Ms. Damen [should be] taken in hand (I jest!)

Ms. Damen feels so dirty after reading Karen's piece that she feels the need to take a shower. “I honestly thought drivel like this only popped up in Penthouse letters,” she fumes. Hmmm, Penthouse letters, eh? Presumably the implication is that Karen's piece is intended to be erotic.

Imagine my surprise, then, when I read Ms. Damen's next stinging blow (oops, no allusion to spanking intended):

Now normally, I don't bother myself with this sort of thing. I'm a whatever-floats-your-boat kind of person.
...as long as it's on Ms. Damen's approved list of boat-floating activities.
I should probably also make clear that I don't care if couples get into spanking for fun. What is being described in the post, however, isn't spanking for fun. (Read the whole thing if you doubt me.)
Doesn't this contradict Ms. Damen's first statement that Karen's piece was like a letter in Penthouse? I assume there aren't too many letters in Penthouse that aren't intended to be for fun, but not being a regular reader, I'll have to be guided by Ms. Damen on that. She continues:
It's spanking as discipline, spanking that presumes a husband's right to determine what is and is not acceptable behavior from his wife.
Does it? Is that what it means? Let's see, what does it say on this site about this sort of ‘discipline’? Take a look here. Or read what Karen herself says. This ‘discipline’ is something she wanted, something she wanted so much that she acted out more and more until her husband got the message that she craved this kind of control. Sure, maybe it would have been better had she just told him that's what she wanted, but when Karen writes that she wanted it, how is it that you read non-consent, Ms. Damen? Is it that you think you know best what other people should want? Is it that if they want something other than what you approve of, you jump to the conclusion that they can't really want it? Surely Karen should be the judge of what she wants, not you.

Notice how Karen stresses the love, the peace and the passion of her very long term marriage. That's pretty good going isn't it? How many couples married that long feel those things and to the degree Karen evidently does? Who are you to judge her?

Do you want a daddy? Or a husband?
Is Karen being treated badly, like a child? Or is she loving her relationship and her husband just as they are?
Because, you see, the above post excerpt doesn't describe to me a husband at all.
You don't like the sound of it, so it's not ok for Karen to like it? What happened to ‘whatever floats your boat’, Ms. Damen? Are you aware of how widespread the desire for this sort of relationship is? Are all the women who enjoy being taken in hand in need of therapy?
And I admit, I get the queasy, turning-in-the-stomach feeling from people who blur the two roles like this. All I can think is: If it's not all right for fathers to have sex with their daughters, as though they were wives, why is it any more right or natural for husbands to discipline their wives, as though they were daughters?
That is begging the question, Ms Damen. This is not about being treated like a child, it is about being treated like a woman, the way that individual woman wants to be treated. It is consensual. It is what floats her boat. In the case of a child, there is no choice, no escape, no consent. (Hmmmmm...)

the boss

Take the Taken In Hand tour

Have you seen the following articles?
The Taming of the Shrew
Is he who (or where) he says he is?
Secretary: a deeper understanding
About Schmidt: choose engagement, not withdrawal
In praise of Fascinating Womanhood
What easy-to-say word gives every lover pleasure?
Thanks for giving me hope
Obedience
Blush and Gary, by Gary
Why you shouldn't mention the ‘M’ word

2003 Oct 10 - 04:21 | add new comment | latest article | previous article | next article |

I must say I am most confused...

I must say I am most confused! Why would Ms. Damen read a site like this if she is so opposed to it?

by Meg on 2003 Oct 10 - 04:18 | reply to this comment

My guess: she hasn't!

Meg, my guess is: she hasn't read the site, or she'd know her comments were ignorant.

Alternatively, she is one of those people who's curious about this but is still wrestling with her still unconscious desire for it. And that's OK. It's a brave woman who'll admit to wanting this. I knew a woman who was well over 40 when she finally twigged this is what floats her boat..

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2003 Oct 10 - 09:01 | reply to this comment

I wouldn't put her over my kn...

I wouldn't put her over my knee if she paid me.

by Todd Evans on 2003 Oct 10 - 09:33 | reply to this comment

Not to mention that there are...

Not to mention that there are trolls that think thier doing the world a 'service' by making others feel bad about themselves in order to deter them from thier desires the troll doesnt see fit to be right. The troll thinks they can fool people into thinking they are one of us to undermine and disrupt our happiness....and they think its right just like the pychos that are against abortion that go out and kill to make thier own point ( as example ). These type trolls are control freaks and feed upon weaknesses of what we are all trying to except within ourselves for those that are still trying to.

Mistic

by mistic on 2003 Oct 10 - 20:57 | reply to this comment

Tortured Concepts

It seems to me the whole review of Karen's piece, along with that site's own reader comments, is filled with glaring inconsistencies and tortured concepts. This apparent "vanilla" community seems to suppose there is one default sexuality or at least a default "natural way" of expressing heterosexuality. I suppose that would mean something like the traditional missionary position with sex intended only for having babies. Anything else supposedly would be unnatural according to this default logic...or do we have a logic that allows for some additional practices but still limiting to Ms. Damen's one way and obviously narrow standards? It is hard telling what her standards are because "whatever floats your boat" is obviously not her true standard.

The truth is, Ms. Damen, you may be prejudiced by accounts in play for pay magazines or web sites intended to appeal to prurient interests if that is your background. You make sweeping genralizations which simply hold absolutely no meaning to ANYONE in this genuine community. We choose to live without your kind of pretense, living, as the poet Rilke says, "through our own questions" and not yours. We are living for one moment in the eternity of Creation and choose not to allow the limits of others to diminish our capacity for loving, and what we do is about how we live and love. What we do is not "unnatural" or deviant or wrong. It is as natural as the air we breathe.

Live and love your own way without fearing judgement from others. If you are trying to listen to what we say and simply are unable to hear the music of our intimate dance, that's okay. It's okay if you think our dance is mad. But please, Ms. Damen, please understand that not even you can explain sight to a blind man or sound to the deaf. It is hard to believe that a blind man would judge your sight as bad. It is hard to believe that a compassionate person would judge so harshly the genuine loving of another human being.

Frank Nelson

by Frank Nelson on 2003 Oct 13 - 16:06 | reply to this comment

Go, Frank!

Go, Frank! I hope she listens to you. It might do her some good.

by Helen on 2003 Oct 15 - 14:49 | reply to this comment

Responding to: "I must say...

Responding to:

"I must say I am most confused! Why would Ms. Damen read a site like this if she is so opposed to it?"

She was not, apparently, reading this site. The original post was picked up by a right wing blogger who linked to it from his site. That seems to be where Ms. Damen read it. From my perspective, the kind of mutually agreed upon domestic discipline that the original poster described has nothing to do with politics and is much better discussed out of that context.

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2003 Oct 31 - 00:37 | reply to this comment

I wonder how many languages Ms. Damen speaks?

Because if she is not fluent in another person's language, she cannot understand that other person at all.

Domestic discipline is a type of private understanding and agreement between couples, about how to maintain open communication and accountability between themselves.

For those wives do not wish to submit to their husband's headship, or those husbands who avoid the mantle of leadership in the home, domestic discipline is as incomprehensible as any other unknown language.

And they instead sadly sentence themselves to long hours of arguments, days of silence, years of affairs and the devastation divorce.

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2003 Dec 1 - 00:14 | reply to this comment

Judging Ms. Damen

I think we should be careful before we judge Ms. Damen. Being new to the lifestyle I can totally see how she feels. She is probably a caring person who thinks that Karen is abused and needs saving. It is so far outside her experiences that it seems just plain crazy that Karen could "consent" to have her husband take her in hand that way. I understand the fear that Ms. Damen feels. It has not been that long since women have had the legal right to decide for themselves, to be taken in hand or not. To Ms. Damen this is about oppression, not love. There are women all around the world who have no choice. It is terrifying to think about being trapped in that life. No recourse, no way to get out. Ms. Damen thinks Karen has lived that life for over 20 years. For Karen to say she wants this life, Ms. Damen needs to explain it to herself that of course Karen must have some sort of sickness. Because we know that women who choose to live in abusive situations seem to have some sort of sickness. Why else would they return "willingly" to a dangerous situation that in tragic cases has resulted in the death of many women?

It is too bad that Ms. Damen did not come to this site to read the article. There are many articulate, intellent articles writen by men and women who are happy in this life. Maybe she could have got to a place where she could see that there are many very happy women who not only consent to DD, but there are some who COMPLAIN that they can not get the discipline they feel they need. Perhaps she could have come to an acceptance, even if she did not understand. It takes time and effort to understand something that is new to you. In some ways I applaud Ms. Damen. It took courage to comment on this. I agree that her tone sounded judgmental, and to most people on this site totally uninformed. We choose how we react to her comments. Are we "normal"? What is normal? Who cares? The more important questions are: Are we happy? Are we hurting others with our actions? If we can say yes to the first question and no to the second, then isn't it irrelevant how Ms. Damen feels about our life choices?

This is a safe place to have an open discussion on DD. In our ten years of marriage we have never been as happy and as in love as we have been in the last few months, since we agreed to try DD. I do not feel comforable admitting this to my neighbours or even my family. Not because I feel I have an illness, but because in my country, Canada, my husband could lose everything. In Canada wives do not have to press charges on their husbands for them to be investigated and charged with assaulting them. A report to the police, from family or friends, could result in an investigation. A discription of our lifesyle would very likely get the reaction that Ms. Damen had. Discipline Spankings could very well be seen as abuse. Once charges were laid I would be helpless to stop it. Even if he was found not guilty, if we got a very open minded judge who could conceed my consent, the damage would be done with the charge. This site is a safe place to look for discussions and voice opinions. Will there be some negative reaction to what we say? Of course there will be. There will be people who think I am sick, and that my husband is abusive no matter what I say about it. That is ok. They have a right to their opinions too. If people who disagree are coming to this site and disagreeing then at least they are thinking about it. We have challenged them enough to think about it and comment. I try to understand where they are coming from and hope that given time they may learn to accept what they do not understand.

By the way Karen I loved your article. Thank you for sharing it with the rest of us.

by Tevemer on 2003 Dec 8 - 17:29 | reply to this comment

So many things seem weird or wrong

So many things that people do in this world seem weird or wrong when you first look at them. But if you take the time to research and understand them, you find there is logic and morality there. Most human beings are seeking happiness for themselves and for those around them. I think there are as many different ways to find happiness as there are people, and sometimes it's very hard to understand the things that float other people's boats.

It's great for people to defend the defenseless and try to stop abuse wherever it's found. I'm sure no one here wants to criticize anyone for that. When people think abuse is occurring *here,* I think they are just blind to what we are, what we need, and what we have. Maybe they will find the time to remedy that blindness, and maybe they won't. DD as we know it may be completely beyond their experience. They've seen egalitarian relationships and abusive relationships, and they think that's all there is. But aren't we all equally ignorant about some things - maybe a lot of things? I, for one, feel I know less and less the more I learn.

Melanie
P.S. Frank always writes such great stuff!

by Melanie on 2003 Dec 12 - 21:57 | reply to this comment

Funny

SP says:

I assume there aren't too many letters in Penthouse that aren't intended to be for fun, but not being a regular reader, I'll have to be guided by Ms. Damen on that.
*chuckles* You're funny, Ms. the boss.

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2004 Mar 27 - 08:44 | reply to this comment

the boss's wit

I wish you were writing editorials for the NY Times, in company with Maureen Dowd!

by Malcolm on 2004 May 21 - 04:23 | reply to this comment

Flak

I daresay there are plenty that would be offended by Karen's post. I thought it was relaxed, considered and informative.

I'll add only this. Karen and her husband have been married 31 years and they are still in love.

How many of her detractors could survive one third of that time?

Q.E.D.

by Yan Yan on 2005 Jul 19 - 19:17 | reply to this comment

Comment viewing options

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