A risky strategy but it worked for us

My wife and I were married in 1973. We have been married for 32 years now, and I can put these years in two categorize; the first 29 years and the last 3 years. Let's start with the first 29 years.

I have always loved my wife, but she was hard to live with. When we had a disagreement (and there were many) she always had to have the last word; if I tried to say one more thing, she still had to get that last word in. Most of the time our fights got very loud; I never hurt her physically though. I learned to just back off from these arguments to avoid a fight. She was acting the dominant role and I was acting the submissive role.

During those 29 years, I really do not remember one time when she actually kissed me without my initiating it. She showed no affection for me during those years. We once went over a year without sex. I seriously wondered if she had a fear of being touched. When I kissed her, it would be quick and I almost always got pushed away. As usual, I would back away to avoid the normal argument. Towards the end of those 29 years, I told our daughter that if I didn't love her mother, I would never be able to continue living with her. It was time for a change; it was time for me take control of our marriage. This was sure to set up a battle. For once, I was going to stand up to her and not back down. I was going to have to be the first one to change.

Actually, I think I have always been the dominant type. I just never knew how to apply this trait properly. Before approaching my wife, I looked at D/s web sites. And there were a lot of bad ones out there. I weeded out the good ones from the bad. I needed to know how to approach her (and afraid of the fights we would encounter). So, yes, I was definitely the first one who needed to change; I had to be sure what I was doing was right. Let's go to the past three years.

I sat down one night with her and told her things were going to change with us; I told her I wanted her to be submissive. No fight; she didn't say anything to me, for three days. Then she faced me and told me that that was the most disgusting thing I had ever said to her. To avoid a fight I didn't say any more that day, but I came back the next day and the next, and we finally started talking more about it. I told her I was taking control of our marriage and taking control of her. It was like a huge brick wall in front of her at the start, and every day a little crack formed and grew.

When I approached her with this, I stressed one thing: she would always be able to trust me with this control. I emphasized I would never hurt her physically, or emotionally. The biggest part of this was that I sat down with her twice and prayed about it. I felt very awkward with this, but was sure it was right. We worked on it for 6 weeks, until, on Valentine's Day (and her birthday), she walked up to me with a glow on her face that I had never seen before, but have seen many times since. I knew then that I had her.

Fast-forward three years to today. We have just (due to job) moved into a new house this week. It is almost two hours away from where we lived for many years. This past week has been very stressful. I have been working to relieve the stress from her; she has taken the move hard.

Since that Valentine's Day three years ago, we have not had one fight, and she always offers her opinion, and sometimes I change my decision based on her idea. She has become very affectionate; we have sex more now in a month then in a year before; and she never pushes away my advances. She used to nag me about everything. She quit this without my asking her to, and she has not nagged me once, since. I make all decisions for her now, and she gladly submits. She has been a lot of work for me – and has been worth all of it. When I talk to her about her being so submissive, her face just glows; this makes her so happy.

When we started this three years ago, I told her it would be a journey, and that she would learn and grow in her submission. I talked to her tonight and reminded her of this. She is not one of these “wanna be” ‘submissives’ on the internet – she never discusses being submissive, she just is submissive.

Alan

Take the Taken In Hand tour

Have you seen the following articles?
She wants to be taken in hand against her will?!
How is this different from other male-led relationships?
Give new love a chance
Learning the ropes
Why do some prefer a Taken In Hand relationship to a conventional relationship?
What the woman gets out of it
Don't tell me to leave my baggage at the door
Who says you have to be submissive?
Acts of love
Happy living in fear of a man?!

2005 Jul 24 - 08:22 | login or register to post comments | latest article | previous article | next article |

Don't try this at home

There is obviously a lot more to this story than Gale has said here. It sounds as though Gale took quite a huge risk, and given that it worked, I think there must be some facts missing in Gale's explanation. Perhaps what brought Gale's wife round was that she saw that he was not trying to force her to submit for his own self-serving reasons, but for the good of their relationship. Perhaps they thereby started engaging with each other, and that made it possible for good feeling to come back into the relationship, and for Gale's wife to be consenting. But what would be unlikely, to say the least, would be for a woman in a bad relationship to feel good when non-consensually taken in hand. It has to be consensual. So I would love to hear the other side of this story. Might your wife write her story for us, Gale? 8-)

by the boss on 2005 Jul 24 - 08:34 | login or register to post comments

Could the Clue Be..?

After reading a lot of the posts over the past maybe year and a half, here's the theory.

Marriages where the wife is particularly, or shall we say unusually, contentious or unusually controlling might in fact be marriages where the wife is secretly longing to be taken in hand.

This doesn't mean do it nonconsensually. I fully agree, the boss, that something vital is missing from this story.

But it does seem that the women who most welcome the idea of Taken In Hand are those who know they can't be with a man who isn't dominant because they are quite simply going to take advantage of him. That's the pattern I see here.

Whereas a woman who is a dominant personality or egalitarian in nature is NOT going to find herself locked in a power struggle with her man, so being taken in hand isn't going to be what she wants. If she's dominant, just like a dominant male, she can get her point across quietly and firmly. If she's an egalitarian she can simply negotiate with him when there's a conflict, and neither one has to prevail all the time.

This would be the explanation behind this apparently miraculous conversion that has taken place here. And it fits for a lot of the others who post how much happier they are after being taken in hand. Much as they didn't realize it, their fighting with their man and struggling for the power shows they WANTED him to have the power.

For those women, and only those women, being Taken In Hand is "natural" and right. This extends to those whose contentiousness is physical (several women who want to be wrestled into submission) as well as to those whose contentiousness is more psychological.

Whereas for the woman who is dominant, there will be very little contentiousness because her husband, the more submissive of the two, will gently step aside and accept her decisions, and harmony will reign just as it does in a Taken In Hand household.

"Pat"

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2005 Jul 24 - 14:55 | login or register to post comments

Could the clue be...

Some of what "Pat" said rang true for me but for myself, the reasons for the power struggle differ. Before I met my husband, there was a pattern to my relationships. I'd meet a guy, get involved with him, we'd engage in a power struggle, I'd start to walk all over him, he'd let me and then I'd lose all respect for him. This would happen over and over. See, I have a very dominant personality (this is where I disagree with "Pat") and I refuse to submit to anyone who isn't stronger (not talking about physical strength) and more dominant. A line from Conan comes to mind, Red Sonya tells Conan that she can never "give herself" to a man unless he can beat her in a fair fight. Well, that's kind of how I was I guess. Except the fight was with words and actions, not swords. The guy I'll submit to has to WIN my submission by standing up to me and not letting me take advantage of him and no one ever made the cut, except my husband. Deep inside me I longed for a man to come along and be the dominant partner but not just any man would do. He would have to prove himself more dominant than me and up to the task of "taking me in hand", and as my husband will tell you, I'm quite a handful. ;)

by MeadowAngel on 2005 Jul 26 - 20:05 | login or register to post comments

Supports My Theory

MeadowAngel, what you say supports my theory. I didn't mean by "dominant personality" a strong willed submissive. That is the way I see the women who want a man stronger than themselves but feel they must put up a fight.

When I say a dominant woman I mean one who is comfortable and happy in the driver's seat and doesn't secretly want to be relieved of command. She's the one (or the egalitarian) who is not going to get locked in one of those power struggles with a man. She won't pick a more dominant man than herself (unless by error).

I would use myself as an example. My marriage is mostly egalitarian. There are areas where I am dominant (decisions re: the child). There are areas where he takes the lead but I get a veto (re: money). There are no power struggles going on here, at all.

"Pat"

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2005 Jul 27 - 14:14 | login or register to post comments

Pat, whatever works for people is good

and I mean no disrespect. But for me, personally, an egalitarian, equal marriage sounds very unromantic, very unsexy. For me, it would feel more like a business partnership. Its one reason why the idea of splitting the costs for dates turns me off too...not that I as a woman am a "sponger" or "golddigger", but to me it shows that the man seeks to take care of the woman.

But, to each her own I guess!

by BlueRose on 2005 Jul 27 - 18:25 | login or register to post comments

Splitting Costs is Not the Same as Equal

Bluerose, splitting costs is not the same as being in an equal relationship. There just isn't anything to struggle about because no one is looking to hold power over the other.

When it comes to the who pays for dating thing I am with you to a point. I think, since men still make more money than women on the whole, they should pay for dates until a relationship is established. After that I think there should be some kind of reciprocity but not 50 50 down the middle..because women still earn less.

But she can cook him dinner or buy him a small gift and make him feel his efforts are reciprocated.

"Pat"

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2005 Jul 27 - 22:10 | login or register to post comments

I like it better as it was "in the old days"

Women (most women anyway), like to feel TAKEN CARE OF. That's a hard feeling to get when dates are split equally. I've gone out to eat with male co workers with whom we split the costs of the meal. If I did that with a man I had a romantic involvement with, it would feel as if I was out with a co worker again.

For me it has nothing at all to do with how much money women or men make. It has to do with the desire of many women to feel cared for by the man they love. That is why I like doors held for me, meals paid for for me, being helped on with my coat, etc. It has nothing to do with the pay scale or being a golddigger or anything like that...it has to do with a feeling of being cherished and cared for.

by BlueRose on 2005 Jul 30 - 17:29 | login or register to post comments

True, But

Splitting the cost of a date would not only not feel like the man was investing in the relationship (which is how I looked at it) but it would be harder on the woman because of her smaller spending power.

Reciprocation in the form of a small gift or making him dinner is the way to show him that she cares too.

"Pat"

by a Taken In Hand reader on 2005 Aug 1 - 21:35 | login or register to post comments

Power struggles and setting new order

Well I don´t find this article potentially dangerous as the boss does. Maybe it´s just that Taken In Hand men are more men of action and they rather seek good solutions (you know rumour has it that men are generally more solution-oriented) so for some women what Noone and the others write may sound too harsh or potentially nonconsensual.

But in a Taken In Hand relationship men are those who lead so I find nothing wrong in the idea of intruducing this lifestyle to your wife. We have reached it kind of naturally even though I started talking about what turns me on but he always had a clear vision of what "is good for me and what is not". In the beginning I felt absolutely repelled by the idea of being "brought up" but later I found out that I really enjoy his care and that he has proved many times that he is worth my trust.

by Anna Maria on 2005 Aug 4 - 08:29 | login or register to post comments

Risk, consent and trying this at home...

I'm not so sure that Alan was taking such a big risk. From his post, it sounds as if the relationship was already empty for him.

Note that he said,

"if I didn't love her ... I would never be able to continue living with her."
To me, this says that the "risk" was minimal. He was risking a relationship that was almost dead in the water anyway.

As for consent, it's difficult to negotiate with a woman who wants to fight instead of communicate (or one for whom fighting *is* communicating). Communication and negotiaton require that both parties are willing to listen.

Remember that he did not use any means or threats to compell her to do anything.

I emphasized I would never hurt her physically, or emotionally.
All he did talk to her until she came around to his way of thinking:

I sat down one night with her and told her things were going to change with us; I told her I wanted her to be submissive. No fight; she didn't say anything to me, for three days. Then she faced me and told me that that was the most disgusting thing I had ever said to her. To avoid a fight I didn't say any more that day, but I came back the next day and the next, and we finally started talking more about it. I told her I was taking control of our marriage and taking control of her. It was like a huge brick wall in front of her at the start, and every day a little crack formed and grew. (emphasis added)

I'm sorry, but I don't have a problem with non-consentual talking, especially when he goes out of his way to assure her that he will not hurt her emotionally.

She had a choice. She could continue as she was until he got fed up and left, or she could agree to do what he asked of her *or* she could have come up with her own solution.

Alan might not have had a problem if she had said, "No, dear, I'm not going to be submissive. I hate the whole idea of being submissive. Instead, here is what I want to do... [insert her idea here]... what do you think?"

That would have given him a starting point. She would have been part of the process. She would have been willing to talk and work things out with him. Instead, she didn't talk to him for three days.

the boss, there are a lot of women out there who are unwilling or unable to talk about what they want or need. These women need special handling.

A man who has a wife like this probably should "try this at home".

If the woman's only mode of communication is fighting, what else is the man supposed to do? You cannot negotiate with a partner who is unwilling to talk. You either dominate, submit or leave.

I applaud Alan's patience and his non-harmful tactics.

BTW: His use of prayer as part of the solution was appropriate *only if* religion was already part of her way of life. Imposing religious practices on someone who does not believe in them is as abusive as non-consentual physical punishment.

by CarlF on 2005 Aug 9 - 02:30 | login or register to post comments

Comment viewing options

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