What kind of site is this? D/s? TPE? CP? DD? ABCD?

On the page about me, Mary Lou Day writes:

This is a superb Web Site you've created but what is it? You talk about Traditional Relationships, but you say you don't think it's Natural and you're not religious. Is it a DD site? Parts of it look like a Spanko Site. There's a lot of D/s on it, are you D/s? It's confusing because you've said comments against BDSM but the Site could be a TPE one.... except you don't accept the slave/master dynamic. What are you????

The short answer, Mary Lou, is that on a personal level I have a bit of an aversion to being put in a box or given a fixed label, and in terms of the web site, I don't want to get into arguments about words. The idea of having big discussions about whether or not Taken In Hand is a DD site or a D/s site, or both, depending upon what you mean by that, or what the definition of such-and-such a term is... well I'm nodding off in boredom already, just thinking about it. It just doesn't interest me.

However, since this seems to be important to some readers, here are my thoughts on this. I do hope that nothing I say here will offend anyone. (Fear of upsetting people is another reason not to have an explicit discussion of terms, I think!) The last thing I want to do is offend anyone. None of what follows is in any way to criticise anyone else's choices. Each person must follow his or her own path in life, and in no way do I want to suggest that paths other than mine are wrong. I have enough trouble following my own path, never mind sitting in judgement of anyone else's! :-)

Part of the reason that I avoid labels is that I think that the best relationships are those that arise and evolve naturally as a result of the interactions of the two unique individuals involved. There is no magic formula for relationship success: we have to make our own magic, starting from where we are as individuals, and jointly creating a relationship we both value. A good relationship is a dynamic, evolving entity, not an immutable set of rules. When I imagine being in a relationship that is stereotypical, static, and easy to label, my reaction is: what's the point? Perhaps others understand things better than I do, but to me, it sounds mindless, boring, unchallenging, tedious, unsatisfying.

When I first became interested in the idea of what I now call Taken In Hand relationships—or rather, when I first faced the fact that such a relationship was what I wanted—I had not read anything or talked to anyone about it. So it is not really surprising that I do not think in terms of labels such as “domestic discipline” or “D/s”. Why suddenly attach a label to a set of ideas that has taken shape and evolved in my mind long before I had ever heard of those labels/“lifestyles”? (I personally don't even like the idea of a “lifestyle“, because that, to me, sounds somehow artificial, fixed and clearly defined.) I have no objection to others attaching any label they find helpful to Taken In Hand, I just don't feel inclined to pin it down myself.

My aim in starting this site was to create a new kind of site—not a standard relationship site on which it is completely taken for granted that to have a good relationship, husband and wife must be equal and seen to be equal (whether they like it or not)—and on the other hand, not a standard traditional site on which it is taken for granted that the wife should submit to her husband—but also not a BDSM / D/s / SM sex site (which all leave me personally completely cold, if not queasy). I wanted my site to be free of the cliquey language, embarrassing rituals and modes of address and the surprisingly narrow thinking one finds on some D/s and BDSM sites; and as a non-spanko, I wanted a site that would also not be a DD/spanking site.

I wanted the site to be free of posts advocating self-serving narcissism. I wanted the site not to be irresponsible. I wanted the site to do no harm. We stress that the husband in a Taken In Hand relationship puts his wife and their relationship first because that is the key to creating a marriage in which the man is in control in a good, healthy and sustainable way.

I imagined a site on which lovers of books like Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged would have deep philosophical discussions with lovers of Jane Austen's novels, and where men who appreciate Doesn't Anyone Blush Anymore?, by Manis Friedman would happily rub shoulders with women who love books like Helen Andelin's Fascinating Womanhood and Laura Doyle's The Surrendered Wife.

I hoped to create a positive, warm site that would be neither anti-men nor anti-women.

I wanted to create a site that, while being firmly focused on relationships in which the husband wears the trousers in the relationship, was not hostile to other paths. The idea of Taken In Hand as a prescription for all is against everything I believe in. This is a free choice, or it would be an abomination. Taken In Hand is not compulsory! Whilst I wanted my site to focus on Taken In Hand relationships, that is just because that is my personal preference. I was not trying to create a huge site catering to all preferences, but that does not mean I think everyone should share my preferences.

I wanted the site to be supportive of lifelong, fully committed, sexually exclusive, faithful marriage, by showing that monogamy need not mean monotony but in fact can be much more exciting and sexually fulfilling than less focused (e.g., open or poly) relationships, staying single or having adulterous affairs.

I wanted the site to foster non-stereotypical, evolving, exciting unlabelled relationships in which the spouses do not feel trapped in ill-fitting role boxes. I wanted to provide a forum on which women would feel free to be themselves rather than trying to squeeze themselves into a rigid stereotypical D/s-style ‘submissive’ box, and where men would not feel pressure to put on a ridiculous swaggering stereotypical ‘dom’ act.

Taken In Hand wives respect, honour and appreciate their husbands and strive to please them, but they tend not to claim to be submissive, because they do not feel the deep need to serve that so many believe is the essence of submissiveness. I don't believe that there is any duty to submit, any more than there is a duty to be in charge. For me these matters are individual preferences, not duties or burdens to suffer.

There are many many sites out there for women who have a very deep desire to serve, and many others for those who choose to submit to their husbands for religious reasons. But until I started this site, there was no site for those women who worship the man who actively masters them and submits them but who otherwise don't feel submissive, and there was no site for men who enjoy the thrill of actively dominating and submitting their wife and who would find it boring to be in a relationship without at least a little of that.

I wanted it to be clear that the purpose of creating a Taken In Hand relationship is that, for those of us who like this sort of thing, it creates a white-hot sexual connection, and thus a rock-solid permanent bond between husband and wife. I wanted it to be obvious that if the Taken In Hand idea is not your cup of tea, it is not for you!

The Taken In Hand relationship is neither all about the man, as in some D/s relationships in which the man has control, nor all about the woman, as in some DD relationships—it is for both. I wanted that to be very clear on my site.

I wanted to create a thoughtful site that would be about ideas—the philosophy and the psychology of these relationships, the underlying substance—rather than experiences or particular practices. I had in mind a more analytical, deeply interesting (to me) site that would raise and discuss interesting issues that would help people create vibrantly happy marriages and improve relationships more generally, as opposed to a site that would just have a lot of posts detailing posters' experiences. Sometimes experience posts do raise interesting issues but often they are just experiences. Experience posts also tend to give too much information (for my taste, at least), and the more such posts we have on the site, the more it attracts similar posts.

I wanted my site to be one free of exhibitionism—one on which private information (such as intimate details about what a poster did in the bedroom on a given occasion) would remain private rather than appearing on the site. I wanted my site to appeal as much to readers' parents or grandparents, as to individuals who might also read obviously racy, graphic sites.

I wanted my site to be free of religious proselytising. On the other hand I did not want my site to be hostile to religious people. I wanted it to appeal to Orthodox rabbis and conservative Christians as well as fellow atheists.

I wanted a site that would take it for granted that different men, and indeed couples, have wildly different preferences in regard to how the control can be manifested in a Taken In Hand relationship, rather than being a site that would be dominated by one preference in this regard.

I hoped that readers would be able to see the beautiful substance beneath the overt form of the Taken In Hand relationship in general, and of individual couples' relationships in particular.

I hoped that people would see this site not as a throwback to darker times when women had no choice, but as an expression of the real choice women (at least Western women) now have. I hoped that this site would give women who have, in psychological terms, had no choice but to choose so-called equality, the psychological freedom to choose a Taken In Hand relationship instead of that miserable (for them) so-called equality. And I hoped that this site would, similarly, make men, too, feel more free to embrace their preference for a Taken In Hand relationship. In no way do I want to make anyone feel compelled to change any preference they might have.

On some sites, there is a snobbishness that I find unappealing. There is a sort of hierarchy of posters, with those not claiming to be ‘experienced” being deemed less likely to have good ideas. What nonsense! I wanted my site to be free of posts arguing from authority. I wanted my site to be free of posts talking down to other people.

I wanted my site to be free of meta comments—endless arguments about meta issues such as how to post, how the site should be run, how x's response was judgemental, or y shouldn't have posted in z manner. I hoped that posters would address ideas and issues and not get into uninteresting petty squabbles about what is acceptable behaviour on the site.

Have I achieved my aim? Erm... not yet, not perfectly at least, but nevertheless the site does have its own unique identity, and people seem to be discussing Taken In Hand relationships—and using my chosen phrase, “Taken In Hand” to do so—all over the internet.

I chose the phrase “taken in hand” to distinguish my site from sites aimed at those who believe that if a woman wants to live under the control of a man, she must be a very obedient, already-in-hand women with a deep need to serve and obey.

Many D/s ‘doms’ want to be served and obeyed and would never countenance the idea of dominating and submitting their woman. Some are positively scathing about the idea. There was no site in existence for those who do enjoy dominating and submitting their woman. I wanted my site to be for those men, and the women who love them. The phrase “taken in hand” highlights the activeness of the husband's control, and does not suggest that it is a wife's duty to be already in hand. It suggests the sort of dominance that involves submitting the woman, as opposed to the sort of dominance that requires the woman to act as if she has already been submitted by the man despite the fact that she hasn't.

Please do not conclude that I think any man has a duty to dominate and submit his wife. I do not! If submitting your woman is not a thrill for you but instead a disagreeable chore that you find entirely uninteresting, then Taken In Hand is not aimed at you. This is not about fixed prescriptions and proscriptions, it is about individual preferences.

I also like the fact that the phrase “taken in hand” suggests interaction, connection, and movement towards an ever-better relationship.

This is real life we are dealing with here, not a fantasy, not people acting out roles. In real life, women often would hate to wear the trousers in their relationship, and long for their husband to take charge and not take any nonsense, but unless their husband takes charge and actively gets and keeps the upper hand, by default the women will continue to run things, because that is what they have been doing (painful though it is for them) in the absence of their husband's control.

Likewise, wonderful, loving husbands have tried so hard not to boss their wife about, because they have had it drummed into them from childhood that that was the way to have a good marriage, that it is sometimes difficult for them to take charge (despite how much they hate not to be wearing the trousers). I wanted this site to provide information and respectful support for men trying to take charge in their marriage.

The last thing I wanted was a site in a constant battle about labels instead of discussing more interesting matters.

But let me go through a few quibbles I have with each of the labels the poster asked about, to make it more obvious why I hesitate to use them:

SM (sadomasochism)

Many years ago, in my read-all-the-classics phase, I read Julliette and Justine, by the Marquis de Sade—and wished I hadn't. I also read Anne Rice's Beauty series, and was unmoved by them. I have read Story of O a couple of times, and that too does not really speak to me. Also, I have no interest in the whole pain thing. I don't get the appeal of causing pain, or indeed receiving it. I conclude that I am no sadomasochist.

On the other hand, if it is the case that if there is any hint of violence or intensity in a relationship, it counts as sadomasochistic, then I must put myself in that category. I do not think of all (consensual) violence/intensity as being sadomasochism (SM), but apparently others do.

BDSM (bondage, discipline, dominance, submission, sadomasochism)

The few things I have read that are aimed at the BDSM community have made me think that BDSM is not for me. It is absolutely not that I have any moral objection to BDSM, it is just not my cup of tea. There is quite a distinct BDSM sub-culture, with its own language and rituals, and quite specific, even stereotypical, ways of interacting (and no, I am not just referring to the internet).

To me, it feels artificial, and there is a certain exhibitionism associated with it, that I find distasteful. Not immoral, just not my cup of tea.

I personally am not interested in the master/slave idea, stylised scenes, the human toilet idea, dungeons, wearing kinky costumes, rubber or leather (except occasionally, for fun, or when attending a fancy-dress party), intricate lists of often rather bizarre rules and consequences, instruments of pain such as nipple clamps, humiliation, play parties, munches, or anything requiring a safeword. The idea of a grovelling, obsequious, quivering, submissive woman desperate to serve and willing to be humiliated and punished for the slightest thing leaves me cold. My fantasies don't revolve around masters and slaves, or men shouting at women, or making women eat out of a dog's bowl (whether or not it's been washed).

For me, Taken In Hand is not a mere game to play at a particular time on a particular day, with a set of toys and equipment. Toys and equipment might be fun on occasion but they are not the whole point, and for me it has to be twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. In fact, even to mention that it is 24/7 seems all wrong to me, because it suggests that one could say, this week, let's take a day off. The man's control needs to inform the entire relationship. If it is possible to take the day off, the control simply isn't there for me. It would not feel real. And I want it to be real, not just feel real.

Of course the husband can choose to give the wife a freer rein on a particular day, and he can rein her in firmly on a particular occasion, but that is not the same as engaging in a BDSM play scene, or having a conventional relationship which is BDSM in the bedroom. Lots of BDSM web sites and books and BDSM folk I have met IRL stress the fact that the relationship is strictly equal/non-dominant in every respect except in the bedroom. That is not for me. In the sense of “equal” they mean, I'm all for a bit of inequality. (It doesn't seem unequal to me in any bad sense, just different.)

D/s (dominance/submission)

Whenever I come across an explicitly D/s person or web site, I find statements that are just not consistent with what I want. I particularly dislike the very serious, dutiful, self-sacrificial, disapproving atmosphere on many D/s sites. For me, if it's not hot for you, why do it?! I wanted my site to avoid the idea of dominance as a burden, submission as a duty, and instead stress that the reason we are doing this is that it is hot and fun and thereby bonds the couple together in a joyful, happy marriage with a white-hot sexual connection.

I also dislike the custom of using lower case to denote submission and capitalising references to the dominant person: “when i know i have pleased my Master, only then will i be able to feel my own happiness.” I personally prefer standard English.

Many D/s sites and individuals I meet seem to emphasise the issue of whether or not a person is Truly Submissive, and whether or not she has jumped through enough hoops to qualify for the label submissive. They seem inordinately excited by rituals and what they call ‘protocols’. They tend to contain a lot of posts frowning on those who only feel submissive when actively dominated, and by extension, on those who are more into dominating and submitting the woman they love than simply being served.

I also dislike the fact that many D/s sites are very much opposed to the whole idea of love, and sexual exclusivity, and that they do not stress that the dominant partner puts the submissive partner first. On many such sites there is an assumption that it is all about the wishes of the dominant partner. Again, I am quite sure that in many D/s relationships there is love and sexual exclusivity, and the dominant partner does indeed put the submissive partner first. I just wanted my own site to stress that Taken In Hand is for both as opposed to being all about one.

Moreover, D/s and M/s sites tend to take the view that there are different levels of submissiveness, where to be more submissive is to have a greater desire and ability to serve. That whole concept of submissiveness as having a need to serve leaves me cold. Similarly, many D/s sites assume the, to me, very peculiar idea of dominance I mentioned above, namely, dominance without active dominating.

The whole D/s idea seems so very rigid and stereotypical and boring to me, but again, that's just me. To each his own. I make no claim to understand D/s. And no doubt someone with different preferences would feel the same about my preferences.

I prefer the idea of individual men and women exploring their nature fully and freely rather than to try to squeeze themselves into someone else's idea of what they, as a man or a woman, should be. I like the taming idea, the idea of subjection. Where is the fun in being handed submission on a plate? The husband in a Taken In Hand relationship enjoys a little challenge now and again, and doesn't hesitate to take his wife in hand when necessary. It is all part of the fun of being in charge in the relationship.

TPE (total power exchange)

Again, I have only recently heard of “TPE” relationships. I like the idea of power exchange and have read a few such web sites. As with all these labels, there are elements of the descriptions of TPE relationships that do sound consistent with Taken In Hand. But most of the TPE sites I have found seem to be heavily BDSM-inspired, so are not to my taste. Moreover, I have no interest in collars, tattoos, or piercing or branding, whether in reality or even just in fantasy. This is not a moral judgement, just a difference in preferences.

Taken In Hand can sound boringly conservative and conventional to anyone with a penchant for some of the more elaborate, painful, ritualistic, theatrical, humiliating BDSM practices, but it is hardcore and extreme to anyone who doesn't like the idea of the man's control not being confined to set scenes and times. Perhaps TPE is where Taken In Hand meets BDSM. But given the fact that TPE is part of the BDSM subculture, only a small proportion of Taken In Hand relationships could also be described as TPE.


Because of the way my ideas developed, and because of my (very limited) experience of folks who consider themselves “spankos,” I don't think of myself as a “spanko.” I was interested in what I now call Taken In Hand relationships long before I discovered the existence of the spanking/DD community.

The husband in a Taken In Hand relationship might or might not use spanking, but either way, it is not the spanking per se that is the point, it is the husband's active control of his wife.

My impression is that this is a slightly different emphasis which makes all the difference. To me, spanking per se is not erotic, and many Taken In Hand inclined individuals have no interest whatsoever in spanking, whether just for fun or ostensibly for discipline or punishment, so it does seem as though Taken In Hand does not quite fit the mould of a spanko site.

However, one thing I like about the spanko community is their wonderfully vibrant sense of fun. I'd like to see more of this spirit on Taken In Hand actually.

DD (domestic discipline)

Again, I only heard of “DD” relatively recently, and do not think of myself as being DD. But as with all these labels, I am very glad that lots of individuals who think of themselves as “DD” love Taken In Hand.

Different individuals have different ideas about what “DD” means, and I find some of the ideas associated with it questionable. For me, the idea that this is about correcting the bad behaviour of a faulty woman is a mistake. Why would a man want to be with such a woman? I don't get it. For me, the idea that this is about helping a woman who has difficulty functioning as an adult, or saving a woman from herself, or preventing her from harming herself, is unappealing, to say the least.

Just as D/s sites sometimes appear to be all about the dominant partner, so DD sites often appear to be all about the one on the receiving end of the discipline. I wanted my site to be for both, not all about either the man or the woman.

When I first discovered the DD (domestic discipline) community, I was struck by two things: first, the heavy focus on spanking and punishment, to the exclusion of all other forms of control, and especially to the exclusion of more subtle forms of control; secondly, the astoundingly vehement denial of the erotic aspect of so-called “discipline spankings”. Here were people who on the one hand were obsessed with spanking and most certainly finding it erotic or they wouldn't be reading erotic spanking stories and the like... and on the other hand, adamantly denying the connection between that and “real discipline”. It is completely inconceivable that there is no link between the two things.

I personally don't really like the DD focus on punishment, and many or most Taken In Hand relationships do not involve physical discipline. You can maintain control in many ways, not least by the power of your personality. See also the terrific articles by DeeMarie.

Another thing I noticed was that lots of DD sites talk about contracts, rules, and fixed punishments for misdemeanours. As with BDSM sites, it all sounds too fixed for me, too stereotypical, too static and boring, not individual enough. (Sorry! I do not mean to suggest that others should find BDSM or DD boring, merely that I do.) A relationship must be evolving to continue to be fulfilling in the long term, and it must also be unique to the two individuals involved.

Surrendered wives , old-fashioned girls,
the man as strong romantic hero who ravishes the heroine

I am delighted that many readers have discovered Taken In Hand after reading Jane Austen, modern romance novels, Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead, Laura Doyle's The Surrendered Wife, Helen Andelin's Fascinating Womanhood, and other such books. Elements of the ideas in these books appeal to me greatly, but I am not very keen on the “surrendered wife” label, and in the case of the latter two books, the men sound decidedly hypersensitive and weak. Apart from the phrase, “surrendered wife”, the only other I have thought of here is “being a man”, and as a reader quite rightly pointed out to me, using that phrase might suggest that one thinks that men who have no wish to take charge in their marriage are not real men, which of course is not true.

Traditional Relationship

In the past I have said that Taken In Hand is about celebrating “traditional relationships” but this has caused no end of misunderstandings and offence, so I conclude that using this phrase is a mistake, though it still has some appeal for me, because these relationships do have something in common with traditional relationships, except that the Taken In Hand one is freely chosen and thoroughly consensual.

But for some readers, the phrase “traditional relationship” conjures up the idea of tyrannical men and uninteresting docile miserable resentful nothing women devoid of autonomy and having no choice and no opportunities to pursue their own dreams. So to use this phrase risks giving the mistaken impression that Taken In Hand is advocating a return to the Dark Ages when there was no choice for women. On the contrary, I think that unless this is a genuine choice, it is thoroughly bad. Indeed, one of my criticisms of some strands of feminism is that they end up replacing one set of prescriptions and proscriptions with another. I think individuals should be free to pursue relationships and ways of life that they themselves prefer, not feel compelled to follow someone else's prescriptions. Moreover, to some, a “traditional relationship” sounds like a static, fixed relationship, and that description seems not to be a good fit for the kind of Taken In Hand relationship a tough woman who has been on the front lines in Iraq might prefer. Nor does that idea work for people like Eric. So the phrase “traditional relationship” is all wrong.

As you can see, I am at a bit of a loss to know what labels to use to describe Taken In Hand, but perhaps the person who has put it best is Ben Nathan, who writes:

I really believe your success is because Taken In Hand is about human love with bits of all the other bits (spanking / TPE etc) thrown in.

In this comment, he adds:

This site is about very traditional relationships (like marriage/ monogamy), it is not about religion (though it does seem to follow the Judaeo-Christian ethic of love), it is about domestic discipline (who has not, man or woman, mentally or physically disciplined their lover), it is a 'spanko site' (because some of us spank or whip), it is D/s (because some of us use D/s methods), it is BDSM (because, if we are honest, we all love to be tied down and 'taken'), it is TPE (because we all exchange huge amounts of power when we give ourselves to each other)... we all incorporate PART of all these systems (and many, many others) into that great and gorgeous brew we call love—with marriage, partnership, care, freedom, equality, the kids.. everything all gets mixed in.

Clearly I can't speak for the site owner—whether or not he or she is into D/s or heavily into TPE or whatever... but since he or she appears to be a very human being, he or she is, presumably just like the rest of us... taking whatever he or she needs from wherever to be a unique human being... just like the rest of us.

Thanks Ben. I agree.

The Taken In Hand Site Owner and Creator

The Taken In Hand Tour start | next


I believe.....

... that this site is about relationships.

As I said on a different board, we are all unique, and a relationship (being a combination of two unique people) is even more so. Does not make much sense literally, but you get what I am driving at ;-)

People bring to this site different aspects, and take various aspects away with them. Trying to pidgeon-hole various elements by assigning labels to them does not (in my opinion) work.

I would suggest that Taken In Hand is a collation of various thoughts and ideas that have different weights and meanings to different people. In other words, if something means something to you, use it, explore it, comment on it and explain why, but do not expect everyone to instant accept it as "the" way a relationship should be.

Well written.




Long, but not boring :-)

That was long, but not boring, not to me. :-)

I have pondered all the labels myself and I don't feel we "fit" into any one particular category either. The closest one to us by it's purest definition seems to be Domestic Discipline. But I think Dan and I are trying to create our own version of DD from bits and pieces of DD, D/s and whatever other ideas strike us as valuable.

Molding it into something that is right for *us*.

Which is all that is important to me. :-)

This is what I have learned about labels in my four months of extensive research; on every BDSM, DD, Traditional, Vanilla, M/s, D/s, TPE, you-name-it, blog or website I've visited, I find many more similarities than differences.

There are so many universal issues of love, happiness, trust, intimacy, communication and lust that I've come to the conclusion that we are just not all that different from each other. No matter which label we may or may not embrace.

The little things might be different, but the basics are still the same. And I smile warmly whenever I see that, regardless of what rituals we may prefer to use. :-)

Thanks for taking the time to...

Thanks for taking the time to say your thoughts on my question. It's a pretty interesting post, & I agree with Ambers Conclusion too.

DD Site

This is a DD Site for sure, you didn't need to write this post, it's not a Spanko Site.-Naughtynellie

what kind of site

I was expecting to be bored after the wonderful sales pitch you gave your article, but I wasn't bored at all. Just a bit grateful that I didn't have to write it myself. I think this site is just a bunch of people who like each other's ideas about relationships. We may not be all on the same page, but we're in the same chapter. We're similar enough to feel comfortable, and different enough to have interesting discussions.

I decided, a couple of years ago, to accept myself as a "kinky" person. This journey into "kinkiness" brought me into the spanking world where I discovered DD, and most recently to the traditional, Christian, surrendered-wife stuff. None of this is 100% for me; I just take from it whatever seems to serve my marriage and my happiness. I don't know what I am, and I don't know what kind of site this is. I just like being here.

Thanks for a good article.


No it's not a dd site

I must disagree with the previous poster. This is not a dd site, it's an erotic/ bdsm site. dd isn't about Dominant or submission it's about disipline and harmony in the Home and honoring Father as head of the household. punishment isn't supposed to be fun, it's meant to HURT. If it's erotic it's bdsm not dd. dd should be about correction pure and simple not sexual gratification.

Labels, labels...

Hi all.

It seems that the whole point of the post in the first place was to say that labels do not seem to apply to Taken In Hand. If you feel that this site seems to you to be DD, and that appeals to you, good for you. If you feel there are elements of D/s, and THAT appeals to you, even better.

Up to you—I enjoy, share and join in the discussions, as this (to me!!) is a site that allows (and encourages) us to explore our own feelings and what we want to get from a relationship.

Each to our own


Reply to M

Hi M!

My husband and I started doing DD in that pure sense you speak of, never having had an erotic interest in spanking or being into BDSM. Yes, Dan was was always the masculine dominant our the marriage, but in a fairly traditional way. We agreed for Dan to use a spanking on me only as a punishment and only after other disciplinary techniques had failed. Like the Spencer plan, but only one way. Very formal. We never did the "spanko" thing before that.

However, we found that the deeper trust we've gained by doing this pure form of DD has caused our sex life to be enhanced. More trust seems to have equaled more exploration in the bedroom.

Although we certainly didn't *plan* for this to happen, we're not exactly complaining, either. :-)

So now DD has now inadvertantly become a part of what goes on in our bedroom, just from having that increased intimacy and closeness from the change in the power structure.

I know from many conversations with other couples that started doing DD in the same way we did, that this appears to be an extremely common experience for many couples.

Please note: I'm NOT NOT NOT saying every couple doing DD would turn into a D/S, BDSM or anything else just from doing DD. But I am saying that I've heard from a lot of women who said their marriage went towards some type of D/s direction after they started DD.

I would imagine it depends on each couple as far as IF or how much DD would or would not affect the sexual dynamic.

Thus, the lines tend to blur a lot between pure DD and all the various sexual connections that often spring from it, here on this forum and many others. IMO.

Labels and Co-Labels

>So now DD has now inadvertantly become a part of what goes on in >our bedroom, just from having that increased intimacy and closeness >from the change in the power structure.

>I know from many conversations with other couples that started >doing DD in the same way we did, that this appears to be an >extremely common experience for many couples.

This has been my own observation over time as well. And tthis is the basis for our own label, such as it is, Intimate Discipline. We simply recognize that for us we want discipline dynamics incorporated into our relationship first and foremost as a way of enhancing both our abilities for honest communication, enriching intimacy and connection throughout our entire relationship. Even if it's not 'true DD,' this idea still cannot be a bad thing. Neither does it seem much related to what most people talk about in D/s or general BDSM. So maybe a co-label?

For us, we do recognize that sexual and erotic connection is basically what makes what we do work....spanking for us is inherently sexual and there is nothing we can do or would even want to do to get away from that. Recognizing this inherent sexuality certainly does not mean it can't be discipline simply by denying the sexuality, this recognition does explain that we are using our unique sexual expressions in a positive way to keep our relationship healthy, vibrant and alive.

Labels? Don't know what we are and don't use D/s though I have experiemented with this language. I guess I'd have to say we are a Relationship, both participating equally and both with an equal connection to it.



For me, sex and discipline are so interconnected that I couldn't take them apart if I wanted to. Discipline spankings were always a major sexual fantasy for me, and being taken in hand was always highly erotic, even if spanking was not involved. Spankings that do not represent discipline are not erotic for me. The discipline, in turn, represents the love and caring of someone stronger than me, which makes me feel safe. When I first decided to let spanking become a reality, it was a bedroom game, an acted-out fantasy. After a while I realized I wanted the fantasies to be real, too. I wanted the dominance and authority of my husband to be real, not an act put on in the bedroom. This makes our whole relationship thoroughly erotic, in the bedroom and out, whether I'm being soundly thrashed or controlled by a look or a word.

Some DD people obviously think it's important for discipline to be nonsexual, and others out there are appalled at the idea of real discipline in a relationship. Here at Taken-In-Hand, there is an acceptance of male authority and discipline as a basically sexual thing. It's real and it's sexual and its wonderful. We could call this kind of relationship MADRSW, or ABCD as the boss suggests :) or maybe we could just call it hot and happy.


Melanie, there is so much I a

Melanie, there is so much I agree with ---- but.

For me, sex and discipline are so interconnected that I couldn't take them apart if I wanted to.

Yes, I agree entirely.

Discipline spankings were always a major sexual fantasy for me.

Yes, certainly in my case.

Being taken in hand was always highly erotic (Yes yes!) even if spanking was not involved

No. If there is no spanking, for me, it cannot be Taken in Hand. Taken In Hand necessitates control, and in my view, though I know not in everyone's, that implies punishment if deviation from accepted and acceptable behaviour occurs.)

Spankings that do not represent discipline are not erotic for me.

Yes. Absolutely my way of thinking.

The discipline, in turn, represents the love and caring of someone stronger than me, which makes me feel safe.

Yes. I completely agree.

When I first decided to let spanking become a reality, it was a bedroom game, an acted-out fantasy. After a while I realized I wanted the fantasies to be real, too. I wanted the dominance and authority of my husband to be real, not an act put on in the bedroom. This makes our whole relationship thoroughly erotic, in the bedroom and out, whether I'm being soundly thrashed or controlled by a look or a word.

Yes, I agree except I would not accept being soundly thrashed by anybody.

Some DD people obviously think it's important for discipline to be nonsexual, and others out there are appalled at the idea of real discipline in a relationship. Here at Taken-In-Hand, there is an acceptance of male authority and discipline as a basically sexual thing. It's real and it's sexual and its wonderful.

Yes, I completely agree. However, the male autority and the discipline must be accompanied by love and respect. My husband is allowed to spank me when he feels I have behaved badly, and he is allowed to spank me as hard and as painfully as he feels is appropriate. But I would leave him immediately I felt that there was not love, deep love, in his relationship with me; this the important and essential ingredient. Spank me, husband, when you feel I deserve to be spanked. Stop loving me for a moment and you are history, Buster.

Here's some more fitting concepts/labels




So maybe we are an HFC site. : ) Hehe, I love it.


There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it.--Edith Wharton

What is this Site?

Basically I see this site as being largely DD with some D/s and spanko thrown in. I'm glad to see that there's an admission that the discipline is erotic. I get very tired of adults trying to pretend that major stimulation of an erogenous zone doesn't arouse them in some way, even if it takes place after the spanking is over. That's just denial, IMO.

I don't live in a DD relationship and I don't ever plan to. If anything I'd rather it tended to spanko with some D/s. Right now I have some spanking in my relationship but it is not D/s because my husband can't get into that and can't fake it effectively, while he can give a decent physical spanking.

I find D/s to be more attractive because it is gender neutral. My biggest objection to DD is this man as head of the household idea. Maybe in r/l my husband has a lot of that role but he does not take the attitude that he has authority over me. We consider ourselves equal and we each do the things we do best and rule the areas we are most comfortable with. It is perfectly possible for an equal relationship to work, contrary to what a lot of people seem to think.

In D/s, there's almost a parallel "gender" created, the dominant and submissive. People primarily into D/s are more accepting of M/f, F/m, M/m and F/f dom/sub relationships, without automatically assigning males or females the dominant role. (Yes there are a few who do think it's natural for men to be dominant, while there are some male submissives who worship females as if they were Goddesses. I find both cast-in-stone stances to be equally silly).

I had the opportunity to introduce the DD idea into our relationship and I immediately squelched it. I'm not sorry. Something like that where he gets to spank me but I don't get to spank him for doing something that "disconnects" us would make me feel less than him and not respected as a person. I also believe the old adage that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

The interesting thing is that there is a subset (no pun intended) of D/s where BDSM is much in the background and basically it looks a lot like the "traditional marriage" arrangement. I'm wondering if some of them have found their way here.

Like it or not, though, labels can be confining but they also help people figure out where they stand. I do think overall this qualifies as a mostly DD site.

Not in Denial

We do DD even though I don't have an erotic spanking interest and I'm not "in denial" about not feeling erotic feelings from spankings. Yes, I believe I'm in the minority catagory, according to a poll done recently throughout some DD message boards, but please believe it when I say I don't get "off" on the spanking itself, erotic zone or no erotic zone.

I'm not "pretending" either.

As anyone who knows me already knows, I'm extremely upfront about my sexuality. I revel in it. I would try almost anything if I thought it would bring me pleasure or my husband pleasure. I may have difficulties here and there in my sexuality, but lying to myself is not one of them.

The truth is, I've confessed MUCH darker sexual secrets and fantasies to my lovers than spanking scenes. Certain desires which I will never bring up in public because they are so private to me, but which I always brought up to my lovers.

If something as innocuous as spanking were something I secretly lusted after, I would have SURELY brought it up long before now, believe me! Spanking is TAME compared to some of the stuff I've told my husband I've wondered about. Same goes for my husband; he's confessed fantasies to me that would make your ears burn! If spanking was something he lusted after, he surely would have told me years ago, because God knows, he's told me things that makes a spanking look like a little kiss on the forehead.

I became interested in using spanking for discipline simply because my husband and I were having problems in our marriage due to my frequent bouts of lack of control. That was the *only* reason I brought up DD to my husband.

Now, that being said, I don't think it's out of the question for me to possibly *develop* a sexual feeling about spanking. To be blunt, smacking the ass pushes the crotch against *something*, makes the whole area tingle and I can see how one might learn to develop sexual feelings about the whole process.

I am not against such a thing happening. If it occurs, fine. If not, no biggie.

In the meantime, erotic feelings do not occur for me during spankings. And I don't fantasize about them if I masturbate; I have more exciting things (to me!) that get me off. If I develop some erotic connection to spanking in the future, I'll be sure to let you all know. :-)

In denial or not?

Okay, Amber, you may be an exception, but what do you make of the “DD” women who do fantasize about spanking? There is a huge market in spanking stories, and many “DD” women read them. Many themselves say that there are two different types of spanking, one erotic, the other absolutely horrible and they absolutely hate it with a passion. Many themselves say that they have been fantasizing about spanking from a very early age. What do you think about that?

Reply to the boss

The boss said: "what do you make of the “DD” women who do fantasize about spanking? There is a huge market in spanking stories, and many “DD” women read them. Many themselves say that there are two different types of spanking, one erotic, the other absolutely horrible and they absolutely hate it with a passion. Many themselves say that they have been fantasizing about spanking from a very early age. What do you think about that?

Amber says: What do I say about women who do fantasize about it? Hell, more power to 'em! Spank away, fantasize away. How could I possibly be unaware of the erotic aspect after hanging out here and in other forums that speak of it so often? I'd be an idiot if I was unaware of this.

I see people coming to my site all the time because they typed in "spanking" on their Yahoo search. Many (most?) of them are NOT looking for a somber discourse on the relations between men and women and how to increase their marital intimacy. LOL! I'm well aware of what they are looking for: Sex. Excitement. This is quite obvious.

My defensive reply was for the women like me, the small minority, the ones who really do NOT fantasize. Don't you think we might be a little taken aback when someone says we're just "pretending"? Maybe that would feel a bit offensive?

Especially after the umpteeth time you it?

Again, YAY EROTICISM! Go for it! But please don't tell me that if some of us do not find the act of spanking erotic in itself we're "pretending" and "in denial".

I find it frustrating to be called such. Wouldn't you?

Many women say they want or have an equal marriage, many men say they do not want to be an head of the household, many women say THEY WANT to BE the head of the household. I accept all of this.

I've never once told a woman who wants an equal partnership, "Well, if you don't want your husband to be head of the household or let him spank you, you are in denial". I wouldn't dream of making such a judgement over someone else's feelings or beliefs.

If someone tells me what they feel or do not feel, you better believe I take their *word* for that. Shouldn't they know better that I? Who am I to assign a feeling to someone else? I cannot see inside their minds, their hearts.

Now, as for my husband's domiance being erotic for me, yes it is! Run up the flag! Now that gets me turned on and I'll admit to that all day.

But when he tells me I can't have computer time, I don't find that erotic. When he tells me I can't watch a TV show because I didn't get something done, I don't find that erotic. I don't get a "tingle" between my legs, I don't "catch my breath", I don't get all "dreamy-eyed" and think, "WOW! that's HOT! I can't wait to sit in the other room and read because I can't watch my favorite show!"

Maybe for other women, but not for me.

And when he grabs me and pulls me over his lap because I was snotty, I'm not thinking, "Oh my god, this is going to be great! How exciting for ME! I'M REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO THIS MOMENT" NOOOOOOOOOOO, that's not at all what I'm thinking. I'm actually thinking about how can I get out of this and I start talking a mile a minute, desperately trying to get out of the whole thing and trying to put my hand over my butt. Because it HURTS. I don't LIKE it.

No warm tinglies. No wetness down below. No "OMG, now I'm living some fantasy". Nope, nope nope.

Now, afterwards, when he pulls me up into his arms, and he holds me, THEN I feel a rush from his dominance. But I feel THAT similar rush any time he holds me in his arms and any time there is a strong connection between us.

I hope that's clear. :-) It's as clear as I can make it! :-)

Again, I may start to develop an erotic feeling over spanking some day, simply because of the area involved. Maybe I haven't been spanked enough yet, I don't know. I do know I'm very open-minded and whatever is to be, will be. As long as our marriage is working as smoothly as it has been, I try not to analyze TOO much. Well, I try...I didn't say I didn't do it! LOL!

Not in Denial

I must say I have great difficulty with the idea that a woman would let her husband spank her if she DIDN't find it erotic. Speaking for myself, however apprehensive I may feel about it beforehand, and however much I might hate it during (and sometimes I really hate it) I know it's worth it because I just know I'm going to feel absolutely blissful afterwards, relaxed, calm, at peace with the world and utterly turned on. If spanking doesn't arouse these feelings, I don't really understand why a woman would let a man do it to her, or how it can possibly do any good. If you really hated it, how could it arouse any feelings other than resentment in you. And what is the mindset of man who would do that to a woman, knowing she really hated it? How could he? Can you 'learn' to develop erotic feelings about spanking? Surely the feeling are either there or they're not, and if they'r not why do it? For years I was in denial about wanting the spanking thing to be more than just erotic foreplay, couldn't acknowledge that I found the idea of serious discipline more erotic than spanking just for fun, then I found this crazy website and found all sorts of supressed feelings being released, but one thing I just find TOO crazy is the idea of a woman who is not turned on by spanking AT ALL letting a man do it to her. I just don't get it.

Reply to Amber

Okay, if you say so, though I am confused now. How can you say you find your husband's dominance erotic but it isn't exciting to you when he exercises it? Then in what circumstance is it erotic to you? I'm not trying to give you a hard time here but I don't get it. If it's not erotic when he tells you what to do, and it isn't erotic when he punishes you for not listening, and it is erotic after the spanking but also is any other time he hugs you, then I find that a puzzler.

Anyway, while it might be true that a tiny minority of DD folks don't find it erotic to be spanked (and note, I did say "even if it is after the spanking") then why on DD sites do I find all these fetching pictures of ladies bent over in beautiful lingerie, exposing their pert bottoms? Somebody is getting off on this, that is certain. Men at least admit it when they are horny. I respect that.

Don't worry, your husband's fantasies and yours won't make my ears burn. I understand you would rather keep them private, but I've been around the BDSM world and I've heard just about everything.


Scarlett asked:I am confused now. How can you say you find your husband's dominance erotic but it isn't exciting to you when he exercises it?"

Amber says: It depends on what he's doing. I find his words to be infinitely exciting. The actual physical act of spanking as discipline, trust me, doesn't DO anything for me. Slapping my ass during sex, while we are actually making love, that's hot, *erotic spanking* can be hot, BUT *because* he's usually ordering me to do something at the same time.

Scarlett asked: Then in what circumstance is (Dan's dominance) erotic to you? I'm not trying to give you a hard time here but I don't get it. If it's not erotic when he tells you what to do,

Amber says: No, it IS erotic when he tells me what to do. I shiver all over when he talks to me and says certain things to me. Calls me...certain things. He does things to me in the bedroom, things I don't want to talk about, it's private, okay? I find light humiliation and a certain amout of exhibitionism, combined with some bondage, a turn on for me. Spanking just doesn't fit in there. I'm being honest but you act like I'm hiding something and I'm just not.

Scarlett asked: and it isn't erotic when he punishes you for not listening,

Amber: That's correct, I'm not feeling "erotic" at that moment.

Scarlett asks: and it is erotic after the spanking

Amber: Yes, because any time he holds me against his chest, I usually get turned on. He's a lot bigger than I am and he has a really big chest. I alway find that arousing and comforting both.

Scarlett asks: but also is any other time he hugs you,

Amber: That's right. When Dan comes to me and holds me against him, I'm never sure what he's going to do next. He could do anything! He often has, sometimes in the most excitinig ways! The anticipation is wonderful!

Scarlett: then I find that a puzzler.

Amber: I don't know what to say to you to make it clearer. This is me, the way I am. Just as you are the way you are. Not every single thing Dan does turns me on, just because he's Dom. Some things more than others, a few not at all, some a whole LOT. :-)

I can't believe I'm that unusual in this, am I?

Am I the only person here who has certain things that are a huge turn-ons, some things that are somewhat of a turn-on and some things not at all? Am I the only one who has a complicated set of turn-ons?

Scarlett said: Anyway, while it might be true that a tiny minority of DD folks don't find it erotic to be spanked

Amber says: Two percent, actually, according to a poll done recently on the groups I'm in.

I never said I was the majority and I never said everyone should be just like me; I'm just asking for respect and understanding for WHAT I AM! :-)

Scarlett says: (and note, I did say "even if it is after the spanking")

Amber: Yes, but the physical spanking itself did not bring about the warm or erotic feelings. It is the release of the tension that does that. And, his chest, yep, that's a Pavlovian signal for me, every single time.

Scarlett: then why on DD sites do I find all these fetching pictures of ladies bent over in beautiful lingerie, exposing their pert bottoms?

Amber says: I fail to see why me saying *I* do not find spanking erotic means NOBODY is feeling erotic about spanking. Didn't I make that really clear in my last two posts that I'm in the overwhelming minority?

It's so obvious many many MANY people enjoy it for sexual reasons!

YAY for them! But it's not for me. Why does anyone have a problem with this? I don't get it, I really don't see why I'm so "puzzling".

Why don't you tell me some of your likes and dislikes and maybe I can feel puzzled by *you*?

Scarlett says: Somebody is getting off on this, that is certain. Men at least admit it when they are horny. I respect that.

Amber says: I'm horny about lots of things, just not spanking. I do not find pictures or stories about spanking a turn on. I like rape stories and stories about verbal and sexual humiliation.

And I hardly ever feel turned on by looking at visuals, no matter what the picture is.

I'm wired as I'm wired and that's that.

These are my honest likes and dislikes.

Why is this so hard to understand? I don't get it.

Look, I "get" the fact that perhaps you've run across people who use DD as an outlet for their erotic needs but are ashamed to admit it. I'm sure there are people who are afraid of their sexuality and what turns them on, but those people are certainly not me.

I have a sex blog (www.ddwife.blogspot.com) and I've been VERY open and honest about what turns me on from the beginning; from my first posts on here months ago, on my blog, in any comments or posts I've ever made. I have no reason whatsoever to pretend or hide from myself or anyone here.

Now, was all that clear enough? Or do you need another spanking? ;-)


No need for labels

I, too, have difficulty with labels. I don't feel the need for defining something that is fluid and likely to grow and develop with time. Many of the labels seem to imply a rigidity or need for defining something that is different for every relationship. My partner and I simply use these things as a format for discussion and discovery of what we would like to incorporate or discard as we build a stronger and better relationship. We believe that the greatest aspect is the personal understanding such scrutiny engenders.

As for spanking, do we feel it is erotic? Yes! But it doesn't happen without cause. I fully believe that spanking helps ground her and bring her back to what is important...us. I only spank for infractions against what is good for us. This is very erotic for her because she desires to be reined in and made to feel safe. She is aroused by a strong man who is capable of helping her put everything in perspective and allowing her to let go. She becomes my girl when she feels safe and protected.

Many times, however, spanking is not at all necessary. She can be reined in by a stern look or just by being told that that's enough. She then knows that she can let go because I'm in control. She's safe.

Reading some of the sites on trditional relationships reminds me of an occurrence I witnessed growing up. My grandmother was a strong-willed woman who was very outspoken. My grandfather was always kind of quiet and thoughtful. On this occasion my grandmother was nagging at him about something. He responded gently and she started again. He simply looked at her and told her quietly that he had heard enough. That was it. She didn't say another word on the subject. I believe it boils down to respect. She respected him too much to continue, and he felt no need to raise his voice or belittle her. That is the gentle, quiet authority of a commanding presence. There is no need to flaunt it or be excessive. If you have it, you don't need to wear it on your sleeve or use every infraction to punish your partner. If it is there you simply command respect because there is something inherent in you that people detect.

The Fountainhead

I'm aware of the other books you list but not The Fountainhead. What is it? The link doesn't make it sound promising so I'm curious why you included it?


The Fountainhead, by Ayn Rand

The Fountainhead was written in the 1950s by Ayn Rand, a Russian immigrant to the U.S. who was passionate about freedom and distressed about the drift toward socialism in the U.S. But unlike other famous defenders of the free market, she was also interested in rough sex! Her views were very feminist—her female characters are strong and competent in the world—yet she believed that a woman ultimately desires to be conquered sexually by a man stronger than herself. I think most people react strongly to her writing—love it or hate it. I love it!


Erotic? Non-Erotic? It's Only Connection That Matters

Amber says:

>Look, I "get" the fact that perhaps you've run across people who >use DD as an outlet for their erotic needs but are ashamed to admit >it. I'm sure there are people who are afraid of their sexuality and >what turns them on, but those people are certainly not me.

Amber...I am quite late reading this comment. My apologies.

I fully respect how you describe your feelings about discipline spanking not being erotic for you. I fully uderstand this. However, I would like to clarify that *most* women in DD relationships would describe discipline spankings in much the same way as you do, making perfect sense to me because disruptions in a relationship are certainly not very erotic seeming. You do make the point that his holding you after the spanking is very highly charged erotically and this is what most women mean by saying spanking works for them because of eroticism.

Yes, there are certainly some who use DD (i.e. DD is equivalent to spanking for them) as an outlet to meet their sexual or erotic needs. This is certainly true but this does not say nor does it imply that recognizing an inherent erotcism, no matter if it's before or after the spanking, is some sort of trick to get spanked for sexual enhancement. The whole affair would seem like a lot of trouble in the long run if this were the reason.

I always write that I believe discipline in DD works not because of the spanking in itself (this may or may not seem erotic depending on the individual) but because of the sexual and erotic connection intrinsic to this particular very powerful interaction. Intimate Domestic Discipline spanking with the kind of control involved is a powerful interaction. And since it typically involves closely intimate contact between husband and wife , I think it's fair to make the assumption that it is ultimately the intimate connection (holding, talking and so forth) that restores balance to the marriage and to the individuals. Otherwise, I think a man spanking his wife would not go over very well

Just my thoughts...Frank Nelson

What kind of site is this?

The short answer is that this site is a bunch of bullshit spewed by a bunch of man-hating cunts with nothing better to do than whine. How about this—get a fucking life, stop whining, and stop wasting internet bandwidth.

I'm baffled

It really is hard to know what to make of this one isn't it? Whatever can this person mean by saying the people on this web-site are a bunch of man-hating cunts? There are things on this site that I have found peculiar, baffling, sometimes infuriating, but nothing I've seen that I could describe as man-hating. This is a very strange person indeed. As far as I can judge, all of the women on this site seem to like men, some of them excessively so. I mostly like them myself, even my husband. True, there have been times in the past when I've felt like murdering him, but I always assumed that was normal, and most of the time I like him, quite a lot actually. I would love to know where the man-hating is, because I think I've read most of what's on this site by now, and I haven't found any.

Oooh - a troll!

Altho, as with Louise, I have no idea where they got man-hating from.

Ahh well, maybe they'll heed their own advice, and we'll never know why they think that ;)

Oh my goodness!

Just back from holidays and read that lovely little note.

Who is this very disturbed person and why are they wasting our time with their vile scribblings?

I haven't seen much man-hating around here. Maybe I am looking in the wrong places?

For the record I don't just love and adore my husband, I really quite like him as well. He is a wonderful human being.

An old friend asked me recently what I felt when MB walks into a crowded room. I said at that point I know there is at least one kind-hearted, honest man of character and courage in the room. What more could I want?


can spanking be non-erotic?

The author said:
"the astoundingly vehement denial of the erotic aspect of so-called ‘discipline spankings’. Here were people who on the one hand were obsessed with spanking and most certainly finding it erotic or they wouldn't be reading erotic spanking stories and the like... and on the other hand, adamantly denying the connection between that and ‘real discipline’. It is completely inconceivable that there is no link between the two things."

I would have to disagree with you here, but I think my disagreement with your statement is based on my personal experiences which are highly likely to be different to your personal experiences.

I used to be a prolific writer on a group called 1HD, which is now only available as an archive group. I rarely write now. However, someone referred me to your site and I felt I had to write in response to the above. I am not an expert in the subject, but I know enough to know that, for me, disciplinary spankings are not sexual.

I am a spanko as defined by the term "obsessed with spanking". I have been ever since I can remember. But spanking on it's own has no attraction for me, it must be part of a relationship. I do find spanking stories erotic, but interestingly, only as fantasy. I have attempted to play, but not found it to be enjoyable. (Maybe I just didn't have the right partner, or maybe it is more fun to think about than do... just as for many the fantasy of rape is enjoyable but the real thing would be horrendous.) However, I also found I was interested in the DD lifestyle and so tried to introduce that into my marriage. My husband and I don't have a DD marriage, he is vanilla and just not born to it. We did try, for my sake, but it just didn't work out. However, through my searchings and writings I found something else that works much better for me. I found a dad.

I have a displinary relationship with my dad. He is a spanko. He is a dominant man, he lives in a DD relationship with his wife. Obviously his relationship with his wife is sexual, but his relationship with me is not. How can that be, you ask? Well, it's the nature of the relationship.

When I look back to all my fantasies of spanking, they are of a father figure, maybe a dad, maybe an uncle, maybe a big brother. I do something wrong, the father figure spanks, then hugs and I feel better. The fantasies started when I was about 6 years old. They were not sexual then. I think they only became arousing in my late teens. Dreaming about being spanked by a father figure can be arousing. But never is there any sex. Never is the relationship sexual, never do I dream of having sex with the father figure. However, it always feels fulfilling.

My relationship with my dad started as casual writing on an e-group. We became "friends" when we discovered we had more in common than just an interest in DD. Once, in a time of crisis, I wrote to this man while in a distressed state. He replied by sending me his phone number. I called and we talked. The relationship took a turn, he becoming very paternal, I became dependant on his advice and guidance. Eventually I told him my deepest secret, that I longed for a dad more than anything in the whole world. I can still hear his voice quietly and gently replying "you have one, honey".

In the early days the relationship was only by email and telephone. We talked and talked and talked. He promised to be a good dad to me and I promised to obey and always be honest. Sometimes I was scolded, sometimes I was praised. Obviously he couldn't spank over the telephone. But then we met. He has spanked me, and believe me, disciplinary spankings really hurt. When you know you deserve one you really really don't want it. And I can assure you, it is not sexual. But, it is fulfilling. It meets a very deep need. It makes me feel loved and worth loving. It makes me feel cared about. It lets me know that someone cares enough about me to help me be the best person that I can be. Now that may sound like wishy washy drivel but to me it is so very very important. It gives me self esteem. It gives me a sense of myself as someone who can make a mistake and then be forgiven, to get over feeling guilty and get on with being.

I still enjoy spanking stories. I find them erotic. Maybe one day I will enjoy spanking for play. But I can assure you, being spanked by my dad when I have done something wrong is not arousing and not sexual. It is an act of love. It is intimate. It is personal. It's also really embarrassing. But it isn't sexual. However, unless you have been in that situation, in the context of that kind of relationship, I think it would be very difficult to imagine. I am in the kind of relationship because it is what I need. It meets the needs deep within me. It isn't for everyone. I don't need it to be sexual. I have all the sex I need with my husband. I can enjoy sexual stimulation and arousal from reading stories. But my need for my dad, a dad who does spank, is some other need within me. It is not a sexual need, but it is a primal need. And that is why I know that not all spankings have to be sexual.


Spanking not always sexual for some

I certainly agree with Olivia's thoughts that spankings don't have to be sexual! That is what I've always maintained about myself. The person that used to be my spanking partner always held the notion that it was indeed of a sexual nature, but when I've just been spanked, sex is the last thing on my mind! On the rare occasions my husband has spanked me, it always seems to end in sex and while it's not really my cup of tea, I go along with it perhaps because I feel he has just satisfied me with my passion; therefore, why shouldn't he get his as well. But for me I like to be treated like a bad girl; spanked, scolded and the sex comes at some other time unattached to the spanking scene that just unfolded. The weird thing is that sex with my husband is almost comparable to the feelings I have with spanking in that I feel conquered and totally fullfilled by him through sex, yet my preference is that they both remain separate. I want my spanker to be like a father figure who makes me feel like some naughty child that just earned that trip over his knee and it just seems so foreign to me to then proceed to engage in sex. I only want to bask in the emotions that just invaded my whole being from the spanking I received. To be left reeling afterwards from the awe that I feel for him and his efforts. Some can say spanking is sexual, but how can that be if there are those that feel sex is the fartherest thing from their minds at that time?

Not sexual?

You say you don't find spanking sexual, but then you say you find that being spanked makes you feel the way you do after sex, conquered and totally fulfilled, which sounds awfully to me as if it is a sexual feeling, even if you don't actually want sex after the spanking.

I feel conquered and fulfilled after being spanked as well, and although I like having sex afterwards, it isn't absolutely essential (sometimes my husband is too tired, or I have my period or something), but it is still a sexual feeling for me. I never feel like a naughty child, I find I get my greatest satisfaction from just feeling I am what I am, a naughty wife.

I don't think of sex after I've been spanked...

What I meant was that when I engage in sex with my husband, he makes me feel that same feeling of being conquered and totally fullfilled because he's a damn good lover and it's about like the high I feel when I am spanked. Like I'm on some cloud; therefore, both subjects hold my interest in a big way. But I don't think of SEX right after I've been spanked! I would just prefer to be spanked, end of story. The next day I might be in the mood for sex and that's what I do. It's no different than while I'm having sex, I don't think "Gee I wish I could be spanked right now!" because at that time I'm into the sex. I think of them as two separate subjects! I guess if someone insists that spanking is sexual~ that's fine~maybe somehow it is...but for myself, I like to enjoy being elated on that wonderful cloud I'm on after being spanked and sex at that moment would take over that high and take me away from my thoughts on what I just got...That's not to say I can't have sex afterwards, it's just not my favorite way of doing things....

And I don't always have to feel like a "naughty girl" only...I have different scenarios and differents moods here and there...I have no one way of engaging in spanking. Bottom line~ I like the feel of a man's hand on my ass! ;) naughty girl, naughty wife, whatever....naughty is naughty however you spell it ;) sometimes I don't feel that way at all though! Sometimes I feel like the biggest brat that can't be tamed, but I always like to give in~ in the end ;) To each his own~

Nice piece of writing

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. As a single guy, who is a newcomer to this site and the concept of Taken In Hand, I found them very interesting.

Being a Christian, I tend to think that some aspects of BDSM and D/s cross over certain moral lines that I am uncomfortable with and that Taken In Hand/DD does not. Please don't be offended, I'm just letting you know where I'm coming from. I'm trying to figure out if this is true or just my mind trying to let me indulge in something I find appealing.

[For more of this comment, see this post: I want a woman who wants my leadership but will not submit mindlessly to my every whim.—Editor]

RE: What kind of site is this? D/s? TPE? CP? DD? ABCD?

"Perhaps TPE is where Taken In Hand meets BDSM. But given the fact that TPE is part of the BDSM subculture, only a small proportion of Taken In Hand relationships could also be described as TPE."

I agree.