Saying things for effect

Do you say things for effect, like the following statements?

“My wife is my slave, my property. I have the right to do anything I want with her, including killing her or commanding her to commit murder. No, I would not accept a limit on that power. I am the master.”

“The first thing I do with my girls is to have them strip, then I grade each body part objectively on a scale of A to F. F is for ‘fail’ but just remember that my subjective assessment could be very different from my objective assessment.”

“I don't care! What, you think I care what you want?! I don't! I'm in charge; why should I care what you want?!”

A Taken In Hand person hearing one of these statements is likely to be slightly horrified, whereas a D/s or M/s person is more likely to understand instantly that such a statement is all part of the fun, and said for effect, to create drama, not least to thrill the woman.

This theatricality is just pretend, a bit of fun, acting, playing. It's not real. The man may say that he doesn't care what the woman wants but actually, he does care very much, and he is saying that very thing to give her what she wants. Similarly, it may thrill the M/s-inclined woman to suffer the humiliation of the slave inspection. And to some women, a man who dramatically pretends that his woman's life may be ended at his whim is the man for them.

Not so the Taken In Hand woman. One of the things Taken In Hand folk mean when they stress that the man's control is real as opposed to role-played or acted, is that the man is not saying things for effect. Or, on occasions when he does say things for effect, the Taken In Hand person would think of that as a play part of their relationship rather than the ‘real’ bit.

When there is real control, a little goes a long way. It is so thrilling to those who like that sort of thing, that there is no need to say things for effect. Not only that, but for many Taken In Hand people, the playacting stuff is either distressing or extremely off-putting (if they do not realise that it is just pretend) or it has no power to thrill them (if they do understand that it is just pretend). Those who want real control do not necessarily enjoy play-acted control. Some do, but many don't.

This is in no way to say that there is anything wrong with a bit of acted control, playing, and so on, I am merely drawing attention to the fact that, at least to your average Taken In Hand person, there is a difference between the two. The difference may not strike some as being valid, because the Taken In Hand woman is legally free to leave her husband at any time, so in a way, she has control of her own life. If you therefore think that the Taken In Hand control is no more real than the BDSM control – or that they are both real – then let us agree instead that if nothing else, there is a difference in matters of taste, here. The Taken In Hand person's taste is for control that is clearly respectful and caring and considerate, whereas the D/s or M/s person's taste might well be for control that is ostensibly uncaring, disrespectful, humiliating, and so on. The point is that whatever the difference actually is – whether a real vs. play difference or a difference in taste – there is a difference.

Taken In Hand men tend not to make statements for effect. They tend not to say that they don't care about the woman's wishes, because they do care, and their caring is an important and explicit part of the relationship. In D/s or M/s relationships, there is not necessarily any lack of love and caring, it is just not so apparent.

It is the Taken In Hand person's desire for the control to be/feel real and respectful that also makes some Taken In Hand folk completely uninterested in DD, discipline, and spanking. These things may feel real to many Taken In Hand individuals but they don't to everyone. To some, they feel plain silly. To others, all that stuff is a kinky game. And to some Taken In Hand folk, it all sounds appallingly disrespectful.

Taken In Hand folk tend to find all the ‘protocol’ of the D/s and M/s communities, and the stylised ‘you've been bad; now you need to be punished’ stuff of some parts of the DD/CP community, extremely tedious, silly, theatrical and entirely unappealing. To many Taken In Hand persons these things feel artificial, and Taken In Hand folk want real.¹

Footnotes

1. Or, if you want to quibble about this distinction, let us agree that Taken In Hand folk have different taste and preferences in terms of control. The point is that there is an identifable difference, whatever you want to call that difference.

the boss

Taken In Hand Tour start | next

Have you seen the following articles?
Happy living in fear of a man?!
The erotic power of the unshackled man
Total obedience?
On being the servant-leader in my relationship
Alpha male dominance
In praise of Fascinating Womanhood
Taken In Hand relationships are hot and close
Power connectivity
Have you found a proper balance?
Impregnation

2005 Oct 14 - 11:11 | add new comment | latest article | previous article | next article |

Saying things for effect

The 3 examples you started the post with are NOT what i'd want to hear my husband say to me--we have more of a DD/T-I-H marriage than a D/s one. I guess I don't understand why any wife would want to hear her husband doesn't care or thinks he has a right to end her life but i guess everybody's different. I also don't understand why some T-I-H people don't like DD/spanking. I don't agree with you that discipline and spanking is like saying things for effect. It's very real in our marriage.

Carol

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2005 Oct 15 - 06:51 | reply to this comment

Why some don't like it

I used to wonder why some Taken In Hand people said they weren't into spanking, since for me the desire to be spanked and the submissive feeling were closely tied together, but in fact I've come to realise that getting pleasure from submitting to the man in your life need not involve any DD/spanking at all, these are optional and need not be part of the relationship at all.

by Louise C on 2005 Oct 15 - 21:34 | reply to this comment

I agree!

I am in a T-I-H/DD marriage and the DD definitely doesn't feel anything like playing. And it is important for us to have that aspect very real in order to have the dynamic that works for us.

And I wouldn't even call it spanking....but that's only because that sounds silly and is a word that sounds childish and does not convey what it actually is when I get whipped. Which is usually with a belt.

Spanking is something you do to children if you do spank. Or something sexual if you are an adult and like to roleplay.

But in our relationship at least it is a very serious matter not taken lightly and never played down to a game.

When my husband does take me in hand it is to re establish control over my emotions and open me up to see past them at the greater picture. Since I have a very bad habit of getting sarcastic and smartassy.

He knows in order for us to have a productive discussion he has to get that out of the way or we will spend hours going back and forth with no closure in sight. Especially when it get's to the point that I only listen to find things I can counter him on.

But that's just my opinion and what works for us in our relationship. To each his own. *Smile*

by Sweety on 2005 Oct 17 - 21:10 | reply to this comment

Saying Things for Effect

the boss...First, I agree that most folks in Taken In Hand styled relationships are generally turned off by the kind of stuff you suggest is possible in D/s or M/s relationships. I mean stuff like slave training, slave inspections, etc. would be out of the question for most....both the men and women. However, I am a little puzzled by what you mean saying a Taken In Hand woman wants the 'control' of a man when you say what he does or what he says is not simply for the EFFECT of gaining or sustaining that control.

If we can assume that a D/s dominant man does in fact care about the submissive (woman) but simply shows his caring in a somewhat peculiar way, is the difference you speak of simply the obvious distinction of him saying "I don't care what you think, I'm in charge around here' and the Taken In Hand man saying "I have listened to your feelings, have heard your concerns but I'm in charge around her, I have the control you asked me to exercise and enforce, so I am going to take the action (make the decision, exercise the control, etc.) I think is best for the relationship.'

What is the difference in substance between these two sets of actions even if there is a difference in form? What makes one 'real' while the other is pretense of some sort?

What makes the man's decsion 'best for the relationship' and hence meaningful and connective control if the couple disagrees on what should be done? I'm not saying his decsion is not in the long run what is best for all concerned. I am saying the man justifying his actions by claiming 'what is best for the relationship' is a problematic litmus test to establish or sustain male control. In my experience, an indivdiual (either man or woman) will make a decsion in his or her best interest, the relationship itself changing to meet individual needs. So why the pretense of doing 'what is best for the relationship' if not only for the effect this has on male control and authority?

Or, if it is something different from this, what do you mean by saying a Taken In Hand woman seeks male control?

Frank Nelson

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2005 Oct 23 - 18:23 | reply to this comment

Comment viewing options

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