Wednesday, November 20, 2013


It is very exciting to see that women in a otherwise oppressive era were able to control their men, enhance their financial situation, satisfy themselves, and have a man who was happy to comply with her every wish!  

We've done five interviews to date. One was with a 78-year-old woman, Darlene, a proudly self-admitted “domineering bitch” who controlled every aspect of her marriage starting around 1960. She gave her interview at the center to a crowd of twenty, mostly women, who cheered and applauded as Darlene described her lifestyle. Her takeing charge of the marriage started when hubby acted up too much and she just totally clamped down on him, an interesting story of confrontation and female power in and of itself.

Darlene’s complete conquest of hubby took less than ten, anger-filled minutes, she told us. They were married for over forty years, and during all those years she never lost control. And it’s interesting to note that she had many of the same things in place in the ‘60s—e.g.,  phone screening, domestic routines, male rules of etiquette, turning over his paycheck, etc.—that we thought were “new” forty years later! The same controls, incidentally, that the women in Nancy's family also implemented out of their own needs.

In 1960 such a lifestyle that wasn't widespread, but if one looked carefully, Darlene said, “it was there.” And it was there in lesser measure with all of the housewives who henpecked their husbands, a precursor to current FLR lifestyles. Darlene surmised that for every man like her husband, there were four or five husbands who were wife-controlled, but to a lesser degree. In Darlene's case she controlled the money, the social schedule (which usually had hubby at home) and she didn't do housework.

What she did do was set out to please herself, she told us proudly. She spent lavishly— hubby was a big earner—on clothes, shoes, jewelry, and travel. She also had boyfriends to pursue her carnal desires. This ratcheted up attention among her listeners, believe me. And when quickly asked how many boyfriends, she replied “Twenty or so, give or take a few,” to which she received a round of applause. When asked if hubby knew about her men, she said “Probably, but I didn't give a damn! If he wanted to stay married, he had to shut up and accept it. And he

The evening with Darlene was very empowering for women—and very exciting for submissive men!

We are looking to capture more women's stories as part of this project. Sue and her sisters are going to be interviewed, too. While it's interesting to capture these stories, we are speaking with independent, progressive-thinking, aggressive women who, unfortunately, are in the minority. It would be nice to hear from some of the women who simply henpecked their husbands, though. Not sure whether we could put together a website to solicit women's experiences in controlling their men, to whatever degree they did it, but we are thinking about it.



Obedient husband said...

So we're going to celebrate adultery?
Is that where this whole empowering women thing leads?
Complete and utter bullshit!
I have no problem being submissive, but not to a tramp.
Very disappointed.

Mknight said...

Have to agree with Obedient Husband, whats the point of wife worship if your wife is not committed to you. Also this "research" shows nothing about female empowerment and more that men have had the same fetishes for decades.

Anonymous said...

^ Agreed

That is the one rule I lay down. Be true to me. She is as blessed as I am. Just cause I am a sub does not mean I have no self respect! To each their own though.

I'm-Hers said...

You are losing me as an interested reader. I enjoy reading of others' lives but when you spoke of the 20 or so boyfriends that Darlene had to satisfy her 'carnel' interests I felt a deep emptiness. I echo Obedient Husbands feelings. Sadness. I wonder if Mark, your host, agrees with such premises especially when thinking of the tone and message of his first book (I didn't read the second).

Dennis, immature, insecure girls 'play'. Mature, secure, confident women keep but one man - their husband - to themselves. I don't think I will be reading the summary interviews of the others you post.

Burke Lang said...

Darlene's marriage was beautiful, and her husband was lucky. Darlene is a role model for today's progressive woman. As well, I am grateful to You for publishing these accounts of early female dominated lifestyles as there are few role models out there. Whether a woman decides that she is free to pursue relationships outside marriage or she decides to be loyal to her should be Her choice. Boys should learn to subordinate themselves so that they accept their wives' love affairs. Thanks for a great post.

Mark Remond said...

The verdict is heard loud and clear. I have to say that in inviting certain guest posters, after the initial winnowing and considering, that I have not really edited in the sense of censoring. So adultery is not necessarily being endorsed here, though that is certainly the tone and tenor of the posting, in terms of the reaction of those applauding Darlene's story at the center. But I will not speak for Dennis. All I can say is, for those who are truly repulsed by this posting, I hope you will dial up this blog in future.

Anonymous said...

A woman not true to her man does not deserve a man true to her. A FLR is a female led RELATIONSHIP. And the defining part of a relationships is exclusivity. Its one thing if a couple chooses to go down that path, its another entirely to endorse it.

I come to this blog to read about the FLR lifestyle and to try and learn more about it. Talking about adultery as if it is something to be praised is terrible. If you read the blogs of women that have gone down that path with their husband, it was only after consulting their husband first.

To treat a man that way is not right. Cuckoldry is no longer part of a healthy relationship if the husband is being subjected to it against his own will.

Anonymous said...

It depends on the couple. When Mistress first took me as a slave She made it clear that I would have no say in Her social life with other people but my sex life was entirely Hers to control. She had several encounters with other men and Women, one New Year's Eve She left me home scrubbing floors while She went to a party. She ordered me to participate in threesomes with one of Her other male slaves and periodically loaned me out to other Businesswomen as a sexual play thing. After She ordered me to marry Her She has not done these things but states it is because She does not feel the drive to do it. She asserts that She still has the right to be with anyone She wants and to give me to other Women if She so chooses.

Anonymous said...

I think it depends on the relationship. In any submissive relationship, there might be a degree of fear. While one submissive/dominant would balk at the idea, it might work well for another couple. But I agree with having clear boundaries.

Anonymous said...

I agree with Obedient Husband. In the same way that women are disgusted by men that cheat in a conventional marriage, I am disgusted by women that cheat in a matriarchal marriage.

Marriage is a sacred bond between two people, regardless of who 'wears the pants' in the house.


Mark Remond said...

DENNIS comments in general:

Regarding the critical reader comments concerning cuckoldry or adultery, I am frankly puzzled. First, neither Kaitlin nor I were advocating anything here; we're just reporting her findings. She's trying to do social research that gets her to a point where she can develop an online questionnaire that will allow her to draw some conclusions about the positions and views that women held in their marriages in various decades past. I felt that her research was interesting and from her preliminary findings i developed the posts i did. i won't do that anymore. i'll wait until she completes her work before saying anything; and frankly i am now of the mind to not do it then either.

Obedient husband said...

I've reread "Darlene's Story" in light of Dennis' most recent comment.
I have to agree, Dennis seems more like a reporter reporting a story which most of us didn't like.

So, for the record, my negativity should have been directed at Darlene, not at Dennis.

Dennis, thank you for sharing your findings. You reported what you observed.
Fox News has been sharing a story about a "wave" of gang-like violence call "the knockout game".
Of course I very much dislike the story, but I have no problem with the reporters.
Same thing.
In hindsight, the only sentence in which the reporter implies an endorsement is the sentence which reads: "The evening with Darlene was very empowering for women-and very exciting for submissive men! I only take issue with the last phrase.
Dennis, if you do decide to post again on this research project, I'll think before I go off "half-cocked" and attack the reporter. I apologize.

Omhaki said...

I really enjoy your reports of Kaitlin's research, but I think your header gave the impression that you were fully in support of Darlene's behavior.

As per below

It is very exciting to see that women in a otherwise oppressive era were able to control their men, enhance their financial situation, satisfy themselves, and have a man who was happy to comply with her every wish!

Please do continue to post her fascinating research. Thank you.