DENNIS: MATRIARCHAL UNDERGROUND – FATHER DIDN'T KNOW BEST! PART 1

One of the things that submissive males should be doing is working on behalf of women. To this end i volunteer at the Women's Center, a local, wonderfully radical, Feminist organization. It's been very satisfying and, at times, very enlightening. Nancy and i occasionally conduct informal workshops at the center aimed at encouraging Female-led relationships. One of the past attendees, a Woman's Studies student at a local college, Kaitlin, became enthralled with Female-led relationships. We always represent FLRs as a current phenomena, but she wondered about prior generations of women and whether they exercised similar authority within their homes and how that compared to today's woman-in-charge. The results of her investigations so far are revealing and very exciting!

There is a social revolution going on right now, one that sees women asserting themselves in the workplace and more and more men leaving that workplace to take up full-time homemaking. It's indicative of a marked increase in women's earnings that is making this all possible. Increasing numbers of women are financially independent so they don't need men unless it's on their terms. Many men, on the other hand, are financially dependent on women and have to play by women's rules. It's all very exciting—an inversion of the social structure and a definite move towards Matriarchy. But, according to Kaitlin’s research, it is not so new a phenomenon.

Since the onset of the recession, the demographics of the workplace have changed, and we are seeing way more women in key positions than we might have expected were we to have looked ahead only ten years earlier. A number of things have combined to move women into the workforce and to move men out. The largest factor is women gaining technical and managerial skills at a rate that far outpaces men. Men have not kept pace educationally. We're finding that on anything resembling an equal footing men lose to women. So women go to work while hubby takes up the role of homemaking. And it's okay for his self-esteem to do so since he can blame it all on the recession.

What we have is a new paradigm where couples are suddenly VERY open about woman-led marriages, husbands taking over the homemaking, and about men coming out against the traditional male-centric social structure. It's rapidly increasing as a viable lifestyle, particularly in the middle- to upper-income soco-economic demographic. But it's apparently not new; it's just out in the open now.

What Kaitlin is finding in her surveys is that women in large numbers in highly paid positions in the workplace may be new, but women being in charge at home is definitely not! It's just that with social stigmas being what they were, submissive men and dominant women played their role quietly or confined it to family and close friends.

  

We began connecting Kaitlin with women and couples, and she found that about half were woman-in-charge households. And some of the women traced their authority way back to the onset of their marriages in the late ‘40s and ‘50s. What she found was that women in that era were every bit as much in charge of critical aspects of their household as are modern woman in an FLR. The man usually wasn't a homemaker, however; since women didn't have workplace opportunities comparable with those today, he worked, then came home and worked some more! Kaitlin surmises that, in some ways, women of that era had more power than today's FLR couple, since he did it all; there was no tradeoff. This was the era of the “henpecked husband.” Hubby left his socially acceptable man-in-charge image at the door, handed his wife the paycheck, put on an apron, and stayed home to do the dishes while she went out with her friends.

How did women keep control? Well, it may seem silly now, but many men lived in absolute fear of their wife disclosing their henpecked status, so social pressure was a major factor, especially when she had pictures of her man in an apron and, in one case, a dress! No matter the circumstance, he didn't want to give her any reason to mail his pictures to friends and coworkers, even though they might have been wearing aprons, too! (Mail! How quaint! Today a picture of hubby in a dress could go viral in minutes!) Additionally, there was the time-honored, albeit incorrect stereotype of the nagging wife. Women just wouldn't give their man any peace—and men love tranquility; unless he obeyed, that is, he didn't get it! A third method was control of the money; checks came home in those days, she was waiting for it, and it was turned over.

Although of a later generation, this was Nancy's family; the women controlled the money, made the decisions, and did what they wanted when and with whomever they wanted. The men? Well, can you say housekeeping?

This woman-in-charge dynamic in Nancy's family was very attractive to me incidentally. I wanted in! And it was apparently very attractive to other men as Kaitlin found out by speaking to older FLR women and couples. Kaitlin interviewed men alone to get their reactions to an assertive, in-charge wife, and all the men she interviewed confessed to loving the lifestyle! Why? She has some preliminary but interesting findings, which I hope to share with you in later postings.

Clearly we have more women in charge today than ever, but it's been there in the past, particularly in the home. There have been many more men saying "yes, Ma'am" than would admit it, and women who wouldn't admit their domineering role because it defied the “obedient wife” image so prevalent at that time. Kaitlin will continue exploring what really went on in the past, at home and in the workplace. She hopes to interview many more women and couples. In particular she's interested in speaking with couples outside the sphere of the Woman's center to get a broader feel for the extent of past FLRs. How much power did women really have and how did they wield that power? What she's found so far is exciting and will be the object of future posts.

d

DENNIS: WOMEN'S WEAR—FASHION STATEMENT OR SYMBOL OF POWER?

Among the many issues connected with the ever increasing numbers of managerial women in the workplace are those concerning dress. Broadly two issues arise:

1. Do women have to forgo their traditional options for dress and instead adopt more male-inspired fashion as they move into positions of power in industry and government?
2. Right on the heels (pun unintended) of this question come the protests of men, who think it is unfair, even discriminatory, that women in the workplace can adopt male dress but not socially acceptable for men to adopt women's attire. Some men even claim that this “double standard” shows, by extension, that Feminism is somehow flawed and should be discredited. 

What is our response? Well, Feminist scholars have long argued that women's upward mobility does not mandate they abandon any of their traditional options for dress, or anything else for that matter; women maintain all of their options. There is absolutely no need to dress like men as a condition of acquiring power in the workplace and at home. Women can cross gender lines freely and acceptably adopt male attire; although most women in the workplace see this only as a fashion statement, and definitely not as any homage to traditional male power.

 

Some Feminists go a step beyond stating that women should retain all the options they have for dress. These advocates of female empowerment have stated, and not casually or tongue-in-cheek, that women should offer these same options to men. The unwritten precondition here is that women make such a carte blanche offer to men only when men have ceded a significant amount of their power to women. Otherwise, women retain their options and men have no rights to them. Sorry, guys!

Historically women have retained their modes of dress and beauty rituals as a female-only respite from discriminatory male society. Female attire was typically dismissed as irrelevant, and power was equated with the way men dressed and behaved. Things are changing though; power is increasingly symbolized by female attire.

If women adopt male-inspired dress, they directly pay homage to male authority and sacrifice the increasing power of female attire. As women assume more and more leadership roles, how they dress is going to be associated with power and influence. And it's already happening: a skirt, pantyhose, and heels say “I'm in charge here.” I work with executive women, and none of them has forgone feminine attire. You can look like a woman and be in charge!

How a woman dresses has an impact; men pay attention and show respect. Men realize that these new symbols of corporate power are not available to them, nor (they realize) are the coveted management positions that are increasingly filled by more qualified women. Carol, the woman I work for, often says “Authority wears a skirt,” referring to the significant numbers of women in management at our company with rarely a pants suit to be seen! Yes, power wears a skirt and high heels; I find that the sound of high heels on the hardwood floors of our board room to be very intimidating! Feminine, to be sure, but also intimidating!  The Queen has arrived! Shut up and take notes!

Now, for the male claim of discrimination. We've heard this in many open Feminist forums, where some man brings up this lame argument against Feminism. In open forum, if a man brings this up, we offer him a skirt and heels to wear as our way of ending discrimination right then and there; so far no man has put on the skirt.

We believe that the options for dress that women have are theirs and theirs alone.  Men have no rights unless they are extended to them by women, and most women are reluctant to broadly grant them, at least for now. Society will have to evolve further for that to happen. Within the confines of individual relationships, however, a woman can do as she pleases, granting her man privileges as befit his behavior and her motives.  Whatever women offer, men are advised to reverently accept—in my case a fancy apron and earrings.  It’s an outward sign of my subordinate role in our relationship, one that I embrace.

d

DENNIS: MEN’S NIGHT OUT – BUT ONLY IF SHE APPROVES!

Many progressive couples are of the mindset that men aren’t to be granted outside leisure because they just get into too much trouble. True, if your man is going out with a group of guys after work or to a sporting event of some sort. Little good is likely to come of it; he’s likely to have listened to an evening of men ridiculing women and to have spent a lot of money.

But what if he were out with a group of guys all of whom were in female-led relationships? What if the guys he’s spending time with love their wives and, better still, love their wives being in charge? What if the guys getting together actually reinforces everyone’s commitments to an FLR? Your man comes home better than when he left! Intriguing possibilities! And great nights out!

Guys in FLRs and with strong feminist leanings need a support group, too. Aside from infrequent workshops for men in FLRs, men simply don’t have any other males to talk to or share experiences with on a regular basis. Discussions about his wife’s being in charge of the household and him being in a submissive role aren’t going to be taking place at the local bar. Yet there are increasing numbers of men in the lifestyle who need to have such discussions; men who need reinforcement, encouragement, and new ideas.

Through a journal entry I proposed the idea of “guy socials” to my mother-in-law, Sue, and through her, to my wife, Nancy. Sue carried the idea forward, speaking with a few wives. Some were skeptical; they had had many bad experiences with men’s night out. So our first task was to figure out how to eliminate the possibilities for bad behavior to the satisfaction of these women.

Tom, a personal friend also in an FLR, and I—with the help of Nancy’s mother—decided that putting appropriate rules in place would make these socials possible. The more rules the better, it was decided, in order to address any situation that might arise.

Now we’re not talking about some impromptu party here. Rather, it’s about socials—well-planned, wife-approved, woman-supervised get-togethers with an organized agenda and proper decorum. It may be guys’ night out, but women are in control; and all of us—women and men—want it that way!

So we put together some rules and reviewed them with the wives:

• Guy socials are limited to once a month.
• The socials are, for the time being, limited to a group of six men in female-led marriages. Should the group expand in the future, it will be progressive gentlemen only and only with the women’s approval! No one wants to debate the merits of feminism or of FLRs with outsiders; the intent is to reinforce FLRs, not undermine the good work couples have been doing in promoting the lifestyle.
• Socials are on the man’s time and will not detract from other work he has to do; a man’s work at home is always the priority.
• Women approve of the socials’ agenda.
• The woman who chaperones at the event will ensure that the social
  
  follows the agenda; she can modify that agenda as she sees fit.
• Invitations are sent to the woman, not the man. “Dear Ms. Smith, the presence of your husband is requested at a social to take place at the home of etc…” The invitation goes on to describe the planned event and concludes with, “Please give your permission or your regrets by returning the enclosed card.”
• The man must have his wife’s permission to attend, and we must have her RSVP for him to do so. A man’s not being permitted to attend a social doesn’t endanger his future participation. After all, a woman in charge is what we are all committed to. If anything, denial might be considered a badge of honor and an outward manifestation of a commitment to the lifestyle. As progressive gentlemen, all of us have had to say “my wife won’t let me” from time to time and think nothing of it whether speaking with someone in the lifestyle or with someone at work.
• Women always have an invitation to attend and participate in men’s night out and never have to RSVP their intent to attend.
• The social will always accommodate women attendees; women can steer discussion topics during the social if they so desire or they can plan an entirely different event. In advance of one of our meetings the women decided we’d all attend a local theater; and that was guy’s night out, and an enjoyable one, I might add!
• Women are honored guests and treated accordingly. Men take turns
  
  serving women attendees.
• Meetings are planned at least eight weeks in advance; there are no impromptu husband socials.
• Activities and discussion topics for the meeting must be submitted in advance for review and approval; women have the right to changes or modify the event at any time.
• Women approve of the social’s venue; a man’s home is best if his wife approves; the women frown on restaurants and bars and do not permit meetings at such places, although the ballet or theater is okay.
• At least one woman is to be in attendance at these socials and act as chaperone; if circumstances arise where no women can attend a social, then it is canceled.
• Men clean up after a social.
• We discuss a variety of topics and always have an agenda for the meeting included with the invitation. Invitees may be asked to review a book, story, or issue in preparation for the social. This leads to some great discussions. Topics to date? On the serious side, Feminist issues and women in the workplace topics as well as lighter fare such as “Your best housekeeping tips.” We also had a wine and cheese social and went as a group to the ballet. We’ve had a Feminist speaker and plan to have other women guests present other topics in the future.

So how does it all work? Well, thanks to the rules and women’s oversight, very well. We’ve had some great socials, and we’ve done it without burdening any of the women. Those women who attended in order to provide oversight have all enjoyed the time.

Tom, a longtime personal friend, and I take turns hosting the meetings largely due to our central location. Our first meeting was a wine and cheese social. Darlene, one of the wives, decided to attend because she was very skeptical. Initially thinking the gathering  was intended to be for “men only,” she said, “If the guys don’t want women to attend, then it shouldn’t be happening.” We agreed and assured her that women had an open invitation and that any social without a female chaperone would be canceled. While other wives were also hesitant at first, Darlene’s decision to attend and Nancy’s mother being home to supervise the event allayed any fears they may have had.

It’s been great ever since, with women attending every meeting. The guys always prepare and serve some light fare and keep the ladies happy with good wine, great coffee and involvement in the discussion. It’s interesting (but certainly not surprising) the role reversal we have here. The women are all

successful career women and disengage when the men start talking housekeeping. Twenty years ago, it would be the opposite. At a recent meeting where the topic was housekeeping tips, the women were visibly bored and drifted to another room to “talk business”; we males kept their coffee cups full and continued with our discussions.

What’s next? A number of things are in the works, some of which will help the guys with holiday shopping. We are also excited about our next social in a few weeks on Ikebana, Japanese flower arranging. Ikebana is about beautifying one’s home, a topic of interest in our male group.

d

DENNIS: POSTSCRIPT TO HOUSEKEEPING 101

Let me respond briefly and in a general way to several of the comments on the previous post about our Housekeeping 101 course. Nancy and I are not running schools online or anywhere else outside our local area. Rather, what we're trying to say is "Here is what we did to enhance guys' house-keeping skills; why not try something similar where you are?" What we want to hear -- and what Nancy wanted to hear but felt she never did -- was that people were picking up on our ideas, changing them a bit to suit their situation and then were going off and doing something along similar lines. This is what makes evangelization so rewarding!

A woman in the D.C. area, for instance, is taking our approach and is doing a local version of Housekeeping for three of her women friends' husbands. She shares experiences, makes comments, and gives suggestions as to what she feels we can do better. We love it! We're Feminists, she's a Female Supremacist, but we all feel that everyone gets ahead when men do more or all of the housework. She's interested in some of the things we do -- domestic service, for example -- and we've invited her to visit us and experience it firsthand. She'll also visit the women's center and hold a talk about Female-centric religions that many of us are pursuing or are interested in.

We believe that the best way to initiate change is to think globally and act locally! "Learning to Keep House" was the result of a few women seeing men needing to improve their domestic skills and doing something about it. They put together a program that builds housekeeping skills, raises money for the center, and inspires others. It's all about inspiring people to take action that empowers women.

And finally, "Housekeeping 101" is a finishing school; everyone who has come to it has some level of domestic skills. Before any man can consider this course, he should ask the women in his life for instruction and learn as much as he can. I learned most of my skills growing up in an all-female family where everyone had to carry their share of the load. The women in Nancy's family took it to another level with their standards and things like personal service. Believe me, a mother-in-law can be as good a teacher as she is a taskmistress!

DENNIS: LEARNING TO KEEP HOUSE – ESSENTIAL MAN-SKILLS IN A WOMAN-RUN WORLD

(Note from Mark Remond: For almost a year, from July 2012 until May of this year, this blog was in the capable hands of a guest blogger, Ms. Nancy, and her adoring and dutiful spouse, Dennis. (You can read more about them in my introduction to their first guest post here.) For more than 25 years Nancy and Dennis have been not merely advocating, but evangelizing for female led relationships. Alas for me and my readers, Nancy ceased her guest-posting here in July, citing career commitments amid other factors, but I am delighted to announce that she and her mother (who jointly govern their female led household) have now given permission for Dennis to write occasional guest posts from his unique perspective of a husband and son-in-law completely devoted to female leadership. This is the first in what I hope will be an ongoing series.)

 

With increasing numbers of men staying at home to take care of the house while their more qualified wives assume professional positions in the workplace, there is an increasing need to train men to properly keep house. Asking an average man to clean the living room will likely result in his spending five minutes running the vacuum and calling the job done. Women don’t see it that way; they want perfection and to get it they’re going to have to train their men.

So, how to do this? Well, a woman’s mother or aunts can do some training. In my case, my wife’s mother and her aunt trained me on weekend visits to their homes. Another way is to farm your man out to a local woman-owned cleaning service; they can always use the extra help and he’ll not only learn how to clean house, but how to do it efficiently. I was trained this way when Nancy’s mother arranged for me to work for her friend Mary at her company, Mary Maids. A third way is emerging—formal training in housekeeping specifically aimed at stay-at-home-husbands. And I’ve gone through this type of training, too. Yes, I’m well trained and proud of it!

The women’s center where Nancy, her mother, and I volunteer has always been a local forum for advocating Matriarchy, Women’s Rights, and FLRs. Advocacy takes on many forms, and in this case it’s recognizing that men need structured training in housekeeping. This has resulted in a men-only course offered by our center, informally called Housekeeping 101.

Women have been excited about Housekeeping 101 since it gives their men needed skills without the women having to be involved in the training. Men are initially hesitant but always come to enjoy the program and appreciate how it will help them please their wives. Only the serious need apply, however. Housekeeping 101 is NOT game playing; it's hard work, and to this end, the tuition is purposely expensive—$125, non-refundable. It’s strongly suggested that men pay the tuition and additional fees from their personal funds or allowances ensuring that they’ll appreciate the training all the more.

Paying tuition and fees takes place before the first day of class and isn’t simply about writing a check. There is a little required ritual where men present cash to the women of the admissions committee using a pastel envelope specifically for that purpose. Tuition, paid in full, is required before the first day of class. The monies due are typically much more than a man in an FLR has access to, so he usually has to borrow from his wife.

This is a good thing! In my case I borrowed from Nancy’s mother. It took me two years to pay her back, including the 30 percent interest she added to the loan. Having to ask reinforces the FLR and reminds a man who’s in charge. In addition to tuition, men are expected to make a generous donation to at least one of a suggested list women's groups. They must prove they made the donation and their donations must be judged as appropriate by the center’s board of directors. Most men elect to make a donation directly to the women’s center to support its activities.

Applicants must be nominated by a woman, have demonstrated Feminist credentials, and have a demeanor that predicts success in the program. We are looking for progressive gentlemen who want to put on an apron and do housework. And we get them. The majority of men taking the course are in or aspiring to the FLR lifestyle. All applicants have to go through an application process that includes submitting a written application, writing an essay on an assigned topic, and an interview with the women’s center admission committee. Men can be rejected and no reason need be given; the $125 application fee, as I said, is not refunded.

The week before class starts, a three-hour orientation is conducted during which students meet their faculty members and introduce themselves. The fee for orientation is an additional, nonrefundable $125. During orientation men meet the faculty and learn that obedience is a must—yes, Ma'am! They learn the details of the course and what is expected of them. One of the expectations is that men will carry themselves in a prim manner. We’re not talking effeminate; we’re talking formality and attitude. One of the instructors lectures the men on their attitude, explaining that they should conduct themselves as though they were serving the Queen. Well, in a way, they are! Prim and proper is the order of the day; simply doing housework isn’t enough, one must exhibit enthusiasm for the domestic tasks at hand.

Men supply their own cleaning supplies as dictated by the faculty and MUST wear an apron. The course provides each man with a valuable reference book, including useful checklists such as the “52 Things That Add Up to a Clean Living Room,” lots of hands-on instruction, and an opportunity to put skills into practice.

Housekeeping 101 is limited to eight students and is taught by four VERY demanding women, all in their late 60s and all in FLRs. These Domestic Divas love sharing their knowledge but rarely do housework themselves—their husbands have been doing it for years! The Divas demand perfection, and if a man steps out of line he may find himself whacked with the wooden spoon that each woman carries as her symbol of authority. (Ouch, that hurts!)

Classes are conducted on Saturday morning at the center and a practicum is conducted Saturday afternoon. Classes begin promptly at 7:00 a.m. with students at practicum by noon. Classes consist of lectures, demonstrations, and personal instruction. Men are expected to shut up, pay attention, and take notes. There is no talking among students. Students wanting to ask a question raise their hand and, if recognized, use appropriate protocol of, “Excuse me, Madame, but I have a question” and then proceed with the question. If it is deemed appropriate, it will be answered. The women don’t hesitate to scold a student and embarrass him in front of the others if they think it necessary—and they often do.

Coursework runs the gamut of what a student will need to keep a house clean. Each week covers a specific topic—dusting, scrubbing, ironing, washing, and so on, with cooking typically taking three sessions. Recently men received a lesson in vacuuming as well as a lecture from a woman who owns a local appliance store. She demonstrated the latest in vacuum cleaners while the men oohed and aahed at the new technology. Each of the apron-clad students was called out by one by the instructors to try the vacuums on the center’s rugs. The men seemed to compete with each other as they demonstrated their proficiency with a vacuum. Each man in turn used one of the vacuums and provided his assessments to the class; all the men commented favorably about the vacuum they used. Then it was off to work, spending the rest of the morning cleaning the center before going on practicum.

During the Saturday afternoon practicum, students have a visit (supervised by one of the faculty) to a host woman's home. This woman has volunteered her home to allow students to put into practice what they've learned and to gain some housekeeping experience. Upon arriving at the host woman's home, the male student introduces himself and receives any instructions she may have. The woman host is usually a friend of the instructor and the two of them can socialize while the student—or students, depending on the assignment—cleans the house. The student usually finds himself doing general house cleaning, which always includes scrubbing and bathrooms. The remainder of the afternoon will be spent on what she needs done, ironing perhaps. On leaving, students are expected to thank the host woman and provide her a gratuity in a pastel envelope with a note of thanks. A $25 gratuity is the norm.

Students and faculty return to the center after practicum and receive homework assignments that the men have to complete before the next session. This can include reading, practical work, and preparation. Preparation for laundry and ironing classes means bringing clothes to be used washed and ironed.

Every week for fifteen weeks a different topic is covered. Dusting, scrubbing, toilets, laundry, and kitchens are pretty straightforward, and most men adapt well to these tasks. Sewing and ironing can be challenging for some, so supplemental work may be required. It’s not uncommon for men to take on extra ironing or mending. Men are tested and specific goals have to be met. To be declared proficient at sewing for example, men have to fix a hem and

sew on buttons and they need to do it quickly; five buttons have to be affixed in three minutes; one doesn’t want to keep a woman waiting!

Finally, there’s an entire session on brewing a great cup of tea or coffee. “Coffee and Tea” includes instruction in properly serving these beverages to his wife and her guests with appropriate decorum. It was added because the faculty realizes that personal service is an essential component of an FLR and wanted to provide some training in this important discipline. “Coffee and Tea” includes discussion of coffee makers, coffees, various teas and how to make these. It also covers proper service protocol, including things such as always serving the oldest woman first, serving from a tray, and serving from the left and clearing from the right. “Coffee and Tea” is the capstone session to Housekeeping 101, and men really enjoy it; they look forward to going home and serving their wives. It’s also a great way to demonstrate acceptance of

the couple’s relative roles.

The successful completion of the class is celebrated at a graduation dinner for attendees and spouses. Having completed the course, a man will be competent in vacuuming, washing and ironing, cleaning and dusting, maintaining a spotless kitchen, sanitizing the bathroom, and basic cooking and sewing. Women are provided with a schedule of household chores to use in putting their man on an appropriate and ongoing routine of housekeeping.

I was privileged to attend the inaugural session of this course. I've attended on two other occasions, too—the last two times not as a student, but as a “sheep dog,” as the women call me. Everyone knows men are followers, not leaders, and my job is to lead the male students in doing things the women's way. My job as a male participant is to be a good example for the other men in the group and encourage them along. Believe me, if I get up and brag about my new vacuum or about how much I love to iron, the other men will soon be doing the same—oh, yes, men are easy to control and women should be controlling us! I may appear to be “one of the boys” in the class, but I'm really one of the girls in terms of my loyalties and sentiments, and in terms of wanting to bring more men into a life of service. Men doing housekeeping is step one on the way to Matriarchy!

 

Advanced study – yes! We have a follow-on to “Housekeeping 101,””Gracious Living,” which continues with topics beyond basic housekeeping and includes window treatments, linens and tableware, correspondence and stationery, personal service, and so on. We may discuss this course in future postings.

d

DIVA'S LOVING LEADERSHIP: YES, DIVA!

(Note from Mark Remond: With her kind permission, I am reprinting another provocative post from Diva's Loving Leadership blog. To read more about her FLR marriage with her adoring husband and pet, click on the link just above. Thank you once more, Dree!)

(Sept.29 by Dree)

Diva is always right. Even when My Pet disagrees.

He does this thing where he scrunches up his face and literally bites his tongue (you can see the tip sticking out of his mouth) when he’s upset.

Some kind of tantrum usually follows, but lately I’ve had him repeat to me, “Yes, Diva.”

That gets him to stop biting his tongue and then he takes his puppydog face and does whatever it is that I’ve asked of him.

When I’m wrong or mistaken (and that’s rarely) is when I have him looking for something and it’s not in the place where I insist it should be.

I do apologize if I am mistaken, but I continue to have him look in all the appropriate places, even if he insists that it’s a waste of time.

If My Pet argues, I have him repeat to me, “Yes, Diva,” and then carry on with the assigned task.

Requiring a simple, “Yes, Diva” from him has gone a long way in the past few weeks to defuse any arguments or disagreements that he may have with me. Obviously he can’t argue with me when I remind him who’s in the lead around here.

He works part-time, now, for the same business as I do, and I am his immediate supervisor. It is quite the turn-on to hear him say, “Yes, Diva,” when I tell him to do things at work. We share that special little glance that most lovers do and with a smile, he goes about his duties on the job. It’s wicked, but fun, even if the job itself isn’t.

The “good girl” side of me feels bad for him when he doesn’t like to do what he is told. Bu, then I remember that I am training both him and myself to give and take orders, without question.

If I begin questioning how he feels and thus questioning myself, then I begin to slide, and thus let him slide. We end up back at square one and I have to start all over again, training him how to be led by me.

These days, I’ve been standing my ground.

My Pet’s been throwing fewer tantrums, but still biting his tongue.

He still does what I tell him to do, though.

I’ve begun giving him more and more daily tasks. Since he’s not working full-time, he has more time to see to my needs.

I’ve even taken to calling him in the middle of the day, when I’m at work, to tell him exactly how I expect to find things when I get home: A glass of wine and a nightgown on the bed, so that I get can undressed and relax the moment that I walk in the door.

My Pet has to be showered and shaved every day before I get home from work, as well.

His reward is snuggling up after he’s done with the dinner dishes. That’s my reward, too.

On our mutual days off, he draws me a nice, hot bubblebath and then we indulge in a couple of hours of playtime, before dinner.

During playtime, I have him massage and kiss my feet.

When I let him touch me, I guide and command his moves. It’s almost orgasmic to hear him say, “Yes, Diva,” as he goes from one command to the next, trying to please me.

My Pet is still on sexual probation, so it has actually been quite a while since we have had genital-to-genital intercourse. He gets the scrunchy-face and tongue-biting thing going when I remind him, during playtime, that he is still on lockdown. That’s when I give him new suggestions for how he can put his tongue to better use. His “Yes, Diva,” at such times is a little pathetic, but he gets right to work, as directed.

 

To his credit, his patience for and obedience to my rules is getting more and more admirable. And I am even losing my patience with him less and less. That has led to us talking more openly about sex and our expectations and even his own desires and fantasies. We kiss more and smile more than we have in a very long time. We are actually having more fun.

It will certainly be a highlight worth noting and a memorable event that he can carry with him through his next lockdown on the day that I let My Pet off of sexual probation and I can make him scream, “Yes, Diva!” for all the neighbors to hear.