The purpose of rules in Intimate Discipline

One of the major areas of struggles in beginning an Intimate Discipline structure in a relationship is trying to establish rules of behavior that can be enforced by the husband or head of the household. The idea in this beginning is that relationship problems can be directly linked to the behavior of one or the other partner; therefore, if rules can be set so the objectionable behavior is eliminated, the relationship will remain stable and harmonious. Typically, the submissive partner (the woman in this article) will want correction for her behavior in the form of physical discipline (i.e. spanking) and the man will be expected to self correct as it is his responsibility as head of the household to do so. This physical discipline or spanking will draw the couple together intimately, opening communication, and will allow the husband to be solidly present in the marriage.

Though this concept of rule setting seems fairly obvious, and does in fact have its merits, I do suggest a couple consider carefully some of the inherent limitations. One must consider in the first instance the premise that relationship problems are centered on the poor behavior of the woman or that her need for discipline is founded on her need to have her husband directly and physically correct her objectionable behavior. Is not the need of the woman to have her husband take direct involvement and be solidly present in the relationship? And does not his control in discipline spanking manifest exactly this solid presence?

So what about some of the positive benefits of rules?�We all have habits, ways of doing things, little annoyances that we ourselves would really rather be rid of, that we can help ourselves with through relationship discipline. Are you a little scatterbrained? Do you ever leave things behind when you go some place? Are you always losing your car keys, forgetting to take the book back to the library, or not keeping close track of the checking account balance which is very disturbing when the bad check charges come in? What about spending on credit cards? What about your diet?

What about these little annoyances present in the behavior of your husband? Is his idea of of a gourmet meal something like a half dozen hot dogs, a bag of chips and a six pack of beer�in front of the football game?

By this last sentence, I am not suggesting switching dynamics or spanking the husband (unless you are so inclined) but only that changes in behavior such as those outlined above are likely necessary for both the man and woman. Even if both of us are ‘proper’ and our household functions fairly smoothly in the practical sense, often times long standing marriages will be encumbered by withdrawing or complacent behaviors that can well be addressed.

For instance, do you find yourself saying something like “Don't bother me now, I'm talking to Julie about Mary's husband who is having to ‘work late’ every night this week.” Did it even occur to you that your own husband has been ‘working late’ every night this week?�Could it be they were�out having an after work drink together? �The point is how much are you aware of what your husband is doing when he is not home and how much is he aware of what you are doing?

This withdrawal and complacency comes in many and varied forms. The man will typically engage in behaviors like fishing, golfing, going out for a drink with the boys after work and such things that keep him away from home. At home, he will sit in front of the television, not wishing to be disturbed at all. There is nothing inherently wrong with any of these activities as such; it is when these behaviors manifest withdrawing tendencies and a subsequent complacency (“oh, he is just trying to relax, he has a lot of stress going on. I don't know for sure when he'll be home but I'll get the supper warm for him”) that indicates a problem that rule setting can address.

Rule setting or,�perhaps more precisely, ‘building constructs’ in a beginning relationship can address most of these behaviors of both the husband and wife. I am only addressing Male/Female dynamics here but this is all that is important to address these issues. The couple may determine those areas of their relationship that need correcting and the husband, as HOH/HOR, holds the responsibility for their enforcement. Often times this is described as something like ‘captaining the ship,‘ as giving him ‘final authority’ or some such, but I think the important�point is that the couple togeher have decided on the relationship course, grappling with the particulars of everday living and setting themselves together on a course that is at least sane, not too calm and not too stormy, but one in which�daily challenges can be enhancing instead of threatening. Following the sea captain analogy, in a long-standing marriage beginning discipline dynamics, the couple must steer the ship from the turbulent river to the calm sea, the couple must cross the bar. A rocky ship indeed that needs a capable pilot of the bar.

One may rightly ask why I suggest the husband be the ‘pilot’ or the enforcer of the relationship rules or constructs developed mutually by the couple. The obvious and, might I say, superficial, reason for this is that it is the woman here who wants the spanking for discipline, it is the woman who feels the need for the control of the husband, it is the woman who most strongly feels the need for her husband's direct and solid involvement in the marriage. These are all good and reliable reasons but let's look at why it likely would not work the other way around.

Examining relationships and general male/female behavior carefully demonstrates some important points for consideration. In the writings of many relationship researchers, in particular John Gottman�of the University of Washington (linked elsewhere on this web site in the Links section),

current psychology in this area believes that men (in general)�are most sensitive to relationship deterioration.

Gottman describes what he calls “The Four Horseman of the Apocalypse” in which he describes the stages of a breakdown as: 1: Criticism; 2: Contempt; 3: Defense; 4: Stonewalling. The man, he observes, will generally withdraw at the first sign of criticism where the woman is able to take criticsm fairly well and not withdraw until the interaction becomes one of contempt. This is an important concept or observartion when considering who needs to enforce the relationship design established by the couple.

How many women say or do something they would consider unimportant or trivial and their husband responds with indifference or withdrawal? The trouble here is not at all obvious, in fact it is quite subtle, having to do with private language only a couple understands. The trouble, I think, comes from a little contradiction of Gottman and others: current psychology also recognizes that women are, in general, connection driven and men are performance driven. Why do I say this is a contradiction?

This contradiction in psychology is that criticism is a breakdown in connection, no matter how subtle or how trivial it may appear. I suggest a little something different, something I think better reflects what happens in couple interaction and explains a little better why it is important that it be the man or husband who ‘pilots’ the ship. Because criticism is a breakdown in couple connection, and only the man will withdraw in the face of criticism (the ‘first horseman’),

it is my theory and practice that, in general, it is the woman who withdraws first; and the man who lacks recourse to action will, again in general, respond to this withdrawal by withdrawing. She has withdrawn from her connection drive through some form of criticism, and the man, through his action or performance (i,e spanking),

brings her back to her natural place in connection driven behavior. The woman, on the other hand, is normally able to use her communication, both verbal and non verbal, to bring her husband back to his performance drive if�he gets off track because she will not in general withdraw at the first sign of his criticism.

I think it is important for a couple to consider ‘what rules’ or constructs are actually important to enhance or enrich couple intimacy and communication rather than ‘just doing it’ in an arbitrary way. Work at finding those areas where communication and intimacy breaks down, where we are behaving in a way that does not hold the relationship as a first priority always.

For example, many couples would do well with a construct requiring that each other stop what they are doing (if only for a moment) to acknowledge the other in a meaningful way when they enter the house. Get off the phone when you are gossiping with Julie. Obviously, it is not always possible to simply stop what one is doing but I think it is the general sense that is important, the construct that the marriage comes first and above all else. Avoid complacency or indifference. Engage in constructs that manifest this sense of female connection and male performance. The husband, because he is naturally performance driven anyway, will do well enforcing the connection behavior of the woman, and this enforcement will in itself enhance his own ability/willingness to perform in his marriage connection.

Do whatever is necessary to enhance your own marriage or relationship intimacy, develop your constructs around what is important for you and your unity, begin at your own beginnings and always remember the roughest waters crossing the bar lead to a calm sea.

Frank Nelson