CarlF, thanks so much for another wonderful and insightful look into the workings of a Taken In Hand relationship! Just as the workings of a woman's mind are sometimes difficult for a man to comprehend, so are the mysterious workings of a man's heart and soul -- and you have captured for us the essence of the struggle over protecting and disciplining your woman without allowing your anger to harm her. Women long for a strong, "manly" man to take charge, but sometimes we forget that the very characteristics we seek can be a double-edged sword.

It is a wise woman who knows that learning patience and not pushing her man to do something he is not ready for can be the thing most needed to allow their relationship to grow.

Thank you, Carl, for helping me to understand. This is something we have discussed, but that I couldn't quite see where he was coming from. You are right - I really don't think I want him to spank me with his FULL anger. I only want that little bit of it that I have earned at that particular point in time, and likely could only handle that much. And that may be a very difficult thing for him to do.

The release of the tears that come from a spanking are wonderful, cathartic and good for both of us - now I see how the anger that could be utilized might also be terrifying for both of us. If we ever reach that point where he does spank in anger, it will be a long way down the road, and it will be a road very carefully traveled.

Both John and Carl talk about the time it takes. This site can sometimes be like a home improvement show...where you watch a house be remodeled in an hour. I think it is very good to remember that all of this does take time. Also, I like the fact that both men talk about doing small test. Letting out a little anger on ones wife. Then stepping back and re-evaluating how that went. I remember the first time my husband was able to let out on me in this way. It helped me to go back and remember all of the warnings he threw at me just before it. Now, even when I am being emotional...I am able to hear the warnings better and curb my behavior before we get to that point.

But I would have never know the need to listen while being emotional if he had continued to close up and walk away. Showing me once...what he was really feeling when he sends out those warning...helped me learn so much about him. I think what our husbands do not realize is that it is better in our minds to know the real man we are living with...then to all ways get the cold controlled shoulder. Then we can work on making each other less mad, together.

I agree that a woman who wants to feel her man’s anger does tend to want it “undiluted and undiminished … and now.”

But she, at most, wants to feel appropriate anger in its undiluted and undiminished form.

The type of anger that is reasonable to direct toward your woman, even when undiminished, is still extremely diluted in comparison to anger that CarlF likened to “protecting her from some kind of imminent danger.” (But anger in that situation would likely be of a different type and intensity, and quite possibly counterproductive.)

And anger within a relationship should never have anything in common with what is experienced while dealing with imminent danger. The autonomous fear response and adrenaline rush, the uncertainty of not being in control of the situation and the necessity of rapidly choosing and acting on the least undesirable option with incomplete information while under threat are the opposite of how a man who is in charge, who is in control, should react toward his woman.

I mentioned the visualization technique in my earlier comment as a simple and practical way to learn to transform anger in a constructive way. It is a way to control the situation by experiencing and limiting your behavior in advance, rather than allowing events to choose themselves and spiral out of control.

Also, notice that “thinking” has been used in different ways.

For example, one idea is that you shouldn’t overanalyze an incident to the point of starting to resolve it in you mind, because then you become less able to resolve it on her bottom, which would be the most constructive way at a certain stage in some Taken in Hand relationships, and which may require taking it beyond where she thinks the limits should be.

(This is an example of consensual non-consent (discussed on other threads), which is appropriate only with a self-aware woman who has integrity (one who doesn’t change her mind after the fact and isn’t vindictive), and which should first be made clear in the minds of both, and then made explicit once (and then assumed to be ongoing, unless terminated during a neutral discussion). An explicit understanding is a necessity in the current social environment, and it makes everything more real, since it eliminates guessing games, uncertainty and hesitancy.)

Another non-conflicting idea is that you must analyze yourself sufficiently so that you don’t go beyond where you think that the limits should be. This necessary self-check should verify that your mindset won’t lead to unintended consequences and that, for example, you are not on a path to rage. This is especially important if you feel betrayed in some way, instead of merely angry about some impersonal event.

If you read CarlF’s article The final step, which he references implicitly, you will see that he actually modulated his behavior significantly. And notice that she had refused to help him when he needed her, so he was probably also hurt rather than just annoyed. He handled this well, since this is a condition under which anger can easily spiral out of control.

There wasn’t any disproportionate anger or unthinking rage, a quintessential example of which is dropping a weight on your foot and then breaking your hand by punching a wall.

He first comprehended his anger (through a thought process that has become second nature, unnoticed and fast), and then used the spanking and interplay with his wife’s immediate feedback as part of the process of resolving his anger, and of understanding his wife and their relationship, which their interaction partially redefined. This allowed him to realize that his wife had been trying to move him, and not to hurt him.

His thinking, in this context, has become a form of instantaneous referencing, because he invested four years in observing and thinking in great detail about his wife and their relationship.

With respect to the original article, there is also another possible cause of sulking and disproportionate anger. I think that a man who throws temper tantrums doesn’t actually see himself as the leader in his relationship, and is afraid that this will become evident. Self-indulgent anger always seemed to me to radiate resentment at not being “given” control or “allowed” to be a man.

A man who is truly in charge knows that he has the power to guide or stop anything in its early stages, or whenever he chooses, in any way that works for them. This is why, in my earlier comment, I said that he is always partially at fault if a situation reaches an unacceptable level.

Even men who are lucky enough to be, as Alba said on another thread, “adored, respected and trusted by women who don't cross boundaries and are simply in hand without the need to be taken there” should still overtly take control whenever conditions inside or outside of the relationship start to become unstable, and do so in a way that is worthy of that adoration, respect and trust.

Whenever both people are willing to invest enough time and energy in a relationship, then anger tends to becomes self-limiting. The more the two of them care for and connect with each other, the more layers they create that naturally moderate anger.

And relationships with very little anger can also be extremely passionate and emotionally and physically intense. Feelings aren’t suppressed, but when two people are actively looking for ways to engage with each other and to make each other happy, many causes of anger are inevitably swept away.

Anger is neither the same as passion nor necessary for it, so don’t assume that you are missing out on anything if you are delighted with each other most of the time and can’t help showing it. (An added bonus is that you get to drive the “usual suspects” crazy.) ;-)

Apart from the issue of anger itself, some of the ingrained doubts mentioned in the original article will dissipate as a man begins to understand the different positive effects that a spanking can have on a woman. These effects are discussed in many articles on this site, and I summarized some of them in the first comment on Looking for insight.

I think that the successful scolding that CarlF did as a first step is actually the more difficult option, because it is very easy to say something that means a lot more than you actually intended or even realized. And cutting words can’t be unsaid and can destroy the emotional foundation of a relationship.

Women tend to be much more sensitive to nuance and interpretation, even in a calm conversation. So just imagine the damage that a man could create by accidentally blurting out thoughts that he shouldn’t have been suppressing, using nasty words that don’t actually describe how he feels.

And I think that a woman who wants to know her man by connecting emotionally with him, through physical interaction when he is angry, is unlikely to need any “earlier, diluted phases.”

Assuming, of course, that her man carefully minimizes the possibility of doing any real damage, understands her, and has self-control (as a protective undercurrent that separates what would help her from what would hurt her, and not as a form of “emotional nonexistence”).

He must also understand the situation at hand (which, in a familiar relationship, tends to require at most a few moments of reflection). Otherwise, he may discover too late that he has misunderstood or misinterpreted, and acted on half-baked assumptions, which isn’t the hallmark of a trustworthy leader. (And this is not the same as the issue of “fairness” that has been discussed on other threads.)

When connecting through anger, the physical sensation is secondary to the emotional interaction, and a man may not have fine control over details (like how long and how hard) so, until he gains experience and receives feedback from his woman, he should use only his hand.

It is impossible, for almost everyone, to injure a healthy woman by smacking the lower part of her bottom, and even her thighs, with an open hand. And the physical connection of his hand directly on her skin can lead to a more intense emotional response.

But the first step should always be to understand, truly understand, his woman. And to always remember one of the best descriptions of how a man should strive to make his woman feel (from Toms Pookie, on another thread):

But I always knew I was safe, too. It was always safe to be wrong and imperfect in my husband's arms.

Carl I understand totally, if my husband wants to "come down" before he spanks me. It is first his fear to hurt me seriously and second wouldn´t it fit in his ritual to hug me before spanking, to stroke and to tell me that he really really loves me and everything will be fine and forgiven after the spanking.He forgot this, his own rule just one time and I looked like a pavian afterwards, bruised all over staying in every colour of the rainbow for more than a week. Happend in summer and we could not go out swimming, because the marks were not covered by the swimsuits. I felt the punishment was correct but he was
upset about it. To live taken in hand should be good for both - and so I accept his refusal and his decision to wait, if he feels too mad about my behaviour.