Sunday, November 5, 2017

a paddling gone very very wrong

 FL has made a very interesting comment regarding my insecurities. He wrote:
If you can maintain the joy and wonder - without the insecurity - it can be a fairy tale that lasts forever.  
Before I met Gregory, of the many problems I had at that time, being too strict, too severe or too harsh as a domme has never been a problem I had had.

Being a domme and being able to "feel" the other person was something I was really good at. 
(Ok, it might be that the guys I spanked were lying to me... But I doubt that.)

I am not a heavy physical player. Meaning: I get turned on not by the physical element of being in control, but more by the mental element of it. That´s one of the reasons I was not afraid to be too hard on a man. 

I dont need/crave a lot of physical dominance to get my dominant needs met. E.g: I once told Gregory  ("just because I can...") not to watch a certain american football game on tv. A game he had really wanted to see. But he complied and missed that game. And even today, just thinking at it, makes me smile and turns me on. There was zero physical contact involved. Him not watching that game made me happy on a very deep level.
The underlying questions I was really silently asking him at that time were: "Am I really important  to you? Are you willing to suffer for me? Do you care about me?"
Him not watching that game helped me to believe that he did indeed think that I am quite ok ;-)

With Gregory and I, right from the start everything was different. One of the first spankings I gave him,  actually a paddling, went very wrong.

We were in a very nice hotel room, it was the evening of a great day, full of laughter and joy.  He had brought a paddle in the hotel and  he had told me that he can and has taken quite intense physical pain.

I am still cringing just thinking about the following. I tried to forget it for many months.

He was on the bed, I paddled him, he was quiet, did not move, did not say much.

And immediately after we left the hotel to enter the city night life, when we were on the street for about one minute, he got into a yelling contest with a guy selling food on the streets. Gregory completely lost it. The guy was an idiot, yes, but he was just a random street food seller, selling highly overpriced stuff to people. I could not care about him less. The events unfolded so quickly, I had troubles following the action. The two guys yelled and cursed at each other in ways I have rarely seen or heard in my life. I was just standing there, I did not even try to stop Gregory. The emotions were too raw and deep.

Somehow the two guys were able to not beat each other up  and Gregory and I walked away.

Gregory and I had a talk at the next street corner. I asked him what just happened. I understood that the street food guy was not the real source of anger for Gregory. And Gregory told me in uncertain terms that I had been too hard with the paddle, that I dont know what I am doing, that he fears about his safety with me, that he cant and wont let me paddle him again.  

(A day or two earlier I had caned him, but he did not like the amateurish way I used the cane. So he tried to teach me while I was caning him. I had told him: "You cant teach me WHILE we are in a scene. It destroys the scene/energy".)

And so, now on that street corner, he said to me: "I would have told you that the paddling is too hard, but you were very clear the other day that you dont want me to teach you. That´s why I complied and let you do your thing. I submitted to you. It was not good for me though."

It was all a big mess.

I just read the following comment on Dan´s blog : 

Even if we ask for more or harder, it can be difficult for the wife to gauge just how hard to deliver. She can judge by his reaction as to whether it's hard enough but it is difficult for her to judge how to ramp it up.

Anyway, I was the domme, I was in charge, and he felt terrible.

Not much to say in my defense but that I am very sorry and that I never intended to hurt him. 


  1. Tina,

    I can't help but cringe when I read this post, just as I cringed when reading your experience at the pub. I know that this is a long past event, but I do hope that communication lines are more open now.

    There was a middle ground to these events that could have been taken that wasn't him topping from the bottom or remaining silent and having it end up miserable. e.g. using a Green/Yellow/Red or a numerical pain scale at the start for you to be able to gauge the intensity of your blows.

    Just remember that our mistakes are supposed to be things that we learn from to ensure they don't happen again. This is the more beneficial path than letting them haunt our insecurities forever.

    Take care.

    1. yes,Fur, I did cringe too. Both times. Communication seems not to be our strength...

    2. I have faith that you will be able to find a way to communicate when things are important. Sometimes trying not to hurt someone's feelings results in greater hurt later on. Often being direct and clear is the best path even if it isn't very comfortable at the start.

      Take care.

    3. Thanks, that´s good advice, I think I will do that from now on.
      And: Thanks for your support.

  2. I have to control myself not to go off on a rant at Gregory *deep breath*.

    Firstly I'm glad you are past it and everything is good with both of you. And thank you for sharing. I'm sure it was very difficult.

    It's clear that you were both inexperienced and that your communication was terrible, but the reason it makes me angry is because of the way HE behaved.

    People talk about trust in BDSM, but the talk is almost always one way: that the sub has to trust their dom. And yes, of course that's true. But trust the OTHER way is just as vital and people don't talk about that enough.

    I need to trust my sub to actually submit to my dominance, I need to trust my sub to tell me what's going on with him, I need to trust him to safeword if he needs to, I need to trust him to be willing and able to work through issues with me if I make a mistake etc.

    The first time, it seems like you got it wrong and he presumably did what he thought was the best thing in trying to show you in the moment. You told him that didn't work for you. You were both hurt and upset. People make mistakes and it's totally understandable, that kind of thing can really shake you up. Best case, you both learn a difficult but valuable lesson and discuss how to do better next time.

    Except it seems the learning and the discussing didn't happen.

    The second time, though, he passive aggressively set you up for failure and then blamed you for it, and that makes me livid. As fur sissy said, the choice for him wasn't between 'give you training' (which he knows doesn't work for you) and 'just taking it' (which is what he chose).

    There were a myriad of BETTER choices that he didn't take and then he blamed you for the entire situation in a way that seriously sounds like he had been harbouring this resentment for ages, and that's ugly behaviour. The obvious choice for him was to call 'yellow' or 'red' when it became too much and then to be sweet to each other in the aftermath and talk about what was going on.

    If I'm generous, I would assume that he just didn't have the experience to know better, but his 'oh I've taken so much in the past' claim and the blaming afterwards belies that assumption.

    I'm sorry, but he behaved like an arse.

    I know you love him and I know all of this is really intimate and emotional and difficult and I am being quite harsh on him. It's mainly because the *blaming* thing is a fear that I think many many dominants have, and it’s destructive and unfair.

    Maybe you are never playing with any kind of impact again because of these experiences, but if you do, that open and clear discussion well beforehand needs to happen.

    Best, Ferns

    1. I understand your point. And I can say: yes, it was super difficult for me. It has triggered insecurity and embarassment, and humiliation in me. In blogging about it I am trying to free myself from the feeling of failure I am still feeling.

      I did not see his outburst in the street coming at all. I dont think I did something wrong. My intentions were pure. And I think that I had triggered some stuff in him, stuff that has got nothing to do with me.

      But I do think that the fact that I so misjudged the situation falls back on me and my ability as a domme. It was my job as a domme to make sure he does not "really" get hurt. And I failed in doing that.

      Yes, you are right, it was super passive aggressive of him. I did not realize it at that time, but I do now. I tend to not see passive aggressive behavior when it is addressed towards me. I once, not related to Gregory, even bought a book called: Living with the passive aggressive man.

      And: No, I have no fucking intention of playing with impact again. In that 2 or 3 days, over a year ago, my self- esteem in that matter has profoundly been destroyed. I actually stopped watching caning porn, because it only triggers feelings of "You are doing it wrong" in me.

  3. As a note (wow, this is getting long, I have ALL THE THOUGHTS), some things I've done in the past with new experiences or toys:

    1. If the sub has experience, have him show me what to do. No headspace, no D/s, not ‘playing’ (though it should be fun and sweet), just 'right, show me how to use this thing'. I learnt a lot of my skills from experienced subs.

    2. If it's a new toy, have a practice session. Again, no headspace, no D/s, just 'get over there, I'm going to try this thing out'. Lots of talking: 'how does that feel?' / 'scale of 1-10' / 'can I go harder?' / 'is that thing wrapping?'/ ‘does faster feel better?’ / ‘do you prefer fast and light or slow and heavy?’ etc

    3. The first time I play with a new toy or a new sub (AFTER doing the above if relevant), I'm not trying to reach for anything. We are both learning what it feels like. So that means lots of checking in 'how are you doing there, baby?' and stopping well before he wants to (i.e. leaving him wanting more). There will be plenty of 'next times' where I can push, but not the first time.

    Anyway, I know it was in the past, and the above may be entirely irrelevant, I just hate how it played out for you. I hope you are well and the both of you are happy.

    Best, Ferns

    1. Ferns, thanks for your input. As always much appreciated. :-)

    2. My reaction is maybe a bit superfluous because most already have been said.
      Both a domme and submissive are responsible for what happens. Communication is not just important, it is a key factor. When a sub's limits is by far exceeded a sub should mention this because a Domme is not a mind-reader. An experienced domme may be able to read her sub's body-language. How ever the way Gregory did this is rejectable. I married about 40 years ago a completely vanilla woman. in the ninetees she became a 'converted vanilla' and she started spanking me. One of the main important things was to push up her self confidence. At first she was scared to hurt me. i however praised her saying she did so wonderfully well and after our weekly spanking I gave her a bouquet of red roses and thanked her to show her my gratitude. She felt happy and valued for it and her self confidence grew. If I wanted her to improve certain things I said 'you did great.. however if you would have done .... it would be absolutely fabulous. However making negative remarks oes not work, because it would have lead to nothing, just destroy her self confidence which would be a major obstacle in our further developent.


    3. Thanks, appie.
      My domme self-confidence is really gone since these events.

  4. That paddling incident was 100% on Gregory, not you. He was the experienced player, he told you he was good with intense pain, he knew you were unfamiliar with his limits.
    Physical play is less important to you than mind play and I totally get that but sex does require at least some physicality. Talk first, establish what works. I know it makes it seem like it loses a lot of spontaneity but you are, after all, a professional negotiator. You know how important it is, to avoid future misunderstandings.
    Don't lose your confidence, Miss Tina.

    1. FL, at least one guy, namely you, calls me Miss ;-)
      Btw. he DID clean up that table from the post a few months ago. I was super happy and touched when I entered his house and saw that he had done exactly what I wanted.

    2. I had European parents; I would address you as Miss Tina even without you being a Domme, until invited by you to do otherwise. :)
      That's great about the table. Progress!

    3. lol, yes, step by step :-) The really awesome thing is: I am really into him. I love his body, I love what he does in life, I love his family members, I love that he is in my life :-)

  5. Thank God somebody had the courage to discuss an incident like this. Good for you, Tina.

    I agree with the people who posted about using safewords, especially as you two were just getting to know each other. However, many in the DD sphere (as opposed to BDSM) seem to be vehemently opposed to them because the punishment is not "real" if you can safeword. Dan, whom you quoted, is one of them. He also rejects the notion of "limits" in DD. Others allow safewords for things like a medical injury, but not for excessive pain. The pro I see is one of those people.

    The fact of the matter is that there is some point where the intensity and/or duration exceed what is safe or ensures the physical and emotional well-being of the spankee. Where that point is can vary drastically for different people. It can also vary at different times according to his or her health and emotional state.

    People have very different reactions to being spanked, paddled, and caned. The pro I see has told me how I am very difficult to read. As it gets worse and worse, I tend to go quiet -- like Gregory did. I do that for a number of reasons, but primarily because I begin using meditation or dissociation techniques to cope with it.

    If people reject safewords or the notion of "limits" (and by that I don't just mean limits as to what will be done to someone, but limits in terms of how much pain is too much pain), something is bound to go wrong. Here, it ended up in resentment that exploded during an interaction on the street.

    Anyway, he did seem to set you up somewhat here, and anyone reading this blog knows that your intentions are the best. So, this was clearly a communication/inexperience(with each other) issue and nothing malicious. However, kudos to you for illustrating what can happen if limits aren't respected, which cannot happen without good communication.

    Anyway, good for you for providing a compelling example.


    1. Thanks for your input, James. I will probably reply to your comment in a new blog post.

    2. Now, James, it's not necessary to resort to untruths and misrepresenations to these folks. I have never once, on my blog or anywhere else, said that DD should have no limits. (No one is forced to take my word over yours. Anyone can go to the blog and see for themselves.) Instead, I believe that every couple has to define their own limits. In fact, I emphasize that communication process to such an extent that I reject about 90% of the concept of "topping from the bottom" in the context of DD, because unlike a fair amount of what happens in BDSM, in DD they couple is not play-acting. It is not a scene. And, in its pure form, it is not really about some broad power exchange but, rather, it is about imposing boundaries and rules (often rules the disciplined party has specifically requested) and imposing a painful consequence (again, almost always at the disciplined party's specific request) when the rules are violated. In the context of a consensual, established, disciplinary relationship, the concept of "topping from the bottom" seems to have little to offer other than cutting off beneficial, two-way communication.

      Nor have I ever said that "real" DD couples do not, or should not, use safewords. I do think they are far less common in DD than in BDSM and in many circumstances, less necessary. Again, most DD does not involve "scening" between relative strangers. It tends to arise out of existing, often long-existing, relationships, where communication is already pretty good. In fact, the entire DD phase of the relationship usually starts with an interested husband approaching a puzzled wife, telling her about this need he feels. My wife and I do not have a safeword, because we don't need one. If a swat lands too high, I say "too high." If something else--something beyond the pain of the spanking I asked for and did something to deserve--is not right, I say so. Real complicated, isn't it? On the other hand, if two people barely know each other, or if they *are* using spanking as part of a BDSM scene, then by all means have a safeword. But, that doesn't mean every couple needs one. I know you struggle with this, but many men in real DD relationships actually *trust* their wives and the communication is good enough that the parties actually talk about what is working and what is not.

      Do I reject the centrality of safewords and "topping from the bottom" in BDSM? No, because I don't have an opinion on it one way or another. I don't care, because I'm not practicing BDSM nor is my blog about BDSM. Disciplinary spankings are not BDSM "scene" spankings. They do not, and are not meant to, serve the same purpose.

      I don't know Gregory or Tina and am not in a place to judge. Ferns' comment, however, seems to really say it all: "The second time, though, he passive aggressively set you up for failure and then blamed you for it. The choice for him wasn't between 'give you training' (which he knows doesn't work for you) and 'just taking it' (which is what he chose)." That *is* something that happens in DD, and it is precisely why some disciplinary wives do take the position that their husbands can call an end to a disciplinary spanking any time but, unless it was to prevent injury or to address something that is truly going wrong, then they very well may end the disciplinary aspects of the relationship. They are trying to do their part, and they aren't going to be whipsawed by a man he wants his little fantasies indulged, whines when they become "real," then criticizes her later for not going "hard enough."

    3. James and Dan, too bad we dont know each other in "real life". I´d love to spend an evening with you, just talking about our own lifes and about what made us the people we now are. I am very thankful for your comments here on my blog.

    4. Hi Tina. I agree, it is endlessly fascinating hearing about how people got to this point or, more accurately, how they think they got there.

    5. Thanks, Tina. I really appreciate your perspective, your candor, your kindness, and your generosity. I've learned a lot from our interactions and your blog. I'm sorry you're not blogging more, but I'm glad for the reason. I can tell you that I am having a lot more fun with "TTWD" than I was a year ago when we were communicating more.

      I find the "limits" issue to be very interesting and also a difficult one because you really need to define your terms or risk a complete miscommunication. It's also interesting because there are easy limits like avoiding certain implements, not using degrading language, etc. The harder limits involve determining what combination of intensity and duration is simply too much to make the activity healthy or generally beneficial overall.

      I find it interesting that so many pros (the ones who lean towards DD more than BDSM) shy away from safewords because, especially at the beginning, you really can't read someone's unique body language, reactions, etc. I interviewed the one I see at length about how she defines "limits" and what she looks for to determine if they are being reached. She also explained what she does to get close to them without exceeding them. Although I find it interesting, I also find that there is either very little discussion about limits on the various blogs or it is so superficial that it is not helpful. People use the word all the time, but it is not in a way that gives you any indication of what "limits" they are talking about or how they determine when they are being reached.


    6. I'm not sure exactly how you are defining DD, but I don't see how an experience with a pro would ever meet the definition of "domestic" discipline. The whole point of DD is that is happening within an actual domestic relationship. Otherwise, it *is* BDSM or some variant, but it's certainly not DD.

    7. Dan, let me reply to this by saying: she can be a pro domme and nevertheless have found a way in his heart :-) He´s a guy with a big heart. That´s why I like him and I am still flabergasted that the two of you, two amazing men, "don`t get along" with each other ;-)

    8. It would have been more accurate to disringuksh them as “disciplinarians” from “dominatrices.” I used “DD” because the look and feel of the sessions is domestic in nature, i.e., no leather or dungeons. However, that would be inconsistent with the prevailing use of “DD.” These types of pros seem to have emerged more recently, like in the last 15-20 years.

    9. Thanks, Tina. I think you would understand the "don't get along" part if you saw some of the comments he has left attacking female commenters on my blog who have said things entirely indistinguishable from your statement in the follow-up post that: "But once in a while, I want him to suffer because he chooses to suffer for me, because it turns me on, because it makes me happy, because it satisfies a certain need in me. . . I don't wanna feel guilty for inflicting pain or punishment on him. I don't want to have to apologize for my own domme-y cravings and needs."

      Here is what James had to say about a woman named Marisa who left the following comment on my blog: "Sometimes (not always) spanking him does turn me on." James's reply: "Sadism: enjoyment that someone gets from being violent or cruel or from causing pain; especially sexual enjoyment from hurting or punishing someone. Congratulations on your new status, Marisa."

      Ironically, you are a lot more open than many of the women on my blog about getting off on being dominant.

    10. Dan, my secret is: I am sooooo nice and understanding, being mean to me feels like kicking a puppy. Nobody is comfortable doing that ;-)

      I admit, I have not yet fully understood either what James´s problem with some dominant women is, but I am sure- through very personal and deep conversations with him- that he is on a personal journey; as all of us are.

      I remember vividly that last time I tried to go between the two of you, the whole thing somewhat exploded ;-) Now I am trying to be more careful.

      Just a few more thoughts to both of you: Carl Jung stated the shadow to be the unknown dark side of the personality. According to Jung, the shadow, in being instinctive and irrational, is prone to psychological projection, in which a perceived personal inferiority is recognised as a perceived moral deficiency in someone else.... Hint, hint ;-)

      You guys are triggering something in each other. I dont know what it is, because I can only see the light in both of you guys.

      So, James, let me ask you direct: do you wanna "attack" dominant woman? or are you having fun in pissing Dan off/ provoking him? why/why not?

      And Dan, let me ask you direct: is it important to you that James understands your position and/or even agrees with you? why/why not?

      And to both of you, and everyone else who is reading this: watch the following 3 and a half minute video. That´s good for all of us. :-)

    11. So, first, I love Jung, so you earned a fan just by citing him. I don't know whether the current dispute reflects his shadow theory, or whether James and I just plain dislike each other. I think the shadow can be helpful in analyzing some relationships, but I think here the problem is more basic when it comes to triggers. Something that will trigger me every time is another man trying to top me. And, I really hate passive-aggressive topping. If you come to someone else's blog, try to take over its direction and take it in a direction that is antithetical to its focus, all the while pretending to be doing something else, that is topping behavior and of a particularly passive-aggressive variety. And, I really, really get triggered by passive-aggressive *anonymous* behavior, because the culprit can hide behind anonymity to make sure he never pays any price for that bad behavior.

      Regarding the question you directed toward me, no it's not important to me that James agrees with me or even understands my position. What is important to me is that he understand that he doesn't have any right to force his view of how relationships are supposed to work on other people, including making nasty and demeaning comments toward women he doesn't even know, just because he is on some personal journey resulting from past abuse or trauma. There are few of us who aren't a product of our own past traumas, but that doesn't give you free rein to make your past everyone else's problem. I just don't buy that being a victim allows you to victimize others.

      And, one concrete area where he an I just don't see things alike is the issue of males taking responsibility for their own situation. I think the reason that he liked your last post was that you basically took responsibility for Gregory's bad behavior. But, as several of your commenters pointed out, Gregory set you up for failure, acted like a petulant child and then took out his anger on some unsuspecting guy on the street. In a BDSM scene gone wrong, maybe the recipient has some right to expect the "Domme" to run things and do it correctly, but in a DD relationship the man has asked for punishment, and if he doesn't want it then he has the physical power to resist. James is very intent on removing that responsibility and pretending the men do not have a choice. It is not only disempowering to the men involved, it gives them a pass on their own lack of will.

    12. Dan, thank you so much for that comment. I fell asleep last night, and only just read it. I need to do some legal work now, but I will definitely ponder and reflect your words. You say so many interesting things, I will definitely reply to that comment, I just need a few hours to do that.

    13. Tina: Wirh all due respect to you and great affection for you, I am not here to address issues with Dan. There is a LOT of history. To give you a fully developed record, would take quite a bit of time, but at the end of the day it is not worth it. If he wants to spend his time attacking me, and you want to lard up the blog with his comments, that is certainly your right.

      If you want to ask about the substantive issues, devoid of his inflammatory personal attacks, I would be happy to do so.

      Sometimes you have to let go of the idea of liking or getting along with certain people.


    14. Interesting position, "James", though totally consistent with your usual pattern. You are "not here to address issues with Dan," while your comment that began this exchange centered on addressing issues with Dan. Now, those "issues" were flat-out falsehoods in which you attributed positions to me that I've never taken ... but you've never been one to let consistency or veracity get in the way. Like the time you didn't like that I took down your comments, whined about "censorship," set up a competing blog with a name similar to mine and on which you posted content you stole from my blog, then closed yours to comments entirely.

      I engaged here only because I caught you once again misrepresenting and mischaracterizing things about my positions. Stop doing that, and I will certainly leave you to discuss whatever you like with Tina, given that she is about the only blog owner who hasn't chased you off.

    15. James, not in one million years can you convince me that the following statement is true, and especially not when it comes to Dan and you. "Sometimes you have to let go of the idea of liking or getting along with certain people."

      However, I respect your wish to not have the relationship between you and Dan analyzed. And I wont do that.

      I am a bit surprised that you seem to think I am not seeing the full history. I see and especially FEEL much more than you might think.

      Anyway, I am wishing you well. And feel free to comment whenever you want to. I am always appreciating your comments on my blog :-)

    16. Dan, I needed a while to respond to your comment, because there was so much food for thought in it. I wont say anything about James personally, because he sort of "opted out", but I am very glad to share some general thoughts with you. Thoughts that came to my mind while reflecting about your words.

      I thank you very much for opening up, despite having the feeling of being attacked.

      " If you come to someone else's blog, try to take over its direction and take it in a direction that is antithetical to its focus, all the while pretending to be doing something else, that is topping behavior and of a particularly passive-aggressive variety". It might surprise you, but I have done something like this myself. A few years ago at Kathy´s femdom 101 blog. I allied up with a guy I did not even know, and for a very short time I drove the people at femdom 101 nuts with my comments. (I cant go into the "why?" now. That would be enough material for a new blog post ;-) ) Am I proud of it? No. Do I want to do something like that again? No. Did I have enough power to actually make an impact? Of course not. The femdom 101 blog is still blossoming. And rightfully so. And so is your blog. Your blog is a blessing for so many people, even if a person or a few people once in a while, or even constantly, leave negative comments, in the big scheme of things they cant harm your blog. You got so much to share and the people in the community value and love your blog.

      And: People who dont write a blog underestimate sometimes how much the blogger is giving to the world, how much he or she is offering of himself and how vulnerable the blogger is making himself by blogging.

    17. "I really, really get triggered by passive-aggressive *anonymous* behavior, because the culprit can hide behind anonymity to make sure he never pays any price for that bad behavior. "
      We are all anonymous here. I am not much afraid anymore of letting people know who I actually am, but nowadays I cant do this anymore, I need to protect my Gregory.
      I think it is not fair to hold anonymity against one of us.
      You say you get triggered by such behavior. But Dan, you know enough about psychology to understand that your history and your experiences play as much a part of it as the person pulling your trigger. ;-)

      "What is important to me is that he understands that he doesn't have any right to force his view of how relationships are supposed to work on other people, including making nasty and demeaning comments toward women he doesn't even know, just because he is on some personal journey resulting from past abuse or trauma. "
      Well, you obviously cant stop him. ;-) Even if he is trying to force his view on other people, we all in the "kink community" know, that the world might try to force us into a scheme as much as they want, but we will still have our kinky interests and our not vanilla way of living.

      "There are few of us who aren't a product of our own past traumas, but that doesn't give you free rein to make your past everyone else's problem. I just don't buy that being a victim allows you to victimize others."
      His past is neither your nor my problem. I completely agree with you, there are few of us who arent a product of our own past traumas. Do you feel victimized by his words? I dont. I pondered about his "congratulation, you are a sadist" comment to that other woman. And I think: why killing the messenger? In a way I AM a sadist. I do actually get turned on by seeing people suffer. It needs a certain scenario, a certain atmosphere, but the fact remains that I watch certain corporal punishment videos while masturbating. My catholic upbringing wants me to defend myself , telling the world that I am a good person, and I actually think I am a good person. But nevertheless, I have domme tendencies and facets in me. I think more along the lines of: This whole femdom thing and my domme cravings are so complicated, how can I expect another person to understand it?

      "I think the reason that he liked your last post was that you basically took responsibility for Gregory's bad behavior. But, as several of your commenters pointed out, Gregory set you up for failure, acted like a petulant child and then took out his anger on some unsuspecting guy on the street."
      My Gregory acting like a petulant child? Never ;-) Dan, I cant say much to that. I understand your point. But I love Gregory and he has showered me with love and affection for months now. I just think at Gregory and I get horny.

      "But in a DD relationship the man has asked for punishment, and if he doesn't want it then he has the physical power to resist."
      YES, and YES. You are 100% correct. I do agree 100%.

      "James is very intent on removing that responsibility and pretending the men do not have a choice."
      Maybe that is his experience, or maybe this is what happened to him, or maybe to a friend? I dont know what the reason behind his position is. But he might have good reasons. I mean it is a fact that there are men out there who are beaten by their wifes in a non domestic discipline context .
      Do I not see that this has got nothing to do with the dd you and I are talking about? Of course I see that :-)

      "It is not only disempowering to the men involved, it gives them a pass on their own lack of will." I got to admit, I did not see that point coming. That´s a very interesting aspect. Thanks for sharing.

    18. Dan, I only just read your comment from 5:23 pm. That´s unbelievable for me to see that now YOU want to get over the whole history of who said when what...

      Dan and James: To both of you: really, seriously, honestly, I dont care about the history that the two of you have. :-)

    19. Tina: When I said you did not see the “full history,” I simply meant that you had not seen all of the specic things that were said. I would imagine that you do have a sense of the full history. I have seen how perceptive and intuitive you are several times, and presumably your work in family law reinforces those abilities. I did not mean to suggest otherwise.


    20. Thanks, James. That was a sweet thing to say. Definitely made me smile.
      I dont care about the exact who said what when, because just judging from the last exchanges, I can see and feel how each of you two feels attacked and hurt by the other.
      You are both in self-defending mode. That´s quite sad. I want people to feel safe and warm with /around me.

    21. Tina,

      A few thoughts:

      -- Coming to someone else's blog and taking over: I can't say that I have taken it that far, but I once was guilty of going to another blog and attacking a principle they were promoting. I learned from the experience and have tried hard not to it again. I even try not to comment very much on blogs that are focused on some very different aspect of spanking than mine is. Example: I LOVE Hermione's Heart blog. But, she is very clear that her blog promotes "the fun kind" of spankings. I don't want to detract from that by posting comments that always begin with, "Our spankings are all for punishment, so . . ." So, I contribute to more general discussions once in a while, or to topics that are expressly focused on discipline or punishment.

      Anonymity: Don't get me wrong. I don't have any objection at all to anonymity for those of us in these relationships. What I object to are trolls and internet bullies who hide behind the anonymity to say things that would earn them a punch in the nose were they to say them directly to someone face-to-face. It is hiding behind anonymity to say things you would never say in person that I object to.

      I can't stop him from making nasty comments: I actually can, by deleting his comments on my blog and by calling him out when he lies about me on other blogs. No, that doesn't quite stop it, but it addresses it. Being into DD, I'm all about consequences.

      Do I feel victimized by his words? No. I feel annoyed by him and by his antics. I feel about him sort of like I feel about evangelical Christians who voted for Donald Trump -- a combination of puzzled and repulsed at their mental and moral gymnastics.

      Gregory: I do not mean to attack Gregory, other than part of telling you that you were not the one at fault. And, I am very glad you have someone that makes you horny at the mere thought.

      Disempowerment and choice: As I said, I'm all about consequences for choices made. Many would rather be deprived of their right arm than of their self-appointed victim status.

      Have a great day. Or evening, in Germany.

    22. Thanks Dan.
      And thanks for opening up so much. :-)

  6. I've been away so just saw this discussion. I agree with those who suggest use of the safe words because it helps establish trust. I don't think the problem was so much topping from the bottom, although I have had that happen a lot, as the part of dom/sub relationships that implies that a sub should usually get a bit more than he or she expected. These are sensitive relationships with which we are playing, so these kinds of occurrences are likely to happen. It sounds like you have worked it out with your man and as always, I truly admire your ability to maintain your reason during tempestuous situations.


  7. Reading all this has made me think more about it. I agree that if one needs to practice using a new implement, it should be just that--practice, not a scene. I suppose I'm not so demanding that all scenes be perfect but it does help if there has been adequate preparation, and that includes practice. I too prefer the DD orientation if only because I get no charge at all from leather or metal or rubber outfits. I like to dress in nice conservative clothes as a domme and my friends who play with me like that too. If a woman who is sub to me wants to dress as a schoolgirl, that's fine and I will also dress as a strict teacher, complete with seamed hose and my hair in a bun. The full communication before the scene is what is needed--unless you know your partner really well, surprises do not often work out as you expected. And that's too bad, because I do love to be surprised. But in this area, it is not a good thing, for the most part, to be surprised. We all have our set ideas about what turns us on, what our fantasies conjure up. So I would have a safe word, just because things may go in a different direction from the one planned, but I too have never had anyone use it, nor have I used it when I have been sub to a friend. Not having to use it is a tribute to your ability to foresee a scene.

    1. Thanks Leslie. I do love surprises too, but as you said, we all have our set ideas about what turns us on, that´s why surprises are probably not a good thing here :-)

  8. BTW, Tina, I am as far from an “evangelical Christian” as you can get, and I voted for Hillary (although, I would have strongly preferred a 3rd Obama term, were it legal). The last (and only) time I voted Republican was in 1984. When I go abroad, the first thing I tell anyone is that “I didn’t vote for him.” I am considering starting a t-shirt line with that phrase.


    1. Hallelujah! We finally found something that you, Dan and I can agree on. All three of us are not supporting Trump. Silver lining ... ;-)

    2. ;-) For what it's worth, here in the US, all sorts of people with all sorts of views can come together over hating Trump, or at least being very embarrassed by him. :-)

    3. Dan and James, on a very personal note: I deal with people all day long who are just not able to show some lenience and/or understanding for their "opponents". And that is really something that is getting under my skin. It sucks the energy out of me.

      Once in a while I try to make my own clients see a bit of the opponents perspective, but my clients rarely even wanna see it or know about it. They want me to fight for them and destroy all arguments that the other party comes up with.

      I still do believe in the good of people. And as a lawyer, when I am for instance representing tennants, I can understand them and their feelings/fears. But at the same time I know that if I represented the landlords, I would understand their fears and feelings too. I have represented both tennants and landlords so often in my life, I sort of know in advance what the respective opposing side is going to say. I have sort of given up to expect high , balanced and big picture point of views from my clients.

      In my private live, here: with the two of you, I so "need" you to at least respect the other guy´s view , because it helps me not to lose my trust in humanity. I desperately need to know that there are people out there who WANT to understand each other. Not sure if that makes any sense, and it is probably a very naive thought, nevertheless: as a christmas present for me, from now on, please stop hurting each other. It would mean a lot to me.

    4. Tina,I don;t think there has ever been a point that I don't respect the other guys views. Their actions . . . well that's another matter. But, if you want to know whether there are people who want to know and understand each other, look at your F&%$-ing blog. You put your heart and soul out there, and people respond to it. You aren't going to make the world of landlord-tenant law any less dog eat dog than it is. But, you can live your life every day in ways that are humane, and you can run a blog for people who kind of actively want to dominate others. Do you get quite how unique that is? You are spending your life with people who see their lives as zero-sum games, but hoping to find redemption in "James and I stopping to piss on each other. Instead,how about you find redemption in your post, above, in which you WANT that for everyone? Because it doesn't matter if it happens. It matters that you are the kind of person who wants it to.

  9. Tina and others, I've read the blogs Dan is referring to and he is correct. James instigates disagreements over and over again. He comes across as mean spirited and simply ridicules opinions he disagrees with. I discredit anything that has his name attached and I'm an impartial 3rd party.


    1. If you discredit an argument or statement solely because of the proponent without regard to the merits, you are anything but impartial. You have a permanent bias.

      Show me an example where I “simply ridicule” others without supporting my opinions.


    2. ST, thanks for reading and commenting. :-)
      Both James and Dan have reached out to me in private. And both James and Dan have- each in their own way- found the exact right words to encourage me and support me. I value the input of both of them immensly.