Friday, February 26, 2010
Actually I've been spending my usual blogging time collecting all the posts up till now into a book, tentatively titled Worshipping Your Wife 2: Best of the Blog. But it's painful to go dark for so long, with only a marquee and an empty theater, so I expect I'll have something to say here before long... and certainly before the book is ready to post.
Friday, February 19, 2010
(Note: Top-right photo is from Saharah Eve's website, used with her gracious permission.)
According to Goddess V (from the Wife-Led Marriage blog), “There are few limits to how far a dominant wife can push and control her husband if she handles him properly.”
Fumika Misato (of Real Women Don’t Do Housework) puts it this way: “You should be able to train your husband to do virtually anything you want.”
I not only believe this, I am utterly convinced of it. But, if you want additional verification, let me quote a husband from Lady Misato’s website: “My wife has been experimenting with the techniques on your website. One thing that concerns me is that there seems no limit to her power over me.”
Is his a genuine “concern,” do you think, as he feels himself slipping ever deeper under his wife’s newfound sovereignty? Or, in the guise of a complaint, is this guy really boasting of his helplessness?
Like this husband, who obviously relishes the way he turns into helpless putty in his wife’s capable hands: “At that point, I was so thirsty to submit that I felt there were no limits to my compliance.” He adds, in happy hindsight: “An assessment that turned out to be remarkably true.”
The point being that husbands, once they have bought into the wife-led concept, seem uniformly to enjoy hands-on training.
“Husbands here seem to fall into two groups,” one wag commented on Misato’s old Wife Worship Forum, “those who are already being conditioned by their wives, subjected to behavior modification along the lines advocated by Lady Misato, using sex as both the carrot and the stick, and those of us who WISH we were!”
Mistress Kathy, who writes the candid and caring Femdom 101 blog, likens a husband’s enthusiastic response to his wife’s commands to the way her uncle’s hunting dogs responded to their daily training (and no, she doesn’t equate men to canines):
“It was a joy to watch Liz interact with her husband… She worked with her husband almost every day to fine tune his skills. The smallest finger or hand movement was a signal for him to do something; fetch, come, go, or whatever. Just like my uncle enjoyed working his dogs, she enjoyed working her husband. Just like the dogs enjoyed being worked, her husband enjoyed the feeling of being ordered around and about by his lovely wife.”
The application of animal training techniques to husbands and boyfriends, as noted in the previous post, seems to have spawned an Amazon.com book category unto itself, along with a bonanza of magazine and website articles. Some of these articles are quite tame, excuse the pun, with girl-to-girl advice on teaching a guy how to plan a romantic evening—e.g., “Have your favorite chilled wine on hand so you can ask him to open it before dinner.” ("6 Ways to Train Your Boyfriend")
Other articles, especially those on female-domination sites, openly advocate rewiring husbands and boyfriends through more invasive means, such as autosuggestion, hypnosis, electroshock, neuolinguistic programming, operant and Pavlovian conditioning, even—say it isn’t so!—the prolonged chanting of matriarchal mantras.
Female-empowerment psychologist Elise Sutton takes a more traditional approach in her carefully crafted sequence of “Psychoanalysis of the Submissive Male” procedures. Sutton describes these as “a series of psychoanalysis exercises and procedures to help the dominant woman explore and better understand her submissive man…. [and] to better equip her in taking her proper place in her relationship.”
Ms. Sutton’s intent, clearly, is to empower the wife as the dominant marital partner, while encouraging the husband to dredge up and focus all his submissive feelings upon his wife. To facilitate the process of psychological surrender, the husband is usually to be naked during these procedures, while being interrogated, stimulated and often physically manipulated by his seductively clothed wife.
Hey, guys, like to schedule an appointment?
An even more direct approach to masculine mind control was advocated back in the ‘90s by a dominant wife called “Madame Rebecca” who operated her own Yahoo! Group entitled, I think, “Trained Husbands and Happy Wives.”
She simply advises husbands: “Let your wife do your thinking.” If this seems a bit vague, she spells it out:
“Too many males try to think for themselves. You must learn to allow your Lady to think for you, tell you what to do, what you like, what you are, what you are to think about and such. You have no need for your own thinking and it will only serve to cause you trouble.”
She gets even more specific: “Relinquish all thought process to her and accept whatever she tells you. Don't think for yourself, it will only get you in trouble, your lady will do your thinking for you, accept her thinking as your own.”
Does that sound, oh, I don’t know, a wee bit autocratic? Even dictatorial? But looked at the other way around, from the viewpoint of a husband eagerly seeking to increase his submissive service to his wife, Madame Rebecca is really offering a stirring motivational message. To wit:
“You want her to be more active and you desire to show her you are a useful male and serve her. Does it not appear to you that if she told you or asked you or that if you even thought she wanted you to do something, you should do it? Live for her and let her do your thinking for you. Let her know that you know she is always right and she is smarter than you and knows what’s best for you.”
Let me be clear. I am not advocating this kind of radical female-led mind control, simply including it in the discussion of “being shaped by her.” It does exist, and has no shortage of practitioners and proponents. Indeed, many husbands, who initially balk at having their wives mold their thoughts and opinions, become accustomed, and even addicted to the process over time.
Like this guy explains: “My wife these days is much less tolerant of my opinion. I can usually only get one of two statements in before she dismisses it. I don't think she realizes the change.”
An aspect of female-led thinking that I find particularly interesting, and that some readers will doubtless find controversial (or even shocking), is where a wife imposes her political views on her husband, not only in household discussions but all the way to the polling place.
Judging from many snippets I’ve collected, it’s definitely a trend. Maybe we can chalk it up to feminist payback for all those years of “the little woman” being required to say, “Yes, Dear” to her husband’s now-hear-this pronouncements.
Okay, so here are some “Yes, Dear” election stories, starting with a husband who identifies himself tellingly as “Mr. Karen”: “My wife and I have a system where we vote for only women. If there are no women running for a particular office, we don't vote for that office at all. She told me that that doesn't discount the ballot.”
Another husband confides to Elise Sutton: “[My wife] has melted her politically radical feminist views (specifically that women should be in positions of political authority) into the fabric of our relationship… we now surf the Internet for sites like ‘Emily's List’ and ‘Wish List’ to find female political candidates that we like and we send them small campaign contributions.”
Georgeann Cross, in her online book, Sexual Power for Women, mentions how, during her senior year at college, she targeted a “short-haired conservative” classmate who got himself elected to the student senate: “ I decided I was going to enslave him and make the necessary repairs. If I couldn’t change his views, I would at least take control of his vote in the student senate.”
Mistress Kathy is equally up front about disenfranchising her submissive husband, or, shall we say, appropriating his franchise: “John is not only allowed to vote, but is required to vote. He, of course, votes the way he is told… This morning John and I went to vote. We voted early. On the way out I asked John who he voted for. He answered ‘the way you instructed me to vote, mistress.’ That earned him a ‘good boy.’"
Such husbands, you might assume, are surrendering their proxies over to liberal candidates, and you might be right. But not necessarily. As Mistress Kathy goes on to explain, contrasting herself to a domme wife girlfriend: “While I love [my friend] Liz to death, we are very different people. She is liberal and votes Democratic. I am conservative, and tend to vote Republican. What we have in common is that our guys vote the way we tell them.”
The wife-led polling process can be highly erotic, as this wife tells Elise Sutton: “[As election day approached] I had my husband kneel between the couch and the coffee table in our living room and I brought him the checkbook, stamps, envelopes, and information from all the female candidates' websites, complete with a picture of her and address for sending her money… I made him write a check for each candidate (which I signed of course) and prepare all the envelopes to be sent out. I sat behind him on the couch supervising him and gave him an occasional gentle caress. Seeing my scantily clad foot soldier for the female gender on his knees licking stamps and filling out checks and envelopes was very sensual for me and when he was done, I wound up having him bring my vibrator and orally worship me for nearly an hour. I had some of the best orgasms of my life!
“Afterward I did take off his CB and laid him down on the couch and stroked his penis. While doing this, I softly asked him which candidates he found attractive or powerful and I showed him pictures of the ones he identified. I then shifted my focus by telling him in a variety of ways how weak it must make him feel to know that women are taking over society and that his own wife keeps his little cock in a cage and almost totally denied. While doing this I looked into his eyes and saw him in the deepest state of subspace I've ever seen, and he ultimately had by far the most explosive and continuing orgasm I've ever seen him have.”
This object lesson in wifely dominion earns an accolade from Elise Sutton (who seems to favor a Libertarian position on many issues): “I think it is wonderful how you used the ever-increasing candidacy of women for high political office to take your husband deeper into submission to you and the female gender as a whole.”
Let me add testimonials from two more wife-led husbands, both valued online friends of mine, as it happens, and both utterly devoted to their wives.
Husband No. 1: “my Wife does guide me in all things, including voting. It is only natural as She keeps on top of these things while i tend to the domestic side of life. She reads the front page while i go for the section of the paper dealing with home life.”
Husband No. 2: “i am [another] one of the ones whose Wife instructs on how to vote. i was interested in politics and my Wife and i mostly agreed. When we entered on our FLR, my Wife’s opinions took precedence and i deferred to Her more and more. i now adopt Her political and business opinions and follow Her lead. She now overrules me when we differ… i just let my Wife make those decisions and i vote the way she tells me. In voting, my Wife will make out a sample ballot or write down who and what to vote for. Occasionally we talk about it, but Her decisions are final.”
But at least one female supremacist demurs at this kind of unlimited spousal influence, Katherine West who posts intermittently at Loving Female Authority: “There is no question,” she writes, “that my husband would cast his vote however I tell him, but I also have no desire to rob him of this right.”
Such gallant female courtesy to the weaker sex definitely merits an accolade as well, but perhaps not the very last word in this long post. That goes to another anonymous take-charge woman:
“Let's face it ladies, it's quite fun to be in control of a grown male human animal.”
Friday, February 5, 2010
The reshaping, or retraining, of the husband/boyfriend is foundational to the female-led lifestyle, whether the regimen is self-imposed by the man or at the behest of the woman.
But hubby makeovers, whether mild or extreme, are part of most marriages, not just the wife-led variety. What bride doesn’t envision at least tinkering with the big lug she’s hitched to her wagon? Which bride hasn’t a list of guy things that need fixing (or nixing altogether) post-nupt?
After all, most guys need whipping into shape by women, since we come clueless, by and large, first into the state of matrimony, then into father- and family-hood. We are clueless, too (if I may generalize), about social etiquette and other refinements of civilized society outside of tailgating and guy-talk.
This renders most males, as far as eligible females are concerned, as works in progress, or fixer-upper houses with possibilities but plenty of problems.
So “Changing Male Behavior,” as discussed in other posts, is not just one feature of the female-led relationship. It is at the very core, written into the founding documents, either figuratively or literally. The process may be incremental and insidious, or dramatic and sudden. But it will take place.
“Females are taught by society that it is not right to want to change the male, and that even if it were ethical, it can't be done anyway,” one such wife wrote. “This is a lie, foisted upon females by our prevailing patriarchal society. Male behavior will change and improve dramatically when the woman…”
When the woman does what exactly? Well, we’ll get to what a woman might do to facilitate those little improvements in a moment. But first let’s look at all this female tinkering under hubby’s hood from the staunchly male point of view. Typically, or stereotypically, guys are supposed to resent this kind of female meddling with their personalities, or habits, or behaviors, or quirks, or taste in casual clothes, or favorite adolescent breakfast cereal. And many guys do resent this female litany of their shortcomings, and fight it tooth and nail, while giving ground, inch by inch and mile by mile, like a vanquished army in slow retreat.
But men in wife-led marriages , or working toward that blissful state, do not resist the invasive or pervasive influence of their wives, or at least try not to resist. They have decided to let the reshaping process proceed—according to her design and her timetable.
Maybe more husbands should adopt this point of view. Here’s a cautionary tale, told me by a middle-aged Latina about her own father, who resisted for decades his wife’s attempts to make him go to Mass with the family.
Then this devout lady got an inoperable cancer in her late ‘40s and was suddenly taken from him and her children. After burying his wife, the woman told me, her father has never once missed Sunday Mass. It is there, in church, praying and taking Communion, that he feels her presence most near.
A touching story. And the moral, I would say, is don’t wait for it to be too late to do the right thing. Or, even more specific, to do what your wife asks or pleads with you to do. Do what she says now!
The reshaping process works, as Napoleon Hill commented (in his book Think and Grow Rich, and it works for self-improvement like no other incentive. Women have the “power which has done more to help men achieve success than all other forces combined.”
In Chapter 7 of my book, “Bonus Points: Motivational Magic,” I quote husbands and wives on the success of these wife-inspired marital makeovers—guys losing weight, stopping smoking, getting fit, getting promotions, sometimes with positive, sometimes with negative incentives (yes, punishments involved).
Nowadays you can find FLR blogs where hubby’s progress is documented, where Coach Wife is helping him get to goal weight, kick a nasty habit (smoking, net porn, “wanking in the loo,” etc.).
There are wives who up the ante on their hubby training in various ways (far beyond the purview of this blog), and husbands who willingly submit to these intense regimens. Think Rocky Balboa, out doing his predawn roadwork, with Adrian driving alongside, shouting in a megaphone.
As one wife comments, “Modifying his behavior can take months or even years of loving manipulation, but it is SO worth it!”
A deeper level of male behavior modification is espoused on the DreamLover Laborataories site, a process they call “Identity Reframing.” The idea, explained elsewhere in these pages, is to “get the man to feel pride, rather than shame, in serving his wife, in private or public.”
As the author, Kathrin Cohen, explains it: “No male expects you to deliberately try to change his self image. After all, all his subsequent actions will be self-directed and require no intervention from you. He will never suspect that you have been ‘customizing’ the mental mechanisms that are making all the decisions for him.”
If this smacks somewhat of getting Rover to roll over, you’re getting the message. Many female-authored FLR websites you will see links to various books and articles on how animal training techniques can be successfully employed on husbands and boyfriends. You’ll find no-nonsense titles like these:
How to Make Your Man Behave in 21 Days or Less Using the Secrets of Professional Dog Trainers by Karen Salmansohn
The Boyfriend Training Kit by Tanya Sassoon
Husband-ry 101, How to Train Your Husband to Be the Spouse You've Always Wanted Him to Be by Michael H. McCann
Don't Shoot the Dog!: The New Art of Teaching and Training by Karen Pryor
The New Bride’s Guide to Training Her Husband by Emily and Ken Addison
What Shamu Taught Me About Life, Love, and Marriage: Lessons for People from Animals and Their Trainers by Amy Sutherland
And, of course, the sagacious Fumika Misato, goes into considerable depth on behavioral or operant conditioning of the male on her seminal website, Real Women Don’t Do Housework.
Does this sort of wife-administered Pavlovian regimen work? Apparently so, at least according to this guy: “It is strange that, while I don't really want the various kinds of punishment my wife delivers, at the same time I can't think of a better feedback mechanism to improve my general behavior and performance of my duties.”
End of Part Two (one more to go!)
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
In the posting “Give It Up to Your Queen!” I cited the trite “truism” that “Any relationship is under the control of the person who cares the least.” The idea, apparently, is to guard against being seen as caring too much… especially when you do!
But protecting yourself in the intimate clinches is just not a smart tactic in romantic relationships. It can lead to many things, but happily-ever-aftering is probably not among them. Far better, at least according to us wife-worshippers, to open your heart and mind completely to the object of your adoration—“Daring to Be Known by Her,” as I titled a chapter of my book.
Withholding from her, or from him (for that matter), how you really feel can lead to the missed opportunity of a lifetime.
A classic example, where both parties realize the price they have paid for their subterfuge, is the final denouement between Rhett and Scarlett in Gone With the Wind. Too late Scarlett realizes and blurts out her true feelings to the man she has considered all these years a “ruffian” and a “scoundrel” and—and “no gentleman.”
By this last reel, of course, Rhett no longer gives a damn. The last time he did care, he tells her, is when he grabbed her—his own wife—and carried her upstairs “into the swirling darkness,” to ravish her and, he hoped, entirely expunge the image of Ashley Wilkes from her brain. Then, alas, as he explains (p. 1031 of the Macmillan hardcover):
“I was afraid to face you the next morning, for fear I'd been mistaken and you didn't love me. I was so afraid you'd laugh at me I went off and got drunk. And when I came back, I was shaking in my boots and if you had come even halfway to meet me, had given me some sign, I think I'd have kissed your feet. But you didn't."
Scarlett answers: "Oh, but Rhett, I did want you then but you were so nasty! I did want you! I think—yes, that must have been when I first knew I cared about you… but you were so nasty that I—"
Rhett’s classic reply: "It seems we've been at cross purposes, doesn't it?"
Of course, the Rhett-Scarlett Power Game, permuted over all those tumultuous decades, is the engine of the book (and film), and keeps us reading and watching GWTW over and over. But the unhappy upshot of the power game remains, even after marriage, when hero and heroine are supposed to live happily ever after.
To avoid such tragic cross purposes, Lady Misato (as quoted in Chapter 6 of my book) counsels the “tell-all” approach to husbands: “Consider a true and honest confession of your feelings to your wife. Express yourself without reservation. Don’t be afraid to let your wife know how powerful she is.”
The advice is applicable the other way round, as well. Drop the game and let yourself be vulnerable!
There was a book that espoused this idea, many years ago—basically to dote on your spouse, instead of playing power games. Only this advice was directed not to husbands, but to wives. The book, Surrendered Wives by Laura Doyle, is still selling briskly, with ancillary audio cassettes and seminars. (Actually Doyle’s book echoes many of the prescriptions of an earlier anti-feminist best-seller, Marabel Morgan’s The Total Woman.*)
I recall the “Surrendered Wife” idea being bandied about on Lady Misato’s original husbands’ forum, one dismissing it as "Stepford Wives' tales."
Another guy opined: “Effectively, it's Wife Worship in reverse! Now, this poses some very interesting questions: Is the key to a perfect marriage that one partner submits to the other, not really mattering which one submits to which? Is Lady Misato wrong and whoever it was wrote Surrendered Wives right, or vice versa? Or are they both right and wrong at the same time? I'm not sure I have all the answers, but doesn’t being a ‘surrendered wife’ simply mean that you are doing what your grandmother or even your mother did before you, except they did not have a choice and you do? Boring, ain't it?”
Another commented: “I do not feel comfortable with your postulation that wife worship is merely Surrendered Wives in reverse. Men are bigger and more aggressive. A woman's control rests on moral ascendancy. Let me postulate it as a step forward in the evolution of human society and pronounce Surrendered Wives an avatism.”
Lady Misato settled the debate: “Let me pipe in here with one philosophical point: Marriage works better when one partner submits to the other. I happen to believe that it is more interesting, effective and, indeed, natural for the husband to submit to the wife. I have not read the book (I ought to) but I suspect most if not all of the reasons cited are entirely valid, only I doubt there is any strong reason in support of the husband being the head. Remember, [in a wife-worship marriage] you are not abrogating responsibility, only submitting your will to hers. She'll load you with your responsibilities.”
Let me offer the parting shot on this topic to Mistress Kathy of the Femdom 101 blog:
“No matter what the experts say, marriage is simply not 50/50: somebody has to ultimately be the last say. Women tend to dominate men even in so called vanilla marriages with no overt D/s. Why not simply bring it out into the open and once and for all settle the matter and concede that the wife should be boss?... I mean what is the big deal about it?”
* “Mr. Lynda,” who relished being under the thumb of his take-charge wife, “Ms. Lynda,” on the old Spousechat message board, apparently followed some of Marabel Morgan’s more playful prescriptions—in reverse: “I found a book entitled Total Woman that was written in the late sixties or early seventies by a woman who told other women how to keep the home fires burning… I have done some of those things in reverse. Have you ever stripped for Lisa, and been her naked servant for the evening?”