What Taken In Hand requires of you as a husband

Frankly, so long as you are considerate, thoughtful, and attentive to your wife's needs, there is no reason to change your attitude toward her. Regarding her as some inferior being would be rather stupid.

Still, there are some points worth considering.

First, understand that—regardless of the state of your marriage—it did not get that way overnight. This is especially true if one or both partners had been previously married or otherwise in prior intimate relationships.

Whatever habits or reactions individuals had in previous marriages or relationships, they will probably bring into subsequent relationships. This is one reason why some people run through marriages Hollywood style. The advantage to literally taking a woman in hand is that it can break the cycle.

Second, realize that it takes two people to make a marriage and only one person to break it. While one person can carry the load briefly, no one can do so indefinably.

Merely putting a difficult wife over the husband's lap is not going to make her love him. Sometimes, it will not even solve the problem! That said, unless the marriage is too far gone to save, it will cause her to respect him. In and of itself, that can be of great value.

The chances are quite good that a husband is not going to see any dramatic changes at the beginning. Not only do women test, entrenched behaviors resist change. Nevertheless, the padding of a woman's bare buttocks will frequently bring about the desired changes.

Third, again unless the relationship is dead, there are simply those times when your wife expects you to take charge. Although a woman's signals are often subtle, they may proliferate until she totally loses respect for her husband's capabilities.

At the same time, she wants to be among the most important things in her husband's life—certainly ahead of any other woman.

Fourth, Taken in Hand cannot be a pin the tail on the donkey addendum to the domestic agenda. It must be systemic.

One reason that many people find Taken in Hand so difficult to understand is that it requires rethinking and unlearning disastrous concepts designed to create unstable boyfriend-girlfriend relationships based on equality and explicit kindergarten-like “may I” permissions.

Taken in Hand is deceptively simple. It only requires understand one woman and meeting her needs—though, not always her immediate wants!

Fifth, one sure way to know that Taken in Hand is not working is for spanking to become a big deal after the first few times. In as much as possible, the disparate constituencies need to flow together as effortless as possible.

By whatever name, Taken in Hand is not some recent concoction. Instead, it developed over millennia as a practical means of problem solving before the days of professional marriage counseling, serial monogamy, and easy divorce. That is why some of its chief proponents are women!

Taken in Hand is not about beating a wife into submission. Rather, it using her natural inclinations—including the intuitive understanding that there are simply those times when a woman needs her bare buttocks soundly spanked—to separate the proverbial fire-breathing dragon from the desirable maiden.

Modern age difficulties often arise because, early in the relationship, a woman may not realize she needs to be spanked until it, with amazing predictability, dumps her emotional baggage and clears out the accumulated psychological garbage. Despite hounding choruses of naysayers, that is one reason why nonconsensual spanking—within the context of marriage—is sometimes a perquisite to domestic tranqulity.

Sixth, Taken in Hand wives do not need to be micromanaged. The longer the leash, the better the marriage once understandings are reached.

More than anything else, women need holding and emotional support. There has to be a physical and emotional connection beyond sex.

Seventh, the husband needs to be sure the he is not the problem. Male immaturity and narcissism have no place in marriage. No matter how beautiful the wife, she is not a trophy.

Good husbands cherish and nurture their wives. Insecure men treat them as perpetual servants.


Taken In Hand Tour start | next


Spankings a "big deal"

Noone, could you please expand on your fifth point?

Fifth, one sure way to know that Taken in Hand is not working is for spanking to become a big deal after the first few times. In as much as possible, the disparate constituencies need to flow together as effortless as possible

Are you saying that for those Taken In Hand couples whose marriages include spanking, spankings should become routine non-events? How does that square with the need for an emotional reset?

Physically Taking In Hand Should Not Be a Big Deal

Successfully executed, physically taking a woman in hand has a flow. There is a recurrent configuration of verbal, physical, and even silent interplay between the man and the woman that leads to a quite predictable and desirable conclusion to what began as a complicated state of affairs.

Typically, difficulties do not involve the actual spanking—more realistically, in the American bedroom, a brisk paddling —so much as they emanate from the *production* preceding it. One of real tragedies of the modern era was that—while sex became all too casual—paddling an obdurate woman's bare buttocks became a really *big deal*!

While initial spankings can be awkward and unpleasant for both husband and wife, there should come a point the husband should develop confidence in his proficiency. Likewise—although not necessarily *liking* to be *Taken in Hand*—the wife's assent should exceed any acrimony.

Women in traditional *Taken in Hand* marriages seldom *like* being spanked. It *hurts* and it is humbling—if not embarrassing. Yet, there is a recognition on the part of the wife that:

* There are times when husbands need to *take charge* when things start getting out of control,

* There are simply those times when a woman needs her bare buttocks soundly spanked, and

* When the above marital dynamics coincide, the husband should take the wife in hand.

The more the first two factors overlap, the more imperative it is to fulfill the third.

Both physically and psychologically, nature created women to accept spanking. Thus, if a woman continues to resist—beyond the normal limits of *testing* the man's resolve—then there is a problem.

Beyond the preliminaries—either before or during the spanking—there should be capitulation on the part of the wife. Her internal tensions should release and she should—both physically and emotionally—accept her husband's authority.

The most common evidence of the above is a curious mixture of tears and calmness—even as the woman continues to cry. This is difficult to explain to novices because the elements seem incongruous. Yet, within the apparent contradiction, is the *emotional reset* that causes women *feel better* after having been spanked or find having been spanked to be a*positive experience*.

If a woman is merely *getting high* during the spanking—as often happens with tepid and rhythmic smacks with the hand—then she may not cry. Consequently, having retained control, she continues to think herself mentally tougher than the man. This sets the stage for continuing the destructive power struggle that *Taken in Hand* should ameliorate.

Because tears can be so important to a woman's psyche, women privately counsel spanking the back of the upper thighs—as well as the buttocks—if tears are not forthcoming when disciplining is desired.

As with so much about taking a woman in hand, some of the best advice comes from women. Although women seldom want a bruit, they do respect decisive men able to take them in hand and straighten them out.

An Explanation for CarlF

Among the things to remember in trying to understand that which I write is that, until a little over a decade ago, I had written nothing about my experiences with *wife spanking* or *Taken in Hand* relationships.

Those opposed to spanking have always been around. My mother-in-law was a good example.

It was not until the anti-spanking high jinks reached it's brief zenith—at about the same time that internet usage became widespread—that I had any reason to share my insights. Consequently, the events described are from memory.

Had I not had floundered during the early years of our marriage, I probably would have recalled very little of those difficult times. Yet, because I spent so much time working things through, many of the mile stones remain crystal clear.

Although most of what I post is fresh. I am not a writer by profession. Depending on time, I may or may not do much editing. Sometimes, I am appalled by my oversights!

An exception to the above was my submission to the "What would you have done differently at the beginning?" thread. Having thought about the question previously, my original composition ran eleven single-spaced pages!

When I extracted the highlights, it was still too long. By the third revision, I had a descend-sized post.

Also, the more I have written, the more I have simplified. I leave out a lot of the twists, turns, setbacks, and complexities.

Thus, there may be apparent contradictions various posts. When they occur, they are usually the result of trying to emphasize a similar concept from a different perspective or from elimination of detail.

Noone - you said above "There

Noone—you said above "There has to be a physical and emotional connection beyond sex. ". To that I say AMEN!


Women will test both consciously and unconsciously and to fail to recognize these times will only make this practice more difficult. Don't even judge her for these tests, simply prepare yourself that they WILL happen and learn to see it as one more part of her feminine energy. She wants you to pass the test so she knows she can trust you.

Re: Testing

I agree with Randall, except that I think that trying to recognize when she might be testing you is a big waste of time and energy, and the stress could make things worse.

Instead, just consistently focus on her well-being, while being fair (honorable), firm and prepared to enforce compliance. But also use a bit of common sense and be flexible in a reasonable way, instead of mindlessly turning rules into a fetish (unless that excites her).

For example, if you want her to start getting ready for bed no later than 10 PM, but the finale of her favorite show runs until 10:15, there is nothing wrong with making an exception.

But if she tries to use this to move bedtime to 10:30, gently tell her that her health comes first. If she resists, or starts to pout, lift her off the couch, put her over your shoulder and carry her to the bedroom. If she continues refusing to accept your decision, then let her butt worry about whether she is subconsciously testing you.

More on Testing

As I use the term, *testing* is not the same that despicable behavior some call *bratting*. Testing a man's resolve is not the same as provoking him.

Although testing may follow provocation, the two may also occur separately.

Moreover, there are two basic types of testing. From a practical perspective—from the man's point of view—one is subtle while the other is often expressed without reservation.

Surreptitious testing occurs when a woman needs reassurance. Holding, listening, psychological or physical stroking, and similar techniques may satisfy this form of testing. These may ameliorate the tension because the woman simply needs to know that she remains the only woman in her man's life.

Although easily dismissed as just an attention-getting ploy, this level of testing should be taken seriously. That which a woman complains about is not always what is on her mind. Hence, it may behoove the man to discover the root of the difficulty.

Of course, this takes time—which is why too many men tend to ignore it. However, failure to pay attention to the woman at these times is to risk not finding out how she thinks—getting to know the woman.

Acute testing is most likely to happen during the heat of a confrontation—especially when the wife senses the husband may be ambivalent about an impending spanking.

Faced with the opportunity, some women create a scene. This may very from a well worn, "Oh, you wouldn't dare," verbalization to throwing a full-blown *Category 5* tantrum. Others may simply refuse to cooperate or ask for *consideration*—such being allowed to *protect themselves* or request that the husband only use his hand.

In this power struggle, the husband who backs down or grants too many concessions may face a more difficult situation in the future! If the woman is allowed to have her way—either through getting her way or not being made to cry—it becomes further evidence that she is *mentally tougher* than the man.

Because women despise weakness in men, total capitulation will lead to loathing.

More on Testing

Recent research coming from Germany suggest that females might be able to *smell* both ambivalence and determination in men. Although not necessarily something that a woman could articulate, nevertheless, she might be able to sense the difference between when a man is intend on dominance, and when he is more anxious about taking her in hand.

When these olfactory inputs are compared with subsequent male behavior, it become quite easy to understand why some women are able to manipulate men into a psychologically inferior position.

This insight also makes it possible to appreciate the rather common sense observation that men able to take a woman in hand, and handle her the first time a crisis erupts, tend to experience less resistance in some subsequent discord with the same woman.

What Taken In Hand requires of you as a husband

Noone said:
"Frankly, so long as you are considerate, thoughtful, and attentive to your wife's needs, there is no reason to change your attitude toward her...........Third, again unless the relationship is dead, there are simply those times when your wife expects you to take charge. Although a woman's signals are often subtle, they may proliferate until she totally loses respect for her husband's capabilities."

What if your husband never notices subtlety (signals) and outright admits to having to be blatently talked to? Mine never notices (fill in the blanks). My husband is frustrated that I should "expect" him to notice anything said or done that is subtle and says he "is not a mind reader, men just don't notice these things."

I've been reading this site for a while and notice that the men who comment seem to think (in a wide general way) that to notice a look or smile or action from a woman is important to pay attention to.

So—is it unnatural for a man to notice and do the men on this site practice attentiveness?


There are several ways to look at a profound failure to communicate within marriage.

One is, from a man's point of view, women tend to send a multiplicity of bewildering—sometimes even contradictory—signals. Most men, being cut-to-the-chase-types, can become confused unless they know for what they should be looking in a stream of verbal and nonverbal communication.

Having been once burned, men who have honestly tried and failed in a first marriage tend to become more sensitive the second time around. That may be one reason why spanking seems to be more common in second marriages that it is the first time around.

A man may be inattentive for any number of reasons. Stress can be a factor. So can unreasonable expectations. Often, men expect too much too early and give too little too late.

Faced with other difficulties, the man may also think the woman to be unbelievably complicated. As noted above, this may be because a lot of communication in marriage is nonverbal.

Many times men fail to appreciate how much work it takes to make a marriage work.

There is also misandric acculturation imposed by society. Absent some artificial title, usually acquired through family wealth and attending exclusive schools, men have been relegated to a second-class status. They have also been brainwashed into thinking that women are just like men—only smarter.

Moreover, many men do not grasp that understanding a woman is more art than science. If it were a profoundly simplified task, some man would have long ago created a clever anagram or witty poem that deciphers the feminine mystique.

Yet, once comprehended, a man realizes women are not esoteric creatures from another world. Despite various attempts at obfuscation, female behaviors on a personal level are quite manageable.

From the female perspective, woman should be important enough for a man to take the time to understand her. To ignore a woman is tantamount to a slap in the face.

At the same time, unless a woman has been abused, she usually grow up with self-protective shield that keeps the *hormone wolves* at bay. Ideally, women wait for the *right* man to break through her defenses. Today, young women tend to give up too much too soon.

One of the problems with the current interaction of men and women is that it occurs to a superficial level before physical involvement throws normal mating dynamics out of kilter. Consequently—in marriage, as in comedy—subtleties tend to get lost as a result of premature passions.

This problem is further exacerbated by the *serial monogamy* and the *divorce culture*. Too many couples think that if *this one doesn't workout, there's always another*! The results of thinking are disastrous.

Over half a century ago, an open—and sometimes quite explicit—discussion of paddling a woman's bared buttocks would have been scandalous. At the time, it was also quite unnecessary. Most of the time when *it* really needed to be done, *it* was done privately and without much fanfare.

Then, as a result of the Sexual Revolution, the *rules* of the game changed. In fact, the game itself became so excessively rule-bound that many people avoided it altogether.

As the recently devised and fatally flawed scheme collapses, men and women are going to have to rediscover the old—and, frankly, much simpler—dynamics that once made marriage a rather stable institution that kept the rest of society from falling apart.

Among the rediscovered forces of equilibrium will be a widespread acceptance of *wife spanking*. Once that transformation occurs, explicit discussion will once again become unnecessary.

Meanwhile, because spanking became so *verboten* amid a cultural tsunami of political correctness, it may require more explicit discussion a more frank discussion between husbands and wives than was necessary for past generations.

Still, even with insights, explicit discussion may be necessary. As I have pointed out before, after a lot of three steps forward and two steps back, it took my wife providing a private *show and tell* session for me to get the message that there are simply those times when a woman's bare buttocks need to be soundly paddled.

If a woman gets sufficiently desperate—and, for my wife, a failed marriage was not an option—she will reveal as much as necessary about her needs. When a woman is willing to peel back the curtain on that much of her mystique, only a man absolutely devoid of good sense ignores her!

A failed marriage is not an option ...

What if it's the husband who believes a failed marriage is not an option?

We both read Taken in Hand and believe it to be right path our marriage. But the wife has a long history of abuse, beginning in childhood, and is a "runner". This works for us, but how do we confront the constant need to withdraw due to fear and insecurities without triggering more withdrawal in spite of this being what we both want?

re: failed marriage not an option

I am sorry that someone has not responded to your important question. I have no psychiatric training, but it doesn't take a PhD to understand that your wife, with her traumatic history, would require specifically adjusted to your circumstances, don't you? I hope she has had some counseling to deal with the post-traumatic effects of her childhood, which are significant. you must wonder just a little if her being drawn to being Taken in Hand is an unconscious way for her to deal with her history through you. Down deep, she may feel that she deserves to be abused, thus is drawn to the familiar script of abuse. Particularly as she is a "runner", she may be re-playing the script in ways where she has a "second chance" to exercise self-protective control. I think you two have a big challenge. I do think you should explore this more together and understand that one size does not fit all -- there may be other expressions of your masculine authority, and other ways for her to feel the force of your control, that are more rewarding practices for you to gain the same sorts of results as discipline like spanking produces. But I hope you give it a lot of thought. The decision is yours, of course, but exploring it with her might be productive.

Spanking a woman will not aut

Spanking a woman will not automatically result in her respecting you. Some might call it abuse. Also, servitude is part of many happy relationships and marriages.

Feminism is the Collective Aut(ism)

Originally known as self-study, the motto of the radical reactionary rout should have been *aut vincere aut mori*.