dennis: TWO QUESTIONS ON MALE PROTOCOL IN A MATRIARCHAL HOME

(Note from Mark Remond: Here’s another reader comment followed by dennis’ response, not published before. This Q&A deals with some of the finer points of Joan’s Protocols of concerning male etiquette and female privilege which dennis has been sharing here.)

Dear dennis:

Concerning your post "Dennis: Meeting Joan & Learning of ‘The Protocols" : Women have always hated housework but it was their role and they did it. Here we have a behavior control situation where the men are taught to love housework and talk about its joys with other men. I love it. Here are two questions among many:

1. Are the men permitted to sit during meals with the Ladies or do they serve and eat elsewhere after clean-up?
2. Are they permitted to sit on chairs ever in the presence of any Lady?

dennis responds:

The answer to your first question is a resounding “it depends!”

For a small group of two or three Women, such as a weekday dinner then, yes, after the Ladies are served, i am welcome to sit at the table and enjoy dinner with them—and even participate in their conversation if invited. Afterward, the Women retire to the living room for desserts and drinks, and i go about cleaning up. The Women will, on occasion, ask me to join them, but most times i have to excuse myself as i have other tasks to accomplish; they understand. An even rarer treat is to be invited to share a cigarette or drink; a rare privilege that takes little time but which i greatly appreciate.

If we have a larger group of Women, then my duty, and my desire to serve, takes precedence. i'll serve dinner and hover near the dining room to tend to the group’s needs, but not so close as to be seen as listening in on the conversation. It's rare, but i may be extended the privilege of dining with the Women after they are served. As noted below, being allowed to dine with the Ladies does not convey the privilege of participating in their conversation.

After dinner the Ladies move to the living room for conversation and drinks. Once everyone has been served drinks and desserts, i'll eat and begin cleaning the dining room. Sue [Nancy’s mother] prefers that i minimally interrupt the living room conversation, so instead of looking in on the Ladies periodically, they will summon me by ringing a bell. The bells, which i've written about previously (“I Hear Bells”), are Nancy's Aunt's throwback to the Edwardian era, when servants were summoned by a bell and a light in their quarters, indicating that service was required and in what room. We don't have lights, but we do have different-sounding bells in each room. The bells allow me to efficiently take care of my kitchen clean-up while taking care of the Ladies without disrupting them.

The answer to your second question (“Are males ever permitted to sit on chairs in the presence of any Lady?”) is a resounding “yes,” but again with conditions.

A man's being invited to sit with the Women is indeed a compliment, not because Women think he has something to say, but rather because they likely feel he can learn something from the discussion. Remember the directive? Men should “Shut up and listen!” The Protocol for men speaking or participating in a conversation is to “speak when spoken to, to give a response when asked.” Men aren't allowed to hover near the conversation, even to listen; they must be invited in, at which time they take the seat offered, usually one in the back of the room. Often, to reinforce the man's status, he will be seated on a stool.

But, no, i don't have to sit on a stool, unless told to do so, although the wise male will take a stool periodically to demonstrate his deference. But men do have other Protocol-dictated restrictions on where they may sit. Men are not to sit in a chair with arms—EVER! In the dining room a chair with arms has traditionally been the “head of household” chair. In our home we have six such chairs, all reserved for Women in the family or Female guests. One is always reserved for Nancy and another for Her Mother, Sue. This Protocol extends to other rooms in the house. If there’s not a chair without arms available, the man stands. This Protocol also extends to outside establishments. such as restaurants where practical—and it usually is practical!

—d

dennis: JOAN AND THE PROTOCOLS–LEARNING TO SERVE, Part 1

This is the second part of my recollections of Joan [Nancy’s Grandmother] and Her teaching me the Protocols. Affording personal service to the Women is one of the real privileges of a Female-led relationship. Joan infused the entire process of serving with rule and ritual, some of which are very private matters.

Learning to Serve

i arose early to prepare coffee and await Joan who promised a full day’s training—in what I wasn't exactly sure, but I had been assured that it would “make me a better man.” Absent Her training, all that i did that morning was wrong, but that would all soon be corrected. Joan would see to that! When She appeared, immaculate in casual attire, I knelt before Her and kissed Her extended hand as prescribed by the Protocols.

Joan got right to work; the Grandmotherly Woman of the night before gave way to a strict, in-my-face Disciplinarian who inspired fear. i'd wanted a Woman-in-charge situation, but now, for a fleeting moment , I was afraid, unsure. That feeling quickly passed, however, as i was swept up in Joan's Goddess-like aura, letting Her start to mold me into the submissive man i wanted so much to become. i needed to do what She wanted, when She wanted it, and how She wanted it done. She would give the orders; i would follow them. Fail to do so and there would be “consequences,” painful ones, i was to learn. My accelerated trip into the submissive lifestyle would begin with my learning to serve.

In Nancy's family, personal service has rules and rituals, mostly due to Joan's insistence. A student of social history, Joan patterned our rules for personal service after the servants of the Golden Age of opulence, the Edwardian period. In the Edwardian home one would find maids, butlers, and ladies in waiting all at the beck and call of their privileged employers. In our home, the men assume all these roles with all the proper protocol they entail as they serve the Women.

Attire

Before one could even start, there was the need for proper attire. That morning i appeared in a brand-new pair of casual slacks and a new golf shirt. Only shorts were acceptable, i was informed. She ordered me out of the slacks and cut the legs off them, using a pair of pinking sheers; now I had what can best be described as a pair of Daisy Dukes, but they complied with the Protocol. She also cut the sleeves off the golf shirt. “Shave those underarms before tomorrow,” Joan ordered. “You men are disgusting! Now let's get into something pretty,” she said, taking me into the kitchen where i learned another of the Protocols.

Any time a man is doing housework or serving the Women, the Protocols dictate that he wear an apron—NO EXCEPTIONS! Joan made it clear that an apron would be chosen for me; it would be a long time before I was privileged to select my own. On the hook in the kitchen was the one i was to wear; if two are hanging, one is worn while the other is backup—a soiled apron is not permitted. Prim and proper is the rule. A decidedly Feminine black satin apron with white trim—embroidered with my name—was Joan's gift to me; I still have and revere it. It was a bit intimidating but i did as i was told, squaring its fit and tying it in back. “An apron is practical,” Joan said, “but it’s also very symbolic.” Yes, it is, there's no doubt as to who’s giving orders when the men are wearing aprons. “You won't see a Woman in an apron around here,” Joan said, “and you won't see a man without one!”

Next footwear. Proper attire according to the Protocols demands I wear a pair of ballet-style slippers in an appropriate color. These slippers are really quite practical. They are commonly available in the Women's hosiery/accessories department of any department store. They have a satin upper, a suede sole, a bit of decoration (bows or rhinestones) and are very comfortable; the Women love them, and so do progressive gentlemen. They fit snugly and provide excellent traction on the highly polished wood and ceramic floors that i soon would be racing across as i served the Women.

Stoop-and-Bow

Stoop-and-bow, as Joan called it, is an important show of respect that had to become second nature. The stoop-and-bow was a variation on the traditional curtsey that i had learned first. Joan had me put my left leg forward, my right leg back, bow my head, and then dip while holding both sides of my apron up and out. After about a second i rose and released my apron. Having to perform this time-honored ritual of respect was a major motivation for wearing an apron. My first tries were devoid of the graciousness She expected, so i did it over and over and over again. She added a bit of motivation with a small leather slapper that She used on my bare legs—OUCH! Joan said Her slapper helped learning; and i wasn't going to disagree! i spent two hours walking away  from Joan to the end of the living room and back, where I curtseyed to Her. The stoop-and-bow differed from the curtsey only in that i balanced a tray with my left hand so i could only use my right hand to raise my apron. The stoop-and-bow and serving from the tray were essential to personal service and had to be mastered; with Joan's tutelage and some help from Her slapper, they were. So ingrained has this ritual become that it’s second nature, and I often find myself doing it at work when I serve my boss, Carol, Her morning coffee—sans the ballet slippers and apron, of course!

Rising Up—My Tribute to Joan

Joan insisted that men serving Her do so while standing on the balls of the foot and extending upward, mimicking the position of a foot in a high-heeled shoe, but without the support a high heel would offer. It was difficult and painful learning experience, all the more so since She used Her slapper to enforce Her demand that i learn this movement. i had to wonder why, if She wanted me in this position, She just didn't have me wear high heels; i would have done so had She demanded it, of course. i asked Her this only to provoke Her anger—and receive four sharp slaps with Her leather

instrument of terror across the back of my bare legs. Lesson learned! It was a difficult movement, and surely that's why She liked it: requiring the males of the family not only to do this, but to master the movement, confirmed Her power over us.

One need not rise up constantly in moving about the house, but when serving the Women commenced, it was definitely time to rise up. i practiced this over and over that first day under her tutelage, and finally—perhaps ten days later—mastered what i regard as a very difficult and painful movement. Most of the Women never insisted on my rising up, but Joan did—always! And because She did, and because i still worship this departed Goddess, i perform this maneuver to this day just as though Joan is watching, slapper in hand for motivation. Sometimes when i think of Joan, i'll serve Nancy and Sue and rise up about five feet from them and keep doing so until leaving their presence; although it's not required, they understand, i think, that my doing so is a tribute to Joan.

 

Joan had me walk around in my uniform to practice what i'd learned and to get used to the slippers and the soft rustle of the satin apron. It was all so mesmerizing! If i ever had a “man-card,” i surrendered it to Joan in that instant. The road i was going down led to a submissive lifestyle, and it was a one-way street.

And for me, there would be no turning back!

--d

dennis: FEMALE SUPERIORITY: A FACT OF THE POST-INDUSTRIAL AGE

[Note from Mark Remond: Once again I am posting a recent reader comment paired with a response from dennis, this time on the topic of female superiority—a topic which first appeared in these pages back in September of 2010 with Beckie Sue’s Wife Worship & Female Superiority, Part 1. ]

*

LS said:

dennis, I hope you will speak more about female superiority and male inferiority. Not much of this has been discussed on this forum. I know it’s controversial, but it’s an idea that’s slowly coming out of the closet as we see women outpace men in all sorts of areas. It seems that most, perhaps all, men know or fear deep down inside of themselves that they are inferior to women (and I think women may feel the same). It’s a hidden type of knowledge. That may be the reason why men have tried to control women so much. Men also may project their own sense of inferiority on women; they treat women the way they secretly want themselves to be treated. But when men accept that feeling inside, they find it easier to serve women as subordinates, to worship them, and to accept the need for female values to be dominant.

I think it is actually a bit strange that there is so much resistance to this idea of male inferiority. As individuals we all recognize that some people are better at certain things than ourselves and normally we have no trouble recognizing it and according these people their due. Why can’t men do this with women? If we did, a lot of things would fall into place. men would be at peace as Women’s subordinates. I would like to hear your thoughts on how you accepted female superiority and anything else you have to say along these lines.

dennis’ response:

Thank you for your comment, but i beg to differ on your statement, “Not much of this has been discussed on this forum. I know it’s controversial, but it’s an idea that’s slowly coming out of the closet as we see women outpace men in all sorts of areas.

i think that the theme of Women being morally, ethically, and intellectually superior to men is a common theme that has run through my postings and those of my Wife, Nancy. Unfortunately the rules of society have discriminated against Women, but only because the physical strength of men counted for something in an agrarian and, later, an industrial society. This and

ONLY this allowed men to lord it over superior Women. Additionally, i do not see that the concept of Female superiority is at all “controversial.” It’s not controversial at all, it’s fact! Men are rapidly coming to grips with this and Women have long recognized their innate superiority and have consistently manipulated and worked around men.

With a post-industrial society we see rapidly increasing change in the status of each gender. Men are becoming irrelevant while Women take more and more control and put in place the standards to which society will function. men would do well to recognize this and position themselves for the roles for which they are qualified AND the roles that Women will permit them to have. In the workplace we are seeing more and more Women ascend to leadership positions; this trend will only accelerate what with programs and policies in place to promote more Women, not simply because they have better skills—they do!—but because society increasingly sees moving Women up as atonement for centuries of patriarchy and as a way to make major changes to society by having in-charge women infuse Female ideas and standards going

forward. In other words, it is the interests of society as a whole to move rapidly to Matriarchy where Women are in charge and set the rules of the game! men are going to have to march in step to the sounds of rapidly moving high heels!

Do men perceive Women as being superior? Damn right they do! i do and so do many men i know, even men who are yet outside the FLR lifestyle. Women are reinforcing men’s inferior feelings by being more assertive and by challenging patriarchy.

—d

DENNIS: KAITLIN'S WORK GOES ON

i was at our local Women’s Center the other day and ran into Kaitlin who is continuing Her graduate research. (See my earlier post, “MatriarchalUnderground: Father Didn’t Know Best,” Oct. 25, 2013.) She has accumulated a lot more data and is more confident in the trends She is seeing. Apparently Women during the past several generations have had a lot more control than we suspected!

You may think of the '50s and '60s as being the era of the obedient Woman. Well, think again. And you may think that was not until the '70s that Women gained some real control and personal freedom. Not necessarily so! Yes, the '70s were a time when

Women became more vocal, but, according to Kaitlin’s anecdotal research, Women in earlier decades had plenty of power and freedom.

Consider the following trends that are materializing in Kaitlin's research:

§  The more educated the man, the more likely he is to be in a Female-led relationship. Kaitlin muses that this raises an interesting question: “If we want to achieve Matriarchy, do we simply have to educate men?”

§  In the majority of couples surveyed by Kaitlin, Women exercised financial control.

§  In the all cases studied, the husband had more education than his Wife, but She was still in charge.

§  In the relationships studied. all of the men did at least some housework, and they did it as a matter of routine as dictated by their wives

§  In half the relationships studied, men did at least 50% of the housework.

§  In 15% of relationships, men did all the housework.

§  The wife not working outside the home had no bearing on his doing housework; couples deemed it fair that he take on responsibility no matter what Her employment status.

§  Women felt that their social life and personal pursuits took priority over housework; men agreed.

§  Women enforced their rules in a number of ways: denial of sex; denial of domestic services (meal preparation and sewing, for example); and “motivational speaking.” About a quarter of the Women mentioned physical punishment as a means of discipline.

§  About half of the Women interviewed have admitted to having an affair. Interestingly, when this topic was brought up among the male half of couples interviewed, none of the men suspected their wives of an affair. Women apparently keep secrets well, even though most of those who admitted having an extramarital affair also said they had confided this to at least one Woman friend.

§  Some affairs were one-night stands, some lasted years. The number of lovers varied, but no one to date has approached Darlene's 20+gentlemen. 

§  Prior to the 1970s, Women with jobs outside the home were less likely to have an affair than were women who were full-time homemakers. It was not until the '70s that working outside the home correlated to women having an affair.

§  Although it's not the subject of Her research, Kaitlin suspects that today's professional Woman is highly likely to have an affair because of the attraction that strong, powerful Women have to desirable men. i can see this dynamic in play with my own boss, Carol.

§  Kaitlin also cites a statistic from some other research that says that when a Woman earns more than $75,000 per year, the likelihood of Her having an affair goes way up.

Where is Kaitlin's research headed? An intriguing question. All I can tell you is that Kaitlin, who regards Herself as a Female Supremacist, is pursuing a graduate degree and wants to find a college teaching position, perhaps in a Women's Studies program, from which She can continue to work inspiring and empowering Women.

d

DENNIS: FOLLOWING UP ON ‘HOUSEKEEPING 101’

i learned a number of housekeeping skills from the women in Nancy's family, and look back on my many learning sessions with fondness. Unfortunately, the women in Nancy's family weren't necessarily concerned with speed and efficiency, only quality.

After we were married with a priority placed on Nancy's career, more and more—and eventually all—of the housekeeping fell to me. Additionally, there were the routine shopping and volunteer work that I did at the Women’s Center. Trying to balance even my secondary career with my domestic duties, i started falling behind and obviously needed some help. That help came in the form of training at both a large hotel and with a woman-run residential maid service. In both instances, quality had to be balanced with speed and efficiency; it was an economic imperative. Nancy's mother, Sue, knew a hotel housekeeping supervisor and a Woman who ran a maid service; both were always looking for help due to the high turnover, which was mainly attributed to the grueling pace. Initially Sue lined up a job for me at a hotel and later with the maid service.

Rhoda, the supervisor at the hotel, was a tough-as-nails woman. She was quick to chastise Her maids if their work wasn't up to Her expectations—and things seldom met Her expectations; and if they did, She'd raise the bar. Rhoda agreed to take me on so long as Sue could promise that i'd work regular hours for at least six months and that i'd recognize that She and “her girls” ran the show; whatever She and her girls said was law!

While Rhoda was my overall boss, she assigned me to one of Her maids, who was responsible for my on-the-job training. The maids appreciated having the help but didn't like having to stop and correct or instruct me. They did enjoy having someone to boss around and did so with about as much energy as did Rhoda. My helping them took some of the pressure off the maids and gave them more frequent opportunities to go out on the balcony to grab a much deserved smoke.

Each maid was responsible for cleaning 12-15 rooms a day—more if we didn't have a lot of guests checking out—plus common areas. It was tough work, but i learned so many lessons that helped me get more efficient at home. I cut the time it took me to dress a bed by over half and learned how to plan my work. It took a lot of yelling and screaming on the part of the maids and Rhoda. but after a few weeks I was elevated to “maid” status and given my own block of rooms, which I cleaned on weekends and whenever else I might be available. My work was all subject to Rhoda's inspection and approval, and no matter how good I thought i was, she always found fault and made me do it better. She was in my face if things weren't right and made it a point to give me all of the “problem rooms” as a rest for her girls and to teach me a bit of humility.

As for pay? Well, i really didn't need to be paid since this was a learning experience, but i received minimum wage that went home to Nancy and Sue. i was required to turn over any tips i found in my rooms to Rhoda, and, on Sue's advice, i gave Rhoda and my supervising maid a gratuity every week. i kept this job for eight months and even today occasionally go back and put on an apron when Rhoda finds herself needing help. i will tell you this: a maid's work is hard and most maids are under-appreciated.

The maid service job was also a training that Sue arranged. A Woman friend

ran a local maid service that cleaned residential homes. Again, I worked this

assignment on weekends, going out in a crew with four Ladies. The supervisor drove the van and inspected the work. My supervisor was, by her own admission, “a real bitch,” maybe even more “tough” than Rhoda, if that's possible. She knew of my FLR home life and had me address all of her Ladies formally, i.e., “Yes Ma'am!” She made sure I did the tough jobs as well as always cleaning toilets. It was break for her crew and She and Her Girls loved lording over me – teaching me humility as well as honing my housecleaning skills. Rhoda was a strict disciplinarian, but that experience was nothing like working on the maid service crew. The supervisor would always be driving us—and specifically me!—to improve on the schedule. “Speed and quality” were her watchwords, often yelled out. She'd always be watching. And if correction was required, She would be in my face to let me know what I did wrong.

Punishment? Infractions usually cost me cigarette breaks, or she might make me smoke while standing outside in frigid weather. And if i got done early with a task, she'd find more for me to do by stripping a bed and having me fix it up. All said, i learned a lot; when you pull up to a totally disheveled house and leave it immaculate an hour and a half later, you're doing something right! And on weekends we usually did five or six houses a day.

In addition to teaching me to be an efficient housekeeper, these two jobs also strengthened my Feminist convictions. men should have to do such work, so that they can appreciate what maids and other pink collar workers do for a living. most men i know couldn't keep up with their female colleagues.

‘ REAL WOMEN DON’T DO HOUSEWORK’—THE BOOK AT LAST!

From Mark Remond: I ‘m as euphoric as a summer skyrocket at the news that Fumika Misato has finally decided to publish Real Women Don’t Do Housework as a book. As you will know, if you’re a regular reader of this blog (all the way back to its beginnings in 2007), I’ve been a long-time convert to Lady Misato’s revolutionary ideas for saving and revitalizing marriages.

Her long-awaited book, which can now be downloaded gratis in .pdf from Scribd.com, is a 93-page quintessence of her wonderful website, which introduced the idea of “wife worship” to the world.

Rather than write a brand-new review of RWDDH, I’m going to reprint my “Tribute to Lady ‘M’” from April 2008, which I also used as a Dedication to Worshipping Your Wife 2:Best of the Blog:

A Tribute to Lady ‘M’ (4.17.08)

In my book I celebrate the rise of FLRs, female-led relationships, and LFA, loving female authority:

“…a new type of female empowerment—not to be confused with female domination or female supremacy. In fact, the proponents of this new empowerment generally dismiss the world of ‘femdom,’ with its bizarre rituals and iconography, as a kind of male-oriented fantasy-land, in which women are ultimately devalued.” (Worshipping Your Wife, p. 84)

I don’t know who coined FLR and LFA, but the acronyms seem to have caught on, especially FLR, helping to destigmatize and advance the cause of women as loving leaders in marriages and romantic relationships.

They’ve accomplished this largely by replacing all the mondo bizarro imagery associated with femdom—B&D, S&M, et al. Instead of a whip-wielding, vinyl-sheathed dominatrix lording it over a groveling lump of naked male flesh, we may now envision something akin to the radiant image that graces Lady Misato’s website, Real Women Don’t Do Housework—and also the cover of my book.

“The Accolade” (1901) by Edmund Leighton depicts a lovely queen or princess, standing statuesque in a shaft of light as she confers knighthood with a longsword on a kneeling, unhelmeted warrior, head bent. Googling will yield many similar images from Leighton, along with those by his fellow historical painters in the English Pre-Raphaelite school, John William Waterhouse and Sir Edward Burne-Jones.

Yes, submissive men can be viewed as heroic knights, and their dominant damsels may be transfigured as radiant and fully empowered queens. This is not just the storybook romance model, but the courtship model, which Lady Misato converted into a working blueprint for contemporary wife-worship (or “wifedom,” as she also calls it) and which I subsequently made the cornerstone of my book.

I acknowledge my considerable debt to Fumika Misato, not just for inspiring my book, but also for helping to save my marriage—and many other marriages, I’m sure. Perhaps she did not originate the terms “Loving Female Authority” (that may have been Elise Sutton, softening her own website a bit) and “Female Led Relationship,” but “Wife Worship” is almost certainly Lady Misato’s inspired coinage. And I regard her as the prime creatrix of the new FLR movement, which is rapidly gaining mainstream acceptance.

For me, and many other men I have discussed these matters with, it was Real Women Don’t Do Housework that showed us that our longings to serve a woman are not necessarily twisted or perverse, but are at the very pulsing heart of romantic longing, even of heroic courtship. They can be proclaimed proudly, not hidden away or denied. Instead of leading us into masturbatory fantasies over kinky images, these longings can lead us right back into our marriages and back to our wonderful wives. We have only to embrace our wives as loving leaders, to treat them as the queens and goddesses they truly are.

Or, to cite my favorite motto: “If you want your wife to be a goddess, worship her.”—Clairette de Longvilliers

Vive La Misato!

DENNIS: WHERE CAN A MAN FIND A STRONG, LEADING LADY?

From Mark Remond: This is another comment by Dennis expanded into a separate post. It was prompted by a comment from reader “Greg” on the Feb. 9 post, “AdditionalThoughts on Joan and The Protocols”:

Thanks for the article. So you sought out this type of relationship and actually found a girl who came from that type of family background? I feel like that is too rare of a chance to not have more of a story line to it. Did you have to search for Femdom clubs then looked for a girl within that community? Did you advertise online for female led relationships and she responded? I just feel like it is so rare to come across a girl who wants an FLR let alone comes from an entire family background with that as the focus.—Greg

To which Dennis responded: “Some of it was just being lucky, but Nancy and i met at a NOW (National Organization of Women) meeting when we were in college. Women were naturally suspicious of the motives of males who suddenly showed up at NOW meetings, but i worked hard for the group and was accepted by them—and by Nancy. i was raised in an all-female household so, naturally, i had a much different view of Female authority than did most men. i was looking for a strong, in-control Woman and i found Her in Nancy. While i was predisposed to follow, She was predisposed to lead, what with coming from a family where the Women were firmly in charge. It all just clicked for us.

But in a further note to me, Dennis amplified a bit on this answer, and in a way that may be helpful to other guys seeking “in-charge women”:

“i'm tempted to give advice on how a man can find a strong, leading Lady. The problem is, as I see it, that too many men go about it too aggressively. For instance, we have too many men who show up at the Women’s Center wanting to “be a slave” and so on, only to be thrown out! It's not what Women want. What they do want is a man who they can control, but one they can control in a practical context, not a fantasy context. There is a difference. As for the Center, we know of seven FLR couples who met at the Center and now have great relationships.”