to no serious harm.

He wasn't an abuser, nor had he any potential to abuse me. He liked "roughing me up a little" and I liked it too. Both of us had been in relationships without this element of sexual fear, and had I not liked it, he would never, ever, ever have tried it on. In fact, I suggested it. He was a great guy and a loving partner.

Just because someone likes to get more physical than you do, doesn't make it bad.

Bel

by Bel of Oz on 2004 Dec 4 - 10:26 | login or register to post comments

Mismatched

If a man finds himself in a marriage where he expected to be head of the household and instead he is with a "bitch" who doesn't let him make the decisions and belittles him...why did he not find this out when he was courting her?

Could it be he was thinking with the little head and forgot to put all his expectations and wishes out on the table?

Abuse isn't about yelling at a wife who is belittling and putting a guy down. It's about undermining her confidence, isolating her from her friends and family, cutting her down constantly with remarks about her stupidity and general incompetence, weight, appearance, etc.

Now don't tell me that a woman who recognizes those signs somehow brought it on herself. If you think that, I have a nice bridge for sale cheap.

I take responsibility for how I treat my husband. He's not an abuser. I don't obey him. I talk back. I tell him off when I think he's wrong. But I treat him as a human being with intrinsic worth. And he knows I love him.

If either party isn't doing that, it's not fair to cast blame on the one who is being attacked.

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2004 Dec 6 - 02:04 | login or register to post comments

You are so Right Romantic Reality

It is true about a marriage being passonate and exciting. Hell I can be miserable all by myself.

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2005 May 7 - 05:50 | login or register to post comments

Fear and Trust

The other night, my man put his hand around the back of my neck, pushed me to my knees and bent me over the bed. I had NO idea what he was planning to do to me and yes, I was scared. However, I know he wouldn't hurt me, I trust him and I trusted him enough that though I was afraid of what was going to happen, I never once asked and it made me so hot it wasn't even funny. So, yes, I would say fear and trust can exist together. I would even venture a little farther to say that I also think that trusting someone as much as you have to trust someone in a relationship like this could in and of itself cause a certain level of fear for anyone because you're so vulnerable.

In addition, I find that I like/need/want that element of fear as well. It's not that I like abusive men. I don't. Been there, done that. But, I like the power I know an intimidating man has, that they're capable of so much yet also knowing that they wouldn't do anything like that to me; that I'm loved by him enough that he wouldn't use it against me but would use it to protect me. I think there's a primal side to it, as was said the subconcious doesn't think rationally about what he won't do, only what he could do. And there is a certain thrill to that.

by Dyane on 2005 Jul 12 - 23:42 | login or register to post comments

Dyane..

How do you manage to not ask anything or protest (even playfully)? You are able to accept, without question?, and your partner is able to assert himself with confidence?

Now, that is erotic!

Grace :-)

by Grace on 2005 Jul 13 - 15:50 | login or register to post comments

Grace

Grace,

Yes, I'm able to accept without question because I have so much trust in him. I've never been able to do that with anyone else. Not only that, but truth be told, when he does things like that there are two reasons I keep quiet and just submit: 1. I'm afraid if I protest or question, he'll stop and I don't want him to. 2. He doesn't do it often so when it happens, I'm stunned into silence.

He also uses what he calls his "God Voice" which is deeper and more authoritative than usual and there's so question, when I hear it, that I better behave :)

He can assert himself with confidence because he knows he has my implied blanket consent. Also, my trust is very important to him and I really think it's that which makes him so aware of what he's doing. It is very precious to him and he doesn't take it for granted because he knows I don't trust easily and that I've had experiences in the past which justify my reticence. He's one of the most thoughtful and attentive men I've ever met and even when he's spanking me, he's very tuned in to my physical and vocal reactions which he uses as cues to determine when enough is enough. The funny thing is, when he stops is when I want him to go just a little further but he pays close attention to what I seem to be ready for and if he doesn't think I am, he won't do it whether I like it or I don't.

When we first met, I told him that I needed to be protected from myself. I was joking, but I found out recently that he took that very seriously and sees it as his duty to do exactly that.

by Dyane on 2005 Aug 22 - 03:27 | login or register to post comments

the mixed emotions of love intertwined with fear

It is difficult for me to figure out the mixed emotions of love intertwined with fear. I have read this article twice this mourning and this particular article shakes me down to my very core of being female. It is because I deeply fear/deeply love an intensely dominant man since the year of 1969 to this very year of 2005. His authority and his wrath is unshake-able!I want to know more about Rudolph Otto and his mystery business! Yep! yep! Yep! It is a terrible sensation to fear whom you love and to love what you deeply and most genuinely fear the most! It is the worst position of human love and human trembling fear I can be in. Thanks for sheDDing some light on the subject though. I really do appreciate the time it took to write such an (s)executed article!

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2006 Jan 14 - 13:13 | login or register to post comments

seems like a double standard to me...

Someone posted this:

"But most decent guys are not willing to "rough you up." It's the abusers who do that kind of thing you describe, grabbing your wrists and pinning you against the wall. You can't easily get a dominant man who isn't abusive to do that. You can get a guy to be a spanker but this stuff, sorry, it's a real hallmark of abuse and the guys who are willing to do it are the ones you better watch out for."

This really upsets me. Why is it that so-called "decent" guys can spank a woman - and that's OK - but if they "rough her up" as she likes, that it not OK and they are going to be abusers? This seems to be a double standard. While I would not want my man to spank me, I might want him to be a little rough. My late partner was sometimes, and he was absolutely not an abusive man.

Honestly, isn't it all about what works in a relationship, and isn't that what this website touts? If a woman likes to be spanked, great. If she likes to be "roughed up" a bit, held against a wall, great. Why is one OK and the other not?

I don't get it...

Sharon

by sarahdinah on 2006 Jan 14 - 21:11 | login or register to post comments

I Have To Agree

Why is it that one person's idea of sexual submission is ok but not one who enjoys a man getting physically rough with her? When I was still with the man that I call Master I longed for Him to enter my room at night while I slept and just take me. Without any warning that He was going to do it. Why does that make me sick and why does that make Him an abuser? I admit that I am new to this site. My dear friend sent me the link. To which I then forwarded to the man that I still consider my Master to give Him a better idea of what I was seeking. I always knew that my idea of D/s M/s was different then what I saw at play parties. There would be some even in a BDSM relationship who would consider my idea of submission abuse. I lived through the fear of Him, I still do. But you know what? I miss Him and would go back in a heartbeat. Because my love and devotion is stronger then ever. He is the only man who can tame me. The only man that I love enough to tame me. And if He chose to consentually/non-consentually rape me I would not tell Him no. I see Him like Dee described it. He is the physical aspect of my idea of God. Let us try to remember that we will never agree on the type of DD we are. You can state that you disagree but please respect us that wish to be taken by force. Held up against the wall, raped while we sleep, Et Cetera. My name is Portia and I am a 36 year old female just discovering that there is a name for what I seek. I look forward to reading more.

In Service I Am His

by sweetsurrenderA on 2006 Jul 14 - 04:27 | 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.